The New York Times is under fire again with progressive democrats. This time for identifying the whistleblower as a disgruntled CIA agent with a “political bias.”
It all started last week when the Times revealed that the so-called whistleblower is a male CIA agent who was previously assigned to the White House.
Moments after the TIMES published the article revealing that information, incensed progressives threatened to cancel their subscriptions.
The drumbeat for cancellation reached fever pitch, with scores of crazed progressives taking to social media, demanding that the Executive Editor of the Times be fired.
“Dean Baquet should absolutely lose his job over this. Quickly. The damage to the whistleblower’s safety is already done, but @nytimes must condemn this decision to protect future sources & whistleblowers. This cannot be left as an acceptable precedent. #CancelNYT,” Twitter user @KristinMinkDC wrote.
However, with all due respect to the rabid progressive mob on social media, and for the sake of clarity, this individual for whatever reason has been assigned the title of “whistleblower” perhaps to give some legitimacy to his claim. However, by legal definition, he doesn’t meet even the basic criteria as a whistleblower.
Which under “The Whistleblower Program” states “an eligible whistleblower is a person who voluntarily provides the SEC with ORIGINAL INFORMATION about a possible violation of the federal securities laws that has occurred, is ongoing, or is about to occur.”
Nothing within this complaint was original and or first-hand knowledge, but rather a compilation of erroneous materials gathered from a multitude of sources including articles from the mainstream media, in short, a partisan “hit job” under the guise of a legitimate whistleblower complaint.
The Times under siege attempted to explain their decision to their frenzied readers stating they published “limited information” about the whistleblower to give him credibility against Trump’s claims that the unidentified person was a “political hack job.”
However, that “credibility” seems to be eroding by the hour as more information is being revealed. Perhaps the most damming is the assertion by the whistleblower aka “LEAKER” within his formal nine-page complaint that there was a quid pro quo for the aid.
The complaint cited that officials in Kyiv were aware that the military aid could be in jeopardy in early August; however, the whistleblower acknowledged he wasn’t sure “how or when they learned of it.”
That glaring admission regarding the timeline undercuts the contention that there was a quid pro quo in place freezing almost $400 million dollars, without Ukrainian officials knowing about it, would be an impossibility.
Another erroneous contention by the whistleblower is the July 19th text message conversation from Volker to Giuliani, provided to Fox News on Thursday showing that it was Volker who had actually encouraged the former New York Mayor to reach out to Ukraine, and not the other way around.
However, according to the whistleblower’s complaint, he claimed diplomats were upset about Giuliani’s role in pushing Kyiv to open an investigation into the Bidens.
Stating within the complaint, that by mid-May, U.S. diplomat Kurt Volker sought to “contain the damage” from Giuliani’s outreach to Ukraine.
In fact, Volker actually sent Giuliani a message reading, “connecting you here with Andrey Yermak, who is very close to President Zelensky.”
Trump noted that the whistleblower had no first-hand knowledge of alleged abuse.
“Who’s the person that gave the whistleblower the information? Because that’s close to a spy,” Trump said. “You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart, right? The spies and treason? We used to handle it a little differently than we do now.”
At this juncture it would be safe to assume this latest political “hit job” is following within the same general pattern as the Russian Collusion hoax, with the same players lurking within the deep-state, disgruntled, desperate and despicable bureaucrats attempting another soft coup.