FACT CHECK: Trump’s fiction about whistleblower complaint

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump and his GOP allies are making groundless accusations that a whistleblower complaint by a CIA officer was improperly filed because it was not based on first-hand knowledge.

In tweets and public statements, they assert that a whistleblower cannot submit a complaint if it relies on so-called hearsay or second-hand information. They also suggest nefarious behavior — “deep state” as one White House adviser put it — in the circumstances surrounding the form for the complaint, which alleged that Trump abused his office in pressing for a Ukrainian investigation of a Democratic rival, Joe Biden.

Source

So I've been seeing numerous people (including the President) claiming that the whistleblower criteria was changed just days before the complaint was made against Trump. Yesterday the ICIG verified that these claims are completely false.

In a statement released to the public the ICIG revealed that the form the whistleblower filled out on August 12th had been in use since May 24, 2018. On top of that, it was also revealed that the whistleblower did in fact provide first hand information. To quote the statement itself:

In summary, regarding the instant matter, the whistleblower submitted the appropriate
Disclosure of Urgent Concern form that was in effect as of August 12, 2019, and had been used
by the ICIG since May 24, 2018. The whistleblower stated on the form that he or she possessed
both first-hand and other information. The ICIG reviewed the information provided as well as
other information gathered and determined that the complaint was both urgent and that it appeared
credible. From the moment the ICIG received the whistleblower’s filing, the ICIG has worked to
effectuate Congress’s intent, and the whistleblower’s intent, within the rule of law. The ICIG will continue in those efforts on behalf of all whistleblowers in the Intelligence Community.

So can we stop perpetuating this false conspiracy theory?

Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence
Community’s Statement on Processing of Whistleblower
Complaints

a reply to: Xcalibur254


So the Intelligence Community IG is covering for the IC? Color me surprised!

Why is the ICIG refusing to release the documents involving the changes in the whistle blower document???

Why is the AP refusing to report on that?

Never thought I would see the day that the American public would be so dumbed down that they would stick up for the CIA!

smh

a reply to: seeker1963

To actually change the rules surrounding whistleblower complaints it would require an act of Congress. Remember that the Whistleblower Protection Act is an actual law in the USC. It isn't just some departmental policy.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: seeker1963

To actually change the rules surrounding whistleblower complaints it would require an act of Congress. Remember that the Whistleblower Protection Act is an actual law in the USC. It isn't just some departmental policy.

I am not talking about the whistle blower act itself I am talking about the form that was changed. I believe it was Lyndsey Graham who asked the ICIG for the emails and documents on how and who changed the whistle blower complaint form to include "hearsay" which we all know is not admissible in a court of law, and the ICIG is refusing to release them. As of now they have until Thursday to release these documents.

Why won't the ICIG release them?

APNews is on the same level as CNN unfortunately.

The whistleblower form was revised in august 2019

here it is - there's a clear box asking if your complaint is first hand or second hand
www.dni.gov...



here's the submission form from 2018
www.scribd.com...

Which clearly has the requirement:

In order to find an urgent concern credible the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information.

So yes, the form was changed from needing firsthand info, to simply asking if your info is first or second hand.

Trump also said

WHO CHANGED THE LONG STANDING WHISTLEBLOWER RULES JUST BEFORE SUBMITTAL OF THE FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER REPORT? DRAIN THE SWAMP!

the form was changed, when and why - who knows.
but there was a specific point that FIRST HAND information was required - coincidentally, that no longer exists on the new form.

a reply to: seeker1963

Even if the form changed right before the complaint was made, it's still a complete red herring. The ICIG made it clear that the whistleblower had both first-hand and second-hand information.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

And the whistleblower had first-hand information. So what's the issue?

a reply to: Agit8dChop

You ask why the form was changed? Lol

When you can't win within the rules you change the rules.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: seeker1963

Even if the form changed right before the complaint was made, it's still a complete red herring. The ICIG made it clear that the whistleblower had both first-hand and second-hand information.

didnt you just say

So I've been seeing numerous people (including the President) claiming that the whistleblower criteria was changed just days before the complaint was made against Trump. Yesterday the ICIG verified that these claims are completely false.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

So what's the issue?

Issue? That the whistleblower lied and that this is just another set up by the Democrats.

"@SpeakerPelosi⁩ said on 60 Minutes last night she knew the details of the classified Ukraine call before White House released transcript," Cheney wrote on Twitter. "This is starting to seem like a political set up. So, Madame Speaker, 'what did you know and when did you know it?'”

LINK

8

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: seeker1963

Even if the form changed right before the complaint was made, it's still a complete red herring. The ICIG made it clear that the whistleblower had both first-hand and second-hand information.

So you admit your claim has no basis. Ok, mods close thread please.

The Dems/MSM ran an organized effort to unseat a duly elected President using fake evidence and illegal FISA warrants and THIS is what has some peeps all spun up?

MAGA 2020

Before too long, I believe, the People will have to take this all into our own hands...

a reply to: Agit8dChop

How do you know the provenance of that first form? It only resembles the current form in the most superficial ways.

Even if it is legitimate, where are all the other revisions that have taken place over the intervening year?

My argument is based on official statements made by the ICIG. Your's is based on random links from the internet.

I'm going to go with the expert and not some link you found on Twitter.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Washington post

They also suggest nefarious behavior — “deep state” as one White House adviser put it — in the circumstances surrounding the form for the complaint,

“ nefarious behavior “ that makes everything sound all dark and deceitful .


I guess we could quit perpetuating lies if this Little tidbit of information was included in the OP .

This is from your source .

The IG said it had removed that language from the form earlier this year because it determined that “it could be read - incorrectly - as suggesting that whistleblowers must possess first-hand information in order to file an urgent concern complaint with the congressional intelligence committees.”

Which makes it clear that rather than Trump and his administration of villains trying to perpetuate a fraud on the American people with lies and false allegations .

It ends up being the fact that the ICIG should hire better a editing staff.

But I guess that’s what you get with government workers .

Lucky I caught that I’m sure you didn’t want any misunderstanding .

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Yeah that's what I was wondering too.....

Less than half a page and he's already debunked his own thread....

Probably should have done juuuuuuust a bit more research there old BUDDY OP

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Thank you for providing the actual .gov source. Much appreciated.

The one thing that bothers me immensely is the fact that something was intentionally changed just a few days prior to the new guy taking over.

Obama changed the way raw intelligence data is dispensed just a week or so before President Trump was sworn in on January 20th. Not nice.

Reading your sourced link, it seems his ICIG also changed the form LESS THAN a week before the new ICIG took control. That is highly highly suspicious to me.

~~I. Charles McCullough had been ICIG since Obama created the office in 2011.
~~He changed this Complainant form (which had required first hand information) on May 24, 2018.
~~The new Trump appointed ICIG entered duty on May 29, 2018!!!!!

Not nice.

The Obama Intelligence Community changed all the rules just days before the new people were taking over. Now we find McCullough did the same thing as he was being removed and Atkinson was taking over.

It makes me wonder what Obama and his IC had been up to and why he was changing everything not months but days before Trump's people were taking over. He did it as he was walking out the door, and McCullough did it as he was walking out the door.

Not nice.

www.odni.gov... IG%20Statement%20on%20Processing%20of%20Whistleblower%20Complaints.pdf

The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018, which went into effect before Inspector General Atkinson entered on duty as the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community on May 29, 2018, following his swearing in as the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community on May 17, 2018.

Thanks again, OP. This clears up a couple of things indeed.

Boy...this OP went down in flames fast.

...as it should've.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Don't worry, I heard on the news that the IC cleared the IC and debunked the idea that the Russia thing was a witch hunt.

If you need to know what's going on, then let the accused investigate themselves, and rest easy.

a reply to: Xcalibur254


Thank you.

I appreciate factual information.

Hard to come by these days.