Intel Community Admission Of Whistleblower Changes Raises Explosive New Questions

The Federalist ^ | 10/01/2019 | Sean Davis

[SeekAndFind]

[CivilWarBrewing]

Say WHAT?

Fox News said this morning that no forms were changed, and that the prior narrative that the Deep State intel community did something wrong was HOGWASH.

[StolarStorm]

The coup attempt continues. Wonder if these SOBS realize the full ramifications if they are successful.

[MHGinTN]

Brennan should have already been before firing squad as a traitor to the Republic. But he’s untouchable as a deep satte member, a demon rat, a moose slime, and the main enabler of the treacherous Barry Soetoro. Brennan is determined to bring down the Republic, one way or another, and as a moose slime lying is officially permitted.

[rockinqsranch]

Reading this my take is the ICIG under pressure from Schiff, and a host of other left wingers within CIA changed the rule so the complaint could be released to Schiff.

Regardless Schiff will be found ultimately to be behind the mechanics of this outrage IF WE are looking for a point of blame.

[1Old Pro]

The way the complaint was written, this mole was working with this army of Dem lawyers for weeks, if not months.

[gcparent]

They can’t keep their lies straight. So now the whistleblower used the old form requiring first hand info?

[Jeff Chandler]

So the Inspector General changed the rules in order to specifically target the president.

[beekay]

The ICIG is Michael K. Atkinson. He was an Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia from 2006 through 2016. He had previously worked for the U.S. Department of Justice for over fifteen years. He earned a Juris Doctorate from Cornell University and a Bachelor of Arts from Syracuse University.
You may draw your own conclusions.

[missnry]

The ICIG in its press release also failed to disclose when precisely its whistleblower forms and rules were changed, despite top lawmakers on oversight committees in both chambers specifically requesting that information. ,

WHEN WAS IT CHANGED!!?

What Day? What Hour? Who directed the change? Why the change?

[Eddie01]

ex post facto

[LeonardFMason]

That is how it reads.

[CivilWarBrewing]

So when is a patriot (if there ARE any) in the intelligence community going to blow the whistle on Brennan, Schiff, an IG, etc..???

And what about SCHIFF attempting to interfere in the 2016 election involving getting DIRT on Trump?:

Audio: Russian Comedians Prank Called Rep. Adam Schiff, Promised Him Naked Photos Of Trump

"Olga PUSSova", ROFL

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Good Lord!

the ICIG understood that certain language in those forms and, more specifically, the informational materials accompanying the forms, 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.

The ICIG’s claim that it would have been incorrect to perceive a requirement for firsthand information is bizarre considering the previous version of the form clearly stated in unambiguous language that firsthand evidence was required in order for “urgent concern” whistleblower complaints to be deemed credible. It said, in bold, underlined, all-caps text, “FIRST-HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED”

The ICIG needs to be brought up on charges at a minimum.

[Magnum44]

This whole thing was cobbled together as a knee jerk response to the fact that Barr’s investigation is getting close to dropping a hammer. The wheels are going to come off this whistleblower wagon pretty quickly, IMO.

[Robert DeLong]

Michael Atkinson is the ICIG

[eyeamok]

the ICIG also explicitly admitted it changed its policies because of the anti-Trump complaint

When did this happen?? If they admitted this then ARREST the IG for

18 U.S. Code § 241. Conspiracy against rights

[digger48]

Schitt and his staff are likely the ones who wrote it and leaked it to the media

[glorgau]

The anti-Trump complaint that was released last week, which congressional Democrats are using as the basis for impeachment proceedings against the president, is riddled not with evidence directly viewed by the complainant, but repeated references to what anonymous officials allegedly told the complainant: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials,” “officials have informed me,” “officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me,” “the White House officials who told me this information,” “I was told by White House officials,” “the officials I spoke with,” “I was told that a State Department official,” “I learned from multiple U.S. officials,” “One White House official described this act,” “Based on multiple readouts of these meetings recounted to me,” “I also learned from multiple U.S. officials,” “The U.S. officials characterized this meeting,” “multiple U.S. officials told me,” “I learned from U.S. officials,” “I also learned from a U.S. official,” “several U.S. officials told me,” “I heard from multiple U.S. officials,” and “multiple U.S. officials told me.”

Looks like a little team got together and set the whistleblower up as a patsy to get him to blow his cover. Very nicely done.