By Roger L. Simon
What’s the difference between a whistleblower and a leaker? In today’s America, not much.
If you read the letter written by the so-called whistleblower who’s been the cause of the current impeachment dust-up (Impeachment 3.2—or is it 4.6?), the rhetoric sounds like that of a leaker, not of a true whistleblower.
The dead giveaway is that he or she references The New York Times as “evidence” for the accusations, when that newspaper has been a recipient of many leaks. And those leaks have frequently been revealed to be either lies or distortions that necessitate retractions, even, ironically, when the newspaper has been awarded Pulitzer Prizes.
On top of everything, the “whistleblower” admits in his letter: “I was not a direct witness to most of the events described.” So, what was he? (Or she? Or zhe?) Sounds like a leaker to me! And leakers, as we all know, tend to be biased. That’s why they leak.
During the House Intelligence Committee hearing Sept. 26, acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire testified he “didn’t know” if the whistleblower was biased. This was the correct legal response but, as they say, if it walks like a duck…
What’s really going on here? The real impetus (besides the obvious Trump Derangement Syndrome that has been going on for years now) for Impeachment 3.2 is hiding in plain sight in the transcription of the phone call.
No, it’s not about former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, with his $50,000 monthly pay-out from a Ukrainian company. It’s about CrowdStrike. That’s what President Donald Trump mentioned first and seemed far more interested in. (Check the transcript and you will see this corroborated.)
Trump’s reason: CrowdStrike—a California cybersecurity firm co-founded by an alleged Putin enemy—was knee-deep in the whole Russia collusion fabrication. It was CrowdStrike that investigated, on behalf of the FBI, the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s server during the 2016 election and declared it to have been done by Russia. James Comey’s FBI never investigated that itself.
CrowdStrike was also involved in—and had to walk back—a calumny concerning Ukraine and Russia. They had claimed the Ukrainians had lost 80 percent of their artillery due to malware-infected software. The Ukrainians called this out as a lie—and they were right.
The Ukrainians seem to know something. Trump wanted their help. Given what has occurred—the complete evisceration of the bogus Russia collusion probe and its provenance under investigation—as chief of our executive branch, he has every right to ask them.
Of course, that’s making the Democrats crazy—they stand to lose big time, and they know it. The president has often said he would never allow something like this probe to happen to another U.S. president again. He seems to be serious about that. Better impeach him before he finds out.
Word is coming out that the tattletale… scratch that, leaker… scratch that… whistleblower behind this latest impeachment episode is someone connected to the CIA. (Interesting, isn’t it, that the House is on the brink of voting impeachment without knowing—or apparently caring—exactly who the accuser is?) In one of his rare candid moments, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned Trump not to take on the intelligence community (i.e., the deep, deep state). They have too many weapons at their disposal.
Well, they seem to be using them now. A war is heating up, with impeachment as only the stalking horse for a change to the character of America itself. We must all pay close attention to save the Republic.
