On Episode 90 of War Room: Impeachment Stephen K. Bannon, Raheem Kassam, and Jason Miller contend the validity of the whistleblower – and whether the term itself is even applicable.
“What is at the heart of this whistleblower controversy?” Bannon asked his co-hosts. “Is he an official whistleblower or not?”
Kassam responded, referencing a recent essay by Michael Anton in the Claremont Review of Books: “He’s not a whistleblower. The whistleblower laws and accepted nomenclature about the way this works requires firstly the person to work directly in the organization or with the organization he’s blowing the whistle on.”
“This person,” he continued, “the CIA person, if it is that person – which I think there is a 99.9 per cent certainty about – did not work with this, did not hear the call first had. He probably did not even hear the call second hand, it was probably third hand.”
Bannon asked: “If he had been a detailee there and gone back does that qualify?”
You can listen to the War Room: Impeachment podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, Spotify, Google Play, and Soundcloud.
“If he had been a detailee,” Kassam explained, “that wouldn’t have been the process. The process within the White House and the NSC for whistleblowers is completely different from the whistleblower process from the rest of government.”
“And he was gone from the NSC at this time, back to his point of origin,” Bannon clarified.
“Absolutely,” Kassam confirmed. “So the phrase ‘whistleblower’ doesn’t make any sense. We need to stop using it. We need to call him the ‘crybaby.’ Because this person was crybabying about the fact that him and his buddies thought they set policy. They don’t set policy.”
“This is something Anton gets to in the essay in the Claremont Review of Books, and goes through in detail not just how a whistleblower process is supposed to work, not just how this person is so removed from this whole process it doesn’t even count; but also why. And it comes back to what we’ve said on this show from the very beginning: these people think the president’s job is to appoint them and leave them alone to set policy.”
“Is that why this is so important?” Bannon turned to Miller.
“This is one of the key Democratic narratives,” Miller explained. “That they want to treat the whistleblower as if they’re some kind of un-indictable, sacrosanct, perfect being. Where it is very clear President Trump wants this person to have to be held accountable for the entire drama that they caused.”
Bannon added how the Democrats are claiming if the individuals identity is exposed, “the whole whistleblower concept will collapse.”
“Right,” Miller affirmed. “We’ve had legal scholars on [War Room: Impeachment], and I’ve even read through the Whistleblower Act. It doesn’t grant you any sort of anonymity. If you see some aspect of waste or fraud in say spending within your job and you go and report it, it means you’re not going to get fired.”