Ratcliffe explains WHY Schitt is withholding ICIG Michael Atkinson’s testimony

[The Purge]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

 

[BULLDOG]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

 

[The Purge]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

 

[BULLDOG]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

 

[The Purge]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

Then if you knew, why did you ask you phony piece of shit!!!!

 

[kyzr]

There is no fucking way that any low level "deep state" schmuck should be able to write a bullshit "whistle-blower letter" using 2nd and 3rd hand information and affect the president. The whistle-blower law was intended for the DNI and those under the DNI, not for congress to investigate bullshit allegations by a partisan spy about the president.

 

[BULLDOG]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

Then if you knew, why did you ask you phony piece of shit!!!!

I see nothing of any consequence. Again, which line do you have a problem with, and why?

 

[The Purge]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

Then if you knew, why did you ask you phony piece of shit!!!!

I see nothing of any consequence. Again, which line do you have a problem with, and why?

And why don't you understand?

 

[BULLDOG]

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

Then if you knew, why did you ask you phony piece of shit!!!!

I see nothing of any consequence. Again, which line do you have a problem with, and why?

And why don't you understand?

Because you haven't pointed out exactly why you are whining. First hand knowledge has never been a requirement for a whistle blower to turn in a report.

 

[The Purge]

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

Then if you knew, why did you ask you phony piece of shit!!!!

I see nothing of any consequence. Again, which line do you have a problem with, and why?

And why don't you understand?

Because you haven't pointed out exactly why you are whining. First hand knowledge has never been a requirement for a whistle blower to turn in a report.

Well so says most of the left wing sites on Google, but this guy wasnt a whistleblower....he was a leaker, and as such new rules are inacted!

 

[BULLDOG]

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

Then if you knew, why did you ask you phony piece of shit!!!!

I see nothing of any consequence. Again, which line do you have a problem with, and why?

And why don't you understand?

Because you haven't pointed out exactly why you are whining. First hand knowledge has never been a requirement for a whistle blower to turn in a report.

Well so says most of the left wing sites on Google, but this guy wasnt a whistleblower....he was a leaker, and as such new rules are inacted!

So says the rules that have been in effect for decades. Who did he leak to? The people he turned his report in to had every tight to see the information he reported. Just because Trump wasn't able to keep his unethical behavior secret doesn't mean somebody else did something wrong. Trump makes unfounded, childish accusations all the time. You repeating them makes you sound just as petty and wrong as he does. Your accusation that rules were changed to give Trump some disadvantage is just goofy.

 

[OKTexas]

Must be nice to ‘run’ an investigation in such a way where you can try and remove a sitting president while protecting your own backside. Adam Schiff has definitely been very ‘careful’ about what he does and does not release to the public, and while we all know there has to be some very specific reason why … it’s hard to say for sure.

Until now.

Paul Sperry sent this tweet about Schiff withholding the transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson from October 4 behind closed doors which lasted for eight hours.

EIGHT HOURS.

Gosh, that seems like a rather large chunk of testimony the American people should be made aware of, don’cha think? Especially if this is being done for the good of the country and stuff.

Huh, now why oh why would Schiff want to hide answers around his staff’s contact with the whistleblower? If he has nothing to hide you’d think he’d be front and center with that testimony.

Of course, we all know he has something to hide or he wouldn’t have done so much of this behind closed doors.

(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...

------------

IMHO, this impeachment is an extension of the Russiagate fiasco, and a transparent attempt to "change the subject". Frankly, given the parallels of this conspiracy with the previous conspiracies, it is likely just phase 2 of the Russia collusion hoax. It should be investigated by the DOJ, with the Schiff meetings, the whistleblower rules being changed, and the entirety of the rank smell coming from Ukrainegate.

The investigation of these conspiracies, should include thorough investigations of the Press. It's not a good thing for the press to overtly act so corruptly as they are in this matter. I want to know whom has subverted the press such as it is at current. At the bottom of all this is the fact that there is a lot of money swilling around in all of this graft, and it is likely the press violated their public trust in accepting bribes. Time to carefully investigate those press organizations which use public airwaves to peddle thier poison.

Always talk about rules being changed. Exactly what rules were changed, and how? Who changed those rules? When were those rules changed? Be specific..

The Whistle blower bill from first hand to second hand....you are a fucking idiot NOT knowing what we are talking about!....damn, if you don't know anything, stay the fuck out of the thread, instead of making yourself look dumber than you already are!

Which line do you have a problem with? Why? Be specific.

H. R. 2515
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
July 10, 2019
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

AN ACT
To amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the definition of whistleblower, to extend the anti-retaliation protections provided to whistleblowers, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

15 U.S.C. 78u–6) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(6)—

(A) by striking “(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—The term” and inserting the following:


“(6) WHISTLEBLOWER.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The term”; and

(B) by adding the following new subparagraph at the end:


“(B) SPECIAL RULE.—Solely for the purposes of subsection (h)(1), the term ‘whistleblower’ shall also include any individual who takes an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A), or two or more individuals acting jointly who take an action described in subsection (h)(1)(A).”; and

(2) in subsection (h)(1)(A)—

(A) in clause (ii), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:


“(iv) in providing information regarding any conduct that the whistleblower reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to—

“(I) a person with supervisory authority over the whistleblower at the whistleblower’s employer, where such employer is an entity registered with or required to be registered with the Commission, a self-regulatory organization, or a State securities commission or office performing like functions; or

“(II) such other person working for the employer described under subclause (I) who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.”.

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2019.

What the hell does that have to do with the ICIG?

.

 

[Care4all]

There is no fucking way that any low level "deep state" schmuck should be able to write a bullshit "whistle-blower letter" using 2nd and 3rd hand information and affect the president. The whistle-blower law was intended for the DNI and those under the DNI, not for congress to investigate bullshit allegations by a partisan spy about the president.

you do know all of what you said is simply bull crud, don't you? At best, it is your WISH LIST, but it simply is not the way it works or has worked, for whistleblowers.....

there has not been a single person here defending what the president did, or can give an honest or factual defense for it....

kinda hard to do, when there were so many people, including the president, admitting to it....

everyone knows, including you, that the President, used his power as president, to go after a political rival, through using a foreign govt, and tax payer's money and the tax payer's whitehouse as hostage,

until the Ukraine President, made a public announcement on CNN that the Ukraine opened an investigation in to Burisma/Bidens...

the ANNOUNCEMENT is what was REQUIRED to get the congressionally passed military aid and DC visit.... NOT taking care of any corruption that actually might exist, but JUST the announcement.

No president sends their personal campaign lawyer Giuliani to run the entire diplomatic /state dept in the Ukraine with the 2 charged goons, to fight this alleged corruption concerns with the Ukraine...

They would go the LEGAL route, through the AG at the DOJ and the Uk'e Prosecutor general, as per our LEGAL AGREEMENT with them, when investigating a US Citizen in their country....


Sorry, you and Trump, ain't fooling anyone with half a brain.... the facts are not on your side.

Also, the whistleblower complaint, was proven to be an accurate complaint, not a bogus one... if it were not a real urgent concern, the IG would not have been required to turn it over to Congress. The IG reported that the whistleblower complaint had LEGS, after the IG did his preliminary investigation in to the complaint and after the IG found and spoke to, first hand witnesses.