The Whistle-Blower Conundrum

October 30, 2019

If we needed to set the scene to entice a whistle blower, we would need to plan it to be a safe-zone for such a person.  We would need to promote the cloak of heroism onto the would-be whistle-blower.  Someone would need to entice them.  Yes, them.  The conditions as they are today have already had the stage set.

Sounds quite a bit like the scene and circumstance initiated by Democrats in the House of Representatives.  The Democrats, having nothing more than the watered-down soup of their own unsupported accusations are in search of a prybar, a device to break into a sound circumstance and nearly magically turn that watery foundation into a hearty stew – one set to support accusation where no cause exists.

The psychology of the whistle-blower reveals that not all whistle-blowers are, in any way, heroes.  The psychology of a pseudo-hero, so desirous of being recognized for heroism, creates a perfect storm for the seekers of a whistle-blower–and the satisfaction of the hero-syndrome complex.

Those who have become Whistle-blowers to confront and end an untenable situation are not what is being sought by a political party in its focus to take down a President. There is no valor here in their search. The tone and tenor of former CIA chief John Brennan’s open invitation to whistle-blowers is enough for all who heard it over and again, to know this is not about heroism. It is about gain; in this case, political gain.  Simply, the Party of Democrats in a pointed effort to unseat a duly elected POTUS has put out a whistle-blower scenario, pointedly, by someone who was not in possession of facts or first-hand knowledge, but as bait.

The Whistle Blower appeal drives those people who seek attention while claiming the heroic.  The Party did not have any evidence; and needed it. The appeal; a tool to get someone, anyone, who was willing to claim it, and had the exposure to use whatever the Party wanted, in order to fulfill their need, and thus, become a hero – on a grand scale.  In plain language, they needed a stoolie.  No would-be hero by proxy would ever heed to that call; but it’s exactly what they seek; and will continue to seek. They have no evidence, so they will get someone to provide it; someone who sees it as a noble fulfillment. The Brennan bait offered it specifically.  The closed hearings were enough to both keep such a person interested, but allow the Party to take whatever time necessary in order to find just such a person or persons.  Coincidentally, we are to believe, within the timing of an election process in full swing.

All of these things are in, and shall remain, in motion. The push to find anything that will promote their preferred narrative by advertising for a heroic whistle blower are documented in Brennan’s appeal. Keep in mind that a person’s “feelings” that their first-hand appraisal of a conversation as being improper, simply does not substantiate that their opinion makes it so.

Ultimately, those answering the call to satiate their personal hero syndrome will be romanced into the role. This Whistle-Blower will not be given kudos and a medal. He will be used and discarded; unable to recover or reverse any of it.

The portrait of a Whistle-Blower who, even when for the heroic act, often includes being excluded and avoided, cast out from those who would rather not associate with them, be loyal to them, or even hire them. Negative connotations of what some whistle blowers have done which is not heroic, in turn, transfers onto the sincere, and will ultimately exclude, rather than embrace them.

Law Enforcement must meet a high and exacting standard, yet our Representatives are avoiding it.  They can keep their enticed help and stick to the facts; ALL the facts, and yes, NOTHING BUT the facts.

Transparency is OWED to the PEOPLE, whom they must serve. If they cannot shine the full light of day on what all the facts are, then they are cherry picking to suit, not the law, but their chosen narrative. There’s directorial manipulation going on in the House “impeachment inquiry’ to present a production of deliberately limited scope; and the whistle blower is part of their well doctored picture.  Why do we not hear more about the original whistle blower? Is it due toe problems with the content of claims is based on hearsay and not fact?  Was whistle-blower 1 the enticement to invite someone more believable, someone who may have seen the transcripts before they were released?  Perhaps it’s someone who is motivated; like may of the ‘friends’ of Blasey-Ford; to come forward and get their spin on what has always been Presidential privilege to keep conversations between heads of state classified.  We may only know if, and when, the process becomes totally transparent.  Until such time, it is a twisting of the esteemed position the House has created. They have placed themselves as though royalty, totally ignoring the rights of the accused and the position of the Presidency to be effective.

The Democrats are building an Ivory Tower of Justification upon a foundation that is more quicksand than block and mortar.


-Marion C. Fletcher ©10-2019   In collaboration with Lin Cava