Supposedly, the House Intelligence Committee is waiting for the whistleblower’s attorney to get the security clearance needed to accompany the whistle blower in his testimony to the Committee. I heard on one of the Sunday news shows that the whistleblower’s attorney is Mark Zaid. The name is not unfamiliar to me.* Zaid is a “Super Lawyer” who focuses on national security work. Why the Intelligence Committee would need to wait for Zaid’s security clearance is beyond me. As an attorney who specializes in matters of National Security, one would think Zaid already has whatever security clearances he would need.
From Zaid’s website:
Mark Zaid is the founding Partner of Mark S. Zaid, PC. He often represents former/current federal employees, intelligence and military officers, whistleblowers and others who have grievances or have been wronged by agencies of the United States Government or foreign governments. Moreover, Mr. Zaid regularly represents members of the media. Of note, Mr. Zaid teaches the D.C. Bar Continuing Legal Education classes on “Defending Security Clearances” and “The Basics of Filing and Litigating Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Requests”. He has been named as a Washington, D.C. Super Lawyer every year since he was profiled in 2009, as well as a “Best Lawyer” by Washingtonian Magazine in 2009, 2011, 2013, and 2015 (issued bi-annually), for his national security work. As the National Law Journal once wrote, “if Agent Mulder ever needed a lawyer, Zaid would be his man.”
* I know of Mark Zaid because Zaid was the lawyer who represented George Hickey in Hickey’s suit against St. Martin’s Press, which was filed just after the statute of limitations ran out (and was probably a deliberate action to create a dissembled argument against Howard Donahue’s theory about the Secret Service accident in the JFK assassination), for St. Martin’s publication of Bonar Menninger’s Mortal Error.
Monday, Sep 30, 2019 · 2:31:30 PM +00:00
·
DeniseHa
Now I’m hearing on the news that, according to the whistleblower’s attorneys, it’s actually concern for the whistle blower’s safety that is holding up the testimony. I thought Adam Schiff specifically addressed this in the program I saw, and said no, it was security clearances. Both reasons seem to reflect poorly on the White House, either as a delaying tactic or as witness intimidation via a desire to find out who the whistle blower is and threat of “Civil War,” etc. I do wish the whistle blower’s attorneys would do a press conference so that their explanation is clearly first-hand.