Posted on 01/30/2020 8:57:35 AM PST by davikkm
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts on Wednesday blocked an attempt by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) to pose questions regarding the so-called “whistleblower” — the individual who sparked the House Democrats’ partisan impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump — according to reports.
Politico and The Hill state Roberts indicated he would oppose reading Paul’s questions, as it is believed he would be forced to name or provide identifying information on the alleged individual.
Speaking to reporters following a Republican dinner, Paul signaled he may still fight to have his question read.
“It’s still an ongoing process; it may happen tomorrow,” he told reporters.
However, other Senate Republicans, include Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R-SD), appear to have sided with Roberts over Paul.
“I don’t think that happens, and I guess I would hope that it doesn’t,” Thune said when asked if the so-called “whistleblower” will be named.
Roberts has not offered any legal argument for hiding the individual’s identity. As Breitbart News has repeatedly explained, the only statutory protection for people who submit whistleblower complaints is that the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG) cannot name him or her publicly:
Even left-wing mainstream media outlets—CNN, the New York Times, National Public Radio (NPR), and Reuters — determined that, certainly, no law prohibits President Donald Trump or members of Congress from disclosing the name of the leaker who sparked the impeachment inquiry.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
In this Demonrat Dog-and-Pony show, Whisltleblower is just a euphemism for Liar
Whistle Blower is probably Schitt...
When Rand announces he has a question today, “Mr. Chief Justice, I have a question about Eric Ciaramella, the whistleblower”. At that point the cat is officially out of the bag.
How does chief justice Roberts know who the whistleblower is?
Another judge ignoring law and making his own.
I think Roberts is trying to appear evenhanded and above partisanship, as he did with Obamacare. The correct response would be for Roberts to rule based on the law and the Constitution, which would allow the question and naming Ciaramella. We know that is not going to happen with our compromised Chief Justice.
Not sure why some folks on FR dislike Rand Paul so much. Yes, he disagrees with Trump occasionally, but he does so openly, and basis his firm principles. He doesn’t stab Trump in the back.
And when he sees a political sham and abuse of the Constitution, as is going on now with “impeachment,” no one speaks louder in support of Trump than Rand Paul.
J Roberts is the cowardly lion.....or in other words a “a Chicken shit”......gutless ass.
When Rand announces he has a question today, “Mr. Chief Justice, I have a question about Eric Ciaramella, the whistleblower”. At that point the cat is officially out of the bag.
...
I like your style!
This thread needs a pic/meme of Foghorn Leghorn saying, “kid, I like your style”
Thank you. That is a very good question. Everybody knows who he is. It is public knowledge, but it appears roberts and most of the GOPe are in bed with, or are afraid of, the deep state.
Speaking for myself:
I respect Rand, as a man of principle. I find him easier to relate to in terms of where he’s coming from than his father.
Unfortunately, some of his principles are obscure, or a bit inflexible in face of reality.
On balance, I like him, but he sure can be a contrary pain.
More proof that the only good thing we got out of 8 years of George W. Bush was Alito. The best thing about Obama was that during his last term he opened our eyes to the deep state and the fact that the global establishment republicans are not conservatives and definitely NOT on our side.
Any questions on what legal theory suggests that the guy is actually covered by whistleblower rules, and what statute supports this?
DC and its inhabitants live in an imaginary world, where unlaw is law and truth is untruth. Delusionary, illusionary. Nearly everyone thinks and talks in this trace so described.
Can’t say this; can’t think that; someone needs to come out of that trace and start fighting for reality.
How did Roberts end up with this gig?
Did the SC draw straws?
He need not use the term “whistleblower,” but it seems he could ask whether Schiff has ever discussed impeachment of President Trump with a gentleman by the name of Eric Ciaramella.
Constitution requires the Chief Justice to preside. However he has no real power, just there to keep everyone from speaking at once. He’s not a trial judge.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.