The unmitigated gall of the whole Ukraine whistleblower story has been an out-and-out effrontery to our laws, decency, and the body politic. And now this…
Andrew Bakaj is one of the attorneys representing the 33-year-old registered Democrat CIA employee who was placed inside the White House by former CIA director John Brennan for the purpose of spying on President Trump and thwarting the Barr/Durham Spygate investigation and now claims to be a whistleblower, sent a letter to the White House warning President Trump to “cease and desist” attacking his client.
The lawyer argued his client, which we now know to be a CIA leaker named [CERTAIN SOCIAL MEDIA OUTLETS WILL NOT ALLOW US TO MENTION THE NAME EVEN THOUGH THE ENTIRE WORLD ALREADY HAS], is in “physical danger” because of Trump and certain conservative media outlets.
Of course, that’s a bunch of nonsense, as there is no protection of anonymity in the whistleblower statutes. The only guarantee is that there will be no retribution from superiors on the job. For goodness’ sake, the world probably already knows his personal pronouns at this point. The only person who may not reveal a whistleblower’s name is the Inspector General, the person [HE SHALL NOT BE NAMED] was supposed to go to first and didn’t, violating the very law he now tries to hide behind. Instead, [HE SHALL NOT BE NAMED] went to liar and leaker Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), because the entire thing was orchestrated as a hit job on Trump, and Schiff has been attacking Trump since the day he was inaugurated.
“I am writing out of deep concern that your client, the President of the United States, is engaging in rhetoric and activity that places my client, the Intelligence Community Whistleblower, and their family in physical danger,” Bakaj wrote to White House counsel Pat Cipollone in a letter Wednesday.
“I am writing to respectfully request that you counsel your client on the legal and ethical peril in which he is placing himself should anyone be physically harmed as a result of his, or his surrogates’, behavior,” he said.
Again, there is no legal protection of anonymity for a whistleblower, especially one who is involved in a coup, which is exactly what he started by giving a fourth-hand account of something that wasn’t even true.
In the letter, he added, “should anyone be physically harmed, my co-counsel, Mark Zaid, and I will not hesitate to take any and all appropriate action against your client. Those who are complicit in this vindictive campaign against my client, whether through action or inaction, shall also be responsible, be that legally or morally.”
You mean the same Mark Zaid that we reported who is a NeverTrump hater who tweeted back in 2017 ‘We Will Get Rid Of Him’ regarding starting an impeachment movement because he didn’t like the president? Yeah, that Mark Zaid.
How alternate universe time is it that people who have attacked a duly elected president are now acting as if they are the victims of attacks by the same duly elected president? You can only find this type of behavior in the leftward land of silliness.
[HE SHALL NOT BE NAMED] filed a whistleblower complaint in August over fourth-hand knowledge he had about President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The world has since discovered that [HE SHALL NOT BE NAMED] met with Adam Schiff’s staffers before he filed the whistleblower complaint in an orchestrated coup attack against President Trump.
[HE SHALL NOT BE NAMED]’s lawyers are trying to convince the world that POTUS doesn’t have the right to free speech, because they don’t like that the president is defending himself by pointing out that their client is a deep state POS.
The Democrats and the Left are trying to take away Trump’s due process rights by not allowing him to face his accuser. It’s similar to how Schiff and his band of cretins in the House have been doing their impeachment inquiry hearings in secret behind closed doors so that the American public can’t find out what they’re doing, the lawyers for [HE SHALL NOT BE NAMED] are attempting to pull off the same thing for their client, even though no such protection of anonymity exists in the law.
Democrats no longer believe in due process for anyone they don’t agree with, so they are threatening the President of the United States to end his free speech rights against a client who didn’t follow the whistleblower law and who filed a false complaint against him. How do we know it’s a false complaint? Like the rest of the world interested in this issue, we have read the transcript of the phone call that [HE SHALL NOT BE NAMED] filed his complaint over.
