The IC IG has no authority to investigate the President

[The Purge]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

 

[OldLady]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

 

[Ernie S.]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

Or maybe a former Vice President that DID step over the line?

 

[OldLady]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

The Purge? I'm waiting.

 

[Crepitus]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

The Purge? I'm waiting.

Don't rush him, logic is hard for tRumplings.

 

[theHawk]

The establishment really doesn’t like their quid pro quo system being exposed by President Trump. They need their “Biden deals” to get themselves rich in turn for letting foreign countries **** us over on trade deals. These people hate America, and love being able to get rich off destroying America like the Bidens did.

 

[The Purge]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL, OF COURSE!

 

[The Purge]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

The Purge? I'm waiting.

Don't rush him, logic is hard for tRumplings.

Thinking is hard for you, Creepytoes!

 

[OldLady]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL, OF COURSE!

Isn't that Barr? He is named as being in on the misdeeds.

 

[Crepitus]

From another blog. Something to ponder....

As many have noted: (1) the Ukraine-related "whistleblower" complaint lacks an “urgent concern” as defined in the statute to justify forwarding to Congress and (2) the complaint lacks first-hand knowledge, which the IG IC had specifically required for “credibility” and hence entitlement to whistleblower treatment—until after the appearance of this particular complaint. More fundamentally:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) has no authority to receive or investigate complaints about the President.

In Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3033 (“Inspector General of the Intelligence Community”), paragraph (g) (“Authorities”) sets out the IC IG’s authority. The authority to “receive and investigate” complaints is provide in subparagraph (g)(3): “The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate . . . complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence . . . .”

The President’s conversations with other heads of state is not “an activity within the authorities and responsibilities” of the DNI. (Check Title 50 U.S. Code Section 3024, “Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence” if you like.)

By “receiving and investigating” an alleged whistleblower complaint about the President, the IC IG is acting outside his authority and contrary to law.

Put simply, the IC is not above the President. The Democrats and the anti-Trump media are effectively leading or joining an IC-facilitated coup by pretending otherwise.

Who would you say has the authority to investigate a President who seems to be stepping over the line?

The Purge? I'm waiting.

Don't rush him, logic is hard for tRumplings.

Thinking is hard for you, Creepytoes!

Thinking is hard for me but "I know you are but what am I" is the best you can do.

Sure, let's go with that.

Lmao.