ICIG Michael Atkinson Attempts Four-Page Justification for Changing "Urgent Concern" Whistle-blower Guidelines…

Methinks Mr. Atkinson doth protest too much.  Prior to the current “whistle-blower complaint” the Intelligence Community Inspector General did not accept Urgent Concern whistle-blower claims without first hand knowledge.  However, the ICIG revised the protocol in August 2019 to accept a CIA complaint against President Donald Trump.
Today the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, Michael Atkinson, presented a four-page justification explaining why the IC changed the Urgent Concern rules to allow the CIA to target President Trump with anonymous complaints based on hearsay:
[scribd id=428170378 key=key-F008IZYmYVgk3cSYV6uR mode=scroll]
The IGIC revision was made at the same time HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff was tweeting in August about President Trump, Rudy Giuliani and holding back funding pending assistance with political opponents.  Note the Date: (link)

President Trump announced Joseph Macguire as the Acting ODNI on August 8th, 2019. (link)  The CIA operative “whistle-blower” letter to Adam Schiff and Richard Burr was on August 12th (link).   Immediately following this letter, the ICIG rules and requirements for Urgent Concern “whistle-blowers” was modified, allowing hearsay complaints. On August 28th Adam Schiff begins tweeting about the construct of the complaint.
The coordinated effort obviously ties back-in Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael K Atkinson.
The center of the Lawfare Alliance influence was/is the Department of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD. It was the DOJ-NSD running the Main Justice side of the 2016 operations to support Operation Crossfire Hurricane and FBI agent Peter Strzok. It was also the DOJ-NSD where the sketchy legal theories around FARA violations (Sec. 901) originated.
The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) is Michael K Atkinson. ICIG Atkinson is the official who accepted the ridiculous premise of a hearsay ‘whistle-blower‘ complaint; an intelligence whistleblower who was “blowing-the-whistle” based on second hand information of a phone call without any direct personal knowledge, ie ‘hearsay‘.
Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.
[scribd id=427107405 key=key-NIWNe4solplQazOFaLnl mode=scroll]

[Irony Reminder: The DOJ-NSD was purposefully under no IG oversight. In 2015 the OIG requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.]
Put another way, Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.
Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse. 2016:

Immediately after the Carter Page FISA warrant is approved, in the period where DOJ-NSD head John Carlin has given his notice of intent to leave but not yet left, inside those specific two weeks, the National Security Division of the DOJ tells the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) they have been breaking the law. The NSD specifically inform the court they are aware of contractors who have been using FISA 702(16)(17) database search queries to extract information on political candidates.
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has looked into the FISA application used against U.S. Person Carter Page. Additionally, U.S. Attorney John Durham is said to be looking at the intelligence communities’ use of systems for spying and surveillance.
If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.
Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective.
Atkinson’s conflict-of-self-interest, and/or possible blackmail upon him by deep state actors who most certainly know his compromise, likely influenced his approach to this whistleblower complaint. That would explain why the Dept. of Justice Office of Legal Counsel so strongly rebuked Atkinson’s interpretation of his responsibility with the complaint.
In the Justice Department’s OLC opinion, they point out that Atkinson’s internal justification for accepting the whistleblower complaint was poor legal judgement. [See Here] I would say Atkinson’s decision is directly related to his own risk exposure:
[scribd id=427513014 key=key-Cum93CuySEZBYl3jOxgh mode=scroll]
Within a heavy propaganda report from the New York Times there are also details about the Intelligence Community Inspector General that show the tell-tale fingerprints of the ICIG supportive intent (emphasis mine):

[…] Mr. Atkinson, a Trump appointee, nevertheless concluded that the allegations appeared to be credible and identified two layers of concern.

The first involved a possible violation of criminal law. Mr. Trump’s comments to Mr. Zelensky “could be viewed as soliciting a foreign campaign contribution in violation of the campaign-finance laws,Mr. Atkinson wrote, according to the Justice Department memo. (read more)

Does the “foreign campaign contribution” angle sound familiar? It should, because that argument was used in the narrative around the Trump Tower meeting with the Russian Lobbyist Natalia Veselnitskaya. More specifically, just like FARA violations the overused “campaign contribution” narrative belongs to a specific network of characters, Lawfare.
The “Schiff Dossier”, aka “whistle-blower” complaint was a constructed effort of allied members within congress and the intelligence apparatus to renew the impeachment effort. The intelligence team, including the ICIG, changed the whistleblower form to allow the CIA to insert the Schiff Dossier, written by Lawfare.
The Soft-Coup effort continues…

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Impeachment, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda, Russia, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Ukraine, Uncategorized, USA, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

293 Responses to ICIG Michael Atkinson Attempts Four-Page Justification for Changing "Urgent Concern" Whistle-blower Guidelines…

  1. I have a simple question: Who does the ICIG report to? I mean, his entire authority is delegated from the executive authority of the President. Who are the middlemen between the ICIG and the source of his authority?

    • benifranlkin says:

      DNI Maguire? If so, he could change it back and say he never approved it.

      • BitterC says:

        To borrow a phrase, at this point, what difference does it make? Everything is out in the open and impeachment train chugs on,
        The whistleblower’s complaint is no longer needed. Kind of surprised Schiff wants to interview her. The only info of interest to be had is the names of the sources, but Schiff isn’t going to dig for those

      • rmramerica says:

        Is that why John Ratcliffe was stopped from being appointed DNI? Someone who would stop this nonsense? This is all sickening. Thanks to the Republicans in the Senate for standing strong with Trump and Ratcliffe.

        • The Akh says:

          Need to know who specifically pushed back on the appointment. I remember Ratcliffe saying he was socked by the resistance that came from some in the Republican party. Was Romney one of them?

        • littleanniefannie says:

          Need you ask about Ratcliffe? No way did the DemonRats and the IC cabal want Ratcliffe anywhere near the point of their next attack. They don’t want anyone with honor and integrity near their latest “dossier”.
          My fave from today was Nancy NoNo calling for “prayers for the President”. Some of those drugs on the streets of San Fran must have gotten into the water system and she OD’d on it mixing her drinks.

        • donna kovacevic says:

          Lindsey Graham makes me sick. Why does that govno go on Hannity and others and then when asked a question has that stupid smile, and waits then says something not even remotely close to what was being asked. Talking points I am sure I could do no big whoop same ole same ole. Lindsay tonight on Hannity was really pointless. What the hell is funny Missy that you have that idiotic smile on for. Boooo

    • iwasthere says:

      My understanding is that the IG’s are watchdogs and do not report or answer to the Agency chain of command – they report to the IG of the USA. How this man got this job – my understanding based on informed people is that a former McCain staffer is at the WH making these recommendations – and Trump will not fire the guy. Huge disappointment for MAGA. Of course McConnell will not put the Senate in recess – and therefore, Trump cannot make the many layer deep appointments (recess appointments) necessary to get control of these rouge agencies. So half of the problem is McConnells power trip.

      • todayistheday99 says:

        I thought that all it would take is one Senator to override the block on recess appointments which has not happened. Any experts out there that could fill us in on how it works?

        • Chump Change says:

          Sure. CommieKKKrats in power…recess appointments. China Mitch in power…too ethical to allow recess appointments. The idiot doesn’t realize his enemy has no ethics.

      • dscottv says:

        Maybe McConnell will loosen his grip during Trump’s second term.

      • Q&A says:

        “a former McCain staffer is at the WH making these recommendations”…
        Henry Kerner, Special Counsel?
        The United States Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is a permanent independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency whose basic legislative authority comes from four federal statutes: the Civil Service Reform Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, the Hatch Act, and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)…
        OSC’s primary mission is the safeguarding of the merit system in federal employment by protecting employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practices (PPPs), especially reprisal for “whistleblowing.” The agency also operates a secure channel for federal whistleblower disclosures of violations of law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; abuse of authority; and substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. (from Wiki)

      • Sherri Young says:

        Please ask your friend if he/she meant a former Boehner staffer, Johnny DeStefano. He left the WH. One of his clients is Juul.

  2. tdaly14 says:

    It’s an all out coup!

    • MACAULAY says:

      Been that for a long time.
      The amazing thing is that it is still going on. Very scary.

      • Louisiana Tea Rose says:

        Still going on.
        It sure is.
        No wonder Mollie Hemingway was smiling that smile tonight on Special Report as she sat quietly and listened to Stirewalt and Liasson crank out the liberal tripe.
        Canary, I would like you to meet my good friend Cat who is very happy to make your acquaintance.

    • donna kovacevic says:

      My husband who is not into American politics will come into my room when I watch and sit for a bit and listen. The other day they were talking about the WB hubby says there is no fn wb they made it all up. Well there you go and this from a Canadian.He keeps asking why do they hate the President so much what has he done? Then gets pissed and says he is doing good for the country working hard, not getting enough sleep, I hope it does not catch up with him. Ba$$$$ds these crooked politicans nothing but a bunch of banditos they don’t give a f…. about people Trump does. Then he really swore in serbian sounds so much more effective.I say God Bless PDJT.

  3. Somebody's Gramma says:

    Good. Another rat exposed.

  4. Paul says:

    The IG is a deep state smuck. No one will believe this crap.

  5. justlizzyp says:

    But- ‘everyone’ that matters said that claims the form had been changed were debunked and a conspiracy theory. (/Sarcasm)
    Now, I love a good conspiracy theory, but at some point all these coincidences become a ‘pattern of evidence.’ I think we hit that point about 2 years ago.

  6. cboldt says:

    All of Atkinson’s letters surrounding this scam remind me of the Weissman approach.

  7. doofusdawg says:

    The letter states that the form was the same as before. Then the rest of the letter states that the statute was more broad and describes how the complaint adhered to the law. Two diametrically opposed facts. Orwell.

  8. El Toro says:

    Time to get the circus cannon out for one Michael Atkinson, catch net not needed or wanted for this coup member.

  9. Bryan Alexander says:

    Just because the form was changed doesn’t mean it is OK. Citing “John Doe told me” as your ONLY evidence is completely ridiculous.

  10. Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

    Without a doubt this is a CYA for Atkinson, however, he states the form was revised May 24, 2018, four days before he “entered duty” as the ICIG on May 29, 2018.
    So who’s he trying to pin it on?

    • Raquel says:

      My dearly departed husband was a federal employee. One of the practices he fought vehemently was that of backdating forms when it suited. I wonder if and how often this practice fits into this whole scenario.

    • Lee Moore says:

      No you’ve got your years wrong. The form was revised in May 2018, a year before Atkinson arrived in May 2019. It has now been revised again in August 2019.
      The WB used the May 2018 version.

      • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

        I think you’d better reread it.
        Atkinson was sworn in May 17, 2018 and claims he “entered duty” (first day on the job), May 29, 2018.
        He claims the WB used the correct form, which was revised May 24, 2018.
        IOW, he’s claiming, in his statement, “everything was done by the book”.

        • Lee Moore says:

          You’re right on the dates and I’m wrong.
          However, no one (so far as I am aware) is claiimng that there’s anything fishy about the May 2018 form (which is the one the WB used.)
          The fishy smell is coming from the August 2019 form.

    • donna kovacevic says:


    • Kintbury says:

      I looked at the form on line. The printing date of the empty form is August 2019. When was it authorized and who authorized I?

  11. clr says:

    Hat tip –
    Steve Bannon is next guest on Trish Reagan show – Fox bus. channel.
    Could be interesting and related to topics above.

  12. Firefly says:

    Whistleblowers attorney Bakaj authored the regulations the CIA is required to follow to comply with President Barack Obama’s Presidential Policy Directive 19, designed to protect intelligence community whistleblowers with access to classified information.
    “Senior officials told him there was a “war” between the CIA’s inspector general and the intelligence community inspector general, and that CIA IG staff were “prohibited from cooperating” with the broader agency, Bakaj wrote.”

    • benifranlkin says:

      Bunch of gobbledygook

    • SAM-TruthFreedomLiberty says:

      Wow! Interestingly they’re not that many on the deep state team having to show up in several place and roles to keep this charade going.
      btw. that “war” reminds me of the real whistleblower from last year:
      “Clinton campaign planned to fire me over email probe, Obama intel watchdog says”

    • SharonKinDC says:

      Per Dr Piezniak, CIA is all ‘exempt’ (except maybe admin, so something like that) so there aren’t any whistleblower opportunities nor do they have the regular Fed Gov employee protections. Can be canned overnight. Perhaps Dr P is wrong, or Ozero did away with those policies?

      • Firefly says:

        Pieczenik is correct. The first hand is interpreted as the whistleblower turns himself in else it’s not first hand.
        Here’s what I suspect what happened. Under Obama the First-Hand req was status quo- blocking. Whistleblower. Suddenly Trump is elected. Now the Dem CIA IG says hey these forms need to comply with the law- knowing it will result in dem gov people filing out the wazoo. The IC community IG wants the status quo of throwing out complaints. Whistle blower files complaint. It looks like the IC mmunity IG is covering for Trump, not following law,..I could dream all sort of things to wreak havoc (don’t want to give ideas to the warped ones). It’s weaponization of WB complaint system= coup.

  13. It’s all summed up in the first full paragraph of page 3.

    • Peoria Jones says:

      Honestly – a four-page statement? Can you imagine the bodies and pay scales that were involved in that?
      At what point will these people stop digging their own holes? Do none of them have ANYONE decent in their lives who can tell them that the jig is up, and just do the right thing and stop the insanity?

  14. SAM-TruthFreedomLiberty says:

    Not much talk about it but Adam Schiff sent a staffer to Ukraine August 24th!
    An excursion organized by the ATLANTIC COUNCIL which is full of perpetrators of the Russia hoax(crowdstrike, Pinchuk, Hillary,..you name it) AND financed by BURISMA!
    http://clerk.house.gov/GTImages/ST/2019/500022181.pdf (travel disclosure form)
    I demand Schiff and his staffer to testify and show all communications they had in that timeframe!(treason?)

  15. Fishelsea says:

    Appointed and confirmed in 2018 by the Senate. We are literally pumping the swamp from one side of the pond to the other. Looks like the level isn’t dropping much at all. Top cia needs to be purged.

    • Fishelsea says:

      And thanks Sundance and crew, your explanations are always great.
      Tomorrow is a new quarter and a remittance is coming your way.

    • Bill Hollinger says:

      A retired CIA man was on Tucker saying the entire CIA needs to be investigated. His opinion is Trump is more than match for them. Hope he is correct.

  16. MakeAmericaGreat says:

    Yet another compromised member of the Deep State, in Atkinson.
    Just a side note about Bill Barr — his dad was in the OSS, which was the forerunner for the CIA. Complete with similar dirty tricks and propaganda campaigns and such. Barr, of course, also worked at the CIA himself.
    Thus, Barr should be fully aware of the kind of ruthless methods employed by the CIA (and others in the IC) against its opponents, including those opponents that happen to be domestic.
    I doubt any of this surprises Barr much. He’s probably seen it all before, one way or the other.

  17. Greg1 says:

    I love the smell of democrat desperation in the morning……….

  18. bofh says:

    Of all the people who perhaps should have recused themselves, Atkinson certainly stands out as the king of irony.

  19. Michael Kunz says:

    Sounds like the groundwork was laid before they decided to ‘find’ a ‘non witnessing whistleblower’, Trump is correct, this is spying.

  20. “Approaching target; open bomb bay doors; the bombardier has control of the craft.”

  21. ARW says:

    Hmmm…legal cat fight between ICIG and the DoJ whether the whistleblowers compliant was an urgent concern. Not sure what grounds the ICIG has in disputing the DoJs determination but perhaps it’s all set up with Pelosi mentioning Barr is covering up for Trump. The ICIG opinion will now be considered proof the DoJ can’t be trusted.

  22. Jeff says:

    We need Admiral Rogers to come out of retirement

  23. I’m starting to think that Democrats will be forced into an impeachment trial and it will be at their peril. https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/impeachment_bring_it_on_trump_can_put_the_dems_on_trial_in_the_senate.html

    • Battleship Wisconsin says:

      I’m repeating here what I said in an earlier comment on another thread about why the Democrats will go through with impeaching President Trump regardless of the considerable risk to themselves of doing it:
      VoteAllIncumbantsOut: “Why are the Democrats pushing so hard for impeachment knowing they are going to be destroyed from the fallout?”
      Zippy: “Because it further obfuscates a very complex scandal, gives their media allies all kinds of great headlines to further propagandize our idiocracy, and it will allow any findings released in pending reports to be classified as revenge and just an attempt to do what THEY, in fact, are doing – misdirect and obfuscate.”
      Zippy has written a good summary of why the Democrats will impeach President Trump even if they risk being destroyed from the political fallout.
      The best defense in a long-running political fight is to always stay on the offense. Impeaching the president is the most powerful and potentially rewarding means for staying continuously on the offense the Democrats have at their disposal.
      The Democrats may lose in the end, but they’ve judged correctly that the exceptional rewards of impeaching the president — if those rewards actually do materialize — are worth the extreme risks.
      That’s why I believe Nancy Pelosi and her staff of lawfare advisors have been driving the Democrat’s impeachment strategy and plan of action from the very beginning of Trump’s presidency in January, 2017.
      Her prior claims of being reluctant to pursue impeachment were a smokescreen to hide what she and her staff were doing behind the scenes to prepare for the oncoming battle of lawfare wits with President Trump.
      Nancy Pelosi well understands what risks she and her party must take if they are to prevail over Donald Trump and his army of deplorables. She is more than willing to take those risks.

    • Retired USMC says:

      That would be the smart play…I’ll bet POTUS has the nads to take at all the way. They would get crushed in a trail.

  24. Right to reply says:

    If you have to crawl to the ballot box in 2020 DO IT! I am sick to death of them. How dare they!

  25. Chris in Australia says:

    My Research shows the form was created on the 24th September, and modified on the 25th September. See the dates and times in the properties box.

  26. sickconservative says:

    Really all know that they already had it as they had written it at this point.

  27. Zippy says:

    ICIG whistleblower complaints ARE NOT supposed to include complaints against the POTUS.
    How many damned times do I need to post this?:
    Deleted Firsthand Knowledge Requirement For Whistleblowers Implicates Another Federal Agency – Was the ‘nonpartisan’ Congressional Research Service weaponized to force the House into a premature impeachment inquiry?
    30 Sep 2019
    The key paragraph from that excellent analysis:
    The omission of “current or former official described in clause (ii)” in the summary analysis provided by CRS is troubling, since when you cross-reference “clause (ii)” in the statute you learn that there are precisely three categories of people that would be subject to these two clauses—none of which includes the president of the United States.

    • felipe says:

      Zippy, you are welcome to repost this excellent info repeatedly. As you know, there are a lot of pieces to keep track of flying around right now. Repetition of salient points is a good thing (I guess, unless you are Sean Hannity).

    • Sprawlie says:

      Must Read and Share.Thank you for the link, Zippy.

  28. Jim Smith says:

    Ok, I’m lost. It’s the same form from May of 2018?
    Was it changed in August 2019, or not?

    • ARW says:

      I think we will find the process to change the form either started or finished in May 18 but ‘twas the implemented until it was needed.

  29. ARW says:

    There’s an all out war within and between government agencies. Unbelievable. And to think I’m living through it…

  30. JoeMeek says:

    Hersey is the stuff of lynch mobs. It belongs to the dark ages. Let the dark ages keep it.

  31. A2 says:

    The Cantonese have a phrase for this, 俾人砌生豬肉, which describes someone who has been accused of something without any proof, you would say that they “had someone build their raw pork” .

  32. 335blues says:

    It has gone on for three years! Three years!
    The patently obvious crimes have been exposed for a great portion of those three years!
    The perpetrators of the crimes have been known for the better part of those three years!
    Not all of the details are known to us mere citizens of this Republic (the ‘little people’),
    but we know an amazing amount of what has transpired, and continues to transpire!
    But know this:
    we will not sit down,
    we will not shut up,
    and we will not go away,
    we will continue to demand those who are desperately trying to destroy this country
    be held accountable for their crimes.
    We demand indictments for the coup perpetrators.

  33. ChampagneReady says:

    As Archie Bunker would say; It has feathers and web feet, therefore ipso fatso, it’s a duck.

  34. JoeMeek says:

    I though Inspector Generals were suppose to check for wrong doing, not commit it. What a sick and evil place that CIA is.

  35. Preppin247 says:

    The dims are way out over their skis on this one..all screaming impeach before any evidence..only hard core lefties buying this crap..we need Buford T. Pusser…sherriff Clark and a guillotine to clean up this mess

  36. Jf86 says:

    It’s all prima facie for those willing to look…and was so once the transcript was released. In a past life I was an IG and would have had to have first hand knowledge or a direct path to it (person, record, etc) else the complaint would have ended there. Unfortunately, no one is openly fighting for POTUS, and this gives cover for weak-kneed Republicans.

  37. GSparrow says:

    sundance’s article output and contributions are extraordinary and they keep his readers well informed as the fast changing news breaks. “Atkinson’s conflict-of-self-interest, and/or possible blackmail upon him by deep state actors….”
    Blackmail is a serious allegation but it’s not the President that is being accused for this crime so no further action or media attention will ensue except the ICIG’s deliberately inept “investigation” into the matter. Hopefully, OIG Horowitz is more honest and independent.
    Who recommended these back stabbing cutthroats to POTUS so they could join the active Coup against him? Can the “acting” ones like McGuire be easily replaced by a permanent appointee? McConnell et al sabotaged Rep Ratcliffe’s wise nomination by PT with ease and ended any reasonable chance to protect Trump from the evil cabal.

  38. MAGA???? says:

    First it was the ‘pi$s Dossier’ now we have the “Schiff Dossier”

  39. Proud American from Texas says:

    Swamp People on TV. The crusty Cajun fella has it right when they’re trying to catch the gators.
    “Choot him! Choot him!”
    No offense intended to my Louisiana neighbors!

  40. faridrushdi says:

    There comes a point in time where you must accept the fact that the Democrats are so dishonest that there isn’t much you can do to keep them from destroying you.
    Kevin Kline starred in a 1990’s movie “Dave,” where he was acting as president after the real president suffered a stroke. To get rid of him, a presidential aide publicly accused him of malfeasance, which the real president, and not him, was guilty of. He went public, admitted his guilt and took down his accuser in the process.
    I hope that if President Trump finds himself in a “no-win” situation, he uses any means at his disposal to destroy the Democrats. Open their FBI files. Find anything from anywhere from any decade that will make them radio-active. Find “anonymous” friends and family who are willing to tell unfavorable stories. These people aren’t being dishonest for the first time now. They must have histories.
    Use their tactics against them.

    • CountryDoc says:

      But that will destroy the integrity of the constitution and the republic. That is the advantage the devil has. He can lie, he can kill, but we have to follow the foundation we have faith in to preserve it — unless we declare war. Then the rules of engagement change.
      We must first find enforcers loyal to the constitution in executive and judicial branches, then we must turn them loose on those bent on destroying us.

  41. Terra says:

    Note the date of the complaint is August 12…the last paragraph of Atkinsons justification letter clearly states the form was effective AS OF AUGUST 12! Also Schiff already had all of this…he sent thr subpoena to Pompeo requesting the info directly involved with this call on September 9th!! Pelosi told reporters i believe this weekend that she knew the contents of the call…when she called for “A formal impeachment inquiry”! If you don’t believe this is a set up…u haven’t been paying attention to anything since 2016!

  42. Eaglemom says:

    The parsing in Atkinson’s letter gives me a headache. He states that,”in order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the ICIG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing. This includes information received from another person, such as when a fellow employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing was just additional information for the complainant and “background Information on ICWPA Process.” Um, okay, sure! They ignored standard procedure and got around it by saying this was not a requirement in the statute of the law. Lawfare at its best!!!

    • Lee Moore says:

      No. What you’re quoting is the explanatory blurb on the old May 2018 form, which the WB used.
      Atkinson is not claiming that that policy has changed, he claiming that it was complied with, because the WB ticked the box saying he had first hand knowledge and the ICIG confirmed (so he says) that he did have direct knowledge of some aspects of his complaint.
      Atkinson may be lying, or he may be telling the truth, or he may be saying something very very thinly defendable as true-ish (which is my bet) but he’s not saying he ignored the standard procedure.
      He is saying though that on reflection, after dealing with the WB complaint, he did decide that the old form was misleading as it could be incorrectly read to imply that you couldn’t send in a form with only second hand info. Which was never the rule. So he changed the form, to minimise future misunderstanding. But not the policy.
      So he’s admitting that the form was changed as a direct result of the WB’s complaint – confirming Steve McIntyre’s suspicion that there was a connection between the WB complaint and the form change. There was.
      But he is denying that the form was changed to assist the WB. Atkinson is saying that the WB used the old form and standard procedures were applied.

  43. WVNed says:

    Politicians are all blood suckers. It’s how they make a living. They are all teaming up to get trump so the blood can flow like it should. They don’t care about much else. This isn’t even a right left issue.
    The left can go full moonbat on Trump while the right just watches.
    Which is exactly what we have been seeing.

  44. icanhasbailout says:

    ICIG: “The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 isthe same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018”
    He’s claiming this complaint was received on the form that had printed all over it in bold and all caps that you needed first hand knowledge to be a valid whistleblower.
    It’s time we got the actual document with actual signature, if it exists. If the “whistleblower” exists as anything but a CIA-created fictional identity, which I am beginning to strongly doubt.

  45. Mike in a Truck says:

    “It’s a bit of a mind flip, as you enter the time slip,and nothing can ever be the same.Its a spaced out sensation,like your under sedation. Let’s do the Time Warp again…Lets do the Time Warp again.” – Rocky Horror Picture Show

  46. gary says:

    is the urgent concern statute a law or not? if its law,that sob can’t change squat? is it a law?

  47. Lee Moore says:

    I don’t think Sundance’s summary is accurate.
    The old form – which the whistleblower used – allows you to provide second hand info, and even has a box to tick for you to indicate this. However the whistleblower apparently ticked both the first hand and the second hand boxes. The old form starts with a preamble and a warning that the “Urgent Concern” cannot be treated as ‘credible” unless the ICIG has “first hand” knowledge. Unless the UC is “credible” it cannot get transmitted to Congress. So the “first hand” requirement is not to do with what you have to put on the form to get it accepted as an UC, it has to do with the threshold for “credible.” Moreover the warning about “first hand” does not require the whistleblower to supply first hand info, it merely requires that the ICIG possesses first hand info – ie he can get it from elsewhere than from the whistleblower.
    Atkinson then specifically states “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,
    Thus it is clear that :
    1. the whistleblower used the old form
    2. he ticked both first hand and second hand boxes
    3. Atkinson’s position is that he (Atkinson) had first hand knowledge of something relevant (though not the phone transcript)
    4. they changed the form afterwards</i. for subsequent complaints, nixing the warning about first hand and the threshold of credibility, based on their professed belief in the light of this whistelblower episode, that the old form was misleading
    So it's a top quality piece of weaselling by the ICIG. The pressure point is – what "first hand" knowledge did the ICIG have to pass the threshold of credibility ?
    The weaselling out route is much as I predicted on another thread recently.
    Legally this is all irrelevant, since the OLC determined that the complaint wasn't an "Urgent Concern" in the first place, under the law. But politically, though I think the ICIG's explanation is very weaselly, I don't think it is hand caught in the till embarrasing, so long as he did have something that could plausibly be called "first hand." But we don't know what this is.

    • icanhasbailout says:

      Here’s a twist: They aren’t allowed to change that form without going through OMB.
      Either there’s a paper trail of the change process, including how it was initiated and by whom, and what the arguments were for changing it… or this is another fraud.
      If that paper trail exists we need to see the whole thing.

    • mr.piddles says:

      “The old form – which the whistleblower used – allows you to provide second hand info, and even has a box to tick for you to indicate this.”
      I’m not so sure about this. I thought we saw screen shots f the May 2018 form that only had one checkbox.
      Let me try to check the Twitter history on this …

      • mr.piddles says:

        It’s hard to find… I could swear I saw a copy of the May 2018 form that had a single checkbox, and it was within a Tweet that somebody on CTH linked to. It was within the last couple of days, so I’ll have to go check past posts…

        • Lee Moore says:

          Here’s the form incuding the preamble about first hand stuff :
          But as you see from page 4 of the document (page 3 of the form) at the top under the heading “Part 2 Details of Your Discosure”, Qu.1 gives you three boxes to tick, including direct and second hand.
          According to Atkison’s story, the WB ticked both of the top two boxes.

          • Issy says:

            Why is everyone so hung up on the form? I don’t care who said what about the President’s call. In reading the transcript, I didn’t see anything wrong with what Trump said. Trump didn’t make Biden go on camera and tell the world about what he did. He wan’t digging up dirt on Biden, the former VP and his son dug that hole themselves, and now they have to lie in the dirt.

  48. umr_engnr says:

    It seems like the first order of business would have been to isolate these individuals.
    I always thought the best way to catch these guys would not be to investigate past crimes, which they had time to cover up and destroy evidence, but rather to catch them in current acts of resistance trying to protect themselves.
    Feign ignorance, give him an IG position, and feed him some bait that is irresistible.

  49. Bust DeepState says:

    Atkinson is in Deep Shit. This “splainer” is complete garbage. and what was this “Other Information” that ICIG claims to have “obtained” and from whom ?

    • WRB says:

      Probably something like “direct knowledge of the telephone number” or some such irrelevant info. They are definitely playing fast and loose here…they only have second-hand info on the important stuff, and (maybe) first-hand of irrelevant data. But the IG can say there was both first and second hand info.
      These people are corrupt and dangerous, and should be treated with extreme prejudice.

      • WhiteBoard says:

        RECIEVE leak that contains FIRST HAND knowledge; and voila you are a second hand hearsay person that is “Credible” according to Deep State Atkinson – who only needs to read FIRST HAND information LEAKED to him to meet statutory requirements in his mind.

        • Meagara says:

          If I read correctly the 4 page letter states the former form had BOTH the no hearsay language AND the two boxes. And the WB checked both boxes.
          CT should get and publish a full copy of the prior form to see if that’s true.

      • ms doodlebug says:

        Now that ‘hearsay’ is acceptable, maybe we should all start whistleblowing? According to Michael Atkinson, it may be our duty as inhabitants of the United States to report what we ‘hear’, like the divisive, dangerous lies flowing so freely from the mouths of democrats. “Over 240 years ago, on July 30, 1778, the Continental Congress unanimously enacted the first whistleblower legislation in the United States, proclaiming that “it is the duty of all persons in service of the United States, as well as all other the inhabitants thereof, to give the earliest information to Congress or other proper authority of any misconduct, frauds or misdemeanors committed by any officers or persons in the service of these states, which comes to their knowledge.” https://www.dni.gov/ICIG-Whistleblower/?utm_source=Feature%20Link&utm_medium=Home%20Page
        We do want to be good citizens…

        • jebg46 says:

          Perhaps “We the People” can submit a complaint because we have been witnessing a coup against President Trump for3 years.

          • Lester Smith says:

            CIA weaselblower covert name is special agent heard it from the grape vine. The weaselblower stated he filed the reported after he heard from a friend who heard it from a friend you been fooling around

    • WhiteBoard says:

      RECIEVE leak that contains FIRST HAND knowledge; and voila you are a second hand hearsay person that is “Credible” according to Deep State Atkinson – who only needs to read FIRST HAND information LEAKED to him to meet statutory requirements in his mind.

  50. pucecatt says:

    This crap is starting to scare me , I pray for some divine intervention from somebody soon .. God Bless President Trump ??

  51. Bubby says:

    I wish President Trump would forward this post of Sundance to ICIG Michael Atkinson with a note read this and please be at the White House first thing Monday morning and be prepared to discuss it!

    • chipin8511 says:

      “Greatest Trick the Devil Ever Pulled Was Convincing the World He Didn’t Exist”.The Dems greatest trick is convincing everyone that they have the best interest of the country at heart, that they are morally right, and conservatives are evil. We are at war in this country. Dems don’t want you to believe that they are behind it. They have the media on their side.
      Think for yourself and do not believe anything you hear from the left.

      • G. Alistar says:

        Yep, and the dirty cops, Lawfare cabal, dems in general are betting that there is a “sucker born every minute”— and they vote for democrats! Keep in mind that the vast majority of the population done have a clue about all these details here at the CTH. That’s why smart people act foolish.

    • chipin8511 says:

      CIA coup in progress Gina Haspel must go

      • Fishelsea says:

        Chipin8511, nice call on Atkinson and Carlin connection. Thank you

      • littleanniefannie says:

        “CIA coup in progress Gina Haspel must go”
        Along with everyone else in the C(oup)IA

      • wightmanfarm says:

        Hmmm, did Trump appoint Gina Haspel? Why yes, I believe he did.

        • iconoclast says:

          What is your point? His appointment has to make past the corrupt Senate Intelligence Committee. The president’s options are limited.

            • JunkerGeorg says:

              Why not?

            • oldumb says:

              So you think Haspel is really a white hat, or POTUS is a black hat? You really haven’t made any point.

            • GB Bari says:

              There were very few candidates with the breadth, length and depth of Haspel’s experience at the time PDJT need to replace the C_A Director since he wanted Pompeo as SoS.
              Pompeo had appointed Haspel as Deputy Director of the C_A in 2017. Pompeo had spoken very glowingly about Haspel at that time.
              McCain opposed Haspel, Feinstein (Vice Chair of the SSIC) was on the fence. Pompeo spoke highly of her. President Trump had no other candidates recommended to him who had anywhere near Haspel’s experience and backing..
              After she spoke to Haspel at length in several private meetings, Feinstein finally signaled she would approve Haspel even though Feinstein had voted against Haspel in 2013 for a previous promotion because of Haspel’s association with a black site where prisoners were allegedly tortured and beaten. Feinstein represented a needed vote in the Senate.
              Personally I don’t like Haspel’s background either but my knowledge is limited to what’s available on the web, so unless someone is sandbagging here, I don’t believe any of us have the inside knowledge and C_A experience to know who was a better candidate than Haspel at the time (March of 2018) the President needed a new Director.

            • QCM says:

              Don’t feed the trolls

          • Kintbury says:

            The same Republican Senators who said Obama was entitled to his nominees are the same ones stopping President Trump from having his.

      • Rowdyone says:

        If the CIA is limited to foreign, not domestic, ops that explains the Ukraine connection for Crowdstrike and Clinton server. And has there ever been any other CIA whistleblowers? If so are they still alive? Will this one survive once he has testified?

  52. Aintree says:

    I wonder what sundance thinks of this rumor or possible truth:
    “President Trump may bring back former Chief Strategist Steve Bannon and former Campaign Manager Corey Lewandowski” to fight the impeachment barrage. (FNC Outnumbered)
    They are both effective fighters for sure. I think Bannon has learned about trusting any MSM reporter.

  53. todayistheday99 says:

    From Sundance’s timeline the wb requirements were changed shortly after after the WB letter was received.

  54. Michael in Dublin says:

    There is a judge who is going to expose all of this much sooner than many people would like.

  55. M33 says:

    Forgive my ignorance:
    Where can I read the “hearsay-whistlerblower” report?
    I read the phone call, but not the other and I want to compare.
    Thanks for any help!

  56. Sammy Hains says:

    Can the same same precedent that prevented Congress from getting documents during the Mueller investigation keep Congress from getting documents while the Durham investigation is ongoing?
    …Or at least force Pelosi to hold a vote of the full House to open an impeachment inquiry to get said documents?

  57. redline says:

    Atkinson finds himself in a position of possessing a considerable amount of knowledge that would damage his masters, yet having very little to offer them in terms of future value.
    Recent history suggests he should sleep with one eye open, and be wary when alone.

  58. sarasotosfan says:

    What is the number of days over/under that Atkinson announces his departure?

  59. Jive Pawnbroker says:

    My response to Atkinson’s justification for the whistleblower criteria change? Two words:
    Sure, Jan.

  60. Disruptor says:

    How is the fake whistleblower complaint credible when the so-called whistleblower lied by checking the “first-hand knowledge” box?

    • littleanniefannie says:

      And justified it with so many examples in the complaint.
      With this sterling example, I think we all ought to file whistleblower’s complaints on Obama. They will be about on par!

    • WRB says:

      I guess they have “first-hand knowledge”, for example, they saw a record showing the time and date of when the telephone call was made. That means the IG can say there was first-hand knowledge that supported the credibility of the leaker–err–whistle blower.
      But I would still come down like a ton of bricks on these SOB’s

  61. Mr. T. says:

    I Call Bullshit. Atkinson, like the demodummies in Congress, might think we’re stupid, but they are in for one hell of surprise next year.

  62. Laure says:

    Who the heck is advising President Trump on these picks? It says Atkinson was a “Trump appointee”…this comes up all the time and it is very frustrating and tough to defend…isn’t anyone available to vet these clowns? Stephen Miller maybe… Isn’t anyone available for these appointments who is not compromised? Even Maguire (who was not very impressive during his hearing) seems compromised…

  63. Chump Change says:

    Atkinson is a far left wing Cornell University alumni…of course he’s trying to impeach Trump…DUH!

  64. FPCHmom says:

    Much better letter is the one sent by republican congress people demanding an explanation for this.
    If this letter is in response to their’s, it is completely unsatisfactory. They asked for a lot of information about the form and the changes. It is worth reading.

    • Fishelsea says:

      So the whistle blower filed his complaint on a form that wasn’t available until 12 days later. It’s a miracle. Just good old dnc luck.

  65. TigerBear says:

    And yet another who pops their head up above the weeds. Exposure to light brings many slimy crawlers into view.
    The swamp has overplayed its hand with we the people. Many are waking up and many more have already awaken.
    God bless keep guide and protect our President and Nation ?
    KAG 2020 ??

  66. Don McAro says:

    the Federal Register Act requires agencies to publish in the Federal Register include:
    · executive orders and proclamations;
    · documents of general applicability and legal effect
    any other documents that Congress requires.
    The act also requires that these documents are made available for public inspection
    And someone changed the whistle blower form to “include second hand information”

    • ..general applicability and legal effect … I’d say that this change most certaily has legal effect. Can the modification be challenged and the complaint rejected as a result? Asking our resident lawyers ..

        • Don McAro says:

          An example of this… I work for a major news organization…They spent the day visiting the the Federal Register Act, this is because actual information came to light that the form was changed. They have been looking into this..and are taking their time. but it is big buzz.
          I have heard people actually say, it maybe a problem. I have heard people use the example I have been using, and comparing it to the republicans changing the census forms the day before they were mailed out
          Just my take and info

          • CET says:

            By your own admission, you have heard people say there may be a problem. You have thus disobeyed the unmistakable instructions of the Great Prophet Brennan, peace be upon him, to take upon you the very form upon which we dwell, complete the assignment to spill filth upon Trump, pigs be upon him, smoked with the finest bastings, and to completely deliver and insert the blessed form, such that a certain pair of eyes completely vacate their sockets. Then will Peace be upon you.

  67. ChampagneReady says:

    Trump has to switch his effort from draining the swamp. It’s much worse than a swamp. He has to clean out the barn.
    Farmers will get the reference.

  68. mr.piddles says:

    Check it… MSM are now spinning the “oh, the form looks like it was changed, but that was no big deal because it was confusing” angle…

  69. Merkin Muffley says:

    Just like Susan Rice’s Inauguration Day email, this is a last minute CYA. Too little, too late.

  70. Mark W says:

    President Trump and AG William Barr promised to investigate the origins of the Russia Hoax, now the democrats want to impeach

    • Bogeyfree says:

      Russia Gate and now Whistleblower Gate is all mid level managers within the Shake Down Syndicate Corporation directed to distract and take down PT ASAP in order to protect the senior executives before Barr exposes the real abuse.
      It’s always been about the power, influence, control and $$$$$$$$$$$

    • barney says:

      Thanks for the link brother.

  71. mr.piddles says:

    Here’s how you know the IC IG is in Deep State Deep Doo-Doo…
    The ever-reliable Internet Wayback Machine captures snapshots of URLs. And it’s pretty useful, BTW. So does it provide a copy of the IC IG “Disclosure of Urgent Concern Form”?
    Why, yes. Yes it does. It has *one* snapshot: September 30th, 2019. No other snapshots going back to 1996.
    (safe link)
    Can’t make this s-word up, people.

  72. deplorable says:

    To sum it all up: the forms were changed to support this “whistleblower” complaint.
    Atkinson needs to go.
    And Trump needs to eliminate the entirety of the CIA.

  73. Boots says:

    This link was posted above. Here it is again with excerpt. You really ought to read the whole thing. It’s very good. And I think the author is right that Guilliani may or may *not* be the right attorney to quarterback Trump’s defense. Tom Fitton would be a good choice maybe. Sekulow, of course. Larry Klayman, also.
    FTA (excuse the length, it’s just too good to cut short)

    The president’s defense in the Senate, accordingly, must engage, spotlight, scrutinize and expose the entire course of odious conduct by the president’s corrupt attackers, from their first spinning of the Russia collusion hoax,through the latest chapter in their attempted coup.
    Everything will be relevant in the Senate trial, and everyone, no exceptions, should be subpoenaed and interrogated under oath. That means Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Brennan, James Comey, Peter Strzok, and the entire gang behind the coup.
    That includes Strzok, his girlfriend Lisa Page, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and whatever Deep State apparatchiks lied to the FISA judge to enable a spying operation on the Trump campaign and transition team — a crime without precedent and one that massively outweighs anything that could credibly be alleged against President Trump.
    Here is the most important benefit of this broad and aggressive approach to the president’s defense: in confronting all those who have ceaselessly sought to reverse the 2016 election, President Trump’s legal team this time will have a critical tool thus far denied them: the power to subpoena any and all persons, including all those who were elbow-deep in the Russia collusion hoax. Unlike during the feeble and tedious investigation conducted by the Washington elite’s chosen operative, Robert Mueller, every single such person will be sworn and aggressively, publicly interrogated under penalty of perjury, by formidable trial counsel.
    After Robert Mueller’s two-and-a-half-year Russia collusion goose egg, it would be seen as an outrage to deny the president the right to tell the full story that lies behind this latest chapter in the Democrats’ three-year attempted putsch.
    President Trump needs to promptly assemble a highly professional team of tough, seasoned lawyers, who will all have to be well compensated for the huge professional and personal risk they will be taking — we have seen time and again what the deep state tries to do to the president’s prominent supporters. A defense fund for the president would be oversubscribed in two weeks.
    Giuliani, as loyal as he has been, may or may not be the right person to assemble this team.
    The team needs to be put together quickly, and to promptly announce to the world that the Senate trial, if there is one, will focus on, and expose, the entirety of the Democrat/corrupt federal bureaucracy’s anti-constitutional efforts to bring this President down. Many who breathed deep sighs of relief when Robert Mueller threw in the towel are going to be sweating again.
    When McConnell announces the scope of the allowable defense and how long the process will go on as Democrat dirt emerges, Ms. Pelosi may become concerned about how many of her party could be destroyed by the process. She may go so far as to as to think better of going forward. If so, fine — the Dems, once again, as in the Russia hoax, will look like fools. If, on the other hand (and much more likely), she proceeds (into the moving blades of this propeller) so much the better for the President.

  74. evergreen says:

    Uh, the guy who funded his own presidential campaign…?
    That guy? Soliciting a campaign contribution?

  75. sickconservative says:

    Really this will be the final fail, they have nothing but created lies.
    Now watching the media and D crash is going to be popcorn worthy, enjoy the show at this point as they are starting to realize ever so slowly that they are screwed.

  76. bayrat65 says:

    Four pages of lawyer talk!! Good for nothing, well maybe for wiping ones behind. The lawyer class can justify anything, with their fancy words. We need action and movement on this plan to impeachment of our President. No more talk, I’m past being concerned, I’m pissed off!!! Write and call your congress people. I’m to old to go to Washington to protest. But I can talk and scream.

  77. littleanniefannie says:

    So upon rereading the whistleblewit’s Report, I discovered that the first-hand knowledge that was obviously came from one of these officials involved in the corruption: U(p). S(hitcreek) Officials, N(vented). Y(ucked up crap) Times, obviously provided classified documents to the whistleblewit and I can only wonder if the whistleblewit provided copies of these documents to Asskissing (Dim).
    How can he check first hand knowledge and then not provide anything but hearsay? ICIG Asskissing blewit too!

  78. Katherine McCoun says:

    Why is he called “Mr. Trump” v. President Trump by so many “news” outlets? SO obviously biased

    • donna kovacevic says:

      I get so pissed when I hear some not refer to him as President and he is not even my president. That creep Brennan refers to him as Mr. and so did this idiot Atkinson. When I hear anyone say Mr. that means they are not for him, but against him for sure. What next they will be calling him The Donald. I have never seen anyone so disrespectful as these “Govnari” smh.

  79. jus wundrin says:

    Yep, and a senate committee will be all over this!
    …as soon as they get permission from mr. donahue.

  80. Heika says:

    So we have a problem it seems with the ‘respected’ Mr Horowitz – here

  81. Heika says:

    I have always thought.. that when it was stated to be for ‘certain’ that the gossipblower was a man, that it was probably a woman… ? https://twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1177653633036500993

  82. wightmanfarm says:

    “Mr. Atkinson, a Trump appointee,”
    I repeat, Trump’s horrible swamp-creature appointments may very well finish him. How can anyone defend these jaw dropping appointments?

    • amjean says:

      Perhaps you could do a better job; there may be an application process

    • jebg46 says:

      A good part of the spygate cabal scheme is to intimidate anyone who even considers working for President Donald J Trump so he can’t find reliable people, plus all his nominations being held up in Congress on purpose. I remember reading how many years it would take to get them approved at the rate they are going but it was way past 2 terms.
      This is war. This Ukraine coup was timed close to 2020 so they could accuse him of Election interference even though PDJT is investigating 2016 election cycle. They think we are stupid. NOT.

  83. So when are the Republicans going to start to use these same tactics against the left? This is getting ridiculous.

    • They can’t – they are brothers in arms (of each other).

    • Bill says:

      Because he has a limited pool of people to choose from. So somebody in his camp probably giving their best educated guess as to which appointee may be the least duplicitous. Just a guess at this point, because it keeps happening.

    • jus wundrin says:

      When the repubs had the congress, the dems called them the do nothing congress. I think they are right in one sense because when something needs to be really investigated, the repubs do nothing.

      • jebg46 says:

        Many Republicans are implicated in the swamp corruption and spygate. Otherwise at least one senator would vote against McConnell’s no recess appointments.

    • donna kovacevic says:

      Miss Lindsey said he would like to see someone investigate it. Really pederu what are you getting paid for? Oh he smiled a lot on Hannity nauseating evil traitor Lindsey is. I would again trust President V. Putin before Lindsey and the rest of them. God Bless PDJT.

  84. Bogeyfree says:

    IMO mid level managers following orders and desperate to take down PT to protect the senior executives before Barr exposes The Shake Down Syndicate.

  85. littleanniefannie says:

    BTW Sundance, this is the Schitt Dossier, not the Schiff Dossier!

  86. Lulu says:

    This man belongs in prison for the rest of his life.

  87. logboom says:

    Wrong analogy to refer to D.C. as the swamp. It’s more like a version of dystopian creatures in a zombie movie who never die and are everywhere. And the survivors endlessly in survivor mode while wiping out hoards of blood and gut thirsty zombies.

  88. California Joe says:

    What’s truly amazing is that IG Michael Atkinson sees a three year attempt by the FBI, DOJ and CIA to frame the President of the United States for a crime that not only he didn’t commit but a crime that never even happened using intelligence agency personnel and sources such as the illegal unmasking of hundreds of Americans, FBI and DOJ officials making false statements on sworn affidavits to the FISA Court, masquerading American sources overseas as Russian agents, allowing Samantha Power at the UN to unmask opponents of Palestinian autonomy and Atkinson does nothing about any of it. On the other hand he bends over backwards to facilitate a coup on President Trump because he spoke to the Ukrainian President about cooperating in an OFFICIAL investigation by AG Barr. Didn’t Atkinson bother to contact AG Barr and verify the legitimacy of Barr and Durham’s investigation before deciding the whistle-blower was “creditable”…..?

  89. GB Bari says:


  90. spoogels says:

    If ‘hearsay’ is not regarded as evidence in a court of law and is often struck down by the presiding judge, why would “hearsay’ now suddenly be allowed as a legitimate source of a complaint?
    Could it be challenged in court?

    • BitterC says:

      I have gotten pretty good at parsing weasel-speak.
      They say they never rejected form b/c based solely on second-hand info. It is quite possible they never got a 2nd hand complaint before since it was against their policy.
      It would have been more convincing to say that they have, indeed, processed 2nd hand complaints in the past

  91. Garavaglia says:


  92. islandpalmtrees says:

    A woman detailed to the WHITE house by Brennan. A leaker not a Whistle Blower. With no, direct knowledge of the call per Laura Ingram’s guess. We also know, from the news reports that she when back to the CIA in the May, July, August time frame.
    This should be more than enough for Gina Haspel to spot.

    • BitterC says:

      I don’t necessarily believe the leaker was current CIA and returned there. I think that was just a NYT anonymously sourced claim. Could be to throw us off track?
      If Schiff is serious about deposing the leaker then I don’t believe they will stay anonymous

  93. LULU says:

    Julie Kelly at American Greatness wrote this interesting take on Atkinson:
    She outlines Atkinson’s history with John Carlin who was Mueller’s chief of staff. Etc., etc. Very cozy. And there’s more. Apparently Natasha Bertrand, of whom SD has written, is a “cooing” fan of Atkinson…

  94. spoogels says:

    If the employee is in the FBI/C_A/NSA, they have no whistleblower protection.

  95. Huck Hayseed says:

    My sense is the dems know this is a long shot but will set the boundary for investigating candidates in their advantage. Then dems take out Joe with feigned regret and on jumps Hillary to save us all.
    But remember the new boundary. We will have a constitutional crisis hysteria leading to a selected judge saying the investigation has to be frozen until after the election. Next thing you know, all MCCabe Yates Comey and other cases have to be protected until after the election.

  96. spoogels says:

    Ukraine Mystery: Schiff Staffer Made August Visit for Think Tank Backed by Hunter Biden’s Old Employer
    Schiff signed the travel forms
    Another member of the team is David J. Kramer, a long-time adviser to late Senator John McCain who served at the McCain Institute for International Leadership as senior director for human rights and democracy.
    Links to CrowdStrike, McCain Operative in ‘Pee’ Dossier Scandal

  97. Paul Sperry sounding the alarm on Horowitz: From the article-
    Horowitz, moreover, is married to a former political activist who helped run campaigns for liberal Democrats before producing programming for CNN out of its Washington bureau.
    His wife is a CNN producer….OMG
    Follow the wives, as some wise person said.
    So this is what we’re up against. They’re all connected to each other in some way. I guess that’s why Mumbles Pelosi said Barr had gone rogue.

  98. neev1031 says:

    Some thoughts & questions (Sundance – Methinks Mr Atkinson doth protest too much):
    (Apologies for length & any grammatical errors)
    – OLC debunked: statutory compliance & DNI / ICIG authority over POTUS
    – that 5/24/18 form ‘requests (page 2)’ first hand info is wrong (guidance language is ‘must’)
    – ‘need not possess first hand info in order to file’, Filing is not the issue – approval rate is not listed.
    – ‘ICIG cannot add conditions’: he only reduced the threshold
    – has been accepting second-hand info since 5/29/18. God knows how many in the IC have suffered by now
    – ‘authorized access to info & sources’, ‘direct knowledge of certain conduct’ & ‘subject matter expertise’ – How could career CIA person with ‘expertise’ think that PDJT’s talks with world leaders has ‘nothing to do with national security [claim on use of top secret server]’ but is of vital national security interest because of items discussed [claim on foreign election interference]?
    – did May 24, 2018 form have two boxes to check off? With an explicit guidance – ‘ICIG must be in possession of reliable first hand information’? I found one page with the link Sundance provided. Anyone have the complete form rev 05/24/18’
    – claiming direct knowledge is the only path to bypassing the CIA IG & filing direct with the ICIG
    – ‘did not find that … could provide nothing more than second hand info ..’ Page 2 – just the date of the call from a WH announcement would qualify under this standard.
    – the new forms were not available to the f’ing CIA mole (page three ‘in response to recent press inquiries regarding the instant whistleblower complaint ….. has developed three new forms …. now available on the ICIG’s open website …’)
    This is how great civilizations die – those entrusted with so much have no focus beyond self.

    • Dogbert says:

      Maybe we could all turn in whistle blower complaints to the IG and attach some of Sundances’ work.

      • Matt Bracken says:

        Don’t call him a “whistle blower,” he’s not.
        Call him what he is, a designated CIA hearsay leaker.

    • Terra says:

      And it also had to be first hand knowledge to be considered an Urgent concern TO be given to congressional oversight committees!
      It also says last paragraph that the form was effective AS OF August 12..the day the complaint was filed. But they had been looking at it due to media inquiries??? This guy is part of it…but the leak is real…news is fake.

    • Orbanista says:

      ‘did not find that … could provide nothing more than second hand info ..’
      This is of course not inconsistent with “We did not find that he or she COULD provide more than second hand info.”

  99. Liberty ONE says:

    Waterboard Atkinson and get the info. In fact, waterboard ALL of these evil , corrupt DS POS”!

  100. J.Thomas says:

    The CIA has gone rogue.
    Its time to contain it.
    They are waging open war.

    • jeff montanye says:

      what gets me is why the fbi and the cia (nsa, dia, state intelligence service, etc. etc.) thought it was such a good idea to ally themselves institutionally with the democratic party, and attack without cause or mercy, the republican president of the u.s..
      my observation over the last fifty years or so is that the democratic party base is not a natural fit with these agencies whereas that of the republican party is. i realize the key players, the likud mossad, will switch hit but the parties do have a reality in the eyes of their bases.
      so how does this end? i voted democratic or (twice) libertarian before trump back to mcgovern but i swear i believe trump has the law and the facts on his side on all the fronts that involve real lawbreaking, so he might win. he’s getting more popular so he might even be reelected. the idiot dems are even giving him an excuse, his impeachment, to use to blame a market downturn and a recession on. so then what is the move by the fbi and the cia? trump doesn’t like the bush family or that administration generally. after he litigates crossfire hurricane and possibly uranium one, he may have done enough voter education and consciousness raising to see what the fbi and the cia might have had to do with 9-11.
      can’t really say stranger things have happened though.

    • Patrick Healy says:

      That politically correct appointment to head the SeeAyeah was a top spy in the US embassy in London during the Blair regime.
      She was pushed up the ladder by none other than that renegade Catholic/Marxist/Muslin Brennan.
      Is that not reason enough to cry to the heavens for justice?

  101. J.Thomas says:

    The Democrats are obstructing Barrs investigation. Clearly that’s what this is about.
    They’re trying to close Barr’s access to these foreign networks exploited by the CIA and the Bidens. Its obstruction.
    The republicans need to get on message and begin bringing obstruction charges against these people, beginning with Adam Schiff.
    Its time to bring an end to this lawless destruction and these shenanigans. Its time they get the Manafort treatment.

  102. mathew listerud says:

    I’m not computer literate enough to confirm the attached information, but there are people out there saying that the PDF of the “Disclosure of Urgent Concern” form has been doctored, post factum, concerning the acceptance of 2nd hand information.
    Maybe there are others out there that can look at it and give their opinion?

  103. itsy_bitsy says:

    Another very rotten conspirator rises to the top of this stinking brew!

  104. Merkin Muffley says:

    I read the memo, and it is the sleaziest con job I ever heard from a public servant. Lies are being used to move the goal line after the team failed on fourth and goal.

    • covfefe999 says:

      That’s right, moving the goal line. It reminds me of all of the libtard crybabies who keep insisting that Hillary won the election because she was awarded more total votes. It’s not how it works, crybabies. I always say, the winner of a foot race is not the one who takes the most steps, it’s the person who crosses over the finish line first.

  105. Oregonminer says:

    The entire rational by the ICIG is bogus.
    Read the Scope and Authority of the ICIG in 50 USC 3033 (b) (1). By the charging statements given in 50USC 3024 ; Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence, section (f) (A) (i), Tasking and other authorities, the DNI only has authority over the Intelligence Community. The Intelligence Community is defined in USC 3003 (4). This DOES NOT include the POTUS. and in fact 50USC 3024 (f) (1) (B) (i), states :
    (B) The authority of the Director of National Intelligence under subparagraph (A) shall not apply—
    (i) insofar as the President so directs;.
    The ICIG authority is limited to employees of the Intelligence Community within the responsibility and authority of the DNI. See 50USC 3033 (b) (1). As stated in section (a), he is the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community, not he executive branch.
    The ICIG conveniently ignores the constraints to his authority listed in 50USC 3033 (g) (3):
    (3) The Inspector General is authorized to receive and investigate, pursuant to subsection (h), complaints or information from any person concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence constituting a violation of laws, rules, or regulations, or mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to the public health and safety. Once such complaint or information has been received from an employee of the intelligence community—
    The complaint can only be ” …. concerning the existence of an activity within the authority and responsibility of the Director of National Intelligence…. The actions of the POTUS are not subservient to the DNI, and are in fact the other way around; The DNI reports to the President. The
    All of the other BS in the ICIG justification is smoke and dust designed to misdirect, trying to give his actions the color of law. He violated the law by accepting the complaint in the first place, and is now trying to make it appear that he had no choice.
    The ICIG is a swamp creature, through and through. He may have even had a hand in setting this up and writing the so called “whistle blower” report. The question is: where does the DNI stand?

  106. Matt Hay says:

    There explanation about media requests might make sense if it wasn’t changed before any of the releases. If nothing had yet been released, how could there have been media inquiries. Unless of course ICIG is either clairvoyant or lying.

  107. Doug J says:

    Even though they’ve been successful overseas, this is the first time I can remember the CIA trying to Overthrow the duly elected Administration of the USA.

  108. Kae Mechiso says:

    Federal employees and contractors have access to an anonymous 1-800 snitch line to report waste, fraud and abuse in government. A whistle blower should have first hand knowledge of the events they report and thus require that their identity be kept private.

  109. Here is the cite for an actual court decision interpreting the Intelligence Community Whistle Protection Act (ICWPA). Interesting that the court mentioned “whether the President has a personal duty/authority regarding individual whistleblowers.
    And here is the link to the HPSCI Report mentioned in the Czarowski case


    “””The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 isthe same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018, which went into effect beforeInspector General Atkinson entered on duty as the Inspector General of the IntelligenceCommunity on May 29, 2018, following his swearing in as the Inspector General of theIntelligence Community on May 17, 2018.”””
    So the form was changed 1.5 years ago?? True or false?

  111. In any case, this change renders the whistleblower rules utterly worthless – transforming them into an avenue for personal vendettas (as in this very case …) while simultaneously robbing them of being something that, say, a Court of Law could act upon.
    If the whistleblower, by the act of submitting the complaint, effectively swore under oath that (s)he had personally witnessed wrongdoing, then this could be used in Court. But as things stand now, any Tom, Dick, or Harriett who “just didn’t like you” could now flood the department with … graphic novels … and demand to be heard. Their complaints become an easy mechanism for revenge or harassment (as in this very case …), and in this way the whistleblower system becomes unmanageable and worthless.
    “Nice goin’, Tex …” Reckon there was a good reason why the rules were so-carefully written as they were, before you went and f*cked it up?

  112. Oregonminer says:

    The president is NOT an employee of the Intelligence Community. See definitions at :
    5USC 2105 and 5USC 6301. The definition of Intelligence Community is given in 50 USC 3003 (4):
    Intelligence community
    (4) The term “intelligence community” includes the following: (A) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence. (B) The Central Intelligence Agency. (C) The National Security Agency. (D) The Defense Intelligence Agency. (E) The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. (F) The National Reconnaissance Office. (G) Other offices within the Department of Defense for the collection of specialized national intelligence through reconnaissance programs. (H) The intelligence elements of the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, the Coast Guard, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Department of Energy. (I) The Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the Department of State. (J) The Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of the Treasury. (K) The Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security. (L) Such other elements of any department or agency as may be designated by the President, or designated jointly by the Director of National Intelligence and the head of the department or agency concerned, as an element of the intelligence community.
    The president does not work for, nor is an employee of any of the listed entities.
    The so called “whistle blower” complaint has to be about/against someone in the Intelligence Community, only. The ICIG has no jurisdiction over something that happened in say, as example the Department of the interior, a governor of a state, a Senator, or the President. The ICIG Mr. Atkinson knowingly exceeded his authority/jurisdiction.
    The complaint and acceptance by the ICIG is as bogus as a three dollar bill.

  113. Oregonminer says:

    Don’t get embroiled in the details, until you see if the initial Code section charging statements apply. The charging statements limit the ICIG authority to ONLY the Intelligence Community. See 50 USC 3033. NOTHING below the charging statements applies to this case, because it is NOT in the ICIG authority, Period.

  114. Laura (KuhlBrieze) says:

    A collective effort in compiling the ‘whistleblower’ concerns (the concerns being entirely subjective on the blowers part) if Lawfare took part, can seem valid if one looks at the content of the report, sentence construct, and what appears as inclusion of every possible keyword to cover every aspect. However, I am going to take the liberty of taking this a step further.
    I was reminded of the NYT article, ‘I Am A Member Of The Resistance……”. My first impressions were 1) this was “Brennan speak” (construct, key phrases), and 2) there was no sign of life. My own take on the NYT piece was that this was algorithm based. Innocous yet a bit too inclusive regarding keyword coverage.
    I cannot help but consider that this blower report may be the same. A report from one absent, yet informed albeit by overheard verbiage which became cause for ‘concern’ then reporting to the IG.
    The IG’s 4 pager, is at best, mediocre (and verbose) in its attempt to make some sort of logical sense out of something totally illogical to begin with.
    I would be a tad befuddled, but the IG’s ‘this is why I decided…’ is classic counter to cognitive dissonance (as if there is any sense to be made out of this gobblygook at all). Heck, even Adam Schiff had to ad lib .. on the record no less!

  115. BigTalkers says:

    I’ve heard “hearsay” reporting is in contravention the whistleblower statute itself.
    Is this so…?

  116. RICHARD Pollak says:


  117. Darrell W says:

    This is just more evidence that the Deep State anti-Trumpers are still infested in our government. I read this morning on brassballs.blog that Peter Strzok’s wife is in charge of the Clinton Foundation investigation. That explains why there is no Clinton Foundation investigation.

  118. Pokey says:

    Adam Schiff is a turd. Everything he has touched has a foul odor. I hate this treasonous political party hack and I hope he ends up in Hell, where he belongs.
    I have the same opinion of the vast majority of the unelected federal bureaucrats who live off of the generosity of the deplorable taxpayers of our country. What a usefully idiotic collection of toadies. They hold secret committee meetings to plot their political charades. They never do any work, unless you count the endless variety of feel good seminars they attend. As a rule I never believe a word any of them produce and I usually find out my predilections are accurate.
    TRUMP 2020

Comments are closed.