Once again there is nothing illegal about naming the whistle blower who is technically not a whistle blower. Before the democrats conveniently changed the rules this year second hand hearsay wouldn't have even been taken seriously under the whistle blower protection. Whistle blower protection only protects a person's employment it does not provide for them to remain anonymous. There is a separate whistle blower protection act that comes with heavy fines and imprisonment for outing a undercover agent doing covert activities for the US government, this guy is not entitled to protection under that act.

Doesn't surprise me I have to post this run down again, it's really hard for some people to totally understand the laws as written.

You, once again, are ill informed. It is NOT against the law to publish or identify publicly the name of a whistle blower who is not a COVERT AGENT of the United States.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 forbids interfering with or denying federal employees a right to furnish information to lawmakers. The Inspector General Act of 1978 prohibits officials from threatening the jobs of or making other reprisals against federal employees who complain or disclose information to an inspector general in good faith.

That's where the whistle blower's status lays, within those two acts. He is not a COVERT AGENT and therefore does not qualify under The Intelligence Identities Protection Act that makes it illegal for anyone to disclose an intelligence officers identity. He would literally have had to been working UNDERCOVER for the United States government to qualify under that act.