The whistle blower form in April of 2019 to include secondhand accounts

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: carewemust
Quit derailing the thread.

It was a brief detour. ATS members are multi-taskers!

a reply to: Phage

And we hear that this whistleblower did report to others before he filed his complaint to the IG.

Yup

Then he submitted a urgent complaint form . The same form whose parameters have been changed .

Now show me where use of the form is required.

I’ve been answering your questions it’s your turn. Show me when submitting a urgent complaint form doesn’t require a form.

It’s not like they whisper them to each other through glory holes or anything .

a reply to: Veryolduser

It is basically saying that if someone revised a document to get “Leadership” in trouble that person should come forward as a whistle blower.

It is saying that Denise told Adam that her boss has falsified her reports. It is saying that Adam should report what Denise told him. Second hand information.

Guidance from 2016. There is no requirement that information be first hand.

a reply to: Fallingdown

Then he submitted a urgent complaint form .

He did?

Looks more like he submitted a very detailed letter.
www.documentcloud.org...

Show me when submitting a urgent complaint form doesn’t require a form.

I thought you'd never ask.

Making a Protected Disclosure may be as informal as a conversation with your direct supervisor to a formal submission to an IG Hotline, or even a disclosure to an intelligence committee of Congress.

www.dni.gov...

Note to whom the letter is addressed.

originally posted by: carewemust
An additional analysis:

Folks, this “Ukraine Whistleblower” event was a pre-planned event.

As we begin to understand the general outline of how the Schiff Dossier was assembled, we are now starting to get into the specifics.

First discovered by researcher Stephen McIntyre, there is now evidence surfacing showing the ICIG recently created an entirely new ‘whistleblower complaint form’ that specifically allowed for the filing of complaints “heard from others“.

More at: theconservativetreehouse.com...-172125[ /quote]

Entrapment.

edit on 27-9-2019 by KKLOCO because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: carewemust

Quit derailing the thread.

Rich coming from the king of thread derailing!

You say that you have no knowledge of the whistleblower using the form in question so it must not have happened. When asked for proof you say " I cant prove unicorns dont exist"......

Lolz🤪

Quit derailing threads

a reply to: Phage


He submitted a letter following the parameters for disclosure of urgent concern as cited in the opening paragraph under 50 U.S.C. § 3033. Must’ve been out of printer Ink?

Making a Protected Disclosure may be as informal as a conversation with your direct supervisor to a formal submission to an IG Hotline, or even a disclosure to an intelligence committee of Congress.

A protected disclosure is any disclosure made under the whistleblower protection act. And is in no way related to a disclosure of urgent concern.

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: Veryolduser

Where is Anonymous and Q when you need them, ay?

Anonymous is fake the only real hackers had been luz sec and I don’t believe in Q

What you talkin bout? Beto is the hacker known as Cult of the Dead Cow. Al Gore invented the internet aka the information super highway.

Why do all these democrats claim to be internet elites? At least Trump admits hes not good with "the cyber."

originally posted by: Phage

Looks more like he submitted a very detailed letter.

Looks more like he submitted a very detailed letter with a lot of quotes for one not actually there, so how many people worked on this letter? Did he do anything else but work on this for 2 months?

a reply to: Fallingdown

He submitted a letter following the parameters for disclosure of urgent concern as cited in the opening paragraph under 50 U.S.C. § 3033.

Yes, he did. You did look up that paragraph, didn't you?

A protected disclosure is any disclosure made under the whistleblower protection act. And is in no way related to a disclosure of urgent concern.

Really? Then what does this mean?

Protected Disclosure refers to the release of information made by a Federal employee, contractor, or military member to an authorized recipient. The information shared is believed to pertain to a violation of law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.

www.dni.gov...

a reply to: Xtrozero

Did he do anything else but work on this for 2 months?

Nine pages?

a reply to: Phage

Yes, he did. You did look up that paragraph, didn't you?

Truth be told I did better than that. September 9th letter from inspector general of the intelligence community to Adam Schiff and David Nunes.

“ received a ‘disclosure‘ From a individual there after (the complainant )regarding a alleged ‘urgent concern’ “

Let’s put those three words together ! Disclosure of urgent concern . Yea!!!




And since it was secondhand information they use the new form rather than the old form. Which brings us back to the OP .

really? Then what does this mean

Seriously ? I’m sure it was in your training manual didn’t you read it ? It means you’re protected for making a disclosure under the whistleblower protection act . Hence “protected disclosure”

What do you think it means ?

a reply to: Fallingdown

Let’s put those three words together ! Disclosure of urgent concern

Gosh. The whistleblower's letter starts:

I am reporting an "urgent concern"

Coincidence?

And since it was secondhand information they use the new form rather than the old form.

I don't suppose you can prove any form was submitted, can you? Can you show that a particular form is required?

What do you think it means ?

I think it means that a disclosure of "urgent concern" is a Protected Disclosure if it is submitted through the proper channels. I think that the intelligence committees of the House and Senate (via the IG) qualify.

originally posted by: KKLOCO
a reply to: Veryolduser

So the left was setting the stage beforehand. All they needed was the ammo.

lol, 'the left'

Just absolutely not accepting responsibility or that any of it could be true. It's just going to be 'deep-state' conspiracy theories.

"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and not lose any voters!" because folks like you will say 'the left made him pull the trigger!'

originally posted by: Veryolduser
Here is your link to the twitter user who found the edit and detailed the older versions which doesn’t include secondhand accounts as a viable source of information.

mobile.twitter.com...

Basically the original whistle blower form only allowed first hand knowledge and was changed in April of 2019 to allow for secondhand knowledge. This is in conflict with what is on the books regarding the process for whistle blower complaints. So somebody changed it without approval which is fraud. This would explain why the acting DNI had such a hard time figuring out what to do

Interesting time for a change....
Or maybe not
What a crock
These jackasses cant ever do anything peoperly

a reply to: Phage

Gosh. The whistleblower's letter starts:

I am reporting an "urgent concern"
Coincidence?

Those are two words .

Here Remember context .

I don't suppose you can prove any form was submitted, can you?

Can you prove one wasn’t ?

I think it means that a disclosure of "urgent concern" is a Protected Disclosure if it is submitted through the proper channels. I think that the intelligence committees of the House and Senate qualify.

No it’s a generic term for protection under the whistleblower protection act. Ask Adam .

What are Protected Disclosures in the Whistleblower Protection Act?

Easy to find

a reply to: Fallingdown

Can you prove one wasn’t ?

Nope. I can't prove unicorns don't exist either.

No it’s a generic term for protection under the whistleblower protection act.

Yes. And a disclosure of "urgent concern" is protected by that act if it is made to an "authorized recipient." The IG is an authorized recipient. If the information had been leaked to the press instead of being submitted to authorized persons, this would not be the case. That's the point. It's protected. It doesn't matter how it is submitted, what matters is to whom it is submitted.

Easy to find

I know. I posted this just a little while ago. Remember? From the office of the DNI:

Protected Disclosure refers to the release of information made by a Federal employee, contractor, or military member to an authorized recipient. The information shared is believed to pertain to a violation of law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.

www.dni.gov...

Can you look up the legal definition of "urgent concern?" See if it sounds similar?

a reply to: Phage

Nope. I can't prove unicorns don't exist either.

It’s well-known that Noah was Monokerophobic.

Yes. And a disclosure of "urgent concern" is protected by that act if it is made to an "authorized recipient." The IG is an authorized recipient.

Damn you were so close .☹️ Disclosures aren’t protected people are .

a reply to: Fallingdown

Disclosures aren’t protected people are .

Then what is Protected Disclosure?

I would like to thank phage and falling down both of your input on this subject is interesting. Phage I know most people on here are down voting you but you have helped this thread a lot. I do have my own personal biases on this subject however it’s always nice to have someone champion his own beliefs even if I don’t agree with them.

Falling down your input in countering phage is equally impressive.

To everyone else who has added to this thread thank you for the time invested into this and your additions to it