Now We Know Why The Media Won’t Expose Trump’s ‘Whistleblower’

I & I Editorial Board:

“…The mainstream press has been oddly incurious about the identity of the “whistleblower” who got the Trump impeachment train rolling. Now we know the reason why.

Real Clear Investigations on Wednesday published a bombshell account by investigative reporter Paul Sperry, who says that the identity of the so-called whistleblower “has been an open secret inside the Beltway.” There’s even a 40-page research dossier floating around on him compiled by former colleagues.

It turns out that the person who wrote the second-hand, factually inaccurate account of President Donald Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky isn’t just some careerist, non-partisan CIA official, or even, as Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson put it, a person with “some indicia of an arguable political bias.”

Eric Ciaramella is, as Sperry reveals, “a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia ‘collusion’ investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.”

What’s more, Ciaramella left his White House post in mid-2017 “amid concerns about negative leaks to the media.” Sperry reports that, according to that 40-page dossier, Ciaramella also helped generate the “Putin fired Comey” narrative.

Oh, and he worked “on Ukrainian policy issues for (Joe) Biden in 2015 and 2016, when the vice president was President Obama’s ‘point man’ for Ukraine.”

As partisan icing on the cake, before filing his complaint against Trump, Ciaramella met with the staff of House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff – who is running the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry – for “guidance.”

This sounds like a whole lot more than an “indicia” or an “arguable” bias. In fact, it smacks of the very kind of Deep State that Trump has been talking about.

The press reaction to Sperry’s story? Complete and utter silence.

The only Washington publication to cover his revelations was the Washington Examiner, which has a conservative-leaning editorial board.

But that story, from the headline down, reeks of liberal bias. The reporter, Steven Nelson, spends the second paragraph of the story attacking Sperry, calling him “a partisan pro-Trump figure who … critics accuse of trading in disinformation and conspiracy theories.”

Well, we know Paul Sperry. He worked for Investor’s Business Daily for years, where the Issues & Insights team was before striking out on its own. (He’s written for us, as well.) Paul is a diligent reporter who has broken more stories than Steve Nelson could dream of. To brazenly malign Sperry using leftist tropes is journalistic malpractice at its worst.

Even more bizarrely, Nelson claims to have found “at least one significant factual inaccuracy in the report,” but never reveals what it is. This is the sort of sloppy, biased journalism we expect from the New York Times or the Washington Post or CNN.

That aside, there’s another reason the mainstream press won’t touch Sperry’s story. If it did, it would have to admit that it’s known the “whistleblower’s” identity all along. And that it knows his biases. And that it’s under no obligation to protect his identity. And, finally, that it covered up his identity to keep the impeachment train rolling.

So the blackout holds. The only interest the Washington Post has shown in Ciaramella’s identity is to blast Republicans for trying to “unmask” him. The New York Times laughably claimed that it didn’t know his politics or his name.

It’s no surprise to us that the mainstream press is carrying water for Democrats on the impeachment story. But even we are sometimes surprised and dismayed by its cravenness…”

Original

The Whistleblower

This has the same retched stink as the Kavanaugh lynching. When you think Democrats can’t go lower, they somehow find a way.

DANIEL J. FLYNN:

“…Paul Sperry of RealClearInvestigations wrote the name Eric Ciaramella on Wednesday. Not since a chained, old man uttered “Jehovah” in Life of Brian have so many people reacted with such hostility to hearing a name said.

Discovering that Eric Ciaramella tattled on the president does not rank with learning that Webster shot J. R. or finding D. B. Cooper in Al Capone’s vault. America merely lacked a name. We knew the type.

Ciaramella graduated from a high school that costs $30,000 a year to attend, received his undergraduate degree from Yale, and obtained a master’s from Harvard. A few years after graduation from that tony private high school, the youngster estimated to its alumni magazine of trips to 28 different countries (he admits he lost count).

When others provide you with the best education and pricey junkets to obscure parts of the globe, not getting the president you asked for might come as a terrible blow. So Ciaramella sought to rectify this injustice by anonymously peddling secondhand gossip — false in large part — designed to instigate another round of impeachment discussions. He did so by first going to Congressman Adam Schiff. When you seek to report a federal crime, go to the FBI. When you seek to gin up political trouble, go to Adam Schiff.

This came as the latest instance of the 33-year-old CIA employee using his government position for partisan, political ends.

Ciaramella absconded from the National Security Council after widespread suspicion arose that he leaked information for the purpose of damaging the president he ostensibly served. At that time, Mike Cernovich wrote in an article that Medium.com later removed that “Ciaramella helped draft Susan Rice’s anti-Trump talking points before the Inauguration.” Cernovich described him as “the main force pushing Trump-Russia conspiracy theories.”

Paul Sperry notes that Ciaramella circumvented his chain of command in telling another agency of a meeting between Trump and Russians in the Oval Office a day after James Comey’s firing. This email, referenced in the Mueller report, effectively launched a “Putin fired Comey” narrative depicting the president of the United States as a marionette controlled by the Kremlin.

“And Ciaramella worked with a Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election,” Sperry reports, “inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleagues said. The operative, Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government. ‘He knows her. He had her in the White House,’ said one former co-worker, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.”

Politico detailed the collusion between Ciaramella’s DNC operative pal and Ukraine in a lengthy report by Kenneth Vogel, now with the New York Times, and David Stern, who resides in Kiev. “Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office,” they write. “They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.”

Why did John Brennan assign Ciaramella to the National Security Council? What role, if any, did Ciaramella take in this particular collusion involving Chalupa and a foreign government to influence the outcome of a U.S. presidential election? Why did Sen. Rand Paul describe Ciaramella as Vice President Joe Biden’s point man on Ukraine?…”

Original

Tent encampments across California are testing residents’ tolerance and compassion as street conditions deteriorate.

Thomas Fuller, Tim Arango and Louis Keene:

“…Insults like “financial parasites” and “bums” have been directed at them, not to mention rocks and pepper spray. Fences, potted plants and other barriers have been erected to keep them off sidewalks. Citizen patrols have been organized, vigilante style, to walk the streets and push them out.

California may pride itself on its commitment to tolerance and liberal values, but across the state, record levels of homelessness have spurred a backlash against those who live on the streets…”

Original

Doug Santo