“Tense moments” just now at the impeachment hearing with Rep. Devin Nunes questioning Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman on with whom he spoke about the July call between Presidents Trump and Zalensky with Committee Chairman Adam Schiff shutting down it down as an attempt to out the whistleblower:
Tense moments as Nunes pushes Vindman to name agencies of the two individuals with whom he spoke about the July call. Schiff interjects: “We need to protect the whistlblower .. These proceedings will not be used to out the whistleblower.” Vindman tells Nunes he doesn’t know WB.
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) November 19, 2019
Vindman refused to answer, however:
Nunes is saying Vindman can "plead the fifth" or answer questions about who he specifically talked to about the call.
Vindman and his attorney say Vindman will not answer specific questions about who he talked with bc of rules by Rep Schiff to protect whistleblower's identity.
— Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) November 19, 2019
But as Byron York points out, Schiff is citing a “statutory right to anonymity” that doesn’t exist:
Recommended
Chairman Schiff just said again, this time in public hearing, that the whistleblower has 'a statutory right to anonymity.' That is simply not correct. From ICWPA: https://t.co/5GfR5cBtPb pic.twitter.com/Pduxp8Av7V
— Byron York (@ByronYork) November 19, 2019
Brit Hume adds that “it is nonsense” that this keeps getting cited by Dems:
Adam Schiff keeps saying the whistleblower has a “statutory right to anonymity.” He said it again this morning. It is nonsense. Only the IC official who receives a whistleblower complaint is required to withhold the name, and not in all circumstances.
— Brit Hume (@brithume) November 19, 2019
This fight was expected, by the way:
This fight over identifying the whistleblower had been expected today since it led to a shouting match last month behind closed doors. https://t.co/WoRyDnocvC
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) November 19, 2019
But it’s an incredibly stupid fight because everyone knows the name of the whistleblower but nobody will acknowledge it:
Vindman says he doesn't know who the whistleblower is but he can't name the agency the person he spoke with because it would out the whistleblower.
That's a bit of a contradiction.
— Drew McCoy (@_Drew_McCoy_) November 19, 2019
Everyone knows who the whistleblower is or thinks it is and are just pretending otherwise. There's also no statutory requirement for anyone but the IG not to use the guys name.
I mean, that's fine but let's not pretend it's anything but that.
— Drew McCoy (@_Drew_McCoy_) November 19, 2019
Also, the whistleblower's ID is pretty irrelevant at this point. Not only do we have the memo of the call but this whole thing has gone beyond either of the calls.
So it' s just game playing because there is in fact politics in politics.
— Drew McCoy (@_Drew_McCoy_) November 19, 2019
***
