Fox News Business host Melissa Francis on Monday slammed President Donald Trump’s “outrageous” demand to find out identity of the whistleblower behind last week’s blockbuster complaint about his call with the Ukrainian president.
Francis told the hosts of Fox News’ “Outnumbered” that it is “outrageous to say that you demand to see a whistleblower.”
“That sentence, in and of itself, doesn’t make any sense,” she said. “They’re blowing the whistle on corruption that they see.”
On Sunday night, Trump claimed that he deserved to meet the whistleblower.
Like every American, I deserve to meet my accuser, especially when this accuser, the so-called “Whistleblower,” represented a perfect conversation with a foreign leader in a totally inaccurate and fraudulent way. Then Schiff made up what I actually said by lying to Congress……
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 29, 2019
Trump took it a step further on Monday afternoon, telling reporters that “we’re trying to find out about a whistleblower.”
Under the Whistleblower Protection Act, whistleblowers’ identities are kept anonymous by law to protect them from retaliation. Additionally, the whistleblower’s lawyer warned acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire that Trump’s comments could put his client in “harm’s way.”
Watch Francis below:
Fox News Business host says it's "outrageous" to demand to see a whistleblower pic.twitter.com/ffK5ifyRhD
— TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) September 30, 2019
The file photo of Trump was taken 9/24/2019, less than a week ago. He is not looking well.
The right to “to be confronted by the witnesses” comes from the 6th amendment and takes place in the course of a trial. There is no right to for someone accused of a crime to haul an accuser into his office or any other place and for any reason. This President has clearly lost a few of the remaining marbles that are now pinging around inside that rotten melon of his.
tRump continues to behave like an innocent person- covering up evidence, obstructing the law, threatening witnesses. That’s what all innocent people do.
Not to mention that the police allow for anonymous tips to be made to them in the course of their investigation of a crime. Now, if the tipster turns out to be a critical witness to the crime, then yeah, ultimately they’d likely have to testify, but if you just have some hearsay to pass on, there’s nothing that says that you would have to testify about things you aren’t an actual witness to.
And that’s the case with this whistleblower; he’s only passing on information that he has gathered from other parties. If this were a criminal proceeding, there’s no reason he himself would have to testify or reveal his identification to the perpetrator. There would be actual witnesses to the events that would testify, and the circumstantial evidence only needs witnesses to authenticate it.
I kept expecting the preying mantis she was talking with to lean over and eat her head.