Barr needs to throw the whistleblower complaint out, its based on an illegal revision of the law

[Bush92]

The IG should be investigated.
The Senate needs to subpoena him.

On what grounds?

The report was valid

The report was "credible" but not valid.
The whistleblower did not have firsthand knowledge, and the wrongdoing was not under the DNI's authority.

Makes no sense

Police investigate crimes all the time based on second hand information.
I did not see the murder, but I overheard someone talking about it.

How about this, a wealthy guy like Soros puts up billboards around Langley saying that he'd pay well for anyone who "leaks" or "composes" wrongdoing about Trump. Brennan sets up a CIA agent in the Whitehouse to gather "hearsay evidence". Then the CIA agent gives the "evidence" to the Soros' team of lawyers to craft the complaint. While this is going on the Law is changed to allow second hand "hearsay" evidence instead of "firsthand knowledge".

All of this is taking place to counter the Biden's prolific pillaging of the Ukraine and China, which the dems have zero interest of investigating. These charges against Trump pale in comparison to Hillary's crimes during 2016 when she hired agents to hire Russians to create the "Steele Dossier", which was used by the FBI to spy on Trump. The Hillary and Biden crimes are real, the accusations against Trump are not even crimes, so says the DOJ and Dershowitz.

Hearsay evidence is still evidence

It is up to the investigating authority to determine if it was credible. In this case, it was

Sure is after you change the the regulatory standards just weeks before the complaint is filed with the inside help of that weasel eyed fuck Schiff.

 

[deanrd]

Doesn’t matter

A credible report was filed and investigated by the IG
The “firsthand knowledge” wording is in the Whistleblower Protection Act. Barr can deny whistleblower protections but cannot deny the basic facts of the complaint

Not only that, the IG evaluated and determined it to be “urgent and concerning“.
That means he investigated it before turning it over.

 

[Defiant1]

Doesn’t matter

A credible report was filed and investigated by the IG
The “firsthand knowledge” wording is in the Whistleblower Protection Act. Barr can deny whistleblower protections but cannot deny the basic facts of the complaint

Not only that, the IG evaluated and determined it to be “urgent and concerning“.
That means he investigated it before turning it over.

I hope he has his resignation letter ready.

 

[Crepitus]

AG Barr needs to throw out the whistleblower complaint because its based on an unlawful revision of the original whistleblower law.
The original law said that the whistleblower had to have "firsthand knowledge" of the wrongdoing. This entire setup of Trump is illegal.

The Intelligence Community Secretly Removed The First-Hand Knowledge Of Wrongdoing Requirement For Whistleblower Reports
"Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings. This raises questions about the intelligence community’s behavior regarding the August submission of a whistleblower complaint against President Donald Trump. The new complaint document no longer requires potential whistleblowers who wish to have their concerns expedited to Congress to have direct, first-hand knowledge of the alleged wrongdoing that they are reporting.

The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”

Should Barr keep the original as-written requirement of "firsthand knowledge of wrongdoing" in any whistleblower complaint, and throw out this illegal complaint? Take a poll...

That's fake news. It never happened.

 

[Crepitus]

Doesn’t matter

A credible report was filed and investigated by the IG
The “firsthand knowledge” wording is in the Whistleblower Protection Act. Barr can deny whistleblower protections but cannot deny the basic facts of the complaint

You do realize they can’t randomly change the law themselves to suit their purposes, right...
Power they take for themselves could one day haunt even you...

The law applies to protecting whistleblowers not how reports of illegal actions are investigated

The IG received a report he found credible and investigated it. Trump covered it up

It's actually specifically laid out in the law that they do.

In this document from.the DNI it is described by this example:

“Denise tells her coworker, Adam, she just completed a new classified report for their supervisor, Mr. Snyder. Denise also confides to Adam that Mr. Snyder deliberately revised portions of her analysis with false information to mislead leadership. Adam is surprised, but Denise says Mr. Snyder has done this with a previous classified report as well,” according to the guidance, entitled “Protecting Whistleblowers with Access to Classified Information.”

“Because Adam has good reason to believe that misconduct is occurring in his work unit, he is required to report this misconduct,”

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/Whistleblower.PDF

 

[Dragonlady]

Doesn’t matter

A credible report was filed and investigated by the IG
The “firsthand knowledge” wording is in the Whistleblower Protection Act. Barr can deny whistleblower protections but cannot deny the basic facts of the complaint

You do realize they can’t randomly change the law themselves to suit their purposes, right...
Power they take for themselves could one day haunt even you...

The law applies to protecting whistleblowers not how reports of illegal actions are investigated

The IG received a report he found credible and investigated it. Trump covered it up

The IG should be investigated.
The Senate needs to subpoena him.

The IG is a Republican, Trump appointee, as is the Acting Director of National Intelligence.

I find it very telling that the whistle blower has uncovered corrupt, criminal behaviour by the President and his closest advisors. Using taxpayer funded military aid to extort political favours from world leaders, and then using the federal national security apparatus to cover up this illegal activity is simply the most corrupt and illegal act ever committed by a sitting President. And you're focusing on the process under which this criminal behaviour came to light.

Make no mistake, Trump will be gone by Christmas. The vote in the Senate will be unanimous. It cannot be otherwise, because Trump has proudly admitted he did this. Barr, Pompeo, Guiliani and Pence are all implicated in both the extortion and the cover-up. The most criminal administration in US history, will all end up in jail.

 

[miketx]

The IG should be investigated.
The Senate needs to subpoena him.

On what grounds?

The report was valid

The report was "credible" but not valid.
The whistleblower did not have firsthand knowledge, and the wrongdoing was not under the DNI's authority.

Makes no sense

Police investigate crimes all the time based on second hand information.
I did not see the murder, but I overheard someone talking about it.

How about this, a wealthy guy like Soros puts up billboards around Langley saying that he'd pay well for anyone who "leaks" or "composes" wrongdoing about Trump. Brennan sets up a CIA agent in the Whitehouse to gather "hearsay evidence". Then the CIA agent gives the "evidence" to the Soros' team of lawyers to craft the complaint. While this is going on the Law is changed to allow second hand "hearsay" evidence instead of "firsthand knowledge".

All of this is taking place to counter the Biden's prolific pillaging of the Ukraine and China, which the dems have zero interest of investigating. These charges against Trump pale in comparison to Hillary's crimes during 2016 when she hired agents to hire Russians to create the "Steele Dossier", which was used by the FBI to spy on Trump. The Hillary and Biden crimes are real, the accusations against Trump are not even crimes, so says the DOJ and Dershowitz.

Hearsay evidence is still evidence

It is up to the investigating authority to determine if it was credible. In this case, it was

Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.

 

[rightwinger]

The law applies to protecting whistleblowers not how reports of illegal actions are investigated

The IG received a report he found credible and investigated it. Trump covered it up

The IG should be investigated.
The Senate needs to subpoena him.

On what grounds?

The report was valid

The report was "credible" but not valid.
The whistleblower did not have firsthand knowledge, and the wrongdoing was not under the DNI's authority.

Makes no sense

Police investigate crimes all the time based on second hand information.
I did not see the murder, but I overheard someone talking about it.

Call the police and tell them your neighbor who has had his car broken into, is parking his car in the garage instead of leaving it in the driveway like you think he should.

WTF does that have to do with anything?

If I called the police and said I had heard that my neighbors son was breaking into cars ......they would investigate

 

[rightwinger]

On what grounds?

The report was valid

The report was "credible" but not valid.
The whistleblower did not have firsthand knowledge, and the wrongdoing was not under the DNI's authority.

Makes no sense

Police investigate crimes all the time based on second hand information.
I did not see the murder, but I overheard someone talking about it.

How about this, a wealthy guy like Soros puts up billboards around Langley saying that he'd pay well for anyone who "leaks" or "composes" wrongdoing about Trump. Brennan sets up a CIA agent in the Whitehouse to gather "hearsay evidence". Then the CIA agent gives the "evidence" to the Soros' team of lawyers to craft the complaint. While this is going on the Law is changed to allow second hand "hearsay" evidence instead of "firsthand knowledge".

All of this is taking place to counter the Biden's prolific pillaging of the Ukraine and China, which the dems have zero interest of investigating. These charges against Trump pale in comparison to Hillary's crimes during 2016 when she hired agents to hire Russians to create the "Steele Dossier", which was used by the FBI to spy on Trump. The Hillary and Biden crimes are real, the accusations against Trump are not even crimes, so says the DOJ and Dershowitz.

Hearsay evidence is still evidence

It is up to the investigating authority to determine if it was credible. In this case, it was

Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.

Hardly, it is the basis of many investigations

 

[rightwinger]

On what grounds?

The report was valid

The report was "credible" but not valid.
The whistleblower did not have firsthand knowledge, and the wrongdoing was not under the DNI's authority.

Makes no sense

Police investigate crimes all the time based on second hand information.
I did not see the murder, but I overheard someone talking about it.

How about this, a wealthy guy like Soros puts up billboards around Langley saying that he'd pay well for anyone who "leaks" or "composes" wrongdoing about Trump. Brennan sets up a CIA agent in the Whitehouse to gather "hearsay evidence". Then the CIA agent gives the "evidence" to the Soros' team of lawyers to craft the complaint. While this is going on the Law is changed to allow second hand "hearsay" evidence instead of "firsthand knowledge".

All of this is taking place to counter the Biden's prolific pillaging of the Ukraine and China, which the dems have zero interest of investigating. These charges against Trump pale in comparison to Hillary's crimes during 2016 when she hired agents to hire Russians to create the "Steele Dossier", which was used by the FBI to spy on Trump. The Hillary and Biden crimes are real, the accusations against Trump are not even crimes, so says the DOJ and Dershowitz.

Hearsay evidence is still evidence

It is up to the investigating authority to determine if it was credible. In this case, it was

Sure is after you change the the regulatory standards just weeks before the complaint is filed with the inside help of that weasel eyed fuck Schiff.

The complaint would be valid under the old rules

 

[Dragonlady]

On what grounds?

The report was valid

The report was "credible" but not valid.
The whistleblower did not have firsthand knowledge, and the wrongdoing was not under the DNI's authority.

Makes no sense

Police investigate crimes all the time based on second hand information.
I did not see the murder, but I overheard someone talking about it.

How about this, a wealthy guy like Soros puts up billboards around Langley saying that he'd pay well for anyone who "leaks" or "composes" wrongdoing about Trump. Brennan sets up a CIA agent in the Whitehouse to gather "hearsay evidence". Then the CIA agent gives the "evidence" to the Soros' team of lawyers to craft the complaint. While this is going on the Law is changed to allow second hand "hearsay" evidence instead of "firsthand knowledge".

All of this is taking place to counter the Biden's prolific pillaging of the Ukraine and China, which the dems have zero interest of investigating. These charges against Trump pale in comparison to Hillary's crimes during 2016 when she hired agents to hire Russians to create the "Steele Dossier", which was used by the FBI to spy on Trump. The Hillary and Biden crimes are real, the accusations against Trump are not even crimes, so says the DOJ and Dershowitz.

Hearsay evidence is still evidence

It is up to the investigating authority to determine if it was credible. In this case, it was

Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.

On what grounds?

The report was valid

The report was "credible" but not valid.
The whistleblower did not have firsthand knowledge, and the wrongdoing was not under the DNI's authority.

Makes no sense

Police investigate crimes all the time based on second hand information.
I did not see the murder, but I overheard someone talking about it.

How about this, a wealthy guy like Soros puts up billboards around Langley saying that he'd pay well for anyone who "leaks" or "composes" wrongdoing about Trump. Brennan sets up a CIA agent in the Whitehouse to gather "hearsay evidence". Then the CIA agent gives the "evidence" to the Soros' team of lawyers to craft the complaint. While this is going on the Law is changed to allow second hand "hearsay" evidence instead of "firsthand knowledge".

All of this is taking place to counter the Biden's prolific pillaging of the Ukraine and China, which the dems have zero interest of investigating. These charges against Trump pale in comparison to Hillary's crimes during 2016 when she hired agents to hire Russians to create the "Steele Dossier", which was used by the FBI to spy on Trump. The Hillary and Biden crimes are real, the accusations against Trump are not even crimes, so says the DOJ and Dershowitz.

Hearsay evidence is still evidence

It is up to the investigating authority to determine if it was credible. In this case, it was

Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.

So there is no such thing as a "jailhouse snitch". I guy who testifies in court about what his cellmate told him. The snitch wasn't there. Everything he says is "heresay", and yet many investigations hinge on it. Heresay is inadmissable if the person who made the original statements is death and can't testify to the veracity of the testimony, but it is most definitely the basis of investigations and even convictions.