(AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

 

Citing “people who are familiar with the matter,” The Wall Street Journal reports that the whistleblower, whose complaint sparked the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, really doesn’t feel comfortable about testifying before Congress in person. His or her attorneys have asked lawmakers if their client might instead answer questions in writing. So far, there has been no response.

The source said the whistleblower’s attorneys fear that Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would leak their client’s identity. Republicans can be so untrustworthy.

Several ideas have been tossed around about how to protect the whistleblower’s anonymity such as having him or her “appear remotely and using technology like voice modulation software to conceal his identity.”

Other ideas involve the use of secure rooms called Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities, or SCIFs. The source said that “while those rooms are available on Capitol Hill, appearing there likely would pose additional challenges to protecting the whistleblower’s anonymity given the number of people, especially reporters, in the halls of Congress. One alternative that has been discussed is using a SCIF at an executive branch agency, people familiar with the matter said.”

A former congressional intelligence official who worked on whistleblower issues told the Journal that he “could recall no precedent for such steps” because “there had never been a whistleblower complaint as high-profile as” this one.

The Democrats’ mollycoddling of the whistleblower stands in sharp contrast to their Stalinesque treatment of the President. This is BS. When an individual tries to bring down a sitting President of the United States, throwing the government into turmoil, the least they can do is appear in person.

Moreover, the whistleblower’s complaint is on life support. Many of the whistleblower’s claims and the interpretations spun by eager liberal commentators have been discredited.

First, we were told there were eight references to Biden during President Trump’s July 25th conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Turns out there were three.

Next, the media breathlessly reported that a ‘promise’ had been made, there was a quid pro quo. There was no promise, no quid pro quo.

The document also claimed that “by mid-May, U.S. diplomat Kurt Volker sought to “contain the damage” from Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani’s outreach to Ukraine.” Text messages from Volker to Giuliani have since shown that to be false. Even ABC News has acknowledged this. They reported, “The State Department has confirmed that Volker put Giuliani in touch with Zelensky adviser Andriy Yermak at Yermak’s request.”

The whistleblower claimed that White House officials were so shocked by the call that it was stored on a special, separate server. It turned out that the use of this server has become common practice in the Trump administration for a valid reason. Early in his presidency, the contents of Trump’s conversations with leaders from Mexico and Australia were leaked to the media.

Then, we heard that the whistleblower had been in touch with Adam Schiff’s staff members before the complaint was submitted.

Until yesterday, the most stunning detail we’d heard was The Federalist’s Sean Davis’ report that only days before the complaint was filed, the intelligence community had quietly eliminated the “requirement that whistleblower complaints contain only direct, first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing allegations.” This change allowed the whistleblower to file a complaint based on hearsay information.

On Thursday, we learned that the whistleblower likely worked with Biden during his vice presidency. A retired CIA officer told The Washington Examiner, “From everything we know about the whistleblower and his work in the executive branch then, there is absolutely no doubt he would have been working with Biden when he was vice president.” The Examiner reported:

As an experienced CIA official on the NSC with the deep knowledge of Ukraine that he demonstrated in his complaint, it is probable that the whistleblower briefed Biden and likely that he accompanied him on Air Force Two during at least one of the six visits the 2020 candidate made to the country.

A former Trump administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, said Biden’s work on foreign affairs brought him into close proximity with the whistleblower either at the CIA or when he was detailed to the White House.

“This person, after working with Biden, may feel defensive towards him because he feels [Biden] is being falsely attacked. Maybe he is even talking to Biden’s staff,” the former official said. “Maybe it is innocent, maybe not.”

It’s obvious to all that the impeachment inquiry is based on a political dirty trick. And we no longer need to concern ourselves with maintaining the whistleblower’s anonymity. In fact, his identity should be revealed. He should answer questions in front of the American people and face the President whom he is accusing.