Son of former IC IG: "There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have 1st hand knowledge"

[Dick Foster]

Republicans (and message board trolls) have been spreading the false claim that whistleblowers are required to have themselves first-hand knowledge about the claims he makes. What must be first-hand information is the evidence gathered by the IG (Such as a conversation transcript, which was made public, or interviews with people who had first-hand knowledge).

“There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have firsthand knowledge of what they’re reporting,” said Irvin McCullough, an investigator at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project (and the son of a former IC IG). “They need to have a reasonable belief. The firsthand information is usually gathered by the inspector general, as I believe did occur here.”

Gee, should I believe Hannity and message board people or the son of a former intelligence IG?
GOP Shows Russian Trolls How It’s Done With Whistleblower Smear

Note: funny stickers can't change requirements.

What kind of bullshit silly souce is the son of a former anything? Your silly thread was dead in its tracks before it could get off the ground. I call it bullshit squared.

 

[pyetro]

Son of a 'former IC IG?

and that means what, exactly?

McCain was a Navy Pilot.

Should I consult his sons on how to fly a plane?

Should I consult Jimmy Carters daughter on submarines?

Should I consult John Kerrys son on how to handle PT boats?

Sorry, not interested in his opinion

Bad analogy. the son is not telling us how to be an IG. He is telling us what the law says, and this law is available online and you cannot refute what he says.

 

[Billiejeens]

Son of a 'former IC IG?

and that means what, exactly?

McCain was a Navy Pilot.

Should I consult his sons on how to fly a plane?

Should I consult Jimmy Carters daughter on submarines?

Should I consult John Kerrys son on how to handle PT boats?

Sorry, not interested in his opinion

Son of a 'former IC IG


Well I have this friend, who's uncle's cousin, girlfriends dad, grandfather was at the grassy knoll and he said their was a 2nd gunman who killed Kennedy

That actually happened though.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Republicans (and message board trolls) have been spreading the false claim that whistleblowers are required to have themselves first-hand knowledge about the claims he makes. What must be first-hand information is the evidence gathered by the IG (Such as a conversation transcript, which was made public, or interviews with people who had first-hand knowledge).
Gee, should I believe Hannity and message board people or the son of a former intelligence IG?
GOP Shows Russian Trolls How It’s Done With Whistleblower Smear

Note: funny stickers can't change requirements.

Hahahahahahahahahaha

Someones child says.....

Really dude?

Deeeeeeesperate

Here is the law the form was based off, what the form says is really irrelevant.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

The law is unchanged since January 3, 2016

Read it for yourself instead of relying on someone else.

Keep posting it. Nobody is going to read it.

They don't listen to you.

Get a clue.

They do not listen to facts or the truth.

I am just the message and like always the messenger is attacked because truth cannot be

You have no credibility.

Can't help that.

I am just the message and like always the messenger is attacked because truth cannot be.

I am ok with not having credibility with mindless partisan sheep that put the party before the country, in fact it is a good thing.

 

[pyetro]

Republicans (and message board trolls) have been spreading the false claim that whistleblowers are required to have themselves first-hand knowledge about the claims he makes. What must be first-hand information is the evidence gathered by the IG (Such as a conversation transcript, which was made public, or interviews with people who had first-hand knowledge).

“There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have firsthand knowledge of what they’re reporting,” said Irvin McCullough, an investigator at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project (and the son of a former IC IG). “They need to have a reasonable belief. The firsthand information is usually gathered by the inspector general, as I believe did occur here.”

Gee, should I believe Hannity and message board people or the son of a former intelligence IG?
GOP Shows Russian Trolls How It’s Done With Whistleblower Smear

Note: funny stickers can't change requirements.

What kind of bullshit silly souce is the son of a former anything? Your silly thread was dead in its tracks before it could get off the ground. I call it bullshit squared.

What kind of b******* silly sources are conservative message board nicknames?

 

[OldLady]

Here is the law the form was based off, what the form says is really irrelevant.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

The law is unchanged since January 3, 2016

Read it for yourself instead of relying on someone else.

Why does the article from the Federalist that Ricky Libtardo posted show the old form saying the complaints had to be based on first hand knowledge? Read his post, please.
Is there anything at all in the world of politics that has an actual answer we can rely on as being true?

I am not sure why. There are some irregularities with the two forms that the site posted, even the short form name is not the same, which is odd.

Also, forms are often made by agencies that later have to be changed, they like to add their own twist to them, which they are not supposed to do.

Here's the article. Sorry--there are way too many threads on this and I was in another one.
Intel Community Secretly Nixed Whistleblower Demand Of First-Hand Info

Sounds like you may have already seen it elsewhere, but in case anyone else wants to look at it.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Republicans (and message board trolls) have been spreading the false claim that whistleblowers are required to have themselves first-hand knowledge about the claims he makes. What must be first-hand information is the evidence gathered by the IG (Such as a conversation transcript, which was made public, or interviews with people who had first-hand knowledge).

“There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have firsthand knowledge of what they’re reporting,” said Irvin McCullough, an investigator at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project (and the son of a former IC IG). “They need to have a reasonable belief. The firsthand information is usually gathered by the inspector general, as I believe did occur here.”

Gee, should I believe Hannity and message board people or the son of a former intelligence IG?
GOP Shows Russian Trolls How It’s Done With Whistleblower Smear

Note: funny stickers can't change requirements.

A friend of mine's cousin's neighbor who knew a lawyer once says that second hand witnesses are unreliable, especially when politically motivated.

We must live in the same neighborhood.

I went right out afterwards and voted for Reagan.

 

[task0778]

Then: (notice the date, upper right corner)

Now:

Added: frankly, I don't see the the absolute requirement for 1st-hand knowledge of wrong-doing. My problem is the timing and the secrecy behind. According to OL's link, I see no reason why information about who changed the form, when it was changed, and the rationale for it shouldn't be a matter of public record.

If I'm a low-level schmuck and I find out about some shady things going on then why shouldn't I tell somebody? Or do they have another form for that? OTOH, this smells of more politicalization of gov't agencies that ought not exist. I think we gotta get tougher about that, people need to go to jail if they betray their oaths to serve and protect without favor or bias.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Here is the law the form was based off, what the form says is really irrelevant.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

The law is unchanged since January 3, 2016

Read it for yourself instead of relying on someone else.

Why does the article from the Federalist that Ricky Libtardo posted show the old form saying the complaints had to be based on first hand knowledge? Read his post, please.
Is there anything at all in the world of politics that has an actual answer we can rely on as being true?

I am not sure why. There are some irregularities with the two forms that the site posted, even the short form name is not the same, which is odd.

Also, forms are often made by agencies that later have to be changed, they like to add their own twist to them, which they are not supposed to do.

Here's the article. Sorry--there are way too many threads on this and I was in another one.
Intel Community Secretly Nixed Whistleblower Demand Of First-Hand Info

Sounds like you may have already seen it elsewhere, but in case anyone else wants to look at it.

I have seen it, though I would not trust a site that does not give you both PDFs and just makes you rely on their snapshot of them.

Either way though, it is not really important. The form does not change the law, and the law has been set since Jan 3 2016

 

[MAGAman]

Zelensky asks Trump for an increase in military aid — specifically, to purchase more Javelin anti-tank missiles, useful in Ukraine’s ongoing conflict with Russian-backed separatists in its east.

Trump responds by saying, “I would like you to do us a favor though.”

So? What's your point?

Do you think asking for a corruption investigation when we have direct evidence of corruption on video tape is wrong?

Funny how Democrats love investigations with no evidence of wrongdoing but run around with their hair on fire when actual corruption is investigated.

 

[Auld Phart]

Son of a 'former IC IG?

and that means what, exactly?

McCain was a Navy Pilot.

Should I consult his sons on how to fly a plane?

Should I consult Jimmy Carters daughter on submarines?

Should I consult John Kerrys son on how to handle PT boats?

Sorry, not interested in his opinion

Bad analogy. the son is not telling us how to be an IG. He is telling us what the law says, and this law is available online and you cannot refute what he says.

So far, his 'expertise' is listed as 'son of a former IC'.

That all ya got?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Then: (notice the date, upper right corner)

Now:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

Find the part in the actual law that says it has to be firsthand knowledge.

 

[MAGAman]

So far, his 'expertise' is listed as 'son of a former IC'.

That all ya got?

 

[Care4all]

Republicans (and message board trolls) have been spreading the false claim that whistleblowers are required to have themselves first-hand knowledge about the claims he makes. What must be first-hand information is the evidence gathered by the IG (Such as a conversation transcript, which was made public, or interviews with people who had first-hand knowledge).

“There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have firsthand knowledge of what they’re reporting,” said Irvin McCullough, an investigator at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project (and the son of a former IC IG). “They need to have a reasonable belief. The firsthand information is usually gathered by the inspector general, as I believe did occur here.”

Gee, should I believe Hannity and message board people or the son of a former intelligence IG?
GOP Shows Russian Trolls How It’s Done With Whistleblower Smear

Note: funny stickers can't change requirements.

So, wizard, the IG didn't have the Trump transcript until he released it. Which was after the complaint was made public.

And the transcript shows there was no quid pro quo discussed.

And if there was never a first hand knowledge requirement then why was the form changed?

nope! the notes of the transcript actually shows there was a quid pro quo

YOU need to read it....

AND we need to see the full transcript of the full conversation

quid pro quo is not necessary either, on some of the alleged crimes he committed

 

[Dick Foster]

Son of a 'former IC IG?

and that means what, exactly?

McCain was a Navy Pilot.

Should I consult his sons on how to fly a plane?

Should I consult Jimmy Carters daughter on submarines?

Should I consult John Kerrys son on how to handle PT boats?

Sorry, not interested in his opinion

Bad analogy. the son is not telling us how to be an IG. He is telling us what the law says, and this law is available online and you cannot refute what he says.

Actually those are perfect analogies and you have pure shit for brains for even posting that kinda crap. That's no analogy, that's simple fact.

 

[Defiant1]

Then: (notice the date, upper right corner)

Now:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

Find the part in the actual law that says it has to be firsthand knowledge.

It doesn't.

The law says in order for the complaint to be passed to Congress the IC IG has to find it credible.

The IC IG rules were in order to find a complaint credible it had to be first hand knowledge (only common sense)

They changed the rules so the IC IG could find it credible.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Then: (notice the date, upper right corner)

Now:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

Find the part in the actual law that says it has to be firsthand knowledge.

It doesn't.

The law says in order for the complaint to be passed to Congress the IC IG has to find it credible.

The IC IG rules were in order to find a complaint credible it had to be first hand knowledge (only common sense)

They changed the rules so the IC IG could find it credible.

The IC IG rules are supposed to be based upon the referenced law. They are not allowed to add their own conditions.

 

[bendog]

Republicans (and message board trolls) have been spreading the false claim that whistleblowers are required to have themselves first-hand knowledge about the claims he makes. What must be first-hand information is the evidence gathered by the IG (Such as a conversation transcript, which was made public, or interviews with people who had first-hand knowledge).

“There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have firsthand knowledge of what they’re reporting,” said Irvin McCullough, an investigator at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project (and the son of a former IC IG). “They need to have a reasonable belief. The firsthand information is usually gathered by the inspector general, as I believe did occur here.”

Gee, should I believe Hannity and message board people or the son of a former intelligence IG?
GOP Shows Russian Trolls How It’s Done With Whistleblower Smear

Note: funny stickers can't change requirements.

Mark Felt didn't have any "first hand" knowledge of the Watergate Breakin or coverup because he did not take any actions in them. You're right, the whole gop mantra on this reeks of desperation. Mueller's investigation came to a stop when any correspondence with Russia was destroyed by Corsi and/or Stone, and they aren't talking.

I doubt there's any smoking gun in the undisclosed conversations with Trump and Vlad, and there apparently aren't any real transcripts outside of Russia. But if Trump directed Barr/Cohn or Pompano to assist Ukraine "reinvestage" the Bidens after Trump pulled military aid in 2019, it should be disclosed to Americans.

 

[task0778]

Then: (notice the date, upper right corner)

Now:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

Find the part in the actual law that says it has to be firsthand knowledge.

It doesn't.

The law says in order for the complaint to be passed to Congress the IC IG has to find it credible.

The IC IG rules were in order to find a complaint credible it had to be first hand knowledge (only common sense)

They changed the rules so the IC IG could find it credible.

The timing of this change is somewhat suspect, if it correlates with the Trump whistleblower. How come the IC IG waited until now to make the change? Coincidence? I don't think so. Possibly they didn't want the Whistleblower program to be misused for personal or political vendettas, and now it can. And is.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Then: (notice the date, upper right corner)

Now:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...CODE-2015-title50-chap44-subchapI-sec3033.pdf

Section K(5) is the part that covers it.

Find the part in the actual law that says it has to be firsthand knowledge.

It doesn't.

The law says in order for the complaint to be passed to Congress the IC IG has to find it credible.

The IC IG rules were in order to find a complaint credible it had to be first hand knowledge (only common sense)

They changed the rules so the IC IG could find it credible.

The timing of this change is somewhat suspect, if it correlates with the Trump whistleblower. How come the IC IG waited until now to make the change? Coincidence? I don't think so. Possibly they didn't want the Whistleblower program to be misused for personal or political vendettas, and now it can. And is.

Does anyone have the actual PDF of the old form and not just a screen shot?