EPIC! Trump UNLOADS on Fake News, Fired ICIG Atkinson and "Fake" Whistleblower Eric Ciaramella at W.H. Presser

[Ame®icano]

"Atkinson saw to it that the 'Whistle-blower' form was updated just in time to allow for second hand information"

Not true, of course. No surprise there!

Its odd that the whistleblower rules changed just in time for it to hurt trump

No they didn't.

Yes they did

ICIG Admission Of Whistleblower Changes Raises Explosive New Questions

A Monday press release from the ICIG admitting it changed whistleblower rules and forms raises explosive new questions about the anti-Trump complaint.

thefederalist.com

The Federalist is FAKE NEWS!
THE ACTUAL LAW WAS NOT CHANGED, AND EVEN YOU KNOW IT!

in this case the lie is a half truth

The law was not changed

but the regulation implementing the law was changed

The IG

read the reference given and you wont have to ask

They'll rather argue without reading the reference.

Pure projection!
I read the reference and quoted directly from it to expose your lie.
Here it is again:
The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018

The article does not say anything even close to that.

It does say that "The ICIG also disclosed for the first time that the anti-Trump complainant filed his complaint using the previously authorized form, the guidance for which explicitly stated the ICIG’s previous requirement for firsthand evidence for credible complaints. "

If he used that form, he must have known that whistle blower did not meet the requirements, as specified on the form.

From the text: "ICIG also explicitly admitted it changed its policies because of the anti-Trump complaint, raising significant questions about whether the watchdog cooked its own books to justify its treatment of the anti-Trump complaint".

I know the FAKE NEWS article doesn't say that, I cited the actual ICIG report the FAKE NEWS article claims to cite, that is why it is FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!
Here is what the actual ICIG report says:
"The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018"

The ICIG report also says this:
"The Complainant on the form he or she submitted on August 12, 2019 in fact checked two relevant boxes: The first box stated that, “I have personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved”; and the second box stated that, “Other employees have told me about events or records involved.” As part of his determination that the urgent concern appeared credible, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?

That is what the ICIG report says, showing just how BIG a SUCKER your Right-wing sources made out of YOU!!!!!

Why don't you answer the question?

I answered the question, you just can't handle the truth that ALL your sources are liars making a foolish SUCKER out of you1

You answered what you haven't been asked. The question was: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Learn to read!
the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

I did not asked you what ICIG said, I asked you "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Answer the question.

I answered it many times, you need to learn to read!
direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

You telling me to learn how to read? LOL

I didn't ask you to quote ICIG, I asked you three times the same question: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?"

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

FAKE NEWS!!!!!

I see anything you don't want to believe or can't counter becomes "fake news".
The trouble with ignoring reality is it doesn't change reality.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

Learn what direct knowledge is. It isn't information you received second hand from a co-conspirator.
The longer you go on the more lies and absurd rationalizations you spew out!

 

[edthecynic]

"Atkinson saw to it that the 'Whistle-blower' form was updated just in time to allow for second hand information"

Not true, of course. No surprise there!

Its odd that the whistleblower rules changed just in time for it to hurt trump

No they didn't.

Yes they did

ICIG Admission Of Whistleblower Changes Raises Explosive New Questions

A Monday press release from the ICIG admitting it changed whistleblower rules and forms raises explosive new questions about the anti-Trump complaint.

thefederalist.com

The Federalist is FAKE NEWS!
THE ACTUAL LAW WAS NOT CHANGED, AND EVEN YOU KNOW IT!

in this case the lie is a half truth

The law was not changed

but the regulation implementing the law was changed

The IG

read the reference given and you wont have to ask

They'll rather argue without reading the reference.

Pure projection!
I read the reference and quoted directly from it to expose your lie.
Here it is again:
The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018

The article does not say anything even close to that.

It does say that "The ICIG also disclosed for the first time that the anti-Trump complainant filed his complaint using the previously authorized form, the guidance for which explicitly stated the ICIG’s previous requirement for firsthand evidence for credible complaints. "

If he used that form, he must have known that whistle blower did not meet the requirements, as specified on the form.

From the text: "ICIG also explicitly admitted it changed its policies because of the anti-Trump complaint, raising significant questions about whether the watchdog cooked its own books to justify its treatment of the anti-Trump complaint".

I know the FAKE NEWS article doesn't say that, I cited the actual ICIG report the FAKE NEWS article claims to cite, that is why it is FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!
Here is what the actual ICIG report says:
"The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018"

The ICIG report also says this:
"The Complainant on the form he or she submitted on August 12, 2019 in fact checked two relevant boxes: The first box stated that, “I have personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved”; and the second box stated that, “Other employees have told me about events or records involved.” As part of his determination that the urgent concern appeared credible, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?

That is what the ICIG report says, showing just how BIG a SUCKER your Right-wing sources made out of YOU!!!!!

Why don't you answer the question?

I answered the question, you just can't handle the truth that ALL your sources are liars making a foolish SUCKER out of you1

You answered what you haven't been asked. The question was: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Learn to read!
the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

I did not asked you what ICIG said, I asked you "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Answer the question.

I answered it many times, you need to learn to read!
direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

You telling me to learn how to read? LOL

I didn't ask you to quote ICIG, I asked you three times the same question: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?"

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

 

[edthecynic]

direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

Learn what direct knowledge is. It isn't information you received second hand from a co-conspirator.
The longer you go on the more lies and absurd rationalizations you spew out!

Right it means you all were LYING when you claimed the whistleblower had only hearsay evidence.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

It seems like you won't admit Ciaramella had no direct knowledge of the phone call disgraced
colonel Alexander Vindman eavesdropped in on.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Right it means you all were LYING when you claimed the whistleblower had only hearsay evidence.

With regard to the phone call that triggered the whole Ukraine/Trump nonsense what gives you the illusion that I am lying? Are you coming down with the corona virus?
I didn't know hallucinations were a feature of that disease.

 

[Ame®icano]

direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

Learn what direct knowledge is. It isn't information you received second hand from a co-conspirator.
The longer you go on the more lies and absurd rationalizations you spew out!

Right it means you all were LYING when you claimed the whistleblower had only hearsay evidence.

So, if not hearsay, what evidence whistle blower had?

 

[edthecynic]

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

It seems like you won't admit Ciaramella had no direct knowledge of the phone call disgraced
colonel Alexander Vindman eavesdropped in on.

The ICIG report said the whistleblower had direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, whoever the whistleblower is!

 

[edthecynic]

direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

Learn what direct knowledge is. It isn't information you received second hand from a co-conspirator.
The longer you go on the more lies and absurd rationalizations you spew out!

Right it means you all were LYING when you claimed the whistleblower had only hearsay evidence.

So, if not hearsay, what evidence whistle blower had?

The ICIG report doesn't say, only that it is not hearsay, proving ALL you Right-wingers are liars.

 

[Ame®icano]

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

It seems like you won't admit Ciaramella had no direct knowledge of the phone call disgraced
colonel Alexander Vindman eavesdropped in on.

The ICIG report said the whistleblower had direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, whoever the whistleblower is!

Only people who were on that phone call had direct knowledge. Are you saying whistle blower was on the phone call?

 

[edthecynic]

Right it means you all were LYING when you claimed the whistleblower had only hearsay evidence.

With regard to the phone call that triggered the whole Ukraine/Trump nonsense what gives you the illusion that I am lying? Are you coming down with the corona virus?
I didn't know hallucinations were a feature of that disease.

No with regard to the whistleblower complaint, which may or may not involve the Quid Pro Quo call. As you well know the actual complaint has not been made public so YOU know nothing about it.
And you and your ilk are lying about the complaint being ONLY hearsay, but you knew that already.

 

[Doc7505]

"Atkinson saw to it that the 'Whistle-blower' form was updated just in time to allow for second hand information"

Not true, of course. No surprise there!

Its odd that the whistleblower rules changed just in time for it to hurt trump

No they didn't.

Yes they did

ICIG Admission Of Whistleblower Changes Raises Explosive New Questions

A Monday press release from the ICIG admitting it changed whistleblower rules and forms raises explosive new questions about the anti-Trump complaint.

thefederalist.com

The Federalist is FAKE NEWS!
THE ACTUAL LAW WAS NOT CHANGED, AND EVEN YOU KNOW IT!

in this case the lie is a half truth

The law was not changed

but the regulation implementing the law was changed

The IG

read the reference given and you wont have to ask

They'll rather argue without reading the reference.

Pure projection!
I read the reference and quoted directly from it to expose your lie.
Here it is again:
The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018

The article does not say anything even close to that.

It does say that "The ICIG also disclosed for the first time that the anti-Trump complainant filed his complaint using the previously authorized form, the guidance for which explicitly stated the ICIG’s previous requirement for firsthand evidence for credible complaints. "

If he used that form, he must have known that whistle blower did not meet the requirements, as specified on the form.

From the text: "ICIG also explicitly admitted it changed its policies because of the anti-Trump complaint, raising significant questions about whether the watchdog cooked its own books to justify its treatment of the anti-Trump complaint".

I know the FAKE NEWS article doesn't say that, I cited the actual ICIG report the FAKE NEWS article claims to cite, that is why it is FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!
Here is what the actual ICIG report says:
"The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018"

The ICIG report also says this:
"The Complainant on the form he or she submitted on August 12, 2019 in fact checked two relevant boxes: The first box stated that, “I have personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved”; and the second box stated that, “Other employees have told me about events or records involved.” As part of his determination that the urgent concern appeared credible, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?

That is what the ICIG report says, showing just how BIG a SUCKER your Right-wing sources made out of YOU!!!!!

Why don't you answer the question?

I answered the question, you just can't handle the truth that ALL your sources are liars making a foolish SUCKER out of you1

You answered what you haven't been asked. The question was: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Learn to read!
the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

I did not asked you what ICIG said, I asked you "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Answer the question.

I answered it many times, you need to learn to read!
direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

You telling me to learn how to read? LOL

I didn't ask you to quote ICIG, I asked you three times the same question: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?"

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

~~~~~~

Whistleblower Had No ‘Direct Knowledge’ Of Trump Telephone Call — Just ‘Hearsay’

The White House whistleblower suggesting President Donald Trump had an inappropriate conversation with Ukraine reportedly made that claim based on hearsay.

dailycaller.com

 

[Ame®icano]

Right it means you all were LYING when you claimed the whistleblower had only hearsay evidence.

With regard to the phone call that triggered the whole Ukraine/Trump nonsense what gives you the illusion that I am lying? Are you coming down with the corona virus?
I didn't know hallucinations were a feature of that disease.

No with regard to the whistleblower complaint, which may or may not involve the Quid Pro Quo call. As you well know the actual complaint has not been made public so YOU know nothing about it.
And you and your ilk are lying about the complaint being ONLY hearsay, but you knew that already.

"actual complaint has not been made public so YOU know nothing about it "

But you do...

 

[edthecynic]

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

It seems like you won't admit Ciaramella had no direct knowledge of the phone call disgraced
colonel Alexander Vindman eavesdropped in on.

The ICIG report said the whistleblower had direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, whoever the whistleblower is!

Only people who were on that phone call had direct knowledge. Are you saying whistle blower was on the phone call?

The ICIG report does not say what the "direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct" was.

 

[edthecynic]

"Atkinson saw to it that the 'Whistle-blower' form was updated just in time to allow for second hand information"

Not true, of course. No surprise there!

Its odd that the whistleblower rules changed just in time for it to hurt trump

No they didn't.

Yes they did

ICIG Admission Of Whistleblower Changes Raises Explosive New Questions

A Monday press release from the ICIG admitting it changed whistleblower rules and forms raises explosive new questions about the anti-Trump complaint.

thefederalist.com

The Federalist is FAKE NEWS!
THE ACTUAL LAW WAS NOT CHANGED, AND EVEN YOU KNOW IT!

in this case the lie is a half truth

The law was not changed

but the regulation implementing the law was changed

The IG

read the reference given and you wont have to ask

They'll rather argue without reading the reference.

Pure projection!
I read the reference and quoted directly from it to expose your lie.
Here it is again:
The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018

The article does not say anything even close to that.

It does say that "The ICIG also disclosed for the first time that the anti-Trump complainant filed his complaint using the previously authorized form, the guidance for which explicitly stated the ICIG’s previous requirement for firsthand evidence for credible complaints. "

If he used that form, he must have known that whistle blower did not meet the requirements, as specified on the form.

From the text: "ICIG also explicitly admitted it changed its policies because of the anti-Trump complaint, raising significant questions about whether the watchdog cooked its own books to justify its treatment of the anti-Trump complaint".

I know the FAKE NEWS article doesn't say that, I cited the actual ICIG report the FAKE NEWS article claims to cite, that is why it is FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!
Here is what the actual ICIG report says:
"The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018"

The ICIG report also says this:
"The Complainant on the form he or she submitted on August 12, 2019 in fact checked two relevant boxes: The first box stated that, “I have personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved”; and the second box stated that, “Other employees have told me about events or records involved.” As part of his determination that the urgent concern appeared credible, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?

That is what the ICIG report says, showing just how BIG a SUCKER your Right-wing sources made out of YOU!!!!!

Why don't you answer the question?

I answered the question, you just can't handle the truth that ALL your sources are liars making a foolish SUCKER out of you1

You answered what you haven't been asked. The question was: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Learn to read!
the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix. In short, the ICIG did not find that the Complainant could “provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions"

I did not asked you what ICIG said, I asked you "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call? "

Answer the question.

I answered it many times, you need to learn to read!
direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct,

You telling me to learn how to read? LOL

I didn't ask you to quote ICIG, I asked you three times the same question: "Are you saying whistle blower had direct knowledge of Trump's phone call?"

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

~~~~~~

Whistleblower Had No ‘Direct Knowledge’ Of Trump Telephone Call — Just ‘Hearsay’

The White House whistleblower suggesting President Donald Trump had an inappropriate conversation with Ukraine reportedly made that claim based on hearsay.

dailycaller.com

WOW! The Daily LIAR now there is a source for you! NOT!
Nobody even knows who the whistleblower is, so only LIARS say the complaint was hearsay.

 

[Ame®icano]

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

It seems like you won't admit Ciaramella had no direct knowledge of the phone call disgraced
colonel Alexander Vindman eavesdropped in on.

The ICIG report said the whistleblower had direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, whoever the whistleblower is!

Only people who were on that phone call had direct knowledge. Are you saying whistle blower was on the phone call?

The ICIG report does not say what the "direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct" was.

Only people on the phone call had direct knowledge. If whistle blower, as you claim from ICIG report had direct knowledge, he must've been on phone call.

My question to you is still the same: Are you saying whistle blower was on the phone call?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

No with regard to the whistleblower complaint, which may or may not involve the Quid Pro Quo call. As you well know the actual complaint has not been made public so YOU know nothing about it.
And you and your ilk are lying about the complaint being ONLY hearsay, but you knew that already.

ALL reporting, without an exception, says Trump's phone call to Zylinski (the so called Quid Pro Quo discussion)
was indeed the phone call cited by the "whistleblower" (though Ciaramella trully was not a whistleblower)
and formed the accusation on which the impeachment inquisition was based.
That is irrefutable!
Without that quid pro quo accusation there was no case on which an impeachment
could be formed or indeed was formed!

So to be sure we know the complaint that Ciaramella made to Schiff, based on the second hand account
by Alexander Vindman, was indeed the complaint that was made, albeit a politicized complaint.

We know that because of the impeachment itself!

 

[edthecynic]

Right it means you all were LYING when you claimed the whistleblower had only hearsay evidence.

With regard to the phone call that triggered the whole Ukraine/Trump nonsense what gives you the illusion that I am lying? Are you coming down with the corona virus?
I didn't know hallucinations were a feature of that disease.

No with regard to the whistleblower complaint, which may or may not involve the Quid Pro Quo call. As you well know the actual complaint has not been made public so YOU know nothing about it.
And you and your ilk are lying about the complaint being ONLY hearsay, but you knew that already.

"actual complaint has not been made public so YOU know nothing about it "

But you do...

I do know what the ICIG report says about it because, unlike you SUCKERS, I took the time to read it for myself rather than let known liars read it for me!

 

[edthecynic]

I only know what the ICIG report says, you know less than that.

It seems like you won't admit Ciaramella had no direct knowledge of the phone call disgraced
colonel Alexander Vindman eavesdropped in on.

The ICIG report said the whistleblower had direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, whoever the whistleblower is!

Only people who were on that phone call had direct knowledge. Are you saying whistle blower was on the phone call?

The ICIG report does not say what the "direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct" was.

Only people on the phone call had direct knowledge. If whistle blower, as you claim from ICIG report had direct knowledge, he must've been on phone call.

My question to you is still the same: Are you saying whistle blower was on the phone call?

Again the ICIG report only says "direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct" it does not say what that conduct was.
All you idiots need to learn to read!