And, interestingly, this follows a statement from the attorneys representing the whistleblower acknoweledging that their client “has come into contact with presidential candidates from both parties.”
This is the full statement: In light of the ongoing efforts to mischaracterize whistleblower #1’s alleged “bias” in order to detract from the substance of the complaint, we will attempt to clarify some facts.
First, our client has never worked for or advised a political candidate, campaign, or party.
Second, our client has spent their entire government career in apolitical, civil servant positions in the Executive Branch.
Third, in these positions our client has come into contact with presidential candidates from both parties in their roles as elected officials – not as candidates.
Fourth, the whistleblower voluntarily provided relevant career information to the ICIG in order to facilitate an assessment of the credibility of the complaint.
Fifth, as a result, the ICIG concluded – as is well known – that the complaint was both urgent and credible.
Finally, the whistleblower is not the story.
To date, virtually every substantive allegation has been confirmed by other sources. For that reason the identity of the whistleblower is irrelevant.
Except the motivations of the whistleblower are relevant, as Dan Bongino noted on Fox this morning: “There is no Whistleblower. There is someone with an agenda against Donald Trump. What he was blowing the whistle on didn’t happen. We have the transcript of the call. This is all a farce and no Republican should forget that.” – READ MORE