Boy, is it just our imagination or does whistleblower attorney, Mark Zaid, really really REALLY not want Eric Ciarmella’s name out there?
Oh, sorry, our bad.
The whistleblower’s name out there.
Keep in mind, this is the same guy Louise Mensch embarrassed and humiliated in a huge way by firing him very publicly on Twitter …
Whistleblower statutes – passed by Congress – were always intended to allow for anonymity (except in certain circumstances) & it is current USGOVT policy to permit anonymity. In fact, it is usually one of the first Qs asked by OIG of a #whistleblower: "do you want anonymity?" https://t.co/IfWDv9iXxB
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) November 5, 2019
Zaid picked his words very carefully.
There’s a reason and luckily Brit Hume was more than happen to point out what that reason was.
Note the key words here: “allow for anonymity” and “permit anonymity.” The law requires no one to keep the whistleblower’s identity secret except the inspector general who receives the complaints. https://t.co/6EWJ50jBkl
— Brit Hume (@brithume) November 5, 2019
In other words, the media can share Eric Ciaramella’s name if they so choose.
Huh, whoda’ thunk it?
Oh, that’s right, everyone except Zaid.
Yep.
There is no law guaranteeing it.
And when you're involved with trying to remove a duly elected president–you have no right to expect to remain anonymous and avoid public testimony.— mallen (@mallen2010) November 5, 2019
No way in Hell Americans are going to sit back and allow the president to be impeached in secret by an anonymous source.
Correct. Rand Paul schooled a reporter on exactly this today.
— Don't Capsize (@DontCapsize) November 5, 2019
Of course, Zaid and his Lawfare buds are ringleaders of this nonsense
Lawfare: "form of war consisting of use of the legal system against an enemy, such as by damaging or delegitimizing them, tying up their time or winning PR victory."
— Hudson (@HCashny) November 5, 2019
Seriously, they are not in the witness protection program!
— katiebekx (@KateBekx) November 5, 2019
Eric Ciaramella, CIA officer alleged to be whistleblower
— Trudy (@Trudy77136813) November 5, 2019
Ahem.
Anonymity is only to protect their job so they can't be fired. In this case, the person cannot be fired because he is a government employee.
— Thor (@mng2mala) November 6, 2019
Honestly, the more Ciaramella’s attorneys fight to keep him anonymous (even though it’s pretty obvious we know who he is) the less credible they make him and his entire whistle blowing appear.
Way to go, Zaid.
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member