You know what I find
really odd?
Therefore, although the Complainant’s Letter acknowledged that the Complainant was not a direct witness to the President’s July 25, 2019, telephone call with the Ukrainian President, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that other information obtained during the ICIG’s preliminary review supported the Complainant’s allegations. That statement, which BTW comes shortly after your pull quote,
directly contradicts your earlier assertion that the whistleblower "had direct knowledge".
How could you miss that?!
Remember those inconsistencies I spoke of? Here is one...
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.”
See what I mean? Isn't it a crime to lie on Federal forms?
That statement, which BTW comes shortly after your pull quote, directly contradicts your earlier assertion that the whistleblower "had direct knowledge".My assertion was that the whistleblower stated on the form that he had direct knowledge, and he did so state.
You’re not arguing in good faith.
But then again, not many are in this stupid sideshow.