It’s funny that you guys are such thugs that you think outing him is a good thing.
People I know who served would beat the shit out of someone who did what you’re trying to do. You should be ashamed of yourself.
WTF is wrong with you piece of fucking shit republicans. A patriot did the right thing by legally reporting illegal activity by the president and his cronies and you limp dicks get off on the idea of endangering him. I hope you get ran over by a Prius on your way home.I doubt any harm would come to *****
I doubt you are correct on the issue of harm.
Tell it to Christine Blasey Ford, or the alt reich and militia crowds who feel Il Douche is above the law, who repeatedly threaten civil war when they don't get their way. This group has people who "don't care about the optics," remember? Your dismissal is hard to reconcile given the incredible surge in right wing terrorism lately, but I guess minor compared to you trying to help Paul. I know some Brits who might have an award for you.
Pretty fucking ironic considering your sig.I doubt any harm would come to *****
Goddamn hypocrite. Go sit in a fucking corner and let those greater than yourself protect you. At least you'll do less harm that way.The ugliest is the man who thinks nothing is worth fighting and dying for and lets men better and braver than himself protect him.
you must have hung with disreputable sorts it seems. I never did in my 22+ years of service. All a professional group.It’s funny that you guys are such thugs that you think outing him is a good thing.
People I know who served would beat the shit out of someone who did what you’re trying to do. You should be ashamed of yourself.
lolPretty fucking ironic considering your sig.
Goddamn hypocrite. Go sit in a fucking corner and let those greater than yourself protect you. At least you'll do less harm that way.
threats? hoping harm comes to another?WTF is wrong with you piece of fucking shit republicans. A patriot did the right thing by legally reporting illegal activity by the president and his cronies and you limp dicks get off on the idea of endangering him. I hope you get ran over by a Prius on your way home.
Is that all you got? That was a very pathetic response! Your the one who doesn`t have a clue!threats? hoping harm comes to another? -- now that is funny!!
Hoping isn't a threat, but it is a taste of what you're offering since the only reason to post the whistle blowers name is as a latent threat or because you hope harm comes to him.threats? hoping harm comes to another?
IMO Pelosi has a lot to answer for in this cluster by ramming through the impeachment. I'll not forget that she singlehandedly bungled the case against a prolific serial killer in CA. It was great good luck that she wasn't fatal to the investigation and prosecution, but not by any of her own doing. She's incompetent in this case as was then.
So the response to censorship of the public domain is that you're protecting a whistleblower who everyone already knows who it is? Get real. No Trump supporter gives a crap about impeachment and Trump just won impeachment. Look at the betting odds from when it started to now. Bookies set real odds that Trump got stronger by roughly 20% from the start of impeachment to yesterday, and now the GOP is going to victory-lap this all the way to Wednesday. Especially after agreeing with Schumer that Bernie can't be allowed to make it to Iowa on Monday. My oh my, how the mighty have fallen since Harry Reid. Oh and shoutout to Harry Reid from the 191 judges that Trump has rammed through. What a great guy that Harry is! Dems brought this upon themselves.Is that all you got? That was a very pathetic response! Your the one who doesn`t have a clue!
Trumps base would murder the whistleblower!
You must be insane or goofy to believe otherwise!
Trump sure knows how to pick his lawyers:
Charities steered $65M to Trump lawyer Sekulow and family :: WRAL.com
Jay Sekulow, one of President Donald Trump’s lead attorneys during the impeachment trial, is being paid for his legal work through a rented $80-a-month mailbox a block away from the White House.www.wral.com
Jay Sekulow, one of President Donald Trump’s lead attorneys during the impeachment trial, is being paid for his legal work through...the Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group, a for-profit corporation co-owned by Sekulow. The firm has no website and is not listed in national legal directories. The District of Columbia Bar has no record of it, and no attorneys list it as their employer.
But Sekulow, 63, is registered as chief counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice, a non-profit Christian legal advocacy group based in an expansive Capitol Hill row house a short walk from the Senate chamber.
A half dozen lawyers employed by the non-profit ACLJ are named in recent Senate legal briefs as members of Trump’s defense team — including one of Sekulow’s sons. The ACLJ, as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, is barred under IRS rules from engaging in partisan political activities.
...
Charity watchdogs for years have raised concerns about the blurred lines between for-profit businesses tied to Sekulow and the complex web of non-profit entities he and his family control.
The Associated Press reviewed 10 years of tax returns for the ACLJ and other charities tied to Sekulow, which are released to the public under federal law. The records from 2008 to 2017, the most recent year available, show that more than $65 million in charitable funds were paid to Sekulow, his wife, his sons, his brother, his sister-in-law, his nephew and corporations they own.
Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy, said Sekulow appears to be mixing his defense of Trump with his charitable endeavors. The group has issued a “Donor Alert” about ACLJ on its CharityWatch website.
“Charities are not supposed to be taking sides in partisan political activities, such as providing legal services to benefit a politician in an impeachment trial,” Borochoff said. “Regulators should investigate whether or not charitable resources, such as office, labor, equipment, etc., are being wrongly utilized to benefit Sekulow's for-profit law firm.”
The address for CLA Group listed in recent court filings matches Carr Workplaces, a flex-space provider that rents out mini offices, individual desks and conference rooms for periods as brief as one hour. According to its website, the company also offers its customers “virtual offices” that include a mailbox and mail forwarding.
...
A call to Carr last week asking to be connected to CLA Group was forwarded. After a few rings, the call was answered by a receptionist at the non-profit ACLJ.
...
A 2005 investigation by the publication Legal Times reported about questionable spending at ACLJ, quoting former employees describing millions in charity funds being spent to support the Sekulows' lavish lifestyle, which included multiple homes, golf junkets, chauffeur-driven cars and a private jet used to ferry then-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The Guardian and The Washington Post reported additional details in 2017, shortly after Sekulow was named as Trump's lawyer.
Over the 10-year-period examined by AP, the tax returns show nearly $37 million in charitable funds were paid by ACLJ to the CLA Group, the phantom law firm listed on court filings as defending Trump.
...
Sekulow [also] founded the non-profit Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism (CASE), a charity “dedicated to the ideal that religious freedom and freedom of speech are inalienable, god given rights.”
Tax records show ACLJ now receives the bulk of its $23 million annual budget from CASE. All six of the charity’s paid board members share the last name Sekulow, including Jay’s wife, Pam, and their sons, Jordon and Logan.
That tight-knit family control runs afoul of standards issued by multiple watchdog groups to help stem the likelihood of self-dealing and graft.
...
Marc Owens, who served for 10 years as the director of the Exempt Organizations Division of the Internal Revenue Service, said the structure of the charities and corporations controlled by the Sekulow family appeared designed to obscure just who is getting paid and how much.
Federal law forbids charities from excessively benefiting those who have “substantial influence over the organization.” Owens said both the IRS and state attorneys general should investigate.
“This is an apparent web of organizations that seem to exist to pay compensation to Sekulow and his family members,” said Owens, who is now in private practice. “That pattern clearly raises questions for those entities that are tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) as to whether they’re operating for a public benefit or the private benefit of Jay Sekulow and his family members.”
Regardless the whistleblower should be protected from sick people like you who believge otherwise!So the response to censorship of the public domain is that you're protecting a whistleblower who everyone already knows who it is? Get real. No Trump supporter gives a crap about impeachment and Trump just won impeachment. Look at the betting odds from when it started to now. Bookies set real odds that Trump got stronger by roughly 20% from the start of impeachment to yesterday, and now the GOP is going to victory-lap this all the way to Wednesday. Especially after agreeing with Schumer that Bernie can't be allowed to make it to Iowa on Monday. My oh my, how the mighty have fallen since Harry Reid. Oh and shoutout to Harry Reid from the 191 judges that Trump has rammed through. What a great guy that Harry is! Dems brought this upon themselves.
McConnell: ‘You’ll regret this’
The Senate minority leader warned Democrats they’d regret using the “nuclear option.”thehill.com
Yes, censorship of the public domain no matter what (as long it benefits our party!). They will come for you and I next, that is how it has always played out in history.Regardless the whistleblower should be protected from sick people like you who believge otherwise!
Hey, you forgot to post the CNN article criticizing Trump for having an all-white legal team (not a joke by the way).Trump sure knows how to pick his lawyers:
Charities steered $65M to Trump lawyer Sekulow and family :: WRAL.com
Jay Sekulow, one of President Donald Trump’s lead attorneys during the impeachment trial, is being paid for his legal work through a rented $80-a-month mailbox a block away from the White House.www.wral.com
Jay Sekulow, one of President Donald Trump’s lead attorneys during the impeachment trial, is being paid for his legal work through...the Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group, a for-profit corporation co-owned by Sekulow. The firm has no website and is not listed in national legal directories. The District of Columbia Bar has no record of it, and no attorneys list it as their employer.
But Sekulow, 63, is registered as chief counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice, a non-profit Christian legal advocacy group based in an expansive Capitol Hill row house a short walk from the Senate chamber.
A half dozen lawyers employed by the non-profit ACLJ are named in recent Senate legal briefs as members of Trump’s defense team — including one of Sekulow’s sons. The ACLJ, as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, is barred under IRS rules from engaging in partisan political activities.
...
Charity watchdogs for years have raised concerns about the blurred lines between for-profit businesses tied to Sekulow and the complex web of non-profit entities he and his family control.
The Associated Press reviewed 10 years of tax returns for the ACLJ and other charities tied to Sekulow, which are released to the public under federal law. The records from 2008 to 2017, the most recent year available, show that more than $65 million in charitable funds were paid to Sekulow, his wife, his sons, his brother, his sister-in-law, his nephew and corporations they own.
Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy, said Sekulow appears to be mixing his defense of Trump with his charitable endeavors. The group has issued a “Donor Alert” about ACLJ on its CharityWatch website.
“Charities are not supposed to be taking sides in partisan political activities, such as providing legal services to benefit a politician in an impeachment trial,” Borochoff said. “Regulators should investigate whether or not charitable resources, such as office, labor, equipment, etc., are being wrongly utilized to benefit Sekulow's for-profit law firm.”
The address for CLA Group listed in recent court filings matches Carr Workplaces, a flex-space provider that rents out mini offices, individual desks and conference rooms for periods as brief as one hour. According to its website, the company also offers its customers “virtual offices” that include a mailbox and mail forwarding.
...
A call to Carr last week asking to be connected to CLA Group was forwarded. After a few rings, the call was answered by a receptionist at the non-profit ACLJ.
...
A 2005 investigation by the publication Legal Times reported about questionable spending at ACLJ, quoting former employees describing millions in charity funds being spent to support the Sekulows' lavish lifestyle, which included multiple homes, golf junkets, chauffeur-driven cars and a private jet used to ferry then-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The Guardian and The Washington Post reported additional details in 2017, shortly after Sekulow was named as Trump's lawyer.
Over the 10-year-period examined by AP, the tax returns show nearly $37 million in charitable funds were paid by ACLJ to the CLA Group, the phantom law firm listed on court filings as defending Trump.
...
Sekulow [also] founded the non-profit Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism (CASE), a charity “dedicated to the ideal that religious freedom and freedom of speech are inalienable, god given rights.”
Tax records show ACLJ now receives the bulk of its $23 million annual budget from CASE. All six of the charity’s paid board members share the last name Sekulow, including Jay’s wife, Pam, and their sons, Jordon and Logan.
That tight-knit family control runs afoul of standards issued by multiple watchdog groups to help stem the likelihood of self-dealing and graft.
...
Marc Owens, who served for 10 years as the director of the Exempt Organizations Division of the Internal Revenue Service, said the structure of the charities and corporations controlled by the Sekulow family appeared designed to obscure just who is getting paid and how much.
Federal law forbids charities from excessively benefiting those who have “substantial influence over the organization.” Owens said both the IRS and state attorneys general should investigate.
“This is an apparent web of organizations that seem to exist to pay compensation to Sekulow and his family members,” said Owens, who is now in private practice. “That pattern clearly raises questions for those entities that are tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) as to whether they’re operating for a public benefit or the private benefit of Jay Sekulow and his family members.”
you must have hung with disreputable sorts it seems. I never did in my 22+ years of service. All a professional group.
So the response to censorship of the public domain is that you're protecting a whistleblower who everyone already knows who it is? Get real. No Trump supporter gives a crap about impeachment and Trump just won impeachment. Look at the betting odds from when it started to now. Bookies set real odds that Trump got stronger by roughly 20% from the start of impeachment to yesterday, and now the GOP is going to victory-lap this all the way to Wednesday. Especially after agreeing with Schumer that Bernie can't be allowed to make it to Iowa on Monday. My oh my, how the mighty have fallen since Harry Reid. Oh and shoutout to Harry Reid from the 191 judges that Trump has rammed through. What a great guy that Harry is! Dems brought this upon themselves.
McConnell: ‘You’ll regret this’
The Senate minority leader warned Democrats they’d regret using the “nuclear option.”thehill.com
Even if it did violate a law, R's wouldn't do anything about it.
While the law provides no penalty for exposing the whistleblower, it's obvious purpose is to provide a mechanism for which a person brings credible and urgent evidence of wrongdoing forward and remains anonymous so that they be shielded from repercussion. What Rand Paul did was clearly wrong and clearly directly counter to the intent of the law, but that does not make his actions illegal. He should be condemned and e.g. censured by the Senate for it.
Now... There is another part to this. The whistleblower is known to be under protection due to threats to his life. If he does suffer harm, I do believe Rand could face civil and criminal liability for it, however that would require at a minimum showing that it was Rand Paul's action which exposed the whistleblower to harm. Since his name had already allegedly been exposed, this seems a very unlikely scenario.