He is a potential whistleblower.

Your linked article says: "[My client] would like to make protected whistleblower disclosures to Congress." "[T]here are no specific examples provided to support the accusations."

I don't understand the tone of this post. I guess the implication is that whistleblower support relies on the political leanings of the people involved?

Is it my politics talking if I say that the scale of this argument is completely underwhelming to me given the level of true atrocities being committed in the world?

The article details 'incredible' examples of retaliation. That's the biggest concern here, not the whistleblowing.

I think what you & the other downvoters are illustrating is:

You can only be a 'whistleblower' if you're on MY side.

...of course? If he's correct? Who would ever argue he wouldn't count?

But I don't know what your point is in picking one potential whistleblowing example out of thousands. Let's not inject partisan politics where there's no need for it. Whistleblowing has nothing to do with being right-wing or left-wing.

Who are the "Thousands" of others?

I'm assuming that if you counted every potential whistleblower in the US that was ever reported on in the national or local news over the past few decades, it would probably add up to something in the thousands?

In other words, you don't have any basis for that number you threw out.

Can there be a whistleblower exposing some official you like? Please give some examples of those.

The word "thousands" is entirely irrelevant.

And I already made clear, of course there can be a whistleblower on somebody you like, if that person broke the law. People aren't above the law, end of story. So why are you asking for examples? Examples don't matter. It's a principle that applies no matter which side of the political aisle you're on.

Thanks for role-playing the whistleblower's experience for us.

Anytime