If the whistleblower is unmasked

[bluecollar2]

It will have a chilling effect on public safety.

For example, every time you get on an airplane you are protected by the whistleblower act which protects people in the airline industry who report safety-related issues.

Pilots, Mechanics, Flight Attendants, Fuelers, Dispatchers do their jobs knowing that they are protected from retaliation for reporting their concerns.

I say this from experience.

I can't speak for people in the chemical manufacturing industry, rail transportation, hazardous materials handling...but if anyone else knows how the public safety might be affected maybe they could share in this thread.

[dewsgirl]

1. I was watching Rand Paul last night in horror, I

thought he was going to out him right then and there. They have that one guys name, I'm actually surprised he hasn't tweeted it out, yet. I agree, the Whistleblower act is there to protect us all. It is all extremely chilling.

[bluecollar2]

3. I know...

I was wondering about industries like food processing where protections exist.

For instance, if an employee at a vegetable packing house knows that the produce cleaning/sanitizing process is not in accordance with procedures and fears retaliation...

The potential for serious public health problems is enormous...

[dewsgirl]

5. I was thinking of the CDC.

It is all so terrifying.

[bluecollar2]

7. Blood banks, plasma centers

Pharmaceutical manufacturing...

[olegramps]

18. Rand Paul advocated for the idenity of the whistlblower. If he is successful can he charged?

If something happens to harm the person, could those whose sought to identify him be held on charges?

[TheBlackAdder]

22. He's a chickenshit, like his old man. He'll just prod another to do it-claiming he was just kidding.

[spanone]

2. That's what the republicons want. A chilling effect.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

4. The Whistleblower Act is unrelated to OSHA's whistleblower protection programs.

The Whistleblower Act applies only to government employees disclosing illegal activities within the government.

[bluecollar2]

9. Whistleblowing is whistleblowing

Doesnt matter which "act" covers the activity.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

10. It does, because the Whistleblower Act covers very specific employees and actions.

OSHA's whistleblower protections are unrelated to the Whistleblower Act and address different employees and actions. It's always a good idea for people to review what protections apply to their employee status; there's a lot of misinformation out there.

[bluecollar2]

11. I doubt that those who support unmasking

Whistleblowers are willing to make that distinction.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

12. Which is why it's a good idea for people who work to understand the protections they do have,

in order to protect themselves.

[bluecollar2]

13. If this whistleblower is unmasked

It won't matter a tinker's cuss what "protections" people have.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

14. The concept of "whistleblowing" will certainly change; nothing is static.

My objection is with the assertion in the OP that says

every time you get on an airplane you are protected by the whistleblower act which protects people in the airline industry who report safety-related issues.

Airline passengers are not protected by the Whistleblower Act, nor are people within the industry.

[bluecollar2]

17. Semantics in text

If you reread the text in the OP you'll see that it was specified as to which group of people were being protected by which act...

"...the whistleblower act which protects people in the airline industry..."

And, by default, whistleblowing does protect "Airline passengers."



Jttps://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/whistleblower/

[Laura PourMeADrink]

6. Never utter their name!

Link to tweet

?s=20

[world wide wally]

20. As Trump says,"Rand Paul is a doggy looking man" (or something like that)

[Kablooie]

8. Can a Republican use the act to be protected if he whistleblows the whistleblower?

Since trump proclaimed it would be a duty to the country.

[amcgrath]

15. This is a circus

They know who the whistleblower is. They probably have since before the public even knew there was one.

Revealing their identity would cause the republicans several problems.

Outed, a whistleblower has no need to stay in the shadows - in fact a good lawyer or PR team will encourage the whistleblower to go on as many TV shows and do as many newspaper interviews as possible, the Republicans learned this through Valerie Plame.

Secondly, an outed whistleblower has no reason not to appear before committees. This is a problem, because not only will they answer questions, part of their testimony will be to vindicate themselves, by explaining just how serious the events they blew the whistle on are.

Thirdly, while laws are being flouted, whistleblower protection does exist, and attempts by the Admin to punish them will not look good to the public.

This is not an attempt to unmask a whistleblower. This is not an attempt to force a whistleblower to testify.

This is a circus put on, to let every potential whistleblower know that the republicans will come after them hard.

It is witness intimidation.

[crickets]

19. +1 ...I'm not sure they do know,

or even that they think they know, but I firmly agree with the rest of your post. It's an intimidation game, all the way.

This is not an attempt to unmask a whistleblower. This is not an attempt to force a whistleblower to testify.

This is a circus put on, to let every potential whistleblower know that the republicans will come after them hard.

It is witness intimidation.

As with the rest of your post: absolutely on point.

[MineralMan]

16. If the name that's being mentioned is the one I think it is,

there's a strong chance that it's not actually the whistleblower at all.

Here's a puzzle: Why isn't the right-wing media outing the name? Could it be that they know they have the wrong person's name?

[Roy Rolling]

29. Part of the Strategy

They focus on one, when there are likely more than one. Everything they do is for a reason. In this case, to simply make it seem there is one tiny, insignificant CIA person complaining.

There are many.

So the PR response would be “bring it on, there’s more whistleblowers after that”.

They expect Democrats to cower in fear at their threats of unmasking, we shouldn’t play the role of hapless victims of their threats. Let them “unmask” someone only to find there’s a dozen others telling the same story. Call their bluff.

It’s a propaganda war, not a legal battle.

[Marthe48]

21. I think it is when, not if

I appreciate whoever it is and wish them the best! All of the treasonous, traitorous, law-breaking repukes can go straight to hell.

[LTG]

23. I've looked at the whistleblower law

as well as the two other documents that provide whistleblower protections for members of the intelligence community.

I am probably missing something, but I can’t find any mention of anonymity or prohibition of identity disclosure. The protections in general seem limited and difficult to enforce.

[Lock him up.]

25. If outed, can the whistle-blower sue back?

If yes, who (or what if the fed gov) and up to what amount?

[LTG]

27. One of the biggest shortcomings of the

Intelligence Community whistleblower law is that it doesn’t provide access to the federal courts to remedy injuries or damages caused by retaliation or reprisals.

Not sure what could be done for simply “outing” the whistleblower. If he or she came to some harm there would have to be a fairly direct link between the outing, which isn’t a violation of law, and the act that caused the harm. A fairly tall hurdle, even when suing the likes of Trump.

Although a civil case has a lower burden of proof, and he is likely to give you sound bites that could help, it would still be a crapshoot.

But then, I’m not an expert in such things and haven’t delved deeply into relevant case law.

[mainer]

24. The whistleblower is also an intelligence officer

Revealing his/her name makes it doubly egregious.

[LTG]

28. Not all members of the IC,

in fact l suspect most, are individuals whose identities are considered “secret” and whose public exposure would be considered a violation of secrecy regulations and laws.

Area specialists, analysts and most members of the Directorate of Analysis, the Directorate of Science & Technology, the Directorate of Support, and the Directorate of Digital Innovation. Would likely fall within the not classified group.

The Directorate of Operations would, I imagine, contain most individuals with identities considered confidential.

An issue I could be easily wrong about and would welcome being corrected by more informed individuals.

[TexasTowelie]

26. It will also have a chilling effect on personal safety.

The goons on right wing sites and Facebook have the habit of tracking and intimidating anyone that disrupts their agenda.

[MineralMan]

30. Yes. That might deter others from coming forward, which

is probably the goal.

[Counselor1]

31. Make a Viral Response!

I'm the Whistle blower and you can too! Get a whistle, take a selfie with it and post it against Trump anywhere you want! If, you're scared... they've probably got hundreds of shots of your face already.

https://bobcogan.imgur.com/all/