Rand Paul educates reporter on Whistleblower Protection Act after she tells him he broke the law

For a doctor, the Kentucky Republic makes a pretty good lawyer

By Tank Murdoch

(TNS) Few Americans would claim that most mainstream media reporters are expects in the law, and there’s a reason for that: They aren’t.



That became glaringly obvious again late this week when many in the media and noted Leftist pundits declared, without evidence, that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) had violated the law when he attempted to identify the so-called “whistleblower” who Democrats have used as the basis for their impeachment of President Trump.

After the president defense team rested their case during the Senate impeachment trial earlier this week, senator/jurors were instructed to ask questions of the Democratic House mangers and the Trump defense team. Questions are then given to Chief Justice John Roberts to read aloud to the respective team.

Paul attempted to name the whistleblower in his question, identified previously as CIA employee and Democrat sympathizer Eric Ciaramella, but Roberts declined to read it.

Isn’t that a violation of the Whistleblower Protection Act and shouldn’t Paul be held responsible, one reporter asked the Kentucky Republican Friday as the hashtag #ArrestRandPaul made its bot-assisted rounds on Twitter?

“Actually, you got that wrong, too. You should work on the facts,” Paul began.

“The whistleblower statute protects the whistleblower from having his name revealed by the inspector general” of the Intelligence Community, he continued. “Even The New York Times admits that no one else is under any legal obligation.

“The other point, and you need to be very careful if you are really interested in the news, is the whistleblower is actually a material witness completely separate from being the whistleblower because he worked for Joe Biden … at the same time Hunter Biden was receiving $50,000 a month, so the investigation into the corruption of Hunter Biden involves this whistleblower because he was there at the time,” Paul schooled.

“Did he bring up the conflict of interest? Was there discussion of this? What was his involvement with the relationship between Joe Biden and the prosecutor? There’s a lot of questions the whistleblower needs to answer,” he continued.



For the record, the IC IG is Michael Atkinson, and he was the 18th witness to testify under oath before House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff’s largely secretive impeachment inquiry.

While the transcripts of the 17 other witnesses have been released, Schiff has refused to release Atkinson’s testimony, which is, in and of itself, suspicious.

  • We need your help to grow, pure and simple. Share our stories, make sure to tell your friends about this site, and click the red bell in the right corner for push notifications. 

GOT SOMETHING TO SAY? COMMENT BELOW


Get yours FREE! Just pay shipping!


3
Leave a Reply

avatar
2 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Snailmailtrucker
Guest
Snailmailtrucker

The Media’s Arrogance is only Exceeded by their own Stupidity !

Marilyn Renee
Guest

I would like to know why lying in Congress or the Senate is not illegal. It is in court. Why shouldn’t those sitting in high offices be held accountable to the truth? All public servants should be so. This Schitt show has been nauseating to say the least, because it has been ALLOWED! We deserve sanity from our government body. Not the kind of nonsense we have seen from the democrats and their clown.

%d bloggers like this: