As Twitchy told you, Donald Trump suggested that the whistleblower, being “almost a spy,” should maybe be dealt with the way we used to handle “spies and treason.” Great idea, right? Well, the New York Times had a great idea of their own: revealing information about the whistleblower.

Breaking News: The whistle-blower is said to be a CIA officer who was assigned to work at the White House. His complaint suggests he is a trained analyst. https://t.co/wA0GOwwiWX — The New York Times (@nytimes) September 26, 2019

More from the New York Times:

Lawyers for the whistle-blower refused to confirm that he worked for the C.I.A. and said that publishing information about him was dangerous.

“Any decision to report any perceived identifying information of the whistle-blower is deeply concerning and reckless, as it can place the individual in harm’s way,” said Andrew Bakaj, his lead counsel. “The whistle-blower has a right to anonymity.” Well, apparently that’s not up to the whistleblower. It’s up to the New York Times:

Dean Baquet, our executive editor, explains why we chose to publish the information about the whistle-blower https://t.co/5BtDXYpoiz pic.twitter.com/s0mZaivG3t — The New York Times (@nytimes) September 26, 2019

Oh, well, in that case …

You chose wrong — Vivienne (@muther_mettle) September 26, 2019

Kiss my ass Dean- was a bad decision! — (((Arleen))) (@babytwin59) September 26, 2019

So you'll be doing this to some of your sources now? Because couldn't the same be said about many of those? This is wrong. Be ashamed. — Dominic (@djbrunetti) September 26, 2019

I’m not sure we need this information. Plus, how hard is it for the WH to figure it out now? https://t.co/kgSoQDTYwJ — Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) September 26, 2019

Trump just made thinly veiled threats against the whistle-blower. How can you possibly justify publishing this information right now?? — Karl Runser (@KarlRunser) September 26, 2019

For the record, Mark Zaid, another attorney representing the whistleblower, isn’t happy with Dean Baquet’s executive decision, either:

Whistle blower atty. Mark S. Zaid responds: "Publishing details about the whistleblower will only lead to identification of someone, whether our client or the wrong person, as the whistleblower. This will place this individual in a much more dangerous situation" https://t.co/NMCVZnTXZz — Geoff Bennett (@GeoffRBennett) September 26, 2019

Yeah, what could possibly go wrong?

This is wildly irresponsible. You're putting someone's life at risk. — Devin's Ego, Respected (@DevinNunesEgo) September 26, 2019

I think it’s fine that the Times essentially outed the whistleblower. It’s not like Trump has been threatening anyone involved in this today. — Allahpundit (@allahpundit) September 26, 2019

As usual.