Adam Schiff's Jig is Up! Woo Hippity Hoo!

[Care4all]

B, how would you feel if you were working in government for ten, fifteen years and the current administration was Democrats and one of them was doing something illegal, but when you reported them under the whistleblower act, you were completely laughed out of town and discredited because you are a conservative?
Would that seem fair to you?
Only conservatives have a say in what is right or wrong now? All others will be ignored or worse?

nice ... your 'descriptives' and 'whatifisms' don't apply here.


The WB act has nothing to do with political party.

So, don't try making the WB Act something it isn't.

TIA

ROFL

Isn't that what Trump, Beautress, And all right wingers are doing by claiming the WB is a democratic hack ???

 

[Rustic]

Whistle blower protections = protection from retribution.

Whistle blower protections =/= identity protection

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

you progressives are no trust worthy, If the whistle blower has any credibility he should be out in the open

 

[Camp]

That Tucker Carlson guy is one of the American television's biggest political propagandist hacks. He has no credibility and is one of the last people for referring anyone else to being a hack. His specialty is brainwashing and scamming dupes, suckers, and lemmings.

That Rachel Maddow dude is at least as big of a political propagandist hack. You can’t get the unbiased truth out of either one.

Ya, everyone has their favorite political propagandist hacks. It's comical how each side defends it's own hacks and disparages the other sides.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Whistle blower protections = protection from retribution.

Whistle blower protections =/= identity protection

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

 

[Rustic]

That Tucker Carlson guy is one of the American television's biggest political propagandist hacks. He has no credibility and is one of the last people for referring anyone else to being a hack. His specialty is brainwashing and scamming dupes, suckers, and lemmings.

That Rachel Maddow dude is at least as big of a political propagandist hack. You can’t get the unbiased truth out of either one.

Ya, everyone has their favorite political propagandist hacks. It's comical how each side defends it's own hacks and disparages the other sides.

Lol
Says someone who trusts career politicians

 

[Care4all]

Whistle blower protections = protection from retribution.

Whistle blower protections =/= identity protection

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

Yes you do get to be anonymous as a WB, to protect you from retaliation and intimidation and the IG under LAW can not reveal the WB with few exceptions, like a court order from a judge in a criminal proceeding.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Try following the testimony which confirms the behind the scenes, off the

chart attempt by the democrats to pull some underhanded bullshit because the know the MSM won't call them on it.


There, finished your sentence CORRECTLY

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Whistle blower protections = protection from retribution.

Whistle blower protections =/= identity protection

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

Yes you do get to be anonymous as a WB, to protect you from retaliation and intimidation and the IG under LAW can not reveal the WB with few exceptions, like a court order from a judge in a criminal proceeding.

NOWHERE in the statute does it state that a whistleblower identity is to remain hidden. NOWHERE

Get educated ffs. Really sucks ballz that idiots like you get to cancel my vote with your uninformed vote.

 

[Care4all]

Trump' s bullying and intimidation and retaliation IS ILLEGAL.

 

[Mac1958]

One may as well try to look for the humor in this embarrassing mess.

I flipped back and forth last night during halftime between Fox and MSNBC.

Fox: "They have nothing!" MSNBC: "They have everything!"

Alternate universes. Try to laugh.
.

yet both can’t be true. The real lesson here is you have no free press. You have propaganda outlets of Pravda proportions.

Or, more likely, they're both comically biased, blatantly myopic, intellectually dishonest, and playing their viewers for fools.
.

 

[Care4all]

Whistle blower protections = protection from retribution.

Whistle blower protections =/= identity protection

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

Yes you do get to be anonymous as a WB, to protect you from retaliation and intimidation and the IG under LAW can not reveal the WB with few exceptions, like a court order from a judge in a criminal proceeding.

NOWHERE in the statute does it state that a whistleblower identity is to remain hidden. NOWHERE

Get educated ffs. Really sucks ballz that idiots like you get to cancel my vote with your uninformed vote.

The law states the IG can not reveal them if the WB chooses to stay anonymous, with very few exceptions.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

One may as well try to look for the humor in this embarrassing mess.

I flipped back and forth last night during halftime between Fox and MSNBC.

Fox: "They have nothing!" MSNBC: "They have everything!"

Alternate universes. Try to laugh.
.

yet both can’t be true. The real lesson here is you have no free press. You have propaganda outlets of Pravda proportions.

Or, more likely, they're both comically biased, blatantly myopic, intellectually dishonest, and playing their viewers for fools.
.

One can be biased and still be HONEST or present facts.
One can not be deceptive and still be honest and their facts are often mixed with falsehoods

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

Yes you do get to be anonymous as a WB, to protect you from retaliation and intimidation and the IG under LAW can not reveal the WB with few exceptions, like a court order from a judge in a criminal proceeding.

NOWHERE in the statute does it state that a whistleblower identity is to remain hidden. NOWHERE

Get educated ffs. Really sucks ballz that idiots like you get to cancel my vote with your uninformed vote.

The law states the IG can not reveal them if the WB chooses to stay anonymous, with very few exceptions.

Whistleblower protection in the United States - Wikipedia

 

[Mac1958]

One may as well try to look for the humor in this embarrassing mess.

I flipped back and forth last night during halftime between Fox and MSNBC.

Fox: "They have nothing!" MSNBC: "They have everything!"

Alternate universes. Try to laugh.
.

yet both can’t be true. The real lesson here is you have no free press. You have propaganda outlets of Pravda proportions.

Or, more likely, they're both comically biased, blatantly myopic, intellectually dishonest, and playing their viewers for fools.
.

One can be biased and still be HONEST or present facts.
One can not be deceptive and still be honest and their facts are often mixed with falsehoods

Avoiding facts is also deceptive and dishonest.
.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

One may as well try to look for the humor in this embarrassing mess.

I flipped back and forth last night during halftime between Fox and MSNBC.

Fox: "They have nothing!" MSNBC: "They have everything!"

Alternate universes. Try to laugh.
.

yet both can’t be true. The real lesson here is you have no free press. You have propaganda outlets of Pravda proportions.

Or, more likely, they're both comically biased, blatantly myopic, intellectually dishonest, and playing their viewers for fools.
.

One can be biased and still be HONEST or present facts.
One can not be deceptive and still be honest and their facts are often mixed with falsehoods

Avoiding facts is also deceptive and dishonest.
.

What facts were avoided in the interview?

 

[Mac1958]

One may as well try to look for the humor in this embarrassing mess.

I flipped back and forth last night during halftime between Fox and MSNBC.

Fox: "They have nothing!" MSNBC: "They have everything!"

Alternate universes. Try to laugh.
.

yet both can’t be true. The real lesson here is you have no free press. You have propaganda outlets of Pravda proportions.

Or, more likely, they're both comically biased, blatantly myopic, intellectually dishonest, and playing their viewers for fools.
.

One can be biased and still be HONEST or present facts.
One can not be deceptive and still be honest and their facts are often mixed with falsehoods

Avoiding facts is also deceptive and dishonest.
.

What facts were avoided in the interview?

What interview? I made a point and you commented on my point.
.

 

[Dana7360]

One may as well try to look for the humor in this embarrassing mess.

I flipped back and forth last night during halftime between Fox and MSNBC.

Fox: "They have nothing!" MSNBC: "They have everything!"

Alternate universes. Try to laugh.
.

You would have been better off staying on the football game.

It's a waste of time to pay attention to both ends of the spectrum. Cable isn't news. It's opinion.

If you want honest news it's illegal to lie in the news in Canada. Their news is just facts.

If you don't want Canada, the BBC, Guardian and Christian Science Monitor have facts.

It's a waste of time to pay any attention to either end of the spectrum.

 

[airplanemechanic]

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

Yes you do get to be anonymous as a WB, to protect you from retaliation and intimidation and the IG under LAW can not reveal the WB with few exceptions, like a court order from a judge in a criminal proceeding.

NOWHERE in the statute does it state that a whistleblower identity is to remain hidden. NOWHERE

Get educated ffs. Really sucks ballz that idiots like you get to cancel my vote with your uninformed vote.

The law states the IG can not reveal them if the WB chooses to stay anonymous, with very few exceptions.

If they qualify as a true whistle blower and it ONLY applies to the IG. NOWHERE does it say anyone else can't reveal their identity.

This should be easy. Back up your claim. Show where the federal whistle blower statute protects their anonymity. Or retract your lie and admit you were wrong.

 

[Care4all]

Whistle blower protections = protection from retribution.

Whistle blower protections =/= identity protection

I don't know how many times you have to tell these stupid fucking demonrats on this forum that "whistle blower protections" have NOTHING to do with anonymity.

For that matter, this guy doesn't even fit the definition of a whistle blower anyway. So NONE of this "protection" applies to him anyway. Being a legal "whistle blower" is a very specific legal term with very specific requirements. Just "snitching" is not a whistle blower.

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

Hotline Operations | Office of Inspector General | U.S. Department of Health and Human Services


And this


Office of Inspector General
https://www.oig.doc.gov/pages/faqs-about-oig-investigations.aspx
Section 7 of the Inspector General Act states that “[t]he Inspector General shall not, after receipt of a complaint or information from an employee, disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of the employee, unless the Inspector General determines such disclosure is unavoidable during the course of the investigation.”

 

[Care4all]

How do you protect the WB from intimidation and retaliation, without anonymity silly one...?

How do you encourage WB to come forward without anonymity?

How many of the other 17 WB complaints the IG processed this past year do you know the names of?



YOU are repeating a lie, the right wing is twisting and turning and spinning and pushing to cover for Trump' s retaliation towards the WB.... for his evil.

Something you need to consider before being a whistle blower. Your identity is not protected. You don't get to make accusations from behind a curtain.

It's all irrelevant because he doesn't meet the statues set forth to be a whistle blower anyway. They don't apply to the president. They don't apply to private conversations between the president and foreign leaders. That's why they are classified. Trump has a right to privacy without some 3rd party coming in and saying they think they might have heard something from someone else.

Yes you do get to be anonymous as a WB, to protect you from retaliation and intimidation and the IG under LAW can not reveal the WB with few exceptions, like a court order from a judge in a criminal proceeding.

NOWHERE in the statute does it state that a whistleblower identity is to remain hidden. NOWHERE

Get educated ffs. Really sucks ballz that idiots like you get to cancel my vote with your uninformed vote.

The law states the IG can not reveal them if the WB chooses to stay anonymous, with very few exceptions.

Whistleblower protection in the United States - Wikipedia

Office of Inspector General
https://www.oig.doc.gov/pages/faqs-about-oig-investigations.aspx
Section 7 of the Inspector General Act states that “[t]he Inspector General shall not, after receipt of a complaint or information from an employee, disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of the employee, unless the Inspector General determines such disclosure is unavoidable during the course of the investigation.”