Good God man, you could have just said yes or no. But you just can't can you? When you asked me the same question, I gave you more than an "implicit" answer, it was definitive and declarative, with no room for misunderstanding nor was it necessary for you to search past post history for the damn answer.
WTF is it with lawyers? Talk about psychological disorders. . .
Well, I see you put an asterisk on the "But Obama", what's that supposed to mean? I asked you to quote me where I said "but Obama" and that's your response? OK, you can't, can you? Instead go all juris doctorate on me and explain that's what I really meant. I guess it must be "implicit" then? Who is doing the implying? I think it's you.
I'm not going to let you get away with your attempt to deflect/demean by saying that I now turned to "whatabout the media." That's BS and you know it.
You can twist away all you want, trying to make it look like I said something or you said something about kitchen fires and gasoline. Where exactly is that prior to your post I'm now responding to? I must have overlooked it, link up the quote. Oh, it's "implicit."
I said Trump is out of line, wrong, to be attacking the whistle blower. Guess that wasn't enough for you. However I took issue with your position that whistle blower laws should protect whistle blowers completely (paraphrasing) so that they won't be reluctant to come forward. Is that about right? So prosecute Trump/impeach over that? Or are you just venting your spleen because Trump is being an azz again? Now that's news.
Regarding the law protecting whistle blowers to the point they won't be reluctant to come forward: That's nice in some ideal fantasy land. I was being realistic and still am but you seem to have some major problem with reality. You don't like to hear it so you respond with similes/metaphors and insults as if you assume I don't get it. You're the one who doesn't get it. In the real world of today, in the government bureaucracy of DC, it's all about azz, as in protecting your own. Despite all assurances given to whistle blowers, it takes someone with courage and/or another motive/agenda to be willing to come forward with information that is meant to take down the powerful. Because of the resulting blow back, from within and without the government, in the form of career suicide, the unrelenting media spotlight and more, people are rightfully reluctant to step into that crap pile. Ain't no law that will fix any of that.
With all that goes on in the Swamp, why do you think that there are very few whistle blowers coming forward? Does the law need to be strengthened? Is it because of Trump being a d!ck to this particular whistle blower? This issue existed long before him, will exist long after him and the whistle blower protection laws will not change that dynamic one bit.
Now back to kitchen fires and gasoline. . .
