Skip to main content

The Importance of Whistleblowers


The Argument for Withholding Aid

I've been listening to the Republicans trying to explain why Donald Trump withheld aid, and the biggest argument they can give is that he was trying to make sure there was no corruption in Ukraine. Yet they want to brag about the fact that he did finally release the aid after he was convinced there was no more corruption.

The key words here are "no more corruption" because one of their main talking points is the corrupt government that was in place before President Zelensky took office. At the same time, they want to criticize President Obama for withholding military aid. The fact is President Obama refused to send deadly weapons but provided military aid to the same government that was considered by the U.S. Intelligence community to be corrupt.

So they want us to think that Trump did something great by releasing aid to a government that has been rid of the corruption that was in place while President Obama was in office. The fact is President Obama did give military aid to Ukraine beginning in 2014, it just wasn't the deadly military weapons that they wanted.

In fact, after he took office, Trump also refused to send deadly weapons to the Ukraine, but he continued to send aid that the Obama administration had appropriated to the Ukraine. In total, they sent more than $1.6 billion in aid between 2014 and 2019. So if Trump was so concerned about Ukrainian corruption, why did he keep supporting the regime that had been deemed corrupt by sending military aid every year that he has been in office?

The Truth About Whistleblowers

There seems to be this big problem with finding out who the whistleblower is. The funny thing is that so far they are saying that every witness that has testified has only provided hearsay evidence, but the whistleblower went to the authorities with hearsay evidence, that was investigated and deemed to be credible.

These witnesses are the ones who the whistleblower named in their complaint and have come forward to testify to what the whistleblower claimed. Therefore we do not need to hear from the person who went to the authorities, nor do we need to know who that person is.

Whistleblowers in Past Impeachments

The past two impeachment inquiries were also based on whistleblower testimony, although it may not have been called that at the time. They were also hearsay witnesses. The most recent was Linda Tripp, who went to authorities after Monica Lewinsky revealed to her in confidence that she had been having a consensual affair with President Bill Clinton.

Scroll to Continue

Read More From Soapboxie

In fact, Monica denied having an affair with Clinton in a signed affidavit. Linda Tripp continued to pretend to be friends with Monica, all the time wearing a wire so their conversations could be recorded. In this case, Linda Tripp, the whistleblower, worked with authorities to get information that Monica was not willing to provide. That evidence led to the impeachment of Clinton, who lied under oath about their affair, which they claimed was an abuse of power.

The other whistleblower was the person known as "Deep Throat," who provided information to Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post. This person fed information to these reporters that enabled them to name the people that were involved in the break-in and cover-up of the Watergate scandal.

Without Deep Throat, President Richard Nixon would not have been impeached as he kept the reporters on the right track every time they seemed to hit a wall from the Government blockade. As a whistleblower, his identity was never revealed, but three years before his death, he revealed his identity to the public at the age of 91, more than 30 years after the Watergate investigations began. It was because of this anonymity that he was able to continue feeding the reporters the information they needed.

Trusting the Media

As I mentioned before, it was Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein who pursued the story of the Watergate break-in. They were the ones who took the cues from Deep Throat and did most of the investigating that exposed most of the people that were involved in the cover-up. Had it not been for them, no one would have paid attention to the underlying cause for the break-in.

So far, it has once again been The Washington Post and The New York Times that have uncovered all of the wrongdoing by this administration. Once people see their names in the media, they tend to come forward. Some are truthful; some are not. While the Republicans argue that the Democrats won't let their witnesses come forward and testify, the White House will not let people testify that have been subpoenaed. I always thought that ignoring a subpoena was a crime punishable by jail time. In fact, I didn't know one person could tell another person to ignore a subpoena.

One thing is sure, Donald Trump is showing America that the laws of this country and the Constitution have many holes that allow criminals to flourish. The Republicans' defense of Trump is "yeah he did it but it isn't a crime or reason to impeach him." I wonder what Joe McCarthy would think about his Republican party were he alive today.

  • Joseph McCarthy - HISTORY
    During the late 1940s and early 1950s, the prospect of communist subversion at home and abroad seemed frighteningly real to many people in the United States.

This content reflects the personal opinions of the author. It is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and should not be substituted for impartial fact or advice in legal, political, or personal matters.

Related Articles