Rand Paul should be charged for outing the whistle blower publicly

Don't be a stupid person.

DD

 

All the unintentional hyperbole aside, it is sad that it will discourage other people of good faith, from whatever position or background, for reporting wrongs that they see in government or with those in power.

I'm not sure what political calculus by genius RaPaul is worth that chilling effect on an otherwise healthy mechanism.

 

He is just echoing the president.

"I want to know who's the person who gave the whistleblower the information, because that's close to a spy," Trump said. "You know what we used to do in the old days, when we were smart, with spies and treason, right? We used to handle it a little differently than we do now."

 

I wouldn't place all of the blame on rand paul. Are we sure this instance was in "good faith"? If not, that played a role in effecting the "healthy mechanism".

 

The mechanism either exists with complete whistleblower privacy or the system does not exist at all.

Systems with whistleblowers are occassionally abused, of course. Investigations can show if the alleged behaviors were real or whether the whistleblower reported something mistaken or in bad faith. But may I submit to you: in any whistleblower case where the exact claims are proven to be exactly factual, we 99.9% of the time do NOT accuse the whistleblower of acting in bad faith.

Also, LOL. Come on. Members of Trump's own party are admitting his guilt and that he crossed lines. Just say he shouldn't be removed from office and move on. We all have to move on and the votes and arguments of the senators will be recorded by history as more information about the "perfect" behavior of Trump comes out.

 

actually a serious question for folks, not for DD obviously because he has me blocked, but in what (casual) searching I've done, I can't find any evidence off DD's claim here that there are laws that would penalize someone for divulging the name of a whistleblower.

All I can find (and I haven't searched all that vigorously) are laws that prohibit employers from taking retaliatory action against whistleblowers, after the fact.

I cannot find laws that protect the identity of whistleblowers, i.e., protect their privacy and make it illegal to divulge their names.

Perhaps I've missed something obvious, but I'd appreciate anyone who can provide the links to such laws and/or to discussions of such laws.

 

Just when you thought paul and republicans couldn't sink any lower... a sub-basement appears...

 

So it appears that paul is not only despicable, but a coward as well...

 

And other trumplican senators are spinning their defenses for paul...

 

Wow. Beyond "wow". Just when you think there are no new depths to plumb, out comes Deepwater Horizon II.

These are Senators who pre-election basically called Trump the dangerous *&^%$ that he is. Now they can't fight hard enough to be his personal towel boy.

 

this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower_Protection_Act

 

clearly the Chief Justice is/was against ousting the WB... couldn’t he have stepped in?

 

I don't understand why Paul is doping this?

What does it serve?

The people who want to know the name already do.

 

Yea, why huh. I recalled he started doing this while speaking at a trump rally. I think he either got some personal favor from trump or setting up his maga future.

 

The effect... future potential whistleblowers will likely choose not to step forward knowing that their identities will be divulged by members of congress protecting the person they might have blown the whistle on.

 

Hopefully the whistle blower can sue him for damages.

****ing bananna republic we have turned into.

 

Brings up a good point... what if the person named by rand paul *isn't* the whistleblower?

 

Can anyone summarize why he wanted to do this?