Why Can’t Trump Unmask the Whistleblower?

Obviously, Trump wants to find out the name of the whistleblower, which he will then make public along with the person’s voting record and credit card receipts for purchases of “Make Herstory” campaign t-shirts and anything else he can come up with to undermine the person’s credibility.

Obviously, that would be bad and would open up yet another sideshow to distract from his criminality.

But… um… he’s the president. He can look at any piece of information the government has, no matter how classified. He can see the aliens at Area 51. He can see diplomatic cables between our government and the royals of sunken Atlantis. He can even make these documents public at a whim.

So what gives here? Why is he “trying to figure out” the identity of the whistleblower? Doesn’t he just have to call the DNI and ask?

1 Like

There are specific whistleblower protections in federal law. Of course a Director of National Intelligence whose loyalty to the Leader outweighs his loyalty to the Nation would simply pass the person’s identity to the President. But with the ICIG watching closely and with Congressional attention firmly focused by now, Acting DNI Maguire may be unwilling to break the law that explicitly.

But there may be people in the ODNI who would pass the info to the Boss’s cronies despite the law. Or a more loyalist minion might get installed.

Why does it matter to people like you? You guys aren’t interested in the truth if it exonerates Trump, only if it supports your confirmation bias!


Bc it is not worth it. He got two scoops of ice scream and people melted. He farted and it worsened climate change by 37%. Trump fed some fishes in Japan and they diagnosed these poor fish with cervical cancer.


Unmasking the whistle blower is unimportant, getting to the source the whistle blower refers to is paramount.

One has to ask our justice system allows for the accused to face the accuser however the whistle blower is hiding the source.

film, Whistleblowers have special federal protections. Trumps deflecting.

How can someone be a whistleblower if they didn’t actually hear the conversation that they are blowing the whistle on?

It doesn’t matter if they heard it or not…the whistleblower FEELS a certain way. That’s all that matters. No one uses facts and evidence anymore.


Yes, and if my friend calls me and tells me that his neighbors house is on fire because his neighbor works with me and I run out to the shop and tell him, he shouldn’t believe me because I didn’t see the flames. :thinking:

Anyway, whistleblowers have always been allowed to report second hand knowledge, and Trump’ own chosen ICIG made a public statement correcting Davis, who first reported the lie of rules change. He also made a public statement correcting Trump who claimed the whistleblower lacked first hand knowledge.

What a stretch!

Responding to an emergency is one thing. Accusing someone of wrongdoing is a horse of a different color. That required evidence and proof, otherwise it’s all bullshit.

That’s the purpose of the investigation, let’s get these people under oath who shared the wrongdoing with the whistleblower. That shouldn’t scare you, unless you know deep down that Trump’s corrupt.

Oh, and how about responding to the other half of my post.

Eric Ciaramella as a class of 2004 Connecticut prep student: He later moved on to Yale and the White House. Now he could be at the center of an impeachment storm.

Chase Collegiate School, Waterbury, Conn./The Magpie

Joe Biden: Invited Ciaramella to a state luncheon with Italian premier. Also invited: Brennan, Comey, Clapper.

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

1 Like

No, the purpose of the investigation is to impeach Trump in the hope it will keep him from getting reelected. We have the transcript of the call and the statements of both principles. But Nancy Pelosi didn’t wait for the evidence before she declared a sham impeachment inquiry led by huckster Adam Schiff

Save the fake outrage over motivation. The whole impeachment carnival depends on Democrat projections of Trump’s motive for asking for an investigation of Biden’s corruption.

1 Like

Exactly! Plus everybody in DC has known who the “leaker” is long before it was printed online for the whole world to see. :roll_eyes:

Sheltering this guy under the guise of whistler blower protection is just another example of the corruption of Congressional Democrats and of course “piece of” Schiff himself.

1 Like

Actually, most witness testimony is from Trump’s hand picked appointments. You can make this about democrats as you wish.

Whistleblowers are federally protected. And if it was a whistleblower providing damaging material on Obama, you’d raise bloody hell if he demanded that the whistleblower be outed as Trump has done. :man_shrugging:

Whistleblowers are protected against reprisal against them…not by anonymity.

This guy doesn’t qualify as a whistleblower anyway. He has nothing but second hand information.

We have a right to know WHO TOLD HIM WHAT TO SAY!


I think we know that. Alot of this stuff has “John Brennan” written all over it. My guess is that the IG report is going to expose his role in launching the sting against the Trump guys like Popadopalous, and he needs a big cloud of smoke to cover what’s going to come out.

I’m more convinced than ever that this was launched by Brennan and Comey to have insurance in case Hillary’s emails got released. It’s the only thing that makes sense. They were all overconfident that they could mop the floor with Trump and the emails were the only thing that scared them. They wanted a villain in Trump’s campaign that they could blame it on.