Unmask the Whistleblower

Spectator.org

Unmask the Whistleblower

Let’s read the Constitution, shall we?

Specifically Article II, Section IV, which reads as follows, with bold print for emphasis supplied:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Then move along to the Sixth Amendment, which reads in its entirety as follows, with bold print for emphasis supplied:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

In other words, the Constitution clearly stipulates that impeaching a president means the president is being accused of “high crimes.” And the Sixth Amendment clearly stipulates that in “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right … to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Adam Schiff, by hiding the identity of the whistleblower, are denying President Trump his Sixth Amendment right to confront his whistleblower accuser.

Congress impeached both presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. There were whistleblowers quite publicly involved in each case.

In Nixon’s case the whistleblower was his own White House Counsel — John Dean. In Clinton’s case the whistleblower was Pentagon employee Linda Tripp, along with Arkansas state employee Paula Jones. All three made their accusations against the president they were involved with in extraordinarily public fashion.

Yet in Trump’s case there is all this gnashing of teeth that the current whistleblower must have his or her identity hidden to protect his or her security.

Baloney. No one cared about the security of the Nixon and Clinton accusers. And they are still, years later, alive and well. In John Dean’s case he got a book deal for his tale, Blind Ambition. Not to mention that in the Trump era he is now a CNN contributor. You can be certain that if the Trump whistleblower is unmasked both a book deal and a TV contributor gig at either CNN or MSNBC will quickly come his or her way.

The other day the president quite accurately tweeted,

Like every American, I deserve to meet my accuser, especially when this accuser, the so-called “Whistleblower,” represented a perfect conversation with a foreign leader in a totally inaccurate and fraudulent way….

In addition, I want to meet not only my accuser, who presented SECOND & THIRD HAND INFORMATION, but also the person who illegally gave this information, which was largely incorrect, to the “Whistleblower.”

Bingo. The president is 100 percent within his constitutional right — as expressly stated in the Sixth Amendment — to make this demand.

The oath of office taken by a member of the U.S. House of Representatives when he or she is sworn in reads as follows, bold print for emphasis supplied:

I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

If Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Schiff persist in hiding the identity of the Trump accuser, not only are they denying the President his constitutional right to “to be confronted with the witnesses against him” — but in so doing they are in direct violation of their own oath of office as Members of the U.S. House of Representatives that says they must “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” as well as “bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”

If Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Schiff persist in hiding the identity of the Trump accuser — and we now know that Schiff’s aide knew about the identity of the whistleblower when the latter came to the Schiff House Intelligence Committee staff to discuss the subject — not only are Pelosi and Schiff denying the President his constitutional right to “to be confronted with the witnesses against him,” but they are in direct violation of their own oath of office as Members of the U.S. House of Representatives that says they must “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” as well as “bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”

For which both Pelosi and Schiff should be censured — or expelled from the House completely.

And a footnote? CNN’s Jake Tapper has now reported this in a tweet:

Breaking — A source familiar with the investigation prompted by the whistleblower tells me that the “indicia of bias of an arguable political bias on the part” of the whistleblower referred to by the Intel Community IG, is that the whistleblower is a Registered Democrat.

Shocking. Not.