- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/4/20 at 11:01 am to texridder
Horowitz is the same guy who opened his hearing with the statement “There was no bias”. Then proceeds to name 17 examples of BIAS. 
Posted on 4/4/20 at 11:30 am to texridder
Here is what he did regarding the form/rules...
So he changed the form to say you could complain without first hand knowledge but the rules still required a formal investigation could only proceed with first hand knowledge.....but they just bypassed that and investigated anyway and used the second hand knowledge anyway as well.
quote:
In August, the Office of Inspector General changed the form because the office found that some sections "could be read — incorrectly — as suggesting that whistleblowers must possess first-hand information in order to file an urgent concern complaint," according to a statement from the office.
In reality, the language on the original form about first-hand information referred to requirements for the investigation that follows the submission of a complaint — not a requirement of the complaint itself.
So he changed the form to say you could complain without first hand knowledge but the rules still required a formal investigation could only proceed with first hand knowledge.....but they just bypassed that and investigated anyway and used the second hand knowledge anyway as well.
Posted on 4/4/20 at 11:31 am to trinidadtiger
Arguing with tards is fruitless
Posted on 4/4/20 at 10:09 pm to gthog61
quote:
Arguing with tards is fruitless
For you it is, for sure.
Posted on 4/4/20 at 10:18 pm to texridder
quote:
And, Atkinson didn't backdate any documents.
Yes he did, he back dated the regulations and thus the forms to allow the 3rd hand hearsay Ukrainian bull shite, which was a waste of time and tax dollars, to go forward. Oh yeah he bypassed his immediate superior and took it straight to Shitty Shift.
Posted on 4/4/20 at 10:19 pm to USArmytiger
quote:
Atkinson was nominated by Trump in November 2017 after serving 16 years at the Justice Department.
This is the problem. Trump will eventually learn. He claims to want to drain the swamp, yet continually hires and appoints swamp rats.
Posted on 4/4/20 at 10:35 pm to texridder
quote:
For you it is, for sure.
I know, I have answered you before and you are too fricking stupid to understand my point.
Exactly, for me arguing with tards (i.e. you) is pointless.
Thanks or proving my point again. I never tire of it.
Posted on 4/4/20 at 10:45 pm to USArmytiger
Did IC IG Atkinson have anything to do with the Senate Intelligence Committee security guy who got caught leaking the full copies of the FISA applications to the media?
That dude got a slap on the wrist.
What did Atkinson know and when did he know it.
No surprise Warner has his panties twisted over this. Pain is coming.
That dude got a slap on the wrist.
What did Atkinson know and when did he know it.
No surprise Warner has his panties twisted over this. Pain is coming.
Posted on 4/4/20 at 10:49 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
This is the problem. Trump will eventually learn. He claims to want to drain the swamp, yet continually hires and appoints swamp rats.
Unfortunately that is the system in place that he has to work with.
If someone requires a Senate vote there are only so many people to pick from.
He, and we, have learned the hard way that the swamp runs deeper than previously thought.
Posted on 4/5/20 at 9:46 am to Jinglebob
Nm
Posted on 4/5/20 at 10:40 am to USArmytiger
What a fricking shitty slanted article, but it’s par for the course.
frick Atkinson and Horowitz and the rest of the IC bureaucrats.
frick Atkinson and Horowitz and the rest of the IC bureaucrats.
Posted on 4/5/20 at 10:47 am to trinidadtiger
quote:
Warner and Burr
Is the answer to the question:
quote:
I still wonder why, after all Atkinson's involvement in the FISA abuse, he was allowed to move to IG for Intel of all places
Posted on 4/5/20 at 11:04 am to udtiger
UT,
You got that right, and Warner even openly told Atkinson to get on top of the bringing forward of whistleblowers and their protection during the confirmation hearings, Im surprised he and Atkinson did not openly laugh during the proceedings, what an absolute joke on the rest of America.
Is there no one in friggin Washington to put some of these arseholes in jail.
And I could even take it if it was a Jack Nicholson "you cant handle the truth" badarse but its a bunch of pencil neck bureaucrats like schiff, atkinson and warner burrs.
You got that right, and Warner even openly told Atkinson to get on top of the bringing forward of whistleblowers and their protection during the confirmation hearings, Im surprised he and Atkinson did not openly laugh during the proceedings, what an absolute joke on the rest of America.
Is there no one in friggin Washington to put some of these arseholes in jail.
And I could even take it if it was a Jack Nicholson "you cant handle the truth" badarse but its a bunch of pencil neck bureaucrats like schiff, atkinson and warner burrs.
Posted on 4/5/20 at 2:22 pm to gthog61
quote:
I know, I have answered you before and you are too fricking stupid to understand my point.
Just one example would be enough.
Posted on 4/5/20 at 4:15 pm to trinidadtiger
quote:
So he changed the form to say you could complain without first hand knowledge but the rules still required a formal investigation could only proceed with first hand knowledge.....but they just bypassed that and investigated anyway and used the second hand knowledge anyway as well.
The complaint form, the law, or agency policy NEVER required 1st hand knowledge.
Senator Grassley, discussing the whistleblower complaint, was quoted by the Washington Examiner:
quote:LINK
“No one should be making judgments or pronouncements without hearing from the whistleblower first and carefully following up on the facts. Uninformed speculation wielded by politicians or media commentators as a partisan weapon is counterproductive and doesn’t serve the country. When it comes to whether someone qualifies as a whistleblower, the distinctions being drawn between first- and second-hand knowledge aren’t legal ones. It’s just not part of whistleblower protection law or any agency policy. Complaints based on second-hand information should not be rejected out of hand, but they do require additional leg work to get at the facts and evaluate the claim’s credibility.”
The only part of the complaint materials that refer to first hand information are in instructions to the Disclosure of Urgent Concern form (which was NEVER part of the form itself) which state that:
quote:That comports with the part of Grassley's statement that reads:
In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information.
quote:The IC-IG won't process the complaint unless he has done the "additional leg work" (i.e., conducted a preliminary review) to "get at the facts" and "evaluate the claim's credibility" as an urgent concern.
Complaints based on second-hand information should not be rejected out of hand, but they do require additional leg work to get at the facts and evaluate the claim’s credibility.
The erroneous contention that the complaint form itself required first hand information was based on a Federalist article.
The Federalist took the paragraph of the instructions that mentioned first hand knowledge and superimposed it to make it look like it was part of the form itself.
And the right wing media took up the charge and spread the rumor without even comparing the Federalist version to the complaint form itself.
Posted on 4/5/20 at 4:19 pm to texridder
quote:
quote:
I know, I have answered you before and you are too fricking stupid to understand my point.
Just one example would be enough.
your last "gotcha" attempt where you repeated what I said in a different way and were thoroughly pleased with yourself.
Posted on 4/5/20 at 4:20 pm to texridder
DixRider new day same stupidity.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 1:17 pm to Jbird
quote:
DixRider new day same stupidity.
Jbird. New day, same old chickens**t non-response to what was actually posted.
Posted on 4/6/20 at 1:18 pm to gthog61
quote:
your last "gotcha" attempt where you repeated what I said in a different way and were thoroughly pleased with yourself.
Bull shite. Never happened.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News