>>7966426

lawfag is right. I have been trying to explain this to all of you this morning.

The IG unlawfully revealed his name.

The entire situation is under investigation by DOJ and has been since the complaint was filed.

The matter is not adjudicated yet.

The identity was not supposed to be known so Roberts cannot compound the wrong by allowing it to be said in these proceedings.

Roberts is doing the right thing and protecting any future prosecution.

THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE THE PROBLEM! Everything else is consequential . The whistleblower/leaker is being addressed in the proper forum ( DOJ) this is not the proper forum because his acts are most likely criminal and he has not been charged yet

~lawfag jr

>>7966622

I understand the logic you and everyone else are taking.

The problem is the horse went before the cart from the very beginning.

The proper thing to have happen here is for the Senate to give a directed verdict and Acquit the President.

Then allow Barr to continue his investigation into the whistleblower's actions.

Then make a determination if the whistleblower was a legit whistleblower or leaked classified info and charge him if warranted.

What anons want is circumventing the proper legal process because Schiff did.

The end result to that is Justice Roberts will be taking actions that act in a way to determine the whistleblower was not entitled to the identity protection ( thereby guilty of leaking classified info )

When Roberts does it, he does it as SC Justice BEFORE a trial Court ever heard any case and before any Appeals Court ruled on any conviction.

>>7966695

you proved my point. Relatively uncharted! In this particular situation we have the very beginning of the situation being unprecedented and Roberts knows about it. Roberts knows this subject will be coming to the Supreme Court and he cannot address the wistleblower or circumstances surrounding him.

The IG revealed his identity after finding out the whistleblower did not divulge that he met with Schiff's staff.

There is a legit question as to his claim as whistleblower.

If Rand Paul wants to stand on the Senate floor and scream his name for hours he can do that. He ois putting a SC Justice in a position to insert himself into the whisltblower status before it has been adjudicated.

>>7966818

It is being pursued by Barr.

Please listen to McGuire's testimony. It starts at about 28 minute mark https://www.c-span.org/video/?464509-1/acting-director-national-intelligence-maguire-testifies-whistleblower-complaint

He tells you the DOJ is investigating and goes through all of the problems with how the whistleblower handled it.

>>7966914

the legal process I am talking about is not about impeachment. it is about a criminal trial for the whistleblower/leaker