Why Aren’t There More Whistleblowers Against Trump?
How Do We Encourage More To Speak Out?
What you’re about to read covers why so few people have blown the whistle on this administration, what happened to the insiders who did, and how the people who lied to protect those in power came out ahead instead. It then turns to the fix: this country has protected whistleblowers before, the programs that protect them still work, and states can build them now. It ends with the specific law worth asking your state to pass and the offices to call.
No one disputes the wrongdoing. DOGE reached into private databases full of Americans’ records, Trump fired the watchdogs who police the agencies, and the administration handed no-bid contracts to corrupt “friends” of the administration. So it is worth asking plainly: with this much in the open, why are so few people willing to put their names to what they saw from the inside? The answer sits in the public record, in what happened to the people who already spoke out. America destroys the people who tell the truth about those in power and saves the people who fall on their spears to protect those same powerful people.
Let’s start with the man who did everything by the book. Michael Atkinson was the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, the in-house watchdog over the spy agencies. In 2019 a complaint landed on his desk about a phone call between Trump and the president of Ukraine. The law handed Atkinson a narrow job: decide whether the complaint looked credible and urgent, and if it did, route it to Congress. He decided it did, and he routed it. He followed the statute to the letter. For that, Trump fired him in April 2020. Atkinson said afterward that he had only faithfully discharged his legal obligations. The story does not end there. Six years later, in the spring of 2026, the administration’s own intelligence director sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department naming Atkinson and the whistleblower he had protected. A man followed the law, lost his job for it, and then watched the government circle back years later to put him under the threat of prosecution.
Alexander Vindman, who has had his own share of controversy, started his time in the public sphere as a whistleblower. He sat on the National Security Council, listened in real time as Trump pressed Ukraine, and reported his concern up the chain of command. He had come to America as a 3-year-old and grown up to serve the Army for more than two decades. When Congress subpoenaed him, he testified. The White House and its media allies went to work, questioning his loyalty and casting a decorated officer as more devoted to the country of his birth than to the one whose uniform he wore. An Iraq War veteran with 21 years of service left the Army, telling the country that a campaign of bullying and retaliation had cost him his career.
Reality Winner never worked in the White House; she was a contractor reading classified traffic, and one report scared her enough to act. It showed that Russian military hackers had gone after the companies and the county officials who run our elections. She mailed it to a newsroom because she believed the public deserved to know its votes faced a legitimate attack. Prosecutors charged her under a 1917 spying law written to catch enemy agents. They read her private diary aloud to keep her locked up without bail. The judge sentenced her to 63 months, the longest term any court had ever handed down for leaking to the press.
Since then, just days into his second term, Trump fired 17 inspectors general at once, the independent watchdogs Congress planted inside the agencies to catch fraud and abuse. A federal judge later ruled that he broke the law to do it, called the violation obvious, and still declined to give them their jobs back. Every career official watching learned the price of independence in a single evening.
In the first year of the new term, the Energy Department’s watchdog opened nine times as many whistleblower-retaliation cases as it had in the last year of the prior administration, and the EPA referred roughly six times as many. Picture the analyst who spots something wrong, remembers the marched-out watchdog, and decides to keep her head down and her mouth shut.
Now compare those whistleblowers to the people who chose the opposite path. Roger Stone lied to Congress to shield Trump and refused to cooperate with investigators. Trump praised him for having the “guts” not to testify, commuted his sentence days before he was due to report to prison, and later wiped the conviction away with a full pardon. Paul Manafort agreed to help prosecutors, then lied to them, and Trump pardoned him too. Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, and Alex van der Zwaan each lied to investigators in the Russia probe, and each one received pardons.
So we have our answer. The shortage of whistleblowers is not a riddle of courage or character. The one nationwide study of American whistleblowers found almost nothing that separates the people who speak up from the people who stay silent, not background, not temperament. What separates them is the consequences they can anticipate. Sixty-nine percent of the people in that study who reported wrongdoing lost their jobs, and the share climbed past 80 percent for those who brought the complaint outside their own organization. We built a system of rewards and punishments, and it attacks integrity and rewards complicity. The state strips the truth-teller of career, freedom, and reputation, then turns and rewards the loyalist who falls on his spear to keep the powerful untouched.
So now that we have outlined the problem and it’s source, we can look for an example of a successful whistleblower program. In the middle of the American Revolution, ten sailors aboard the USS Warren reported that the most powerful officer in the Continental Navy, Commodore Esek Hopkins, had tortured British prisoners. Hopkins dragged two of them into court. The Continental Congress addressed the misconduct, they knew this wasn’t the sort of activity they wanted their nation to engage in. On July 30, 1778, Congress declared that every American had a duty to report misconduct by people in power, and it voted to cover the sailors’ legal defense. The first thing this country ever did about whistleblowers was protect them and pay their legal bills.
And when this country has wanted information badly enough, it has paid cash for it. Lincoln signed the False Claims Act in 1863 to catch war profiteers, and the law still lets an ordinary person sue on the government’s behalf and keep a cut of what comes back. Since Congress put real teeth in it in 1986, whistleblowers have helped recover more than $85 billion, and the people who came forward keep 15 to 30 percent of it. The securities program Congress built after the 2008 crash runs on the same mechanism: report the fraud, stay anonymous through a lawyer, collect a share of the fine. It has paid nearly $2 billion to about 400 people, including a single anonymous tipster who walked away with $279 million. The answer to our whistleblower problem is unambiguous. In cases of fraud you can pay people, and in all cases you hide their names, discipline those who engage in the conduct being reported, and make the boss who retaliates pay seriously for it. And a note on the obvious objection, that in fraud cases the choice to pay people will brings out liars, that claim does not survive the evidence; studies of these reward programs found no wave of false claims, because a tip pays only when it proves true and brings money back.
States already run a smaller version of the federal fraud program. More than 30 states and the District of Columbia pay people a share of the money the state claws back when they expose fraud against it. The system exists, and it works well. A state cannot rewrite the rules that govern a federal worker’s job, and it cannot call off a federal prosecutor. What a state can do is change the outcomes for everyone else. Most people who see something are not sitting on the National Security Council. They are contractors and clerks and nurses and county officials, the people who read the files and sign the forms. A state can offer them exactly what Congress offered the Warren sailors and what Lincoln’s law still offers today.
A state can give a person who exposes wrongdoing in the federal government two things: protection and a reward. The protection does not require the state to recover any money, and it applies no matter what the person exposed. Keep their name secret: let them report through a lawyer to the governor and state attorney general rather than to the official they are reporting on. Punish retaliation: give a state, local, or private worker in the state the right to sue, legal representation to fight for the return of their job, recover double their lost wages, and make the employer pay their attorney fees. Fund their defense: pay the legal costs of a whistleblower who faces a lawsuit or a prosecution, so those costs do not bankrupt them.
Passing a law that lays out the above is just one path to solving the whistleblower problem. Another path is any governor or state attorney general committing to defend and protect, federal whistleblowers. The governor has incredible resources at their disposal and either office can open the channel and start receiving tips today.
The whistleblowers we keep waiting for are already out there. They are weighing the same odds we are, and they stay quiet because they know that they are largely unprotected if they speak out, and that those engaged in the conduct they report will likely receive rewards and defense from the regime.
So, if you want to help more people on the inside to speak out against the GOP regime, you can tell your governor and your attorney general to make that promise now, out loud and on the record, and tell your state representative and senator to publicly call for the same. Your governor’s contract information can be found at nga.org/governors/, your attorney general at naag.org/find-my-ag/, and your legislators at openstates.org/find_your_legislator/.
If it helps, here is something to put into your own words. Make sure you say it in your own words so it doesn’t get tossed out as a form letter.
I am a resident in (your location), I’m a (your job/life info) and I want my state to protect the people who speak out on federal misconduct and wrongdoing the way Lincoln’s law already does, and I am asking you to commit to it now. The federal government attacks the people who speak out and protects those who are actively undermining law and order. If our state and others don’t commit to providing legal defense for those who speak up, then these crimes being committed by the current administration may be forever unpunished and unknown to the public. Don’t bother sending me a form letter or non-answer, and whatever response you send will be shared with every endorsing organization of yours along with the public and the people who have voted for and/or supported you. If you aren’t here to defend law and order, please resign so we can find someone ready to meet this moment of national crisis.
Feel free to put your call or your email somewhere public when you are done. Every ask out in the open makes the next one easier.
The Existentialist Republic needs ten subscribers per article. We haven’t hit that threshold in 9 of the last 10 days. If you want this work to continue, for everyone, we need you. Don’t let this be the reason you miss rent or skip a meal. For everyone else, you can be one of the ten today and make sure the articles, books, legislation, and training keep coming for everyone.
Buy The ER Team a Cup of Coffee
You can get a free PDF of the book in the BMAC shop for $0.00 by clicking on this sentence.
Conservatism: America’s Personality Disorder — physical copy / free download
Intro to Soft Secession — physical copy / free download
Oppositional Federalism and You — physical copy / free download
Toppling Tyrants: A Field Guide to Dismantling American Fascism — physical copy / free download
Grab Them By The E.A.R.R.: How to Get Politicians to Do What You Want — physical copy / free download
Being Dangerous: Go From Activist to Operative
More Free downloads:
Soft Secession: 100 Policies That Pass
All Four Completed Model Legislation Bills
The Opposition Guide to Tax Warfare
Six-Panel Soft Secession Brochure
Afraid ! 😱. He plays by no rules, but his own ! And his rules have nothing to do with this republic’s constitution !! 😧
Whistleblowers are essential to a healthy democracy and to public safety. They expose wrongdoing, corruption, abuse of power, and systemic failures that would otherwise remain hidden from the public. Without them, critical problems inside government and major institutions often go unchecked.
Unfortunately, under this administration, whistleblower protections appear weakened in practice, regardless of what the law says on paper. Too often, individuals who come forward face retaliation, including termination, investigations, and legal pressure that can destroy careers and personal lives. That kind of environment discourages people from speaking out.
It’s also important to note that many states have their own whistleblower protection laws designed to safeguard employees who report misconduct at the state and local level, adding another layer of legal protection beyond federal statutes. Even so, enforcement and consistency can vary, and those protections are not always enough to prevent retaliation in real time.
The result is predictable and dangerous: fewer whistleblowers come forward, misconduct is harder to uncover, and the public is left less informed and less protected. A system that punishes truth-telling instead of safeguarding it ultimately makes the country less safe and less accountable.
It’s very unfortunate that we have stifled people from coming forward to help keep our states and country safer.