So why did the IG change the interpretation of the law?

SFGbob

Appears the person who was comfortable allowing unelected bureaucrats to change the law at their own discretion was you O'Keefed.

How long was the first hand knowledge standard in effect? Was that the standard under Obama? Why did it just change now?

HHusky

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

SFGbob

HHusky said:

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

I didn't even know there was a whistle blower form. Go fuck yourself. But it's obvious that the old forms had a higher standard than the law required. Not being a complete fucking hack like you with no interest in the truth or facts, I'd like to know when the interpretation of the law changed.

You have no interest in the truth or facts so if you have to lie, make shit up, or bury and ignore inconvenient information you will do so.

GDS

It wasn't.

Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute. In fact, by law the Complainant – or any individual in the Intelligence Community who wants to report information with respect to an urgent concern to the congressional intelligence committees – need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law.

If this doesn't clear it up for you then read Grassley's statement this morning. You seem to be really confused about all this. Maybe stop buying into all the right wing fake news pushed by guys like Houston and Deej.

HHusky

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

I didn't even know there was a whistle blower form. Go fuck yourself. But it's obvious that the old forms had a higher standard than the law required. Not being a complete fucking hack like you with no interest in the truth or facts, I'd like to know when the interpretation of the law changed.

You have no interest in the truth or facts so if you have to lie, make shit up, or bury and ignore inconvenient information you will do so.

Seems as if you're pretty fixated on this collateral matter. But you begin by assuming that the form reflected any actual interpretation of the law by the IG. I don't know that that's the case, but you can feel free to look into it.

SFGbob

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

I didn't even know there was a whistle blower form. Go fuck yourself. But it's obvious that the old forms had a higher standard than the law required. Not being a complete fucking hack like you with no interest in the truth or facts, I'd like to know when the interpretation of the law changed.

You have no interest in the truth or facts so if you have to lie, make shit up, or bury and ignore inconvenient information you will do so.

Seems as if you're pretty fixated on this collateral matter. But you begin by assuming that the form reflected any actual interpretation of the law the IG. I don't know that, but you can feel free to look into it.

Unlike you O'Keefed, I care about the truth and I care about the facts. That's why when I'm wrong I can easily admit it. And it's why you'll maintain a lie for 6 years rather than admit that you were wrong.

HHusky

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

I didn't even know there was a whistle blower form. Go fuck yourself. But it's obvious that the old forms had a higher standard than the law required. Not being a complete fucking hack like you with no interest in the truth or facts, I'd like to know when the interpretation of the law changed.

You have no interest in the truth or facts so if you have to lie, make shit up, or bury and ignore inconvenient information you will do so.

Seems as if you're pretty fixated on this collateral matter. But you begin by assuming that the form reflected any actual interpretation of the law the IG. I don't know that, but you can feel free to look into it.

Unlike you O'Keefed, I care about the truth and I care about the facts. That's why when I'm wrong I can easily admit it. And it's why you'll maintain a lie for 6 years rather than admit that you were wrong.

But surely you should be trying to research this fascinating issue rather than spending your time providing me all these nuggets of wisdom.

SFGbob

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

I didn't even know there was a whistle blower form. Go fuck yourself. But it's obvious that the old forms had a higher standard than the law required. Not being a complete fucking hack like you with no interest in the truth or facts, I'd like to know when the interpretation of the law changed.

You have no interest in the truth or facts so if you have to lie, make shit up, or bury and ignore inconvenient information you will do so.

Seems as if you're pretty fixated on this collateral matter. But you begin by assuming that the form reflected any actual interpretation of the law the IG. I don't know that, but you can feel free to look into it.

Unlike you O'Keefed, I care about the truth and I care about the facts. That's why when I'm wrong I can easily admit it. And it's why you'll maintain a lie for 6 years rather than admit that you were wrong.

But surely you should be trying to research this fascinating issue rather than spending your time providing me all these nuggets of wisdom.

There's no point in ever trying to provide you with wisdom O'Keefed, you're a liar and partisan hack and when the facts don't align with you politics you'll either ignore them or lie and claim they aren't true.

It's just another manifestation of your inability to ever admit when you've been wrong. It's why you ran and hid like a fucking Kunt when you first earned your name O'Keefed. Remember when you earned your nickname?

HHusky

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

I didn't even know there was a whistle blower form. Go fuck yourself. But it's obvious that the old forms had a higher standard than the law required. Not being a complete fucking hack like you with no interest in the truth or facts, I'd like to know when the interpretation of the law changed.

You have no interest in the truth or facts so if you have to lie, make shit up, or bury and ignore inconvenient information you will do so.

Seems as if you're pretty fixated on this collateral matter. But you begin by assuming that the form reflected any actual interpretation of the law the IG. I don't know that, but you can feel free to look into it.

Unlike you O'Keefed, I care about the truth and I care about the facts. That's why when I'm wrong I can easily admit it. And it's why you'll maintain a lie for 6 years rather than admit that you were wrong.

But surely you should be trying to research this fascinating issue rather than spending your time providing me all these nuggets of wisdom.

There's no point in ever trying to provide you with wisdom O'Keefed, you're a liar and partisan hack and when the facts don't align with you politics you'll either ignore them or lie and claim they aren't true.

It's just another manifestation of your inability to ever admit when you've been wrong. It's why you ran and hid like a fucking Kunt when you first earned your name O'Keefed. Remember when you earned your nickname?

I find me interesting too. But the issue was an IG interpretation. Please get on that!

Sledog

HH sure sounds like CD!

SFGbob

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

SFGbob said:

HHusky said:

I guess I wasn't as familiar with the whistleblower form before now as you were, blob. I'm outraged that it was wrong previously. Sounds like Obama must have been covering up something. Please get to the bottom of that, won't you?

I didn't even know there was a whistle blower form. Go fuck yourself. But it's obvious that the old forms had a higher standard than the law required. Not being a complete fucking hack like you with no interest in the truth or facts, I'd like to know when the interpretation of the law changed.

You have no interest in the truth or facts so if you have to lie, make shit up, or bury and ignore inconvenient information you will do so.

Seems as if you're pretty fixated on this collateral matter. But you begin by assuming that the form reflected any actual interpretation of the law the IG. I don't know that, but you can feel free to look into it.

Unlike you O'Keefed, I care about the truth and I care about the facts. That's why when I'm wrong I can easily admit it. And it's why you'll maintain a lie for 6 years rather than admit that you were wrong.

But surely you should be trying to research this fascinating issue rather than spending your time providing me all these nuggets of wisdom.

There's no point in ever trying to provide you with wisdom O'Keefed, you're a liar and partisan hack and when the facts don't align with you politics you'll either ignore them or lie and claim they aren't true.

It's just another manifestation of your inability to ever admit when you've been wrong. It's why you ran and hid like a fucking Kunt when you first earned your name O'Keefed. Remember when you earned your nickname?

I find me interesting too. But the issue was an IG interpretation. Please get on that!

I don't find you all that interesting. Run of the mill dishonest leftist who's ego is so fragile they can never admit when they are wrong. I've only seen about a dozen of those over the years. You, City, Hondo, Snotty, you're all the same.

HoustonHusky

GDS said:

It wasn't.

Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute. In fact, by law the Complainant – or any individual in the Intelligence Community who wants to report information with respect to an urgent concern to the congressional intelligence committees – need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law.

If this doesn't clear it up for you then read Grassley's statement this morning. You seem to be really confused about all this. Maybe stop buying into all the right wing fake news pushed by guys like Houston and Deej.

GodDamnStupid is spinning more lies...or just putting his IQ on display...who knows which.

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress. Which is why they had to lie and change the form/requirements, and why the lawyers that wrote it kept writing "Urgent" on it even though it met literally none of the criteria for it.

The ICIG should have taken it, and it if it didn't have 1st hand accounts of anything found some. Which he didn't. Because there are none. And if he did then sent it to the DNI/DOJ. They looked at it and correctly found there was nothing to it, wrote a pretty severe admonishment about the poor legal judgement/abilities of the ICIG, and then had the DOJ look to see if there was anything there (they found there wasn't). That should have been the end of the story.

But that doesn't get it to be the center piece of #FakeNews around an Impeachment Circus. Which is why they needed the ICIG to change the criteria so he could mislabel it "Urgent". And the the Democratic nutjobs scream like 2 year olds that they didn't get an "Urgent" whistle-blower account that they should never have known even existed (unless they helped write it...which some would point to as being illegal...but rules don't actually matter here).

And as a reminder, the transcript of the call and the participants on the call show that the 2nd hand account of the whistle-blower was nothing but lies. But still...GodDamnStupid's feelings...its not fair.

GodDamnStupid...keep lying about straw-man arguments nobody is making to make yourself feel better about your intellectual lot in life.

GDS

Watching you spin and spin and spin like a fucking top is pretty entertaining.

Yesterday

HoustonHusky said:

The IG only accepted complaints based on 1st hand knowledge of events (until changing the form/rules to allow this). By definition the IG would not have even accepted the paper complaint.

then today...

HoustonHusky said:

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress.

Keep lying though Trumptard!

2001400ex

HoustonHusky said:

GDS said:

It wasn't.

Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute. In fact, by law the Complainant – or any individual in the Intelligence Community who wants to report information with respect to an urgent concern to the congressional intelligence committees – need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law.

If this doesn't clear it up for you then read Grassley's statement this morning. You seem to be really confused about all this. Maybe stop buying into all the right wing fake news pushed by guys like Houston and Deej.

GodDamnStupid is spinning more lies...or just putting his IQ on display...who knows which.

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress. Which is why they had to lie and change the form/requirements, and why the lawyers that wrote it kept writing "Urgent" on it even though it met literally none of the criteria for it.

The ICIG should have taken it, and it if it didn't have 1st hand accounts of anything found some. Which he didn't. Because there are none. And if he did then sent it to the DNI/DOJ. They looked at it and correctly found there was nothing to it, wrote a pretty severe admonishment about the poor legal judgement/abilities of the ICIG, and then had the DOJ look to see if there was anything there (they found there wasn't). That should have been the end of the story.

But that doesn't get it to be the center piece of #FakeNews around an Impeachment Circus. Which is why they needed the ICIG to change the criteria so he could mislabel it "Urgent". And the the Democratic nutjobs scream like 2 year olds that they didn't get an "Urgent" whistle-blower account that they should never have known even existed (unless they helped write it...which some would point to as being illegal...but rules don't actually matter here).

And as a reminder, the transcript of the call and the participants on the call show that the 2nd hand account of the whistle-blower was nothing but lies. But still...GodDamnStupid's feelings...its not fair.

GodDamnStupid...keep lying about straw-man arguments nobody is making to make yourself feel better about your intellectual lot in life.

You sound scared.

Rubberfist

GDS said:

Watching you spin and spin and spin like a fucking top is pretty entertaining.

Yesterday

HoustonHusky said:

The IG only accepted complaints based on 1st hand knowledge of events (until changing the form/rules to allow this). By definition the IG would not have even accepted the paper complaint.

then today...

HoustonHusky said:

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress.

Keep lying though Trumptard!

This is what happens when grandpa takes the Federalist seriously.

Lou Dobbs

CirrhosisDawg

HoustonHusky said:

GDS said:

It wasn't.

Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute. In fact, by law the Complainant – or any individual in the Intelligence Community who wants to report information with respect to an urgent concern to the congressional intelligence committees – need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law.

If this doesn't clear it up for you then read Grassley's statement this morning. You seem to be really confused about all this. Maybe stop buying into all the right wing fake news pushed by guys like Houston and Deej.

GodDamnStupid is spinning more lies...or just putting his IQ on display...who knows which.

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress. Which is why they had to lie and change the form/requirements, and why the lawyers that wrote it kept writing "Urgent" on it even though it met literally none of the criteria for it.

The ICIG should have taken it, and it if it didn't have 1st hand accounts of anything found some. Which he didn't. Because there are none. And if he did then sent it to the DNI/DOJ. They looked at it and correctly found there was nothing to it, wrote a pretty severe admonishment about the poor legal judgement/abilities of the ICIG, and then had the DOJ look to see if there was anything there (they found there wasn't). That should have been the end of the story.

But that doesn't get it to be the center piece of #FakeNews around an Impeachment Circus. Which is why they needed the ICIG to change the criteria so he could mislabel it "Urgent". And the the Democratic nutjobs scream like 2 year olds that they didn't get an "Urgent" whistle-blower account that they should never have known even existed (unless they helped write it...which some would point to as being illegal...but rules don't actually matter here).

And as a reminder, the transcript of the call and the participants on the call show that the 2nd hand account of the whistle-blower was nothing but lies. But still...GodDamnStupid's feelings...its not fair.

GodDamnStupid...keep lying about straw-man arguments nobody is making to make yourself feel better about your intellectual lot in life.

Can you expand on this?

HoustonHusky

GDS said:

Watching you spin and spin and spin like a fucking top is pretty entertaining.

Yesterday

HoustonHusky said:

The IG only accepted complaints based on 1st hand knowledge of events (until changing the form/rules to allow this). By definition the IG would not have even accepted the paper complaint.

then today...

HoustonHusky said:

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress.

Keep lying though Trumptard!

Reading is hard. Lying is easy. It is why GodDamnStupid keeps doing it.

The original form required 1st hand accounts. Its words not mine. It is why the ICIG is now trying to claim it has 1st and 2nd hand accounts even though it doesn't. Whistle-blowing law doesn't, but that doesn't qualify it to be an "Urgent" matter to get in front of Congress. Anyone can file all sorts of paperwork/whistle-blower accounts...the goal was to file an "Urgent" one that got to Congress.

Which is why they changed the criteria on the form.

Which is why the DOJ reprimanded the ICIG for being dumb.

And why Shitt and Botox screamed about getting the Urgent whistle-blower account, something that they should not have even known about and which should not have been "Urgent".

And as a reminder, the transcript of the call and the participants on the call show that the 2nd hand account of the whistle-blower was nothing but lies. But still...GodDamnStupid's feelings...its not fair.

GodDamnStupid...keep lying about straw-man arguments no one is making.

CirrhosisDawg

HoustonHusky said:

GDS said:

Watching you spin and spin and spin like a fucking top is pretty entertaining.

Yesterday

HoustonHusky said:

The IG only accepted complaints based on 1st hand knowledge of events (until changing the form/rules to allow this). By definition the IG would not have even accepted the paper complaint.

then today...

HoustonHusky said:

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress.

Keep lying though Trumptard!

Reading is hard. Lying is easy. It is why GodDamnStupid keeps doing it.

The original form required 1st hand accounts. Its words not mine. It is why the ICIG is now trying to claim it has 1st and 2nd hand accounts even though it doesn't. Whistle-blowing law doesn't, but that doesn't qualify it to be an "Urgent" matter to get in front of Congress. Anyone can file all sorts of paperwork/whistle-blower accounts...the goal was to file an "Urgent" one that got to Congress.

Which is why they changed the criteria on the form.

Which is why the DOJ reprimanded the ICIG for being dumb.

And why Shitt and Botox screamed about getting the Urgent whistle-blower account, something that they should not have even known about and which should not have been "Urgent".

And as a reminder, the transcript of the call and the participants on the call show that the 2nd hand account of the whistle-blower was nothing but lies. But still...GodDamnStupid's feelings...its not fair.

GodDamnStupid...keep lying about straw-man arguments no one is making.

Great job convincing the alt-right ducks. A uw dropout and a half dozen white trash fools!

You do know, however, that you the impeachment inquiry is already underway and a vote is likely later this year? Right?

GDS

Does it get dizzy when you start spinning this fast Houston?

HoustonHusky said:
By definition the IG would not have even accepted the paper complaint.

HoustonHusky said:
The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress.

Blu82

CirrhosisDawg said:

HoustonHusky said:

GDS said:

Watching you spin and spin and spin like a fucking top is pretty entertaining.

Yesterday

HoustonHusky said:

The IG only accepted complaints based on 1st hand knowledge of events (until changing the form/rules to allow this). By definition the IG would not have even accepted the paper complaint.

then today...

HoustonHusky said:

The change in the form has nothing to do with turning in a whistle-blower complaint. It had everything to do in getting that complaint in front of Congress.

Keep lying though Trumptard!

Reading is hard. Lying is easy. It is why GodDamnStupid keeps doing it.

The original form required 1st hand accounts. Its words not mine. It is why the ICIG is now trying to claim it has 1st and 2nd hand accounts even though it doesn't. Whistle-blowing law doesn't, but that doesn't qualify it to be an "Urgent" matter to get in front of Congress. Anyone can file all sorts of paperwork/whistle-blower accounts...the goal was to file an "Urgent" one that got to Congress.

Which is why they changed the criteria on the form.

Which is why the DOJ reprimanded the ICIG for being dumb.

And why Shitt and Botox screamed about getting the Urgent whistle-blower account, something that they should not have even known about and which should not have been "Urgent".

And as a reminder, the transcript of the call and the participants on the call show that the 2nd hand account of the whistle-blower was nothing but lies. But still...GodDamnStupid's feelings...its not fair.

GodDamnStupid...keep lying about straw-man arguments no one is making.

Great job convincing the alt-right ducks. A uw dropout and a half dozen white trash fools!

You do know, however, that you the impeachment inquiry is already underway and a vote is likely later this year? Right?

Hey Chubby Chaser, when is Stretch going to hold the required roll call vote in the House?

Hint: never

SFGbob

Scotty, can you quote the "promise" you said was in the complaint. I can't find it, and I'm sure it's there because I know you would never lie.