(11-19-2019 03:37 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 03:31 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 03:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 03:15 PM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(11-19-2019 03:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Doubtful. But if he names the other guy, or the agency he worked in, it would have been pretty easy to then find out who it was so he was right not to let them go there.

Just more pathetic desperation from a flailing party. Sad.

What do you mean doubtful? As soon as the guy started to say what agency the second guy was with Schiff jumped in and stopped him because we need to protect the identity of the whistleblower. How else can you interpret that?

Right, that's exactly what I said. Doubtful that the guy he told in this agency was the WB as LTC Vindman says he doesn't know him. So the WB is the likely in the agency of the other guy LTC Vindman told, so that agency needs to be kept out of the record.

Please cite the federal statute that says a WB can’t be identified.

Oh, you can identify him all you want, but you better hope to hell that after you do that he doesn't get a scratch on him as a result, or you'll quickly find out about federal statutes!