Impeach 'process' more like covert op than real inquiry
From RealClearInvestigations we learn that Eric Ciaramella's name for weeks has been bandied about on Twitter feeds and intelligence blogs as the suspected person who blew the whistle on the President.
A reporter's attempts to reach Ciaramella were unsuccessful. Though a reporter reached Ciaramella's father, the CIA analyst did not get back to that reporter. Neither did Ciaramella get back to a reporter from his office at CIA headquarters in suburban Washington.
As the CIA employee is not a covert operator, there is no particular need for him to avoid answering press inquiries. In light of the virtual certainties that Ciaramella knew his name was being widely discussed and that a reporter had tried to contact him, it follows that, if he was not the "whistleblower," a straightforward denial should have been a simple matter.
But Ciaramella's deliberate reticence is proof that he prefers not to deny his "whistleblower" role. He has had plenty of opportunity to issue a denial but has not done so. Thus: Ciaramella refuses to deny that he is the "whistleblower."
Further, we can conclude that Ciaramella's refusal, which has no obvious personal benefit, is a result of the desire of Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and other key Democrats to keep Ciaramella's political ax-grinding from reaching the ears of the American public. Similarly, those in the media who decline to air Ciaramella's name are playing into the hands of Democratic Party leaders. If Ciaramella is not the "whistleblower," let him step forward and deny it rather than hiding behind his CIA badge and Schiff's penchant for idiosyncratic "covert ops."
Please see RealClear's expose at:
https://invisiblepaul.blogspot.com/2019/10/report-cia-whistleblower-sought-dirt-on.html
A reporter's attempts to reach Ciaramella were unsuccessful. Though a reporter reached Ciaramella's father, the CIA analyst did not get back to that reporter. Neither did Ciaramella get back to a reporter from his office at CIA headquarters in suburban Washington.
As the CIA employee is not a covert operator, there is no particular need for him to avoid answering press inquiries. In light of the virtual certainties that Ciaramella knew his name was being widely discussed and that a reporter had tried to contact him, it follows that, if he was not the "whistleblower," a straightforward denial should have been a simple matter.
But Ciaramella's deliberate reticence is proof that he prefers not to deny his "whistleblower" role. He has had plenty of opportunity to issue a denial but has not done so. Thus: Ciaramella refuses to deny that he is the "whistleblower."
Further, we can conclude that Ciaramella's refusal, which has no obvious personal benefit, is a result of the desire of Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and other key Democrats to keep Ciaramella's political ax-grinding from reaching the ears of the American public. Similarly, those in the media who decline to air Ciaramella's name are playing into the hands of Democratic Party leaders. If Ciaramella is not the "whistleblower," let him step forward and deny it rather than hiding behind his CIA badge and Schiff's penchant for idiosyncratic "covert ops."
Please see RealClear's expose at:
https://invisiblepaul.blogspot.com/2019/10/report-cia-whistleblower-sought-dirt-on.html
No comments:
Post a Comment