Who’s to say what should be exposed?

This week, there’s been a lot of talk in the media about whistleblowers. Should they be identified? Should they be punished for their actions? 

The recent whistleblower —  having leaked a phone transcript that reveals information about the president’s shady business with Ukraine — has been the topic of conversation among senators, congressmen and the press. Everyone has an opinion about it. On Sunday, as part of their Impeachment Inquiry series, NBC published an article centered around GOP senator from Wisconsin, Ron Johnson’s comments against the whistleblower and the information leaked.  

On the issue, Johnson said: “It’s going to be very difficult for future presidents to have a very candid conversation with a world leader because now we’ve set the precedent of leaking transcripts. The weakening of executive privilege is not good. And by the way, these individuals that leaked this, if their interest was a stronger relationship with Ukraine, they did not accomplish this. Having this all come out into public has weakened that relationship and exposed things that didn’t need to be exposed.” 

Johnson went on to argue that “this would have been far better off if we would have just taken care of this behind the scenes.” 

It’s utterly clear that Johnson is not happy with the leak. While his intentions may be nothing other than wanting to keep things quiet and protect the country’s relationship with Ukraine, his words should concern anyone who supports free press. And for the record, saying that something should have been taken care of behind the scenes doesn’t make it sound any less shady. 

Regardless of the whistleblower’s intentions or of the impact of the leak, keeping the American public informed about the political happenings of their country is, in my opinion, a more just cause than the strength of “executive privilege.” The purpose of the press is to bring issues like this one to light — to act as the fourth branch that checks the power of the rest of the government. Johnson said the whistleblower exposed things that didn’t need to be exposed, but if the president is engaging in activity that puts impeachment into question, that IS information that needs to be exposed and that should be protected by the First Amendment.

One thought on “Who’s to say what should be exposed?

Add yours

  1. Caroline,
    It’s important to note that the Whistleblower did not actually leak anything. The whistleblower went through proper channels to report wrongdoing to the Inspector General The Inspector General determined the complaint was credible and represented a serious threat but then (for some reason) asked the WH if it was OK to release the information to Congress. It was Rep. Adam Schiff who spoke on the record of the existence of the whistleblower report and that the WH was not releasing the complaint. It was the WHITE HOUSE that released the transcript of the call. The Whistleblower followed proper procedures and did not, at any point that we know of, actually release information to the press.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: