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:


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.


[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:


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.

294 Responses to ICIG Michael Atkinson Attempts Four-Page Justification for Changing “Urgent Concern” Whistle-blower Guidelines…

  1. 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.

    Liked by 9 people

  2. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dogbert says:

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

      Liked by 4 people

    • 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.”


  3. Liberty ONE says:

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

    Liked by 6 people

  4. J.Thomas says:

    The CIA has gone rogue.

    Its time to contain it.

    They are waging open war.

    Liked by 3 people

    • 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.

      Liked by 1 person

    • 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?

      Liked by 1 person

  5. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. 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?


  7. itsy_bitsy says:

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

    Liked by 1 person

  8. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

    • 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.

      Liked by 3 people

  9. 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?

    Liked by 1 person

  10. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Pingback: Deep State ICIG Releases Statement on Why It Was Necessary to Change Whistleblower Forms to Include: Watercooler Talk, Rumors, Hearsay and Cafeteria Conversations

  12. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. 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.


  14. 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?


  16. 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?

    Liked by 2 people

  17. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. 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!


  20. Pingback: Revealed: ICIG Michael Atkinson -- Who Turned in the Partisan CIA 'Whistleblower' Complaint -- Is Top Mueller Hoax Operative

  21. BigTalkers says:

    I’ve heard “hearsay” reporting is in contravention the whistleblower statute itself.

    Is this so…?


  22. RICHARD Pollak says:



  23. 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.


  24. 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


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s