Whistle Blower and Eric Snowdon

[kaima]

THE STORY BEHIND THE STORY
Here’s Why The NYT Published Details On The Trump-Ukraine Whistleblower
By Amy Russo

Here’s Why The New York Times Published Details On The Trump-Ukraine Whistleblower
Executive editor Dean Baquet is defending the decision amid criticism from readers and the whistleblower’s lawyers.

By Amy Russo


www.huffpost.com/entry/new-york-times-trump-ukraine-whistleblower_n_5d8e0b55e4b0e9e7604b7903

The New York Times is defending its decision to publish details about the whistleblower whose anonymous complaint helped fuel an impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump.

Amid backlash from readers and the individual’s lawyer, the paper’s executive editor, Dean Baquet, said in a statement on Thursday that information about the person ― a CIA officer who was detailed to the White House ― and his assignment are crucial, especially given efforts by Trump and other Republicans to smear him.

REAL LIFE. REAL NEWS. REAL VOICES.
Help us tell more of the stories that matter from voices that too often remain unheard.
Join HuffPost Plus
“We decided to publish limited information about the whistle-blower ― including the fact that he works for a nonpolitical agency and that his complaint is based on an intimate knowledge and understanding of the White House ― because we wanted to provide information to readers that allows them to make their own judgments about whether or not he is credible,” Baquet said.

The Times revealed that the whistleblower is now back at the CIA, and that the person appeared to be an analyst by training with deep understanding of American foreign policy and Ukrainian politics.

Baquet argued that details about the whistleblower are important in weighing the unfolding events.

“The president and some of his supporters have attacked the credibility of the whistle-blower, who has presented information that has touched off a landmark impeachment proceeding,” the editor said.

The Times noted that “many readers, including some who work in national security and intelligence,” disagreed with publishing the whistleblower story, with some “saying it potentially put the person’s life in danger and may have a chilling effect on would-be whistle-blowers.”

You can read the NYT article about the whistleblower here.

The whistleblower’s lead counsel, Andrew Bakaj, warned that the newspaper’s article was “deeply concerning and reckless, as it can place the individual in harm’s way.”

“The whistle-blower has a right to anonymity,” Bakaj added.

Last week, before the release of a redacted version of the whistleblower’s complaint and a White House summary of Trump’s July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump dismissed the complaint as “just another political hack job.”

On Thursday, following the release of the complaint, Trump ripped into the whistleblower and his sources in the White House, darkly talking of “spies and treason” and of punishment for such offenses “in the old days when we were smart.”

Trump isn’t done. He kicked off his Friday with a fresh barrage of tweets decrying the whistleblower’s complaint as “so inaccurate” and patting himself of the back for a “very legal and very good” call with the Ukrainian president.

House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said earlier this week that the whistleblower wants to speak with his committee and talks are underway to set a date.

[kaima]

In the thread about Eric Snowdon, he was criticized for going outisde prescribed channels to reveal information about government miss-deeds. With the current Whistle Blower case, we have a responsible intelligence officer who is proceeding within the law and guidelines to reveal information about miss-deeds within the government.

Now we get to see how it plays out within the law, with a crooked administration at the helm. Does the Good Guy win in the end?

* * *

In my own career my conclusion was that a whistle blower NEVER wins. As a person they can only lose, be it a career, reputation or in extremes, their life. But some things -- patriotism is one - demand the extraordinary, on occasion.

I was once confronted by a Contracting Officer about breaking the law. I never learned what he based his warning on, but I know my conduct was always within the law, and when I answered that "You will not find my name on anything illegal", he blanched, turned pale (his own record was .. from my side view, questionable ... ) and walked away shaken.

[Jaga]

Kai, I am glad that you did not trick yourself into the trap.

I am glad that finally after so many lies of the current president there is a clear case against him and his corruption.
The SNL has a lot of laughter and some really good analysis of what is going on:

www.mediaite.com/entertainment/snl-cold-open-features-return-of-alec-baldwin-as-donald-trump-fretting-impeachment-inquiry/

see the opening

(I am sorry I am less visible in the forum but I was for three days in Napa Valley CA for the work meeting, just came back)

[karl]

Sept 27, 2019 15:44:06 GMT -7 kaima said:

In the thread about Eric Snowdon, he was criticized for going outisde prescribed channels to reveal information about government miss-deeds. With the current Whistle Blower case, we have a responsible intelligence officer who is proceeding within the law and guidelines to reveal information about miss-deeds within the government.

Now we get to see how it plays out within the law, with a crooked administration at the helm. Does the Good Guy win in the end?

* * *

In my own career my conclusion was that a whistle blower NEVER wins. As a person they can only lose, be it a career, reputation or in extremes, their life. But some things -- patriotism is one - demand the extraordinary, on occasion.

I was once confronted by a Contracting Officer about breaking the law. I never learned what he based his warning on, but I know my conduct was always within the law, and when I answered that "You will not find my name on anything illegal", he blanched, turned pale (his own record was .. from my side view, questionable ... ) and walked away shaken.

Kai

For as wishing not to needlessly prolong this presentation and/or appear to be argumentive for this would be far from the truth. But simply to add to what you have brought in to view. The term,"Whistle Blower", is an interesting term that conjures a mental picture of a lone person protecting the many from an evil that is about to devour them..Perhaps in some cases, this would be so, but on the subject of that person I believe you are correctly speaking of would be," Edward Snowden, I am not sure of Eric Snowdon that perhaps is misprint.

My reasons of reply is not for condoning the currant actions or reactions of this Trump administration, they can speak for them selves. The reasons of my reply is a clarification of actions that do account as proper over that of such actions we are speaking of, that being Edward Snowden and others of his classification.

Yes of course, Government is not always correct in all activities that come across the desks of Federal managers, for they are of the human race, but with much more responsibilities such in actions that effect others of both the public and Federal programmes. If another manager or employee of responsibility has the occasion to see with responsible eyes that some is not correct, yes of course, that respective persons{s} has the duty to bring this to the attention to his/her duty manager. But in doing so in a professional manner. That is to place in to a report out lining the issue{s} and with this, a corrective solution. Even though the report although well managed is long and well detailed, is non the less the proper accepted manner of bringing out a flaw that needs correcting. For in this manner, the person is not only bringing to light, an issue, but also presenting a solution{s}, for this would be needed for the manager or department head to add to his/hers bag of tools. For every one has a boss, and this goes double for department heads and managers. For they must answer for the actions of those they are responsible for.

In the case of Mr. Snowden and others of his sort, they are not true to their employer, but in that stead, betray the trust placed in them.

In the case of an employee rather be they are contracted or career is non-the-less no different, the responsibility is still theirs to accept. If the work does not agree with them, then they needs be get out in to another line of work.

Karl