BOOM! Mollie Hemingway named the whistleblower Eric Ciamella on FOX News! Fist time on MSM?

twitchy.com...


Finally!

Most anchors are fed up to be silenced on the name of the whistleblower... See Howard Kurtz go into damage control!

I usually try to make a better story with a video, but this is just what it is.
I think it is stupid FOX execs have gaged their staff from saying this.

Was this actually the first time on MSM?

Later add:

I generally like Fox news with always trying to give to sides of the story. Opinion hosts not claiming to be non-partisan. Even admitting their ‘color’.
Still these execs are terrible for gagging News hosts. As ms Hemingway states: the report is out there. You can debate the report and remain unclear about the name. Omission is imho one of the biggest no-no’s in journalism.

a reply to: Goedhardt

try not to get so excited next time... Breathe and use English.... You will get your stars and flags....

Why does the WB even matter now?

You are all caught up in that...why? cuz you have nothing else.

Eric Ciamella named the whistleblower by MSM

It's like a UFO sighting , unless there's an official announcement, it never happened...

originally posted by: tinner07
a reply to: Goedhardt

try not to get so excited next time... Breathe and use English.... You will get your stars and flags....

You are close, I dó tend to get excited on stupid things. Still, this time I felt kinda guilty for having hardly any text with the link. And willing to obey the rules of this great site, I added some extra opinion on this.

a reply to: Goedhardt

I honestly don't care who the wb is.
It's the info that mattered not the messenger.

a reply to: Goedhardt

GOOD!

More openness, never less.

a reply to: tinner07

After looking at Registered: 4-11-2012 I don't think this person is too worried about getting stars and flags.
And for this I will star and flag you.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Goedhardt

I honestly don't care who the wb is.
It's the info that mattered not the messenger.

So, you don't care if the info came from someone with no first hand knowledge of the topic?
Or that there is no way to corroborate what the info says?
Or that the WB may just be a vengeful person looking to get back at someone for being wronged?
Or that the info came from someone with a dangerous political agenda?


Without those questions answered, the info is worth as much as my (or your) opinion, which is zero.

I guess that since it fits your own personal bias, it wouldn't matter.

The left should want his name out there. If Trump retaliates, thats a violation he could actually go down for.

So , those Loony Dems had to scrape the bottom of the pickle barrel to find someone ignorant enough to face perjury charges from the US Senate for a "Fistful of Dollars".
He does have time to back out though .
And , I bet he does .
Looks too smart for that.
The Dems would just say , that was not the one and continue their search .
Wonderfully hilarious.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
The left should want his name out there. If Trump retaliates, thats a violation he could actually go down for.

And he was friends with Hilary. If he does that, he would be toast in 2020, maybe. With the Epstein episode that just occurred, they bury it fast with the MSM programming. What do you think Trump would do when faced with removal from the White House? I think he would take as many down with him as possible, and in this scenario he would actually be draining the swamp, which would be another Campaign Promise kept.

So, you don't care if the info came from someone with no first hand knowledge of the topic?
Or that there is no way to corroborate what the info says?
Or that the WB may just be a vengeful person looking to get back at someone for being wronged?
Or that the info came from someone with a dangerous political agenda?


Without those questions answered, the info is worth as much as my (or your) opinion, which is zero.

I guess that since it fits your own personal bias, it wouldn't matter.

a reply to: Krakatoa
Pretty sure that has all been covered unless you keep your head in the sand, which covers your personal bias on this

a reply to: Goedhardt

So, FOX NEWS is spreading unverified rumors, again?

originally posted by: tinner07

So, you don't care if the info came from someone with no first hand knowledge of the topic?
Or that there is no way to corroborate what the info says?
Or that the WB may just be a vengeful person looking to get back at someone for being wronged?
Or that the info came from someone with a dangerous political agenda?


Without those questions answered, the info is worth as much as my (or your) opinion, which is zero.

I guess that since it fits your own personal bias, it wouldn't matter.

a reply to: Krakatoa
Pretty sure that has all been covered unless you keep your head in the sand, which covers your personal bias on this

Really? Do tell. Educate me.

What part of that WB claim is based upon 1st hand knowledge of the Ukranian call?

When did this WB have access to this call, first hand to hear the conversation?

I welcome your explanation of each of these points.

Unless, of course, you don''t have accurate facts to back up your statement.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
The left should want his name out there. If Trump retaliates, thats a violation he could actually go down for.

And, what if one his supporters retaliates? Will Trump go down for that?

What if one of his supporters retaliates against one of this man's family members? Will Trump go down for that?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
The left should want his name out there. If Trump retaliates, thats a violation he could actually go down for.

And, what if one his supporters retaliate? Will Trump go down for that?

What if one of his supporters retaliates against one of this man's family members? Will Trump go down for that?

Will those supporters be in a position to retaliate against his job? Since, that is what the WB laws protect.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
The left should want his name out there. If Trump retaliates, thats a violation he could actually go down for.

And, what if one his supporters retaliate? Will Trump go down for that?

What if one of his supporters retaliates against one of this man's family members? Will Trump go down for that?

Will those supporters be in a position to retaliate against his job? Since, that is what the WB laws protect.

Thanks for revealing your real motive for wanting the whistle blower's name exposed to the general public. It's not about protecting him from losing his job any more. It's about public blood lust, retaliation that may result in violence, threatening the man named, his friends and his family with of loss of life, limb and property.

Someone needs a skull.

And, there is no verification that this is even the original whistle blower, someone who may have been caught up in the bureaucracy of it all, or someone that has nothing to do with it whatsoever.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
The left should want his name out there. If Trump retaliates, thats a violation he could actually go down for.

And, what if one his supporters retaliate? Will Trump go down for that?

What if one of his supporters retaliates against one of this man's family members? Will Trump go down for that?

Will those supporters be in a position to retaliate against his job? Since, that is what the WB laws protect.

Thanks for revealing your real motive for wanting the whistle blower's name exposed to the general public. It's not about protecting him from losing his job any more. It's about public blood lust, retaliation that may result in violence, threatening the man named, his friends and his family with of loss of life, limb and property.

Someone needs a skull.

And, there is no verification that this is even the original whistle blower, someone who may have been caught up in the bureaucracy of it all, or someone that has nothing to do with it whatsoever.

Please refrain from projecting your own warped visions of what I am thinking. The law is clear here, the WB law only protects the person form retribution from "superiors". It does not protect anyone from external forces at all, or their identity. If anyone lashed out at this person, knowing who they were, I would just as equally condemn that as well.

Too many here play loose with the laws and what they cover. That is what I am saying. The stuff you rambled on about has nothing to do with what I said. In fact, it is hearsay and not direct evidence of me having those thoughts at all. The fact YOU thought of them speaks more about you that me to be honest.

originally posted by: tinner07
Why does the WB even matter now?

You are all caught up in that...why? cuz you have nothing else.

What an absolute joke

'' Why does the WB even matter? ''

The same reason the Steele Dossier matters

Because they're fabricated nonsense by the same people trying to oust an elected President.
Crimes are being committed you oaf.. its like saying the shooter doesn't matter in JFK's assassination as long as the autopsy is released.