It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How the Deep State Rigged the Whistleblower Complaint Form

page: 2
31
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Yes

Yes they are




posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ambassado12




This means that I can read the news and whistle blow on a 2nd hand source.

Are you a government employee? If so, you can. And the IG will review your complaint. But I don't think information which is public would get very far through the process.

edit on 9/27/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Spy is not a whistleblower.

The very fact that they work for the CIA
reveals that they have insider information.

It would be different if they are willing to
come forward. If not, this is nothing more
than a carefully crafted game.

And should be treated as such, and will
be by anyone with half a brain.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Are CIA analysts what you would call spies?



It would be different if they are willing to come forward.
Right. No chance of retribution there.

edit on 9/27/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

yep no chance to face your accuser either, how convient, don't you think?

I mean what better way to accuse someone without backlash or repercussions.


I can blame you and you have no Idea if I am lying..

Like the Kavannaugh Hearings, huh?? we MUST believe the accuser, correct?

or did not any of that happen?



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: thedigirati




yep no chance to face your accuser either
Nope. But it takes more than a complaint for any action other than an investigation to be taken.

But I suppose it's better if people just don't tell anyone about anything. That's a good way to drain the swamp. Right?



Like the Kavannaugh Hearings, huh?? we MUST believe the accuser, correct?
Seems quite a few people didn't. And as I recall, his accuser did come forward.

edit on 9/27/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

Right. No chance of retribution there.


That is the way it works if you want to accuse someone
of a crime. Anonymous accusations won't hold in court.


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



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

That is the way it work if you want to accuse someone of a crime.
Swell. Complain about your boss or keep your job. Great choice.



Anonymous accusations won't hold in court.
Right. And people don't find themselves in court based solely on whistleblower complaints.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Has a whistle-blow procedure been put together yet for civilians to "confidentially" share what they've heard about a government employee...like Adam Schiff, for instance?

If not, there should be. It's our government.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Yes.
It's called the FBI.
www.fbi.gov...
edit on 9/27/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

And people don't find themselves in court based solely on whistleblower complaints.


Apparently now they do. Subpoena's have already
been issued based on this phony complaint.

Way to totally cluster fluck the system.

And the person had spurious information at best,
some of it outright inaccurate and obviously lies.





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



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Has a whistle-blow procedure been put together yet for civilians to "confidentially" share what they've heard about a government employee...like Adam Schiff, for instance?

If not, there should be. It's our government.


Just wait, it is coming.

IF this is the way they want to play, it works both ways.

At least Trump doesn't kill people like the Clinton's,
they won't get too many anonymous complaints.




posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

You mean Pompeo? What does that have to do with:

Anonymous accusations won't hold in court.

As far as I know, he hasn't been accused of any wrong doing nor is he going to court. But yes, it makes sense for allegations to be investigated, don't you think?



And the person had spurious information at best,
some of it outright inaccurate and obviously lies.
That's not what the IG seems to think. Or the DNI.

edit on 9/27/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

As far as I know, he hasn't been accused of any wrong doing nor is he going to court.


The AG has already been accused of a cover up by
the Spleaker. She made a direct accusation.


That's not what the IG seems to think.


The IG found political motivation
The report is full of false information,
its out there but I doubt you would care.

Orange man bad reeeeeeee.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships




The AG has already been accused of a cover up by the Spleaker. She made a direct accusation.
I thought we were talking about the whistleblower remaining anonymous. How would that affect what the Speaker says?



The IG found political motivation
That's not what he said.

Further, although the preliminary review identifed some indication of an arguable political bias on the part of the Complainant in favor of a rival political candidate, such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern appears credible, particularly given the other information the ICIG obtained during its preliminary review.

Nothing about political motivation. Nothing about any impact on credibility.

edit on 9/27/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

You know darn well what we were talking about,
did the clouds get to you?

Based on an anonymous complaint that is
nothing more than second hand information.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has accussed William Barr
of a cover up.

This is unacceptable. I can only look forward to
the day when this happens to a Democrat or
a Never Trumper.

I'll get my pom poms ready.



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



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships




Speaker Nancy Pelosi has accussed William Barr of a cover up.
Yes. Because the DOJ quashed the report, in spite of the IG finding it credible.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: burntheships




Speaker Nancy Pelosi has accussed William Barr of a cover up.
Yes. Because the DOJ quashed the report, in spite of the IG finding it credible.


Again, the IG found political motivation.

I am sure Barr might have had his reasons,
couldn't be like that the spy might have
been paid, or is a known liar.

Or the fact that there is false information
in the report, or that it is based on rumors.

LOL!

Or the fact that the person won't come forward.


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



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The BS report that matched almost verbatim the released summary of the phone call?
That BS report? LOL.

Oh my, don't you need a smoke right about now?



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: carewemust

Yes.
It's called the FBI.
www.fbi.gov...


Thanks! I'll see if they allow here-say evidence.




top topics



 
31
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join