Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
So why was the whistle blower law changed in August?
Comments
-
Ha ha ha.........you are one funny goose stepper HH. Good gosh you are desperate. "But he knows who the witnesses are". LOL! Can't make this stuff up ladies and gentlemen.HHusky said:
The whistleblower isn’t a witness to Daddy’s crimes. He didn’t claim to be. But he knows who the witnesses are.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile the whistleblower is still not a whistle blower, did not have first hand info and John Brennen is still trying to unseat a duly elected president using our 17 intelligence agencies and team hondo is all in
You want to talk about shitty fucking Americans, look in the mirror
He never witnessed shit and you libs are all in!
Go get him tiger! Perry Mason caliber you clearly aren't.
-
Keep ignoring what I said. The snitch has every right to lie on the paper as the actual transcript showed...the DNI was correct in identifying the matter as 1) not urgent and 2) derived from a partition hack and write it off.HHusky said:
Having the intake form made consistent with the statute sounds pretty sinister.HoustonHusky said:
Law involves Congress. This was a policy/form change that happened right as the complaint was being made. And they will not comment on who/when the change was made (the "new" file was uploaded to the system in Sept 2019 but I know the HondoFS of the world think that is just a coincidence).2001400ex said:
I'm talking about how your news source said the law changed. And it went on to say it changed for the purpose of allowing the form to be filled out based on second hand information. Both of which are lies.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. Furthermore by definition it was not an Urgent Matter. The snitches' lawyers knew that so they kept saying Urgent even though it didn't meet the definition. For both reasons it should not have been forwarded to Congress.
But Shitt and Botox had already seen it and likely helped draft it. Because they are crooked like that.
The records are in plain site which is why you ignore them. And the transcript shows its a lie as well.
Keep lying HondoFS.
The original form was correct and meant it should never have even been turned in.
Lawfare lawyers realized that and change the form.
The "updated" form got turned in and goes to the DNI. He correctly identifies is as both immaterial (DOJ ruling) and from a partition hack so he wrote it off. And he was both correct and in his power to do so.
Which means he correctly did not forward it on to Congress.
Which made the nutjob left mad because they wanted impeachment without a crime and helped draft it the original complaint.
So they screamed and here we are.
Keep lying to yourself though.
-
Having no questions, no interest in who the actual witnesses are, and no idea how an investigation works, Atl closes the case.Bendintheriver said:
Ha ha ha.........you are one funny goose stepper HH. Good gosh you are desperate. "But he knows who the witnesses are". LOL! Can't make this stuff up ladies and gentlemen.HHusky said:
The whistleblower isn’t a witness to Daddy’s crimes. He didn’t claim to be. But he knows who the witnesses are.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile the whistleblower is still not a whistle blower, did not have first hand info and John Brennen is still trying to unseat a duly elected president using our 17 intelligence agencies and team hondo is all in
You want to talk about shitty fucking Americans, look in the mirror
He never witnessed shit and you libs are all in!
Go get him tiger! Perry Mason caliber you clearly aren't.
If it were Hilary or Barry on the hot seat, he would see the exact same facts and call it the other way. Just my years-earned feelings on Atl, but I am correct and most here know it. -
Again a straight up lie. So you have now joined Race and Blob as posters who have lied in this thread. You could always file a complaint based upon second hand info. Even in the form before the Aug 2019 change there was a field to check if you received the information first hand or second hand. The IG wouldn't deem the complaint urgent and credible (and still won't) thus triggering the laws requirement to pass it along to congress unless they gather enough direct evidence during the 14 day investigative period to deem the complaint credible.HoustonHusky said:2001400ex said:
I'm talking about how your news source said the law changed. And it went on to say it changed for the purpose of allowing the form to be filled out based on second hand information. Both of which are lies.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. Furthermore by definition it was not an Urgent Matter. The snitches' lawyers knew that so they kept saying Urgent even though it didn't meet the definition. For both reasons it should not have been forwarded to Congress.
“It’s an explanation of the IG’s standard for assessing credibility,” said Sanchez in an interview with The Daily Beast. “The IG isn’t going to forward it to the DNI if it can’t corroborate secondhand or indirect information. The whistleblower’s job is not to investigate. That is the job of the IG.”
In other words, Trump’s whistleblower didn’t go through some shady “deep state” backdoor. He or she followed the process, and government investigators found the firsthand evidence themselves. -
Hint for retards: His sources are the witnesses. He knows who they are. Congress will learn who they are. Daddy wants them shot.Bendintheriver said:
Ha ha ha.........you are one funny goose stepper HH. Good gosh you are desperate. "But he knows who the witnesses are". LOL! Can't make this stuff up ladies and gentlemen.HHusky said:
The whistleblower isn’t a witness to Daddy’s crimes. He didn’t claim to be. But he knows who the witnesses are.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile the whistleblower is still not a whistle blower, did not have first hand info and John Brennen is still trying to unseat a duly elected president using our 17 intelligence agencies and team hondo is all in
You want to talk about shitty fucking Americans, look in the mirror
He never witnessed shit and you libs are all in!
Go get him tiger! Perry Mason caliber you clearly aren't. -
Speaking of lying, I'm still waiting for that "promise" you claimed was in the complaint Kunt.GDS said:
Again a straight up lie. So you have now joined Race and Blob as posters who have lied in this thread. You could always file a complaint based upon second hand info. Even in the form before the Aug 2019 change there was a field to check if you received the information first hand or second hand. The IG wouldn't deem the complaint urgent and credible (and still won't) thus triggering the laws requirement to pass it along to congress unless they gather enough direct evidence during the 14 day investigative period to deem the complaint credible.HoustonHusky said:2001400ex said:
I'm talking about how your news source said the law changed. And it went on to say it changed for the purpose of allowing the form to be filled out based on second hand information. Both of which are lies.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. Furthermore by definition it was not an Urgent Matter. The snitches' lawyers knew that so they kept saying Urgent even though it didn't meet the definition. For both reasons it should not have been forwarded to Congress.
“It’s an explanation of the IG’s standard for assessing credibility,” said Sanchez in an interview with The Daily Beast. “The IG isn’t going to forward it to the DNI if it can’t corroborate secondhand or indirect information. The whistleblower’s job is not to investigate. That is the job of the IG.”
In other words, Trump’s whistleblower didn’t go through some shady “deep state” backdoor. He or she followed the process, and government investigators found the firsthand evidence themselves. -
Houston lost what little credibility he had when he stuck his neck out to defend Trump on the Alabama hurricane. He proved he's nothing but another blind Trump cult follower who will distort reality in an effort to hide the Orange Leader's stupidity. Here he is again peddling another lie from the right. Sad!GDS said:
Again a straight up lie. So you have now joined Race and Blob as posters who have lied in this thread. You could always file a complaint based upon second hand info. Even in the form before the Aug 2019 change there was a field to check if you received the information first hand or second hand. The IG wouldn't deem the complaint urgent and credible (and still won't) thus triggering the laws requirement to pass it along to congress unless they gather enough direct evidence during the 14 day investigative period to deem the complaint credible.HoustonHusky said:2001400ex said:
I'm talking about how your news source said the law changed. And it went on to say it changed for the purpose of allowing the form to be filled out based on second hand information. Both of which are lies.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. Furthermore by definition it was not an Urgent Matter. The snitches' lawyers knew that so they kept saying Urgent even though it didn't meet the definition. For both reasons it should not have been forwarded to Congress.
“It’s an explanation of the IG’s standard for assessing credibility,” said Sanchez in an interview with The Daily Beast. “The IG isn’t going to forward it to the DNI if it can’t corroborate secondhand or indirect information. The whistleblower’s job is not to investigate. That is the job of the IG.”
In other words, Trump’s whistleblower didn’t go through some shady “deep state” backdoor. He or she followed the process, and government investigators found the firsthand evidence themselves. -
When did you have credibility Kunt? Was it when you claimed Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress or was it when you lied your ass off and claimed I'd pushed Pizzagate?insinceredawg said:
Houston lost what little credibility he had when he stuck his neck out to defend Trump on the Alabama hurricane. He proved he's nothing but another blind Trump cult follower who will distort reality in an effort to hide the Orange Leader's stupidity. Here he is again peddling another lie from the right. Sad!GDS said:
Again a straight up lie. So you have now joined Race and Blob as posters who have lied in this thread. You could always file a complaint based upon second hand info. Even in the form before the Aug 2019 change there was a field to check if you received the information first hand or second hand. The IG wouldn't deem the complaint urgent and credible (and still won't) thus triggering the laws requirement to pass it along to congress unless they gather enough direct evidence during the 14 day investigative period to deem the complaint credible.HoustonHusky said:2001400ex said:
I'm talking about how your news source said the law changed. And it went on to say it changed for the purpose of allowing the form to be filled out based on second hand information. Both of which are lies.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. Furthermore by definition it was not an Urgent Matter. The snitches' lawyers knew that so they kept saying Urgent even though it didn't meet the definition. For both reasons it should not have been forwarded to Congress.
“It’s an explanation of the IG’s standard for assessing credibility,” said Sanchez in an interview with The Daily Beast. “The IG isn’t going to forward it to the DNI if it can’t corroborate secondhand or indirect information. The whistleblower’s job is not to investigate. That is the job of the IG.”
In other words, Trump’s whistleblower didn’t go through some shady “deep state” backdoor. He or she followed the process, and government investigators found the firsthand evidence themselves. -
Why did you lie about the whistleblower law?SFGbob said:
When did you have credibility Kunt? Was it when you claimed Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress or was it when you lied your ass off and claimed I'd pushed Pizzagate?insinceredawg said:
Houston lost what little credibility he had when he stuck his neck out to defend Trump on the Alabama hurricane. He proved he's nothing but another blind Trump cult follower who will distort reality in an effort to hide the Orange Leader's stupidity. Here he is again peddling another lie from the right. Sad!GDS said:
Again a straight up lie. So you have now joined Race and Blob as posters who have lied in this thread. You could always file a complaint based upon second hand info. Even in the form before the Aug 2019 change there was a field to check if you received the information first hand or second hand. The IG wouldn't deem the complaint urgent and credible (and still won't) thus triggering the laws requirement to pass it along to congress unless they gather enough direct evidence during the 14 day investigative period to deem the complaint credible.HoustonHusky said:2001400ex said:
I'm talking about how your news source said the law changed. And it went on to say it changed for the purpose of allowing the form to be filled out based on second hand information. Both of which are lies.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. Furthermore by definition it was not an Urgent Matter. The snitches' lawyers knew that so they kept saying Urgent even though it didn't meet the definition. For both reasons it should not have been forwarded to Congress.
“It’s an explanation of the IG’s standard for assessing credibility,” said Sanchez in an interview with The Daily Beast. “The IG isn’t going to forward it to the DNI if it can’t corroborate secondhand or indirect information. The whistleblower’s job is not to investigate. That is the job of the IG.”
In other words, Trump’s whistleblower didn’t go through some shady “deep state” backdoor. He or she followed the process, and government investigators found the firsthand evidence themselves. -
Why are you changing the topic Kunt? And I didn't lie. But you sure the fuck did when you claimed I pushed the Pizzagate story.insinceredawg said:
Why did you lie about the whistleblower law?SFGbob said:
When did you have credibility Kunt? Was it when you claimed Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress or was it when you lied your ass off and claimed I'd pushed Pizzagate?insinceredawg said:
Houston lost what little credibility he had when he stuck his neck out to defend Trump on the Alabama hurricane. He proved he's nothing but another blind Trump cult follower who will distort reality in an effort to hide the Orange Leader's stupidity. Here he is again peddling another lie from the right. Sad!GDS said:
Again a straight up lie. So you have now joined Race and Blob as posters who have lied in this thread. You could always file a complaint based upon second hand info. Even in the form before the Aug 2019 change there was a field to check if you received the information first hand or second hand. The IG wouldn't deem the complaint urgent and credible (and still won't) thus triggering the laws requirement to pass it along to congress unless they gather enough direct evidence during the 14 day investigative period to deem the complaint credible.HoustonHusky said:2001400ex said:
I'm talking about how your news source said the law changed. And it went on to say it changed for the purpose of allowing the form to be filled out based on second hand information. Both of which are lies.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. Furthermore by definition it was not an Urgent Matter. The snitches' lawyers knew that so they kept saying Urgent even though it didn't meet the definition. For both reasons it should not have been forwarded to Congress.
“It’s an explanation of the IG’s standard for assessing credibility,” said Sanchez in an interview with The Daily Beast. “The IG isn’t going to forward it to the DNI if it can’t corroborate secondhand or indirect information. The whistleblower’s job is not to investigate. That is the job of the IG.”
In other words, Trump’s whistleblower didn’t go through some shady “deep state” backdoor. He or she followed the process, and government investigators found the firsthand evidence themselves.
