[BenLurkin]

Bureaucrats versus the electorate. Not new, but now weaponized.

And the problem is aggravated by the overwhelming number of neo-Communists and fellow travelers that have infiltrated public “service”

[Presbyterian Reporter]

Sure would be nice to see that the Senate has called CIA Chief Gina Haspel to testify about the whys and whens the WhistleBlower Form was changed.

[Delta 21]

Thats why Congress is in recess right now. All of the “Urgent Concern”.

[the_Watchman]

Furthermore, the supposed charges against Trump are not based on illegal activity on Trump’s part. Thus, if the agency were to go to the trouble of changing their rules in order to file this report, they probably had advanced collusion with the congressional people to assure that the information would rise to the level that the congress critters [read: vermin] would be willing to run with it.

Imagine going to the trouble of changing your rules and filing a report with no illegal activity just to find out, after the fact, that nobody was willing to go out on a limb to push impeachment charges.

[lastchance]

If the complaints are supposed to be by and against members of the intelligence community how is Trump in anyway subject to such?

[Truth29]

This is more evidence of conspiracy and nothing seems to happen to the coup plotters. Where are the indictments from the DOJ for so many of the traitors? Trump needs to call in the military before the civilian agencies construct a scaffold for him.

[TigersEye]

Somebody changed the rules.
Somebody made sure the “whistleblower” knew about the change within days. At a minimum.

[Robert357]

Non-partisan my A$$. This is starting to really smell.

“.....nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) may have been weaponized to mislead members of Congress and the American people —....”

[ifinnegan]

It seems to me anyone can file a whistleblower complaint now and it has to be taken seriously.

If someone reads something, blow the whistle.

Everyone should file.

[mass55th]

I remember when Newsweek spiked Mike Isikoff’s story about the Clinton-Lewinsky affair, claiming the reason they did so was because they didn’t have two verified sources for the story. Since that time, the media has reduced that requirement to the point where they have no need of any verifiable source whatsoever before they put a rumor, gossip, or innuendo in print. This change to the complaint form removing the first-hand knowledge requirement, pretty much mirrors the exact same thing that the main stream media has been running with for quite a while now.

[old curmudgeon]

Is not the answer that the new version allows any person in any jurisdiction to claim to be a whistle blower?

Think of the attacks on Sara Palin and Judge Kavanaugh on steroids with hundreds of complaints, maybe thousands.

The president would spend so much time fighting them the government would come to a halt.

[philman_36]

Riddle me this...

Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community’s Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints September 30, 2019

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. Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute. In fact, by law the Complainant – or any individual in the Intelligence Community who wants to report information with respect to an urgent concern to the congressional intelligence committees – need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law. Since Inspector General Atkinson entered on duty as the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, the ICIG has not rejected the filing of an alleged urgent concern due to a whistleblower’s lack of first-hand knowledge of the allegations.The
Complainant on the form he or she submitted on August 12, 2019 in fact checked two relevant boxes: The first box stated that, “I have personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved”; and the second box stated that, “Other employees have told me about events or records involved.”

Why the push to focus on the new form when it wasn't even used?
Looks like a head fake to me to distract from the fact that this a-hole declared that they had "personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved" when they didn't.

Just something to think about.

[Pennsyltucky Boy]

This has been said before, but is usually attributed to someone who has spent time in field operations:
The best thing that could ever happen within the agency would be for everyone operating in the field to be brought in and put behind the desks and all the drones behind the desks be sent to postings in warm sandy places where live rounds are flying... Then let natural selection take its course.

[Bob Ireland]

***misleading guidance about precisely how expansive the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) is was incorporated into the report just as the current whistleblower controversy began to pick up steam***

My question is: where exactly - in the Constitution or US Code - is it written that the Intel Community and/or its Inspector General has authoritative review over the acts or decisions of the POTUS?

The 'whistleblower' is to report on misdeeds they have knowledge of in the Intel community... but POTUS is not in the Intel Community - he is the boss of said community. Why are we allowing an anonymous tattler to judge the appropriateness of actions of POTUS?

Of course the answer is because it serves the purposeful schemes of the Demo'rat Party. Why should any more be said? Were the shoe on the other foot - where the Dems were on the receiving end - then it would be loudly proclaimed that the whistleblower had no standing and had exceeded their authority.

But then, what are the chances of a DS bureaucrat tattling on a Dem? When pigs can fly.

[stylin19a]

I sent an e-mail Sunday to the author of those 2 reports: (I'm guessing I'll probably have to file an FOIA to get the info)
R45431 - Community Whistleblower Protections in Brief  &
R45345 - Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protections

and asked him who requested these reports and when.

all y'all could email him here:

medevine@crs.loc.gov
Michael E. DeVine, Analyst in Intelligence and National Security

here are the reports:

Congressional Oversight of Intelligence: Background and Selected Options for Further Reform

Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protections

all this, just based on dates, sure smells like a set up...

[semimojo]

The most ludicrous premise of this ludicrous conspiracy theory is that multiple federal bureaucracies could within a few days work together, come up with a strategy, agree on a action plan, design, approve and have printed new forms, all the while keeping it secret.

It's amazing the confidence people have in the government's abilities.

[thirst4truth]

So our Inspector Generals are partisan now and are also working to get Trump? Will that be Horowitz, spent 2 years looking into corruption in the Justice Department, when we finally get the report will it say, “they are all clean, no corruption in Obama admin, only Trumps?”

[1Old Pro]

Something Fishy Seems to Be Going on Here.

Ya Think?