Unlike the Atkin’s Diet it is highly processed, impure concoction – produced by swamp denizens to entice others
Maybe Readers remember this Veritaspac Story from Last Week
Inspector General Atkinson “very concerned” (“Better call Saul (Schiff”!)
This was our key observation in that story:
. . . that whenever a Trump appointee goes before the Senate to gain confirmation, we always look at how many Democratic Senate votes the nominee gets. In these times, it has become very clear that senate Democrats only vote, in any number, to confirm Trump’s nominees if they have sufficient “Deep State” credentials to assure that, as part of the Executive branch, they will work… sometimes openly (i.e.. Christopher Wray), sometimes furtively… to undermine, obstruct, and generally work to destroy his presidency!
Mr. Atkinson apparently ‘fills the bill’ for the Democrats: While he was nominated by Trump, he also served under GW Bush AND Barack H Obama.
Clarice Feldmann writes this in her column this week: (bold our emphasis)
“As of May 24, 2018 the relevant Form (IC IG ICWPA FORM 401) required the report involve “urgent concerns,” be about an “intelligence activity,” be “reliable first-hand knowledge” and not be “second-hand knowledge.” If, like me, you believe coincidences like this in D.C. are too rare to mention, this should get your antennae twitching. This complaint merely repeats second-hand knowledge. It is utterly false about the nature of the Trump-Zelensky conversation, and reflects, instead of wrongdoing by the President, that there are some in the bowels of the government who have policy differences with him and wish to wound him.”
——————–
Saturday evening on Breitbart on the Sirius Patriot radio channel, former Federal Prosecutor Andrew McCarthy claimed that the change in rules for classifying a second person gripe by a disgruntled bureaucrat as a “whistle blower” complaint was made by IC IG Michael Atkinson, in advance of him forwarding the Ukraine complaint to he DOJ, AND , to “pretend” Mafia don, Adam Schiff!!
——————-
On Saturday, the Red State blog filed this story (caution! there are some obscenities in this piece…besides the Democratic Party):
Did The Intelligence Community IG actively Aid Whistleblower Impeachment Quest?
“Many of us have been harping on the point that the alleged “whistleblower” in the bullsh** attack on President Trump is not actually a whistleblower.”
STOP calling “the whistleblower” a whistleblower. He cannot legally be viewed as whistleblower–& does not have protection under whistleblower laws–b/c he was not eyewitness to any corruption or fraud & has no firsthand info. His complaint is based on 2nd- & 3rd-hand information.
In fact, the so-called complaint is a compendium of provable lies, misrepresentations. innuendo, and links to newspaper clippings that warrants the assclown who wrote it being horsewhipped out of the front gate of CIA headquarters rather than being lionized even the by the debased excuses for humanity that constitute the Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee.
But if a shocking story reported by Sean Davis yesterday is true, then not only were we wrong but the implications are that the Intelligence Community, itself, and in particular the Intelligence Community IG decided to assist in the effort create a narrative that would justify the impeachment of a lawfully elected president who was acting lawfully.
Sean Davis reported (read Bonchie’s BREAKING: Intel Community Secretly Changed the Whistle-Blower Rules to Allow the Trump-Ukraine Complaint Just Days Before It Was Filed) that the IC changed the rules for classifying disgruntled personnel as whistleblowers in a very significant way:
The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”
The internal properties of the newly revised “Disclosure of Urgent Concern” form, which the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG) requires to be submitted under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA), show that the document was uploaded on September 24, 2019, at 4:25 p.m., just days before the anti-Trump complaint was declassified and released to the public. The markings on the document state that it was revised in August 2019, but no specific date of revision is disclosed…
…A previous version of the whistleblower complaint document, which the ICIG and DNI until recently provided to potential whistleblowers, declared that any complaint must contain only first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoing and that complaints that provide only hearsay, rumor, or gossip would be rejected.
“The [Intelligence Community Inspector General] cannot transmit information via the ICPWA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing,” the previous form stated under the bolded heading “FIRST-HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED.” “This includes information received from another person, such as when an employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing.”
“If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions, [the Intelligence Community Inspector General] will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA,” the form concluded.
What this does is essentially give anyone whistleblower immunity on the basis of rumor mongering.
This leads us to the second part of the problem, which is the seeming active complicity of the Intelligence Community IG in this little farce.
In this September 9 letter, the IG, Michael Atkinson, throws his boss under the bus in order to perpetrate this farce.
Sept. 9 letter from Intel I… by PBS NewsHour on Scribd
More follows in this September 17 letter.
Sept. 17 letter from Intel … by PBS NewsHour on Scribd
In these letters the IG claims that the matter is of “urgent concern.” We know for a fact that there was no universe w(ith)in which an event that happened in July and had already been resolved, particularly a matter that did not involve any intelligence activity whatsoever was of “any” concern to the IC IG, much less of “urgent concern.” The Department of Justice looked at this claim and issued an opinion that all but had a laugh track attached. (Read the OLC ruling.) Even though the opinion is dated September 24, it is obvious from the preceding correspondence that the IG already knew of the determination and it didn’t fit his agenda. In fairness to Atkinson, he may not be a duplicitous douchebag out to destroy the man who gave him the job, he could very well be your run-of-the-mill p***y who is so intent upon winning the approval of the “right people” that he simply didn’t have the courage to stand fast and do his duty.
The second part of this equation is awarding whistleblower status when, in fact, even it its worst light the activity reported does not fall under the purview of the IC IG. (Read the Office of Legal Counsel evisceration of Atkninson’s reasoning for yourself.) Again, in fairness to Atkinson, he may just be a gutless drone who was more intent upon fellating Adam Schiff in a public forum than in doing his job.
Finally, Atkinson opines that he is fearful that the president may have violated campaign finance laws.
Again, not his f***ing job to tell Schiff about this, there are channels for reporting criminal violations that do not involve hyperpartisan Democrats or the press. We now know that possible offense had been investigated by Department of Justice’s Criminal Division and dismissed. The fact that Justice was investigating, and probably the outcome, was known to Atkinson before he wrote to Schiff. Again, in fairness to Atkinson, he may not have been working with the whistleblower to make as big a splash as possible out of this, he may have simply been a weak, feckless little man trying to ingratiate himself with the people he thinks should really be in charge.
To review the bidding. Someone in the Intelligence Committee leadership changed the definition of whistleblower so this whistleblower was elevated from a rumor monger to a protected individual. . . .
********************************
DLH
