Article snippet: Nunes asked Vindman during Tuesday’s hearing if he discussed the July 25 phone call “with anyone outside the White House” and added, “if so, with whom?” Vindman confirmed that he spoke to two individuals who were not in the White House but said they were “cleared U.S. government officials, with appropriate need to know.” He named one of the individuals — Department of State Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent — but oddly refused to name the other, describing him or her as an “individual in the intelligence community.” “What — as you know, the intelligence community has 17 different agencies. What agency was this individual from?” Nunes asked, prompting Schiff to interrupt and express his desire to “protect the whistleblower.” “I want to make sure that there’s no effort to out the whistleblower through the use of these proceedings,” Schiff stated. “If the witness has a good faith belief that this may reveal the identity of the whistleblower, that is not the purpose that we are here for, and I want to advise the witness accordingly,” he continued in what some say was an attempt to coach Vindman. The exchange continued: Many conservatives on Twitter say the exchange — Vindman refusing to name the second source and Schiff interjecting to reiterate his desire to “protect” the “whistleblower,” essentially indicates that Vindman is the “whistleblower’s” source. If true, it calls Schiff’s and Vindman’s claims, that they do not know the identity of the so-called “whis... Link to the full article to read more