I do not think the whistle blower statute was intended to cover indirect witnesses. For instance in criminal law one cannot evoke someone else’s privileges. Seems to me that would follow. Obviously the enemy has been cooking up this non sense for awhile. Hopefully they ensnare themselves.
“I do not think the whistle blower statute was intended to cover indirect witnesses.”
Hearsay is not allowed in as evidence in any court of law in the United States. Maybe so in banana republics.
Hopefully they ensnare themselves.”
In what? No one is enforcing the law.