Who the Hell is ICIG Michael Atkinson and why does he still have his job?

[Dragonlady]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

Send him back to The Clinton Crime Cabal or Obama Bin Lying Jihad.

Release the Volker Transcripts. No more of this bullshit Secret hearings, and Anonymous so called Whistle Blowers.

You seemed agitated Tree.

Here's the thing, you lying traitorous Russian tool. The Clintons have committed no crimes. And if you were the righteous Christian man you claim to be, you wouldn't bear false witness against the Clintons, or Obama, or any of the other people you routinely lie about, smear and defame.

You're posting the same debunked conspiracy theories Trump has been telling since the beginning in regards to the Clintons and Obama, but now that Biden is leading the the Democratic race, Trump is out to smear him the way the RNC and FBI smeared Hillary throughout the last campaign season with their phony email scandal.

The Republican Party has been investigating the Clintons, at a cost to taxpayers in excess of $100 million, and found nothing, with the exception of Whitewater way back in the beginning, they've charged no one, they have no evidence, no witnesses, and could find no crimes.

In contrast, in one investigation of Donald Trump, you have over 100 charges in two countries, 7 guilty pleas, and all of the Trump staffers who faced charges are sitting in jail, or awaiting sentencing. Trump keeps calling the investigation a "witch hunt" but all of Trump's witches, plead guilty.



But because you're a lying Russian piece of shit out to destroy America, you come here and post Trump's lies and bullshit. It is past time that Donald Trump was called to accounts for his destructive and illegal actions. Trump most definitely tried to bully the Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. Trump could not have been clearer.

From the Transcript of the call, released by the White House:

President Zelenskyy: . . . . I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.

I've emphasized the extortion part, because clearly, in Russia, you're so inured to corruption, you can't recognize it when you see it.

 

[iceberg]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

Send him back to The Clinton Crime Cabal or Obama Bin Lying Jihad.

Release the Volker Transcripts. No more of this bullshit Secret hearings, and Anonymous so called Whistle Blowers.

You seemed agitated Tree.

Here's the thing, you lying traitorous Russian tool. The Clintons have committed no crimes. And if you were the righteous Christian man you claim to be, you wouldn't bear false witness against the Clintons, or Obama, or any of the other people you routinely lie about, smear and defame.

You're posting the same debunked conspiracy theories Trump has been telling since the beginning in regards to the Clintons and Obama, but now that Biden is leading the the Democratic race, Trump is out to smear him the way the RNC and FBI smeared Hillary throughout the last campaign season with their phony email scandal.

The Republican Party has been investigating the Clintons, at a cost to taxpayers in excess of $100 million, and found nothing, with the exception of Whitewater way back in the beginning, they've charged no one, they have no evidence, no witnesses, and could find no crimes.

In contrast, in one investigation of Donald Trump, you have over 100 charges in two countries, 7 guilty pleas, and all of the Trump staffers who faced charges are sitting in jail, or awaiting sentencing. Trump keeps calling the investigation a "witch hunt" but all of Trump's witches, plead guilty.

But because you're a lying Russian piece of shit out to destroy America, you come here and post Trump's lies and bullshit. It is past time that Donald Trump was called to accounts for his destructive and illegal actions. Trump most definitely tried to bully the Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. Trump could not have been clearer.

From the Transcript of the call, released by the White House:

President Zelenskyy: . . . . I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.

I've emphasized the extortion part, because clearly, in Russia, you're so inured to corruption, you can't recognize it when you see it.

you seem agitated...

 

[playtime]

Atkinson is a Trump appointee who is doing his job.

Of course that is NOT acceptable to Trumpers

He has been there for two decades. That's longer than anyone should be allowed to be a bureaucrat. Todays deep state corruption is the result of career bureaucrats who protect one another and know they can get away with anything.

blame capt crazy pants for reappointing him.

 

[Jitss617]

This could be the end To the democrat party. The party of evil.

I’m a former democrat.. you guys are done

i'm not a (D)... & they ain't done ....but nice try.

You like to eat babies?

 

[playtime]

This could be the end To the democrat party. The party of evil.

I’m a former democrat.. you guys are done

i'm not a (D)... & they ain't done ....but nice try.

You like to eat babies?

you will believe any rw pablum your dotard president spews... what is it like to not even bother researching FACTS & just ASSume what you are told is actually the truth?

is it all warm & comfy inside that bubble of ignorance? it , must be. no wonder capt bone spur loves the poorly educated long time.

A protester who called for Americans to 'eat the babies' to fight climate change at AOC's town hall was revealed as a member of a pro-Trump fringe group

• 
  
  
  • But soon after a video of the incident went viral on Thursday night, a far-right pro-Trump group called the LaRouche movement announced on Twitter that it was behind the protester.
  • The group, which promotes a host of conspiracy theories, also linked to a post on its website calling the reduction of carbon emissions a "mass-murder policy."

A protester who called for Americans to 'eat the babies' to fight climate change at AOC's town hall was revealed as a member of a pro-Trump fringe group

 

[Jitss617]

This could be the end To the democrat party. The party of evil.

I’m a former democrat.. you guys are done

i'm not a (D)... & they ain't done ....but nice try.

You like to eat babies?

you will believe any rw pablum your dotard president spews... what is it like to not even bother researching FACTS & just ASSume what you are told is actually the truth?

is it all warm & comfy inside that bubble of ignorance? it , must be. no wonder capt bone spur loves the poorly educated long time.

A protester who called for Americans to 'eat the babies' to fight climate change at AOC's town hall was revealed as a member of a pro-Trump fringe group

• 
  
  
  • But soon after a video of the incident went viral on Thursday night, a far-right pro-Trump group called the LaRouche movement announced on Twitter that it was behind the protester.
  • The group, which promotes a host of conspiracy theories, also linked to a post on its website calling the reduction of carbon emissions a "mass-murder policy."

A protester who called for Americans to 'eat the babies' to fight climate change at AOC's town hall was revealed as a member of a pro-Trump fringe group

That’s not evidence lol

 

[playtime]

I’m a former democrat.. you guys are done

i'm not a (D)... & they ain't done ....but nice try.

You like to eat babies?

you will believe any rw pablum your dotard president spews... what is it like to not even bother researching FACTS & just ASSume what you are told is actually the truth?

is it all warm & comfy inside that bubble of ignorance? it , must be. no wonder capt bone spur loves the poorly educated long time.

A protester who called for Americans to 'eat the babies' to fight climate change at AOC's town hall was revealed as a member of a pro-Trump fringe group

• 
  
  
  • But soon after a video of the incident went viral on Thursday night, a far-right pro-Trump group called the LaRouche movement announced on Twitter that it was behind the protester.
  • The group, which promotes a host of conspiracy theories, also linked to a post on its website calling the reduction of carbon emissions a "mass-murder policy."

A protester who called for Americans to 'eat the babies' to fight climate change at AOC's town hall was revealed as a member of a pro-Trump fringe group

That’s not evidence lol

it's more than i can say about you.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

It was verified, dope. By Trump's own appointed "acting" ICIG. He found it to be both "credible" and an "urgent concern".

Document: Read the Whistle-Blower Complaint

"Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:

I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well."



"(U) The term “urgent concern” is defined, in relevant part, as:

(U) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters."

 

[Jitss617]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

It was verified, dope. By Trump's own appointed "acting" ICIG. He found it to be both "credible" and an "urgent concern".

Document: Read the Whistle-Blower Complaint

"Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:

I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well."



"(U) The term “urgent concern” is defined, in relevant part, as:

(U) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters."

The transcript is released get a life

 

[Hutch Starskey]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

It was verified, dope. By Trump's own appointed "acting" ICIG. He found it to be both "credible" and an "urgent concern".

Document: Read the Whistle-Blower Complaint

"Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:

I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well."



"(U) The term “urgent concern” is defined, in relevant part, as:

(U) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters."

The transcript is released get a life

And it says exactly what the whistleblower said it did.

Trump admitted it publicly, dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

Such BULLSHIT.

The law governing this was signed on 3 Jan 2016 and has not been changed since.

You have been lied to and are too stupid to even care.

Here is the link to the law....

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the relevant part.

thank you. i'll dig into this one. it does seem that we have names now, name won't talk, more confusion, dogs and cats sleeping together - no one knows what's true anymore so i simply want to see before and after documentation, not people talking about it. my jury is still out on this one but i'm open to info to help clarify the bullshit so this *is* appreciated.

-----
(5)(A) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.

(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.

(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate.

(D)(i) If the Inspector General does not find credible under subparagraph (B) a complaint or information submitted under subparagraph (A), or does not transmit the complaint or information to the Director in accurate form under subparagraph (B), the employee (subject to clause (ii)) may submit the complaint or information to Congress by contacting either or both of the congressional intelligence committees directly. (ii) An employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee— (I) before making such a contact, furnishes to the Director, through the Inspector General, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and (II) obtains and follows from the Director, through the Inspector General, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices. (iii) A member or employee of one of the congressional intelligence committees who receives a complaint or information under this subparagraph does so in that member or employee’s official capacity as a member or employee of such committee.

(E) The Inspector General shall notify an employee who reports a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this paragraph of each action taken under this paragraph with respect to the complaint or information. Such notice shall be provided not later than 3 days after any such action is taken.

(F) An action taken by the Director or the Inspector General under this paragraph shall not be subject to judicial review.

(G) In this paragraph, the term ‘‘urgent concern’’ means any of the following: (i) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters. (ii) A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity. (iii) An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee’s reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.

(H) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the protections afforded to an employee under section 3517(d) of this title or section 8H of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.). (I) An individual who has submitted a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this section may notify any member of either of the congressional intelligence committees, or a staff member of either of such committees, of the fact that such individual has made a submission to the Inspector General, and of the date on which such submission was made. (6) In accordance with section 535 of title 28, the Inspector General shall expeditiously report to the Attorney General any information, allegation, or complaint received by the Inspector General relating to violations of Federal criminal law that involves 1 a program or operation of an element of the intelligence community, or in the relationships between the elements of the intelligence community, consistent with such guidelines as may be issued by the Attorney General pursuant to subsection (b)(2) of such section. A copy of each such report shall be furnished to the Director.
------
within 7 days.

didn't this happen a month later? or they just chose to "announce it" a month later? it's obvious schiff knew days after it happened, but just wondering about process here.

no one knows what's true anymore

Sure we do. Don't believe that you are normal and your incompetence is ubiquitous.

 

[iceberg]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

Such BULLSHIT.

The law governing this was signed on 3 Jan 2016 and has not been changed since.

You have been lied to and are too stupid to even care.

Here is the link to the law....

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the relevant part.

thank you. i'll dig into this one. it does seem that we have names now, name won't talk, more confusion, dogs and cats sleeping together - no one knows what's true anymore so i simply want to see before and after documentation, not people talking about it. my jury is still out on this one but i'm open to info to help clarify the bullshit so this *is* appreciated.

-----
(5)(A) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.

(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.

(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate.

(D)(i) If the Inspector General does not find credible under subparagraph (B) a complaint or information submitted under subparagraph (A), or does not transmit the complaint or information to the Director in accurate form under subparagraph (B), the employee (subject to clause (ii)) may submit the complaint or information to Congress by contacting either or both of the congressional intelligence committees directly. (ii) An employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee— (I) before making such a contact, furnishes to the Director, through the Inspector General, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and (II) obtains and follows from the Director, through the Inspector General, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices. (iii) A member or employee of one of the congressional intelligence committees who receives a complaint or information under this subparagraph does so in that member or employee’s official capacity as a member or employee of such committee.

(E) The Inspector General shall notify an employee who reports a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this paragraph of each action taken under this paragraph with respect to the complaint or information. Such notice shall be provided not later than 3 days after any such action is taken.

(F) An action taken by the Director or the Inspector General under this paragraph shall not be subject to judicial review.

(G) In this paragraph, the term ‘‘urgent concern’’ means any of the following: (i) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters. (ii) A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity. (iii) An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee’s reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.

(H) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the protections afforded to an employee under section 3517(d) of this title or section 8H of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.). (I) An individual who has submitted a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this section may notify any member of either of the congressional intelligence committees, or a staff member of either of such committees, of the fact that such individual has made a submission to the Inspector General, and of the date on which such submission was made. (6) In accordance with section 535 of title 28, the Inspector General shall expeditiously report to the Attorney General any information, allegation, or complaint received by the Inspector General relating to violations of Federal criminal law that involves 1 a program or operation of an element of the intelligence community, or in the relationships between the elements of the intelligence community, consistent with such guidelines as may be issued by the Attorney General pursuant to subsection (b)(2) of such section. A copy of each such report shall be furnished to the Director.
------
within 7 days.

didn't this happen a month later? or they just chose to "announce it" a month later? it's obvious schiff knew days after it happened, but just wondering about process here.

no one knows what's true anymore

Sure we do. Don't believe that you are normal and your incompetence is ubiquitous.

fuck off.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

Such BULLSHIT.

The law governing this was signed on 3 Jan 2016 and has not been changed since.

You have been lied to and are too stupid to even care.

Here is the link to the law....

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the relevant part.

thank you. i'll dig into this one. it does seem that we have names now, name won't talk, more confusion, dogs and cats sleeping together - no one knows what's true anymore so i simply want to see before and after documentation, not people talking about it. my jury is still out on this one but i'm open to info to help clarify the bullshit so this *is* appreciated.

-----
(5)(A) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.

(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.

(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate.

(D)(i) If the Inspector General does not find credible under subparagraph (B) a complaint or information submitted under subparagraph (A), or does not transmit the complaint or information to the Director in accurate form under subparagraph (B), the employee (subject to clause (ii)) may submit the complaint or information to Congress by contacting either or both of the congressional intelligence committees directly. (ii) An employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee— (I) before making such a contact, furnishes to the Director, through the Inspector General, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and (II) obtains and follows from the Director, through the Inspector General, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices. (iii) A member or employee of one of the congressional intelligence committees who receives a complaint or information under this subparagraph does so in that member or employee’s official capacity as a member or employee of such committee.

(E) The Inspector General shall notify an employee who reports a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this paragraph of each action taken under this paragraph with respect to the complaint or information. Such notice shall be provided not later than 3 days after any such action is taken.

(F) An action taken by the Director or the Inspector General under this paragraph shall not be subject to judicial review.

(G) In this paragraph, the term ‘‘urgent concern’’ means any of the following: (i) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters. (ii) A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity. (iii) An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee’s reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.

(H) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the protections afforded to an employee under section 3517(d) of this title or section 8H of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.). (I) An individual who has submitted a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this section may notify any member of either of the congressional intelligence committees, or a staff member of either of such committees, of the fact that such individual has made a submission to the Inspector General, and of the date on which such submission was made. (6) In accordance with section 535 of title 28, the Inspector General shall expeditiously report to the Attorney General any information, allegation, or complaint received by the Inspector General relating to violations of Federal criminal law that involves 1 a program or operation of an element of the intelligence community, or in the relationships between the elements of the intelligence community, consistent with such guidelines as may be issued by the Attorney General pursuant to subsection (b)(2) of such section. A copy of each such report shall be furnished to the Director.
------
within 7 days.

didn't this happen a month later? or they just chose to "announce it" a month later? it's obvious schiff knew days after it happened, but just wondering about process here.

no one knows what's true anymore

Sure we do. Don't believe that you are normal and your incompetence is ubiquitous.

fuck off.

You're the one who is admittedly confused.
Your opinions are meaningless per usual.

 

[Jitss617]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

It was verified, dope. By Trump's own appointed "acting" ICIG. He found it to be both "credible" and an "urgent concern".

Document: Read the Whistle-Blower Complaint

"Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:

I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well."



"(U) The term “urgent concern” is defined, in relevant part, as:

(U) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters."

The transcript is released get a life

And it says exactly what the whistleblower said it did.

Trump admitted it publicly, dope.

Nothing criminal it’s trump talk,, it works.. raise your kids this way. Powerful American man!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

It was verified, dope. By Trump's own appointed "acting" ICIG. He found it to be both "credible" and an "urgent concern".

Document: Read the Whistle-Blower Complaint

"Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:

I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well."



"(U) The term “urgent concern” is defined, in relevant part, as:

(U) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters."

The transcript is released get a life

And it says exactly what the whistleblower said it did.

Trump admitted it publicly, dope.

Nothing criminal it’s trump talk,, it works.. raise your kids this way. Powerful American man!

He's already done. You're just far too incompetent to understand that yet.

 

[Jitss617]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

It was verified, dope. By Trump's own appointed "acting" ICIG. He found it to be both "credible" and an "urgent concern".

Document: Read the Whistle-Blower Complaint

"Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:

I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well."



"(U) The term “urgent concern” is defined, in relevant part, as:

(U) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters."

The transcript is released get a life

And it says exactly what the whistleblower said it did.

Trump admitted it publicly, dope.

Nothing criminal it’s trump talk,, it works.. raise your kids this way. Powerful American man!

He's already done. You're just far too incompetent to understand that yet.

Yea we will see who wins this

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It was verified, dope. By Trump's own appointed "acting" ICIG. He found it to be both "credible" and an "urgent concern".

Document: Read the Whistle-Blower Complaint

"Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:

I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well."



"(U) The term “urgent concern” is defined, in relevant part, as:

(U) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters."

The transcript is released get a life

And it says exactly what the whistleblower said it did.

Trump admitted it publicly, dope.

Nothing criminal it’s trump talk,, it works.. raise your kids this way. Powerful American man!

He's already done. You're just far too incompetent to understand that yet.

Yea we will see who wins this

Indeed.

 

[Lesh]

On Sept. 30, ICIG Intel community Inspector General) Michael Atkinson issued a news release acknowledging that, under the policy existing when he received the whistleblower's complaint, he could not have deemed it credible and reported it to the director of national intelligence. Instead, he admitted, he processed the complaint under a policy allowing second-hand information — a policy that he did not establish until after he received that complaint.

According to his news release, Atkinson simply accepted at face value the whistleblower’s assertion that he had first-hand information of at least some of the events alleged, even though the report itself provides no such information.

The whistleblower policy says that the ICIG could not deem a complaint credible based on second-hand information. But it does not prevent a whistleblower from filing such a complaint or prevent Atkinson from using it as the basis for an investigation that might reveal first-hand sources. And besides, Atkinson continues, this whistleblower checked a box on a form filed with the complaint saying that he did have first-hand information.

But, Atkinson has admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the Trump-Zelensky call before concluding that the complaint about that call was “credible.” It appears that he substituted a checked box representing an unsupported assertion of first-hand knowledge for the actual substance and content of the complaint itself. IOW, he didn't verify anything, otherwise we would now by now what WAS his 1st-hand knowledge. The truth? Not a damn thing.

So Atkinson ignored what was the correct policy to check the report from this whistleblower and verify what was first-hand knowledge and review the entire report for fallacies. The report should have been validated, but wasn't. Instead, he sent it to the Democrats in the House, which to me smacks of biased and unprofessional conduct on his part. I want to know who he works for, what is the CoC from him up to Trump, and then I want to know what Trump is going to do about it. And then I want people to get fired, if not prosecuted.

And we haven't even talked about the scandal behind Atkinson's decision to backdate the whistleblower's report to AFTER the change was made to the Whistleblower policy to allow a report if it has no 1st-hand knowledge. Atkinson wanted this report to be made public and given to the Democrats to use for political purposes, and that is not his fucking job.

What’s Going On in the Intelligence Community IG Office?

Look, any whistleblower report, with or without 1st-hand knowledge ought to be verified, especially if it's all 2nd-hand knowledge. You cannot put this shit out in the wind without proper validation.

Such BULLSHIT.

The law governing this was signed on 3 Jan 2016 and has not been changed since.

You have been lied to and are too stupid to even care.

Here is the link to the law....

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the relevant part.

thank you. i'll dig into this one. it does seem that we have names now, name won't talk, more confusion, dogs and cats sleeping together - no one knows what's true anymore so i simply want to see before and after documentation, not people talking about it. my jury is still out on this one but i'm open to info to help clarify the bullshit so this *is* appreciated.

-----
(5)(A) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.

(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.

(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate.

(D)(i) If the Inspector General does not find credible under subparagraph (B) a complaint or information submitted under subparagraph (A), or does not transmit the complaint or information to the Director in accurate form under subparagraph (B), the employee (subject to clause (ii)) may submit the complaint or information to Congress by contacting either or both of the congressional intelligence committees directly. (ii) An employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee— (I) before making such a contact, furnishes to the Director, through the Inspector General, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and (II) obtains and follows from the Director, through the Inspector General, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices. (iii) A member or employee of one of the congressional intelligence committees who receives a complaint or information under this subparagraph does so in that member or employee’s official capacity as a member or employee of such committee.

(E) The Inspector General shall notify an employee who reports a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this paragraph of each action taken under this paragraph with respect to the complaint or information. Such notice shall be provided not later than 3 days after any such action is taken.

(F) An action taken by the Director or the Inspector General under this paragraph shall not be subject to judicial review.

(G) In this paragraph, the term ‘‘urgent concern’’ means any of the following: (i) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters. (ii) A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity. (iii) An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee’s reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.

(H) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the protections afforded to an employee under section 3517(d) of this title or section 8H of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.). (I) An individual who has submitted a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this section may notify any member of either of the congressional intelligence committees, or a staff member of either of such committees, of the fact that such individual has made a submission to the Inspector General, and of the date on which such submission was made. (6) In accordance with section 535 of title 28, the Inspector General shall expeditiously report to the Attorney General any information, allegation, or complaint received by the Inspector General relating to violations of Federal criminal law that involves 1 a program or operation of an element of the intelligence community, or in the relationships between the elements of the intelligence community, consistent with such guidelines as may be issued by the Attorney General pursuant to subsection (b)(2) of such section. A copy of each such report shall be furnished to the Director.
------
within 7 days.

didn't this happen a month later? or they just chose to "announce it" a month later? it's obvious schiff knew days after it happened, but just wondering about process here.

no one knows what's true anymore

Sure we do. Don't believe that you are normal and your incompetence is ubiquitous.

fuck off.

Heck of a response there Bucky