Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Gregg Jarrett: Why Leaker Soy Boy is Neither a WB nor Entitled to Anonymity

Posted on 11/6/19 at 4:49 pm
Posted by PhDoogan
Member since Sep 2018
14947 posts
Posted on 11/6/19 at 4:49 pm
Good and accurate legal analysis of why this whole shitshow is a legal farce. Neither the president nor a call with a foreign leader falls under the ICWBPA act, an act which incidentally does not grant anonymity protection.

quote:

nowhere in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) is anonymity even mentioned. Nor is it found in Presidential Policy Directive 19, which also provides specific whistleblower protections.

The Inspector General Act of 1978 prohibits the inspector general from releasing the name of a complainant, but this applies to no one else.

Under this framework, whistleblowers are granted certain rights against retaliation or reprisal in the workplace. In other words, they cannot be demoted, transferred, fired or otherwise penalized for filing a complaint that meets the statutory whistleblower requirements.

However, identity protection is neither provided for, nor contemplated, anywhere in the language.


quote:

As I first explained in a column six weeks ago, the so-called “whistleblower” is not a whistleblower at all. The complaint he filed against President Trump does not meet the two requisite conditions set forth in the ICWPA. That is, the alleged wrongful conduct must involve intelligence activity and it must be committed by a member of the intelligence community.

This was meticulously explained in an 11-page opinion by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) when it issued the following opinion: “The president is not a member of the intelligence community, and his communication with a foreign leader involved no intelligence operation or other activity aided at collecting or analyzing foreign intelligence.”

The OLC opinion made it clear that the complaint by the so-called “whistleblower” regarding Ukraine was so deficient that Congress should never have been notified. The acting director of national intelligence agreed with this assessment. The legal analysis and reasoning was sound.

In our constitutional form of government, the president is a unitary executive. He is not a member of any department or agency – they report to him.

To put it plainly, there is no whistleblower statute that permits an unelected and inferior federal employee to blow the whistle on the president, the most superior officer in the U.S. government.

Article II of the Constitution gives the president sweeping power to conduct foreign affairs, negotiate with leaders of other nations, make requests or solicit information.

The Constitution does not grant the power of review, approval or disapproval to bureaucratic employees. Indeed, the whistleblower law explicitly excludes a complaint involving “differences of opinion concerning public policy matters.”

So what should we call the fake “whistleblower”? It is more accurate to describe him as an undercover informant acting as a Democratic operative who spied on President Trump by gathering hearsay information intended to damage him.


rich that this is coming from the new self-censorship FoxNews
This post was edited on 11/6/19 at 4:55 pm
Posted by TheBoo
South to Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
4516 posts
Posted on 11/6/19 at 4:59 pm to
Well the dems are all in on court of public opinion. No room for your laws here.
Posted by EZE Tiger Fan
Member since Jul 2004
50319 posts
Posted on 11/6/19 at 5:01 pm to
This is why the Filth control every aspect of the educational system and the media.

Keep Americans stupid so you can lie about whatever you want.

The plan works really well on tens of millions of idiots. You have many posting now.
Posted by Janky
Team Primo
Member since Jun 2011
35957 posts
Posted on 11/6/19 at 5:01 pm to
Greg Jarrett is really good at his job.
Posted by Oddibe
Close to some, further from others
Member since Sep 2015
6567 posts
Posted on 11/6/19 at 5:03 pm to
quote:

It is more accurate to describe him as an undercover informant acting as a Democratic operative who spied on President Trump by gathering hearsay information intended to damage him.
Isn't it nice to read a legitimate news article?
Posted by PhDoogan
Member since Sep 2018
14947 posts
Posted on 11/6/19 at 5:17 pm to
Yes, though it is filed under their opinion, it is way more accurate than the BS talking points that Trump was trying to dig dirt on Biden.

I would like to see a legit dissent of this analysis, in the same manner that I would like to see a unicorn.


first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram