As the year ended, the president joined several of his close companions in publicizing the name of the person they believe is the whistleblower who prompted the investigation that led to impeachment.
Never mind that his or her identity is protected by federal law and the alleged identity has never been supported by solid evidence from named sources, so the identity is not needed. Mainstream media, however, have followed the whistleblower protection law as well as their own policies and have not used the name.
But the president posted the name on his Twitter account, so millions of readers around the world know it. Add to that the not-so-subtle threats and implied suggestions by the Trump clan, and the result is the whistleblower's safety is at risk -- perhaps even endangering his/her life.
That doesn't seem to bother the Trumpistas. In fact, it may even be their plan. As long as someone else does the deed, they can insist on their right of free speech.
As Pug Mahoney would say, however, "Your civil rights end where my toes begin." In any case, retaliation like that is no longer civil. It's criminal.
So now comes in another legal issue: Incitement to violence. If something happens to the alleged whistleblower -- despite there being no solid evidence that he/she is who the Trumpistas say -- those who spread the name could be subject to criminal charges.
This would be even more criminal if the name broadcast is not, in fact, the name of the person who touched off the impeachment investigation.
Oops. Never mind.
That won't work, gang. You guys indirectly cause severe harm -- social at least and physical at worst -- to another human being.
Hiding behind "executive privilege" after causing violence or death won't be enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment