CBS’s ’60 Minutes’ aired a segment of the White House whistleblower controversy on Sunday that was slanted to weigh heavily on the side of the Democrats. To make the report meaty, they lied. The whistleblower’s own leftist lawyers said they resorted to making stuff up.
In a Twitter post late Sunday, whistleblower attorney Mark Zaid denied a “60 Minutes” claim that the whistleblower is “under federal protection because he or she fears for their safety.”
“NEWS ALERT: 60 Minutes completely misinterpreted the contents of our letter,” Zaid wrote.
NEWS ALERT: 60 Minutes completely misinterpreted contents of our letter, which is now published online at https://t.co/HjmBrEQLEi. Nor have we, as we stated earlier today, reached any agreement with Congress on contact with the whistleblower. Discussions remain ongoing. https://t.co/3XSwmtuRrn
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) September 30, 2019
As expected, the program tweeted, “60 Minutes stands by its sources and reporting on the whistleblower,” poking the bear.
It didn’t go over well with Zaid who then accused “60 Minutes” of “literally making stuff up.”
Is @60Minutes now asserting it has a source other than letter our legal team sent to @ODNIgov?
Because if it doesn’t, and I know it doesn’t, then it is literally making stuff up. That helps no one, especially the #whistleblower.
The media should always accurately report facts. https://t.co/aRRgzHpVAG
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) September 30, 2019
The ’60 Minutes’ report didn’t identify the letter it claimed to have which was meant to back them up.
They only embedded the letter to the Acting DNI Joseph Maguire. That letter was signed by the lead attorney, Andrew Bakaj, and while it did discuss security concerns, it in no way indicated anyone was under “federal protection.”
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7lxdmf
-
The Importance of Prayer: How a Christian Gold Company Stands Out by Defending Americans’ Retirement
THE LAWYERS WANT THE ACCUSERS IDENTITY PROTECTED
The attorneys seem to not want Republicans or the President to know who the accuser is or anything about him. How else do they protect his identity? Is he going to testify with a mask, dark sunglasses and a wig perhaps?
It is unAmerican to accept complaints from an anonymous person without first-hand information and not let the accused face the accuser.
Democrats are ruining our system of justice. They don’t care what they have to destroy to ruin the GOP.
NEWS ALERT: Re: whistleblower contact w/Congress
We continue to work w/both parties in House & Senate & we understand all agree protecting whistleblower’s identity is paramount. Discussions continue to occur to coordinate & finalize logistics but no date/time has yet been set.
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) September 29, 2019
According to Zaid, complainants never needed first-hand information to become a whistleblower, however, it was always required on the form. In addition, reports iva CNN and the NY Times indicated that he is not allowed to testify as a whistleblower since he doesn’t qualify.
There has never been any requirement that #whistleblowers were required to possess first-hand knowledge to file complaint. No law anywhere states that. https://t.co/fHvIjJIy4m
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) September 30, 2019
wpDiscuz
