President Trump

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
You haven't even seen the transcript and neither has Pelosi. Y'all are getting desperate. How are you going to get rid of capitalism when Trump is so successful?
You think Pelosi made this move without a real clear idea of what she’s going to find out?
 

oldngray

nowhere special
You've seen the transcript?
Dems are already walking back on transcript claims. Now it shifted to there must be other transcripts if this one has nothing.

Anything to keep their narrative doing.

Their goal is to keep throwing dirt hoping something will eventually stick. And to keep media attention focused on Bad Man Trump.
 
Last edited:

It will be fine

Well-Known Member
Dems are already walking back on transcript claims. Now it shifted to there must be other transcripts if this one has nothing.

Anything to keep their narrative doing.

Their goal is to keep throwing dirt hoping something will eventually stick. And to keep media attention focused on Bad Man Trump.
Trump brought up the call transcript, not Democrats. Trump will release “notes” from the call that are doctored to make everything seem innocent. He should release the entire whistleblower complaint.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
Trump brought up the call transcript, not Democrats. Trump will release “notes” from the call that are doctored to make everything seem innocent. He should release the entire whistleblower complaint.

The whistleblower complaint is being released. DNI has to declassify first.

And the DNI already determined there was nothing to the complaint so DNI did not have the authority to release to Congress. It was not a complaint that was subject to Congressional review so they had no right to see it.

Trump ordered it declassified and released anyway.

Yet another nothingburger.

The general counsel for Maguire's office said it had consulted with the Justice Department and determined the complaint did not rise to the level of an "urgent concern" requiring congressional notification. The relevant federal statute defines "urgent concern" as "a serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency" related to an "intelligence activity."

"The complaint forwarded to the [inspector general] does not meet the definition of 'urgent concern,'" general counsel Jason Klitenic wrote in a letter to Schiff on Tuesday. "This complaint ... concerned conduct by someone outside the Intelligence Community and did not relate to any 'intelligence activity' under the DNI's supervision."
What to know about the mysterious whistleblower complaint involving Trump
 
Last edited:

Turdferguson

Just a turd
The whistleblower complaint is being released. DNI has to declassify first.

And the DNI already determined there was nothing to the complaint so DNI did not have the authority to release to Congress. It was not a complaint that was subject to Congressional review so they had no right to see it.

Trump ordered it declassified and released anyway.

Yet another nothingburger.

The general counsel for Maguire's office said it had consulted with the Justice Department and determined the complaint did not rise to the level of an "urgent concern" requiring congressional notification. The relevant federal statute defines "urgent concern" as "a serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency" related to an "intelligence activity."

"The complaint forwarded to the [inspector general] does not meet the definition of 'urgent concern,'" general counsel Jason Klitenic wrote in a letter to Schiff on Tuesday. "This complaint ... concerned conduct by someone outside the Intelligence Community and did not relate to any 'intelligence activity' under the DNI's supervision."
What to know about the mysterious whistleblower complaint involving Trump
Q&A on Whistleblower Complaint Being Withheld from Congressional Intelligence Committees
That's not up to the DNI to conclude that there is nothing to the complaint.


"Does the DNI have the authority to overrule the ICIG’s determination that a complaint is credible, that it pertains to an urgent concern, or that the matter is covered by the ICWPA?

No. The ICWPA specifically gives inspectors general the final say in whether a complaint is credible or whether it pertains to an urgent concern. Moreover, to the extent Maguire might be arguing that he can overrule the ICIG’s determination that the conduct in question is within the scope of the ICWPA, that is also not his call. The law gives inspectors general their own legal counsel specifically so they can make legal judgments about the scope of their jurisdiction and not be dependent on lawyers representing the agencies they oversee."
From my link
 

oldngray

nowhere special
Q&A on Whistleblower Complaint Being Withheld from Congressional Intelligence Committees
That's not up to the DNI to conclude that there is nothing to the complaint.


"Does the DNI have the authority to overrule the ICIG’s determination that a complaint is credible, that it pertains to an urgent concern, or that the matter is covered by the ICWPA?

No. The ICWPA specifically gives inspectors general the final say in whether a complaint is credible or whether it pertains to an urgent concern. Moreover, to the extent Maguire might be arguing that he can overrule the ICIG’s determination that the conduct in question is within the scope of the ICWPA, that is also not his call. The law gives inspectors general their own legal counsel specifically so they can make legal judgments about the scope of their jurisdiction and not be dependent on lawyers representing the agencies they oversee."
From my link

The problem is the complaint wasn't credible.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
Not according to the ICIG. The DNI has no say in the matter
Most relevantly to this discussion, there is no provision in the ICWPA for a whistleblower going straight to the congressional intelligence committees if “the head of the establishment” – i.e., the DNI – does not either forward the complaint to the committees or respond to a request for direction.
from your link

Also, the IG found the complaint was motivated by political bias and the person making the complaint did not have whistle blower protection under the law
 
Last edited:

Turdferguson

Just a turd
Most relevantly to this discussion, there is no provision in the ICWPA for a whistleblower going straight to the congressional intelligence committees if “the head of the establishment” – i.e., the DNI – does not either forward the complaint to the committees or respond to a request for direction.
from your link

Also, the IG found the complaint was motivated by political bias and the person making the complaint did not have whistle blower protection under the law

Did they go straight to Congress, or did they follow proper procedures
 
Top