The conclusion by the Assistant AG in DOJ was that “The alleged misconduct is not an “urgent concern” within the meaning of the statute because it does not concern “the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity...does not include allegations of wrongdoing arising outside of any intelligence activity or outside the intelligence community itself.”BUT...
”Our conclusion that the “urgent concern” requirement is inapplicable does not mean that the DNI or the ICIG must leave such allegations unaddressed. To the contrary...requires reporting to the Attorney General of “[a]ny information, allegation, matter, or complaint witnessed, discovered, or received in a department or agency . . . relating to violations of Federal criminal law involving Government officers and employees...should the DNI or the ICIG receive a credible complaint of alleged criminal conduct that does not involve an “urgent concern,” the appropriate action is to refer the matter to the Department of Justice, rather than to report to the intelligence committees...the ICIG’s letter and the attached complaint have been referred to the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice for appropriate review.So the whistle blower complaint was ILLEGALLY referred to the Congressional committee by the whistleblower himself and the DOJ was assigned to look into the complaint.
Note the first asterisked foot note. This is the public version of a still classified version of the document that was transmitted to the DNI and ICIG dated September 3, 2019. That is the unexpurgated date which included some additional classified data. This one was dated one day before the public announcement of the release of the complaint and the phone call which were actually released on the afternoon of September 26, 2019.