User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:42:26 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, we don't even know if there really is a "whistleblower" do we? We have heard this tune before. The "whistleblower" narrative makes a good soundbite and it gives people visions of a Silkwood-esque crusader and sounds oh-so-serious but it could very well be (and quite often is recently) bullshit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I guess it depends on what you mean by "this". The whistleblower exists, independent of whatever media reporting is out there. It's the nature of the complaint that's still up in the air. I guess that's one theory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:43:30 PM EST
[#2]
This could be the biggest thing since the Mueller investigation!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:44:27 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Twitter threads are kind of a pain - but this one does a good job of breaking down some of the legal issues of the dispute between ODNI and HSPCI... In short, our whistleblower system isn't designed to deal with issues when the President may be the national security risk... 
Man, you do follow commie fucks don't you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:46:27 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here we find ourselves in a typical GD thread, which has gone 6+ pages of discussion, with no one having the slightest idea what the fuck is going on. Bravo GD! Allegedly...with someone...on a call. Those are the facts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:48:24 PM EST
[#5]
It seems the spin is bigger than the event - at least, until we know what the event is.
1. Some rando was bothered by something Trump said to a foreign leader. We don't know: A) Who the rando is B) Who the foreign leader is C) What Trump said D) How the rando learned of what Trump said - was he in the room, was the call recorded, was he given a second hand account by someone else? 2. Said rando files a whistleblower complaint with the Intelligence IG 3. Intelligence IG determines that the "event", if true, is a serious problem and warrants investigation. 4. Intelligence IG delivers the complaint to DNI 5. DNI determines that complaint is not "urgent" as defined by their rules and therefore doesn't need to be shared with Congress. 6. DNI has said nothing about not investigating the complaint. He's looking into it, but doesn't feel it needs to be public at this time. 7. Intelligence IG disagrees with DNI, and decides to be a pansy and take the disagreement public - including sending a formal letter to Shiff, which is guaranteed to cause a media frenzy. Seems like shades of Comey here... Comey was unhappy with things and decided to leak a few things to his buddies so the press would stir up the non-thinking masses and eventually end up with the great farce of Mueller. In the end, I think it will turn out to be that the rando, just like many others, is unwilling to let Trump be president and are turning policy disagreements into fake scandals - trying to neuter the results of the election through endless investigations and fake outrages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:48:30 PM EST
[#6]
Threads like this make me so happy folks like Sylvan get the banhammer.
Amirite? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:52:11 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Trump's IC OIG just invented the whistleblower out of thin air? I guess that's one theory. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: I guess it depends on what you mean by "this". The whistleblower exists, independent of whatever media reporting is out there. It's the nature of the complaint that's still up in the air. I guess that's one theory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:52:39 PM EST
[#8]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:53:10 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Completely incorrect. The law states he must inform and report to the "ODNI" in 14 days and then the ODNI has 7 to determine and report it. It does in fact give him the authority to countermand that determination. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: It's more like the law gives the IC OIG the authority to make the determination that the matter is "urgent" and should be given to Congress within a certain amount of time, and does not explicitly give the authority to the ODNI to countermand that determination. Hence the legal issue. It does in fact give him the authority to countermand that determination. 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(A-C) states the following: 5)(A) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General. (B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar-day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information. (C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:54:04 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Please don't copy and paste false information. 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(A-C) states the following: "Shall" not "may". Words have meanings. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:55:21 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems like 18 USC 1001 would apply in many cases - but go with your theory if you'd like. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:55:54 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. First, the DOJ OIG has nothing to do with this. The relevant statutory authorities are described in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act if you'd like to read further. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is a ton of whining in there. Sounds like a political hit. Who knew we could usurp the process? In the case of incriminating the president, the proper procedure is to usurp the chain of command and go straight to congress for an impeachment hearing. Do I have that correct? First, the DOJ OIG has nothing to do with this. The relevant statutory authorities are described in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act if you'd like to read further. Relevant portion of the ICWPA: "Within a 14-day period, the OIG must determine "whether the complaint or information appears credible," and upon finding the information to be credible, thereafter transfer the information to the Attorney General who then submits the information to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. If the OIG does not deem the complaint or information to be credible or does not transmit the information to the Attorney General, the employee may provide the information directly to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. However, the employee must first inform the OIG of his or her intention to contact the intelligence committees directly and must follow the procedures specified in the Act." I think Shifty fuck_tard was already running his mouth before this information was delivered to the AG for review. They usurped the law in order to get in front of the release of the IG report on FISA abuse. B_S, you always show up in the nick of time for your comrades in the IC. I hope they enjoy prison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:56:02 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some people said some things Allegedly...with someone...on a call. Those are the facts. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Here we find ourselves in a typical GD thread, which has gone 6+ pages of discussion, with no one having the slightest idea what the fuck is going on. Bravo GD! Allegedly...with someone...on a call. Those are the facts. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:56:07 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, this whistleblower is admitting openly that he spied on phone calls between the President and other world leaders? Can he produce a warrant for that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:56:18 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Making false official statements is also a crime. If "whistleblowers" were allowed to lie--to give false testimony--that would also destroy the whole concept of "whistleblowing." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Seems like 18 USC 1001 would apply in many cases - but go with your theory if you'd like. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:57:50 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Trump's IC OIG just invented the whistleblower out of thin air? I guess that's one theory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:58:13 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh my my, you don't know what's suppose to come out from the DOJ IG soon? Hint: it's not good for the IC. Relevant portion of the ICWPA: "Within a 14-day period, the OIG must determine "whether the complaint or information appears credible," and upon finding the information to be credible, thereafter transfer the information to the Attorney General who then submits the information to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. If the OIG does not deem the complaint or information to be credible or does not transmit the information to the Attorney General, the employee may provide the information directly to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. However, the employee must first inform the OIG of his or her intention to contact the intelligence committees directly and must follow the procedures specified in the Act." I think Shifty fuck_tard was already running his mouth before this information was delivered to the AG for review. They usurped the law in order to get in front of the release of the IG report on FISA abuse. B_S, you always show up in the nick of time for your comrades in the IC. I hope they enjoy prison. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is a ton of whining in there. Sounds like a political hit. Who knew we could usurp the process? In the case of incriminating the president, the proper procedure is to usurp the chain of command and go straight to congress for an impeachment hearing. Do I have that correct? First, the DOJ OIG has nothing to do with this. The relevant statutory authorities are described in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act if you'd like to read further. Relevant portion of the ICWPA: "Within a 14-day period, the OIG must determine "whether the complaint or information appears credible," and upon finding the information to be credible, thereafter transfer the information to the Attorney General who then submits the information to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. If the OIG does not deem the complaint or information to be credible or does not transmit the information to the Attorney General, the employee may provide the information directly to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. However, the employee must first inform the OIG of his or her intention to contact the intelligence committees directly and must follow the procedures specified in the Act." I think Shifty fuck_tard was already running his mouth before this information was delivered to the AG for review. They usurped the law in order to get in front of the release of the IG report on FISA abuse. B_S, you always show up in the nick of time for your comrades in the IC. I hope they enjoy prison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 2:59:10 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: B_S, you always show up in the nick of time for your comrades in the IC. I hope they enjoy prison. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:00:14 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ahem. What's the federal code section generally referred to as "making false statements"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:00:28 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ahem. What's the federal code section generally referred to as "making false statements"? Quote HistoryQuoted: Ahem. What's the federal code section generally referred to as "making false statements"? Making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) is the common name for the United States federal process crime laid out in Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which generally prohibits knowingly and willfully making false or fraudulent statements, or concealing information, in "any matter within the jurisdiction" of the federal government of the United States,[1] even by merely denying guilt when asked by a federal agent.[2] A number of notable people have been convicted under the section, including Martha Stewart,[3] Rod Blagojevich,[4] Michael T. Flynn,[5] Rick Gates,[6] Scooter Libby,[7] Bernard Madoff,  and Jeffrey Skilling.[9]Where did you go to lawschool? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:01:18 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Threads like this make me so happy folks like Sylvan get the banhammer. Amirite? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:01:55 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you suggesting that intentionally lying to the investigative body is not a crime? Where did you go to lawschool? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Ahem. What's the federal code section generally referred to as "making false statements"? Making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) is the common name for the United States federal process crime laid out in Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which generally prohibits knowingly and willfully making false or fraudulent statements, or concealing information, in "any matter within the jurisdiction" of the federal government of the United States,[1] even by merely denying guilt when asked by a federal agent.[2] A number of notable people have been convicted under the section, including Martha Stewart,[3] Rod Blagojevich,[4] Michael T. Flynn,[5] Rick Gates,[6] Scooter Libby,[7] Bernard Madoff, and Jeffrey Skilling.[9]Where did you go to lawschool? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:02:29 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
like the piss dossier was invented out of thin air |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:04:04 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was making the exact opposite argument but something clearly went "whoosh". So, again, where did you go to lawschool or are you yet another barista with google? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:07:40 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No you weren't. So, again, where did you go to lawschool or are you yet another barista with google? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I was making the exact opposite argument but something clearly went "whoosh". So, again, where did you go to lawschool or are you yet another barista with google? But just in case there is any confusion: A false whistleblower complain could -in most cases- be subject to a false statements change. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:08:32 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was absolutely making the statement that a false whistleblower complaint could -in most cases- be subject to a false statements charge. I'm not sure how you could read my post any other way. But just in case there is any confusion: A false whistleblower complain could -in most cases- be subject to a false statements change. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:12:03 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Great. I'd like an extra shot of expresso with my latte please. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I was absolutely making the statement that a false whistleblower complaint could -in most cases- be subject to a false statements charge. I'm not sure how you could read my post any other way. But just in case there is any confusion: A false whistleblower complain could -in most cases- be subject to a false statements change. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:14:23 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't do it. You will be charged for the extra shot only you won't get it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:15:08 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Then I'll blow the whistle! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:15:14 PM EST
[#30]
..."former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity"?
There is this... Quote HistoryJason Klitenic, the DNI general counsel, noted in a letter sent to congressional leaders on Tuesday that the activity at the root of the complaint “involves confidential and potentially privileged communications.” Nice that we have a swamp IC actively surveilling the president. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:22:54 PM EST
[#31]
1) How does the IC know what was said?
2) Why is the source a “former” employee? 3) Is this the same IC that has been trying to destroy Trump for years? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:24:15 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
..."former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity"? There is this... ...which would mean that if there was an actual phone call it was illegally monitored by the IC in the first place. Nice that we have a swamp IC actively surveilling the president. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:30:47 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
..."former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity"? There is this... ...which would mean that if there was an actual phone call it was illegally monitored by the IC in the first place. Nice that we have a swamp IC actively surveilling the president. Quote HistoryQuoted:
..."former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity"? There is this... Jason Klitenic, the DNI general counsel, noted in a letter sent to congressional leaders on Tuesday that the activity at the root of the complaint “involves confidential and potentially privileged communications.” Nice that we have a swamp IC actively surveilling the president.  Chuck Schumer: Donald Trump Captured By Hard Right | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC Should we be skeered? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:32:39 PM EST
[#34]
Quoted:
So a story has been brewing for the last few days about a whistleblower within the intelligence community. Apparently a "former senior administration official" went to the IC OIG, who determined that the allegation was an "urgent matter" that required notification to Congress. The ODNI has attempted to block that determination -which to say is legally questionable would be rather generous - and prevent the whistleblower complaint from going to Congress. Last night the story breaks that the complaint may involve some "promise" that Trump made on a phone call with another world leader. No real information other than that. ODNI is testifying behind closed doors today, so something may leak later this afternoon... https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trumps-communications-with-foreign-leader-are-part-of-whistleblower-complaint-that-spurred-standoff-between-spy-chief-and-congress-former-officials-say/2019/09/18/df651aa2-da60-11e9-bfb1-849887369476_story.html Trump’s interaction with the foreign leader included a “promise” that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the U.S. intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community, said the former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
It was not immediately clear which foreign leader Trump was speaking with or what he pledged to deliver, but his direct involvement in the matter has not been previously disclosed. It raises new questions about the president’s handling of sensitive information and may further strain his relationship with U.S. spy agencies. One former official said the communication was a phone call. Did he 'promise' pallets of cash to be freighted over in the dark of night? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:33:52 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Adam shifty is involved, so I should trust him now after he lied multiple times over the past two years.  Put them under oath and ask them what they have. "Mueller Time" was a bust and not a happy ending for dem's and Trump haters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:34:11 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Jesus Christ, you people give underscores a bad name 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:35:52 PM EST
[#37]
Raf where are you when we need you most?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:37:10 PM EST
[#38]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:38:57 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: His join date checks out 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:40:40 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was making the exact opposite argument but something clearly went "whoosh". |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:42:30 PM EST
[#41]
Everyone ask yourself why _ never had a fucking word to say about Adam Lovinger. I’m kidding, we all know it’s because Lovinger blew the whistle on the Russia_Collusion hoax.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:47:46 PM EST
[#42]
Wanna bet it's the Mustache Bolton that's the 'whistleblower'? Fuckin' butthurt bitch...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:49:25 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
HPSCI just released the initial notification letter from the IC OIG... https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20190909_-_ic_ig_letter_to_hpsci_on_whistleblower.pdf So, the House PSCI is violating the law (Title 32 CFR 806.26) by publishing FOUO material to the public? I say this, because the if it were cleared for public release, you would see “ That is, unless I’m completely misremembering the annual training that I just completed last month, but what do I know? If I published FOUO without approval, I’m pretty sure that I’d be out of a job, and potentially subject to criminal penalties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:50:11 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd go farther and say that some will ignore the evidence no matter what it is. We should ignore ignore those people. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:57:43 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, the House PSCI is violating the law (Title 32 CFR 806.26) by publishing FOUO material to the public? I say this, because the if it were cleared for public release, you would see “ That is, unless I’m completely misremembering the annual training that I just completed last month, but what do I know? If I published FOUO without approval, I’m pretty sure that I’d be out of a job, and potentially subject to criminal penalties. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
HPSCI just released the initial notification letter from the IC OIG... https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20190909_-_ic_ig_letter_to_hpsci_on_whistleblower.pdf That is, unless I’m completely misremembering the annual training that I just completed last month, but what do I know? If I published FOUO without approval, I’m pretty sure that I’d be out of a job, and potentially subject to criminal penalties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 3:58:10 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe we should use it as a doorstop? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I'd go farther and say that some will ignore the evidence no matter what it is. We should ignore ignore those people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 4:02:38 PM EST
[#47]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 4:04:10 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Holy shit! Did I just read some stuff that is only legal for journalists like Fredo Cuomo? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
HPSCI just released the initial notification letter from the IC OIG... https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20190909_-_ic_ig_letter_to_hpsci_on_whistleblower.pdf That is, unless I’m completely misremembering the annual training that I just completed last month, but what do I know? If I published FOUO without approval, I’m pretty sure that I’d be out of a job, and potentially subject to criminal penalties. Even worse is that it’s hosted on a .gov site. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 4:04:24 PM EST
[#49]
Didn’t the Obama admin change all the rules about whistle blowers inside government? Basically made it a liability...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2019 4:07:43 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
His join date checks out Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Jesus Christ, you people give underscores a bad name Kind of odd. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File