One of the most layabout GOP senators is Senator Richard Burr from my state, North Carolina. He has been a NC Senator (R-NC) since 2005 and held
He is chairman of the powerful Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; but, acts more like the campaign chairman for minority member Virginia’s Senator Mark Warner’s reelection bid. He had no trouble with issuing multiple subpoenas on Trump’s family members during Mueller’s corrupt investigation; but, he has done squat for Trump in eliminating corrupt intelligence officials.
His latest nonsense public statement is that the whistleblower’s identity should not be exposed. He and staff have not read the 1989 Whistleblower Act!
I posted the following letter on his site which is a summary of Mark Levin’s comments on the applicability of the 1989 Whistleblower Act.
******************************
Senator Richard Burr OP-ED
Senator Richard Burr,
You must be the only American who does not know the identity of the anti-Trump whistleblower and his corrupt attorney. Your public statements that the whistleblower’s identity should not be exposed are patently ridiculous and again show you are not interested in protecting our duly elected president from a coup. The anonymous source also turns out to be a political activist.
The name of the whistleblower is Eric Ciaramella and his corrupt attorney is Andrew Bakaj. Both have ties to the partisan Adam Schiff and corrupt intelligence informants in CIA and NSC. As chairman of the not so intelligent Senate Select Committee on Intelligence you should be investigating these charges that President Trump violated some undefined foreign policy law.
It is surreal that Democrats are concerned about the whistleblower’s rights to safety and anonymity (which are by no means guaranteed under the law), when they are trampling all over the most fundamental constitutional 5th and 6th Amendment rights of the President with football cleats.
Andrew Bakaj sent a letter to the WH citing some lofty quotations from Presidents Kennedy, Reagan and Lincoln and writes that the President’s “rhetoric and behavior fall well beneath the dignity of the office.”
Democrats say and do the most egregious things to the President and then claim how shocked they are by his responses. How can you impeach a president, a process that was triggered by this guy, who is a political hack, without the House, the Senate, the President, scrutinizing his motives, his credibility and his veracity?
The bottom line is that just because it serves the Democrats’ agenda to say that Eric Ciaramella is a whistleblower does not make him a whistleblower. He is anything but a whistleblower according to the provisions of the 1989 Whistleblower Act. He is an informant with 2nd hand information who reported to the corrupt Adam Schiff prior to telling his fairy tale to the ICIG.
The whistleblower’s identity is paramount in this case so he can be cross examined.
First, Ciaramella’s work history and connections prove he is not a whistleblower, but part of a group which coordinated this latest charade to trigger exactly what it did trigger, an impeachment inquiry.
Second, as people have a chance to digest the transcripts which have begun to be released this week, we are discovering discrepancies between reality and witness testimony.
Third, virtually all the testimony so far is witness interpretation and opinion. There is no solid evidence.
The law is on the President’s side because you’re hearing a lot of lies from Schiff, the Democrats and phony legal analysts.
Number one, the whistleblower statute DOES NOT apply to the President of the United States. It does not apply to conversations the President of the United States has with leaders of other countries. And it does not apply to foreign policy. So, the whistleblower statute does not apply to the President or this phone call.
Number two, the so-called whistleblower does not have statutory protections. He doesn’t meet the statutory elements.
Number three, the law does not guarantee anonymity to a whistleblower. Only the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community is to keep it confidential with certain exceptions. The President can release the name, Congress can, the media’s not bound. Interestingly, the House Intelligence Community did release his name. Adam Schiff did release his name by accident last week.
Adam Schiff, like a good mobster, decided that you can’t call this guy as a witness, you can’t call me [Schiff] as a witness because I [Schiff] won’t give you approval. So, the head mobster decides, “I’m in charge of who the witnesses can be.” So, it’s a grand cover-up.
The law is on the President’s side. The facts are on the President’s side.
We do need the whistleblower to testify, Shiff to testify because the whole house of cards will collapse because the American people will see what this was – an outrageous unconscionable attack by them and on the President!
Your committee should ask Schiff how this all came about. Then I’d like to ask that lawyer who said there was going to be a coup, how they were going to take them out.
You cannot be convicted by anonymous accusers without facing your accuser in any place but the former Soviet Union. Just because you’re a whistleblower doesn’t mean you’re a saint. It’s in the 6th Amendment in the Constitution. Schiff has completely trashed the Constitution. They are going after the president’s lawyers. He (Trump) is entitled to a defense. Otherwise we’re not America.
Terry Payne
No comments:
Post a Comment