Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Questionable sources at best and anyway, it doesn't matter. We have Silent Witness lines all over the US. It is not the whistleblower who accuses. The whistleblower is only a tipster. There is no right to confront a tip line caller or a whistleblower. Similarly, the whistleblower complaint in not evidence. It is a lead. The allegations will have to be investigated (impeachment inquiry) and charged (impeachment). The attempt of the alt right and its echo chamber to make this about the whistleblower instead of the treasonous president is pathetic.
None of this matters squat.......Trump isn't going anywhere but back into the White House once again in 2020. And it will be an easy road to victory, thanks dims!! Your continued losing is appreciated, think we found something they are finally good at.
For decades, the Inspector General (who receives whistleblower reports from Federal employees), had a firm requirement that the whistleblower had to have seen the alleged crime himself, or heard it himself etc. The reasons are pretty obvious, starting with the Constitutional requirement that an accused person be able to confront witnesses against him. The accuser must be able to say "I personally saw him do this" or "I heard him say such-and-such".
The form given to potential whistleblowers by the IG said, “If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than secondhand or unsubstantiated assertions, [the Intelligence Community Inspector General] will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA,”
President Trump held his phone interview with the leader of Ukraine on July 25, 2019. In August 2019, the form was changed to eliminate this requirement. Having nothing but secondhand information and other such rumors, was suddenly good enough. Firsthand knowledge was no longer needed.
If I had gone to the I.G. myself, and said that I had heard Adam Schiff (D-CA) say that Trump had done something illegal, I could have been a "whistleblower" myself. With just as much credibility to the I.G as somebody who heard or saw an actual act.
After decades of requirements that whistleblowers must see or hear the act themselves, why did the Intelligence Community abruptly decide that secondhand rumors would be good enough? Coincidentally when President Trump made a phone call to a foreign leader that contained nothing but info and requests required by treaties? And where none of the people who actually heard the conversation firsthand, felt it was worth blowing a whistle over?
Intelligence community changed whistleblower rules to include hearsay shortly before complaint was filed
September 28, 2019
Victor Rantala
Earlier this year, right before the current “whistleblower” complaint against President Trump was filed, the intelligence community surreptitiously “eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings,” according to a Friday report by The Federalist.
The obvious impact of the change and its timing with regard to the current brouhaha with regard to the false charges by an anonymous, politically motivated whistleblower creates a suspicious set-up, laying the groundwork for what has followed.
The Federalist investigation revealed …
The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”
The previous version of the whistleblower document required that complaints needed to demonstrate firsthand knowledge of an alleged wrongdoing. Rumors or hearsay would be rejected, that form declared.
“If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than secondhand or unsubstantiated assertions, [the Intelligence Community Inspector General] will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA,” the form stated.
So what you're saying is that the IG made it easier to track down wrongdoing by expanding who could give leads?
And what you're not saying is that 2nd hand information is a lie and those events never happened?
This might be the weakest and dumbest Trump defense.
"We're not saying that Trump didn't do it. We're saying The IG should have never found out Trump did it."
For decades, the Inspector General (who receives whistleblower reports from Federal employees), had a firm requirement that the whistleblower had to have seen the alleged crime himself, or heard it himself etc. The reasons are pretty obvious, starting with the Constitutional requirement that an accused person be able to confront witnesses against him. The accuser must be able to say "I personally saw him do this" or "I heard him say such-and-such".
The form given to potential whistleblowers by the IG said, “If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than secondhand or unsubstantiated assertions, [the Intelligence Community Inspector General] will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA,”
President Trump held his phone interview with the leader of Ukraine on July 25, 2019. In August 2019, the form was changed to eliminate this requirement. Having nothing but secondhand information and other such rumors, was suddenly good enough. Firsthand knowledge was no longer needed.
If I had gone to the I.G. myself, and said that I had heard Adam Schiff (D-CA) say that Trump had done something illegal, I could have been a "whistleblower" myself. With just as much credibility to the I.G as somebody who heard or saw an actual act.
After decades of requirements that whistleblowers must see or hear the act themselves, why did the Intelligence Community abruptly decide that secondhand rumors would be good enough? Coincidentally when President Trump made a phone call to a foreign leader that contained nothing but info and requests required by treaties? And where none of the people who actually heard the conversation firsthand, felt it was worth blowing a whistle over?
Intelligence community changed whistleblower rules to include hearsay shortly before complaint was filed
September 28, 2019
Victor Rantala
Earlier this year, right before the current “whistleblower” complaint against President Trump was filed, the intelligence community surreptitiously “eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings,” according to a Friday report by The Federalist.
The obvious impact of the change and its timing with regard to the current brouhaha with regard to the false charges by an anonymous, politically motivated whistleblower creates a suspicious set-up, laying the groundwork for what has followed.
The Federalist investigation revealed …
The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”
The previous version of the whistleblower document required that complaints needed to demonstrate firsthand knowledge of an alleged wrongdoing. Rumors or hearsay would be rejected, that form declared.
“If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than secondhand or unsubstantiated assertions, [the Intelligence Community Inspector General] will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA,” the form stated.
Go ahead and shoot the messenger, the message was already delivered.
There is no "turning back the clock" on this one, seems the public is getting tired of the constant bombardment of Tweets and noise from Washington.
Truth is Americans do not like talking about the President every freaking day regardless of what Party he belongs too. Give the public some breathing room, stop Tweeting crap to grab headlines, and get on with governing instead of competing with the Kardashians for clicks. I swear this administration acts like a bunch of teen girls who just discovered social media two days ago.
That would go a long way toward cooling things off.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
