The scandal sparked by a whistleblower complaint covering President Donald Trump’s communications with the Ukrainian president is continuing to grow. Now, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman and noted Trump shill Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has chimed in, demanding on Twitter that certain key identities of the individuals who helped bring this story to light be revealed. In other words, he’s more concerned about the fact that details of the president’s behavior trickled out to the public than he is about the fact that the president of the United States sought to have a foreign government produce dirt on a political opponent.
At issue for Graham is the fact that in the newly revealed whistleblower complaint, the initially anonymous individual reveals that they learned of what they’re reporting through conversations with officials including at least some in the White House. In response, Graham posted on Twitter:
‘It is imperative we find out which White House official talked to the whistleblower and why. Why didn’t they lodge the complaint? As to the other matters in complaint: Clearly a coordinated effort to take second-hand information to create a narrative damaging to the President. When I think of whistleblower complaints I generally think of someone with first-hand knowledge of the events in question.’
Anyone who’s followed Graham’s responses to the twists and turns of the Russia scandal will no doubt be quite unsurprised with his response to this situation. He has routinely dismissed mountains of demonstrable evidence of corruption when it suits him politically, and he’s garnered self-righteous outrage over issues like the zombiefied Clinton email scandal in light of the same political expedience.
Graham seems to think that since the whistleblower didn’t personally hear the president try and get Ukraine to meddle in the 2020 elections, they should not have brought the situation to people’s attention. So where’s the line for Graham, then? What if he only secondhand heard of the president, say, setting up a business deal during an official meeting with a counterpart? Or, say, flinging garbage at a world leader he didn’t like? Is there a line Graham sees out there that the president could cross beyond which he’d no longer support him? Probably not, considering precedent.
Check out Twitter’s response…
Featured Image via screenshot