Rand Paul Unleashes LIVE On Senate Floor – Names Whistleblower Eric Ciaramella 5 Times

[Jitss617]

A very wrong thing to do.

Why?

So deranged fuckwads like you don't threaten him & his family you piece of shit.

Is he not man enough to take it?

 

[Clipper]

www.citizenfreepress.com ^ | February 4, 2020 12:36 pm | Kane

Fantastic Video — Rand Paul Takes Revenge On Democrat Coup Plot

This just unfolded on Senate floor in the past 30 minutes… Shitte has a heart attack!!! ROTFLMFAO

Paul should be locked up for what he did. The fucking yellow bastard did it when the Senate chambers were empty. He didn't have the balls to do it any other time. Another coward like his big mouth daddy Trump.

 

[Nostra]

www.citizenfreepress.com ^ | February 4, 2020 12:36 pm | Kane

Fantastic Video — Rand Paul Takes Revenge On Democrat Coup Plot

This just unfolded on Senate floor in the past 30 minutes… Shitte has a heart attack!!! ROTFLMFAO

Paul should be locked up for what he did. The fucking yellow bastard did it when the Senate chambers were empty. He didn't have the balls to do it any other time. Another coward like his big mouth daddy Trump.

Yeah, doing it while being televised nationally was cowardly.

 

[Coyote]

Dejas Vous and here we go again.

Let's simplify it down. What does it say?

The IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

It's incumbent on the IG to verify or find reliable first hand information before the report can be transmitted. Checks and balances.

What it does NOT say is that a whistle blower can only be a whistle blower with first hand information. In fact the form used REQUIRES the whistle blower to identify whether or not the info is first hand or not.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here because that reads like you are backing up my/rays claim, if so please allow me time to re-evaluate my position.

What claim exactly do you think it backs up?

It outlines the process (the article at the link) - the whistle blower's role and the IG's role. The IG's responsibility is to confirm whether or not it's credible by verifying and, if needed getting first hand accounts if the whistle blower provided second hand accounts.

If the IG can not confirm credibility, the complaint is not sent up, that is all.

The whistle blower is NOT required to provide first hand info.

In this case it was deemed credible.

 

[Clipper]

A very wrong thing to do.

Why?

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

The report was 90% lies. The idea that any Republican is going to assassinate this douchebag doesn't pass the laugh test. Democrats do that kind of thing, not Republicans.

When did Obama protect whistleblowers reporting on his administration?

Answer: never.

Ever hear of the MAGA bomber, fool? Or how about the right wing trash who shot up the pizza joint? Who do you think you're bullshitting, anyway? You know goddam well what some of these nutjobs are capable of. So shut the fuck up.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There is nothing in the law that requires it to be first hand information.

lol...from your link:

In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing. This includes information received from another person, such as when a fellow employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing. (Anyone with first-hand knowledge]

The good news is that ray owes you a great big thank you

Dejas Vous and here we go again.

Let's simplify it down. What does it say?

The IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

It's incumbent on the IG to verify or find reliable first hand information before the report can be transmitted. Checks and balances.

What it does NOT say is that a whistle blower can only be a whistle blower with first hand information. In fact the form used REQUIRES the whistle blower to identify whether or not the info is first hand or not.

Yes it does. Again, page two, first paragraph:

Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second- hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA.

So what this says is that yes, he could file a complaint, but just not as an actual whistleblower.

 

[Nostra]

Dejas Vous and here we go again.

Let's simplify it down. What does it say?

The IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

It's incumbent on the IG to verify or find reliable first hand information before the report can be transmitted. Checks and balances.

What it does NOT say is that a whistle blower can only be a whistle blower with first hand information. In fact the form used REQUIRES the whistle blower to identify whether or not the info is first hand or not.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here because that reads like you are backing up my/rays claim, if so please allow me time to re-evaluate my position.

What claim exactly do you think it backs up?

It outlines the process (the article at the link) - the whistle blower's role and the IG's role. The IG's responsibility is to confirm whether or not it's credible by verifying and, if needed getting first hand accounts if the whistle blower provided second hand accounts.

If the IG can not confirm credibility, the complaint is not sent up, that is all.

The whistle blower is NOT required to provide first hand info.

In this case it was deemed credible.

You do realize the rules were changed after the fact to allow only second hand knowledge, right?

 

[Nostra]

A very wrong thing to do.

Why?

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

The report was 90% lies. The idea that any Republican is going to assassinate this douchebag doesn't pass the laugh test. Democrats do that kind of thing, not Republicans.

When did Obama protect whistleblowers reporting on his administration?

Answer: never.

Ever hear of the MAGA bomber, fool? Or how about the right wing trash who shot up the pizza joint? Who do you think you're bullshitting, anyway? You know goddam well what some of these nutjobs are capable of. So shut the fuck up.

...or the Dimwinger who shot up the entire Republican Baseball team......

 

[Clipper]

What are you Trumptards going to do when Bolton starts talking? Or his book come out? Blame Schiff? Lol!

 

[Clipper]

There is nothing in the law that requires it to be first hand information.

lol...from your link:

In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing. This includes information received from another person, such as when a fellow employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing. (Anyone with first-hand knowledge]

The good news is that ray owes you a great big thank you

Dejas Vous and here we go again.

Let's simplify it down. What does it say?

The IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

It's incumbent on the IG to verify or find reliable first hand information before the report can be transmitted. Checks and balances.

What it does NOT say is that a whistle blower can only be a whistle blower with first hand information. In fact the form used REQUIRES the whistle blower to identify whether or not the info is first hand or not.

Yes it does. Again, page two, first paragraph:

Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second- hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA.

So what this says is that yes, he could file a complaint, but just not as an actual whistleblower.

Breaking! Bolton spills the beans in new book! Can't blame the whistleblower, can ya Trumptard?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What are you Trumptards going to do when Bolton starts talking? Or his book come out? Blame Schiff? Lol!

Nobody is stopping him from talking. He can talk all he wants now. He can do interviews, write op-eds, whatever he wants.

 

[Nostra]

What are you Trumptards going to do when Bolton starts talking? Or his book come out? Blame Schiff? Lol!

Not sure what a Trumptard is, but when Bolton's book comes out and he is trying to sell it I will recall he was fired by Trump and is trying to cash in on his time in the WH before the Trump Presidency is over. That's about as low as it gets.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There is nothing in the law that requires it to be first hand information.

lol...from your link:

In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing. This includes information received from another person, such as when a fellow employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing. (Anyone with first-hand knowledge]

The good news is that ray owes you a great big thank you

Dejas Vous and here we go again.

Let's simplify it down. What does it say?

The IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

It's incumbent on the IG to verify or find reliable first hand information before the report can be transmitted. Checks and balances.

What it does NOT say is that a whistle blower can only be a whistle blower with first hand information. In fact the form used REQUIRES the whistle blower to identify whether or not the info is first hand or not.

Yes it does. Again, page two, first paragraph:

Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second- hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA.

So what this says is that yes, he could file a complaint, but just not as an actual whistleblower.

Breaking! Bolton spills the beans in new book! Can't blame the whistleblower, can ya Trumptard?

You don't know what's even in the book retard! All you have is what publishers throw out as leaks to try and hype the sales for when it's released.

 

[Jitss617]

I just took this pic 1 min ago.. this little turd is at a bernie rally! And put him self on tv!

 

[Clipper]

What are you Trumptards going to do when Bolton starts talking? Or his book come out? Blame Schiff? Lol!

Not sure what a Trumptard is, but when Bolton's book comes out and he is trying to sell it I will recall he was fired by Trump and is trying to cash in on his time in the WH before the Trump Presidency is over. That's about as low as it gets.

He wasen't fired, he resigned. Trump is a liar. Btw, the biggest fool Trump ever hired, Giuliani is still slithering around. Speaks volumes about Trump's judgement.

 

[Coyote]

View attachment 304602 I just took this pic 1 min ago.. this little turd is at a bernie rally! And put him self on tv!

That is a really bad photo shop

 

[Clipper]

There is nothing in the law that requires it to be first hand information.

lol...from your link:

In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing. This includes information received from another person, such as when a fellow employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing. (Anyone with first-hand knowledge]

The good news is that ray owes you a great big thank you

Dejas Vous and here we go again.

Let's simplify it down. What does it say?

The IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

It's incumbent on the IG to verify or find reliable first hand information before the report can be transmitted. Checks and balances.

What it does NOT say is that a whistle blower can only be a whistle blower with first hand information. In fact the form used REQUIRES the whistle blower to identify whether or not the info is first hand or not.

Yes it does. Again, page two, first paragraph:

Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second- hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA.

So what this says is that yes, he could file a complaint, but just not as an actual whistleblower.

Breaking! Bolton spills the beans in new book! Can't blame the whistleblower, can ya Trumptard?

You don't know what's even in the book retard! All you have is what publishers throw out as leaks to try and hype the sales for when it's released.

I can predict what is in Bolton's book by the way Mitch & the mob refused to call him to defend Trump, retard.

 

[Jitss617]

Lol I just put this pic on twitter and I was permanently banned!

 

[Jitss617]

View attachment 304602 I just took this pic 1 min ago.. this little turd is at a bernie rally! And put him self on tv!

That is a really bad photo shop

I swear I didn’t go to bernies rally

 

[Nostra]

What are you Trumptards going to do when Bolton starts talking? Or his book come out? Blame Schiff? Lol!

Not sure what a Trumptard is, but when Bolton's book comes out and he is trying to sell it I will recall he was fired by Trump and is trying to cash in on his time in the WH before the Trump Presidency is over. That's about as low as it gets.

He wasen't fired, he resigned. Trump is a liar. Btw, the biggest fool Trump ever hired, Giuliani is still slithering around. Speaks volumes about Trump's judgement.

Um, Bolton claimed he "offered to resign" right after he was fired.