In late September, it was discovered that President Donald Trump had asked the Ukranian government to investigate Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, while he held millions of dollars over the country’s head. From information released by a whistleblower in the intelligence community, impeachment inquiries have started moving forward in the U.S. House. Despite this, though, the media, and allies of the president seem to be focusing on something other than the inquiries: the identity of the whistleblower.
According to the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Justice, a whistleblower complaint can be made and be seen as an actual complaint if the complaint is made to someone who has the necessary security clearance to handle it and if there is a reasonable belief that wrongdoing occurred. In Trump’s case, the complaint was filed for abuse of office, with the Inspector General of the Directorate of National Intelligence deeming that there was enough reasonable belief that wrongdoing occurred.
On Sep. 26, the New York Times released information about the whistleblower, uncovering that they are a CIA official assigned to the White House and an expert on Ukraine. This information is already enough for the White House to begin investigating who the whistleblower might be. And enough for retaliation to occur. While the language itself does not amount to full retaliation, coupled with the supposed actions, it is against the law.
As soon as the report came out, Trump began calling the whistleblower a ‘partisan cheat’ and a ‘leaker.’ According to the Whistleblower Project, the usage of leaker when describing a whistleblower is typically done to delegitimize their claim. It makes it easier to say that the whistleblower is motivated by personal gain or trying to start a controversy instead of bringing up a questionable action for scrutinization.
Using language such as “highly partisan” and “leaker,” coupled with launching an internal investigation to find out who the hacker is, should be seen as a form of illegal threats and retaliation. Trump said at a meeting with the U.S. mission to the U.N.: “You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? With spies and treason, right? We used to handle them a little different than we do now.” Here, he alludes to killing the whistleblower who, in Trump’s eyes, is a spy.
Trump’s use of this language has led to his supporters doing the same. Many of his supporters have echoed his cries of “coup” and “witch hunt” with some on Twitter attacking the integrity of the whistleblower. Through this language, groups such as the Oath Keepers, a far-right militia, have threatened to use force to stop the impeachment of Trump. Regarding Trump, his vengeance would most likely be aimed at getting the whistleblower fired, which is against the law.
The New York Times’ choice to come out with this information is plain irresponsible. This information can lead to a lot more coming out and to the reveal of the whistleblower’s identity. Already, emboldened by our toxic and divisive political climate, Trump supporters are all over social media, making threats against the whistleblower. If their identity is revealed, they have a right to fear for their safety and worry that testifying at Congress will lead to retaliation.
It doesn’t matter who put in the report. All that matters is what that report says. Trump has published a memo of his phone records and the texts from those involved, so the identity of the whistleblower matters even less now. It is easy to see from the texts and memos released by the White House that the report is true. Now is the time to investigate the abuse of office claims.
Not who the whistleblower is.
