Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) reiterated his stance that whistleblowers should be protected in light of President Trump’s call for a public whistleblower testimony.
But unlike his defense of whistleblower protections last month that did not explicitly mention Trump, Grassley on Monday directly responded to the President, who renewed his crusade over the weekend to expose the whistleblower’s identity.
“The law protects the whistleblower,” Grassley told reporters, according to CNN. “I’m an advocate for whistleblowing and passed all these whistleblower protection laws, so I can only say we have to go by what the law says.”
Grassley added that he wants “maximum protection for whistleblowers” and repeated his claim that he “has advocated for whistleblowers for a long period of time, including this whistleblower.”
CNN reported that Grassley also mentioned that he has not spoken with Trump about his latest whistleblower attacks and that he’d only discuss the matter with the President “if he asked me to discus it with him.”
Last week, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said he told Grassley that he would “absolutely” return the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee to the Iowa Republican in the next Congress.
Well, I guess occasionally you get this stopped-clock thing going on.
Uh-oh…someone’s not toeing the line. This could get messy.
Let’s face it, Grassley is closer to the grave than he is to his next reelection campaign, which is three years away at this point when he’ll be 88 or 89 years old. Its really no wonder why Graham Cracker, who is up for reelection now in 2020 handed the keys to the Judiciary Committee back over to old man winter.
Grassley is one of the major sponsors of the Whistleblower law. This is his deal. I doubt he will give up but I suspect Devin Nunes or one of the other good evangelical politicians will leak the name as soon as possible. It’s gods law that counts.
Concrete sluice. Wire Cutters. All is groovy. We likely need a new bunker there anyway with modern improvements.
Unless it’s the second amendment. Then, of course, that’s inviolable.