Pelosi Warns of ‘New Stage’ of Inquiry if Trump Blocks Whistle-Blower Complaint

[AlbqOwl]

Where in the law does it say that the IG forwards a complaint to the AG? Could you cite the law for me, and highlight the part that says the IG must forward a complaint that he finds credible and urgent to the AG? The law we are referencing does not make mention of the AG. Only DNI & Congress. He is irrelevant to the discussion, according to the law.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I tangled two different statements. AG Barr dismissed the Ukranian accusations but also DNI Maguire has determined the complaint does not merit further investigation or referral to Congress.

 

[Winston]

I tangled two different statements. AG Barr dismissed the Ukranian accusations but also DNI Maguire has determined the complaint does not merit further investigation or referral to Congress.

The law says the IG makes the determination, not the DNI.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Garbage reply. On one hand you say only one source blah blah. On the other yoy say lets trust the opinion of one foreign governmenr official.

Over the word of a us citizen.

You guys arent patriots.

Youre obsessed with Donald Trump. You guys have tds.

This is corruption to the absolute core

Not sure who you are objecting to here.

 

[Athanasius68]

I cited the ICWPA, which is the law of the land. I'm sorry you don't like what it says.

What you cited was changes to the law made in 1998- changes that were made as part of an appropriations bill. That's ok for a history report.

But what matters for the purposes here and now is the complete law in 2019. And that's what I cited.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Wouldn't that mean, she would be allowing an impeachable President to stay in office for nothing more than a Democratic political advantage in 2020?

If, Trump is as bad as they say he is and they are allowing him to stay in office when they have the ability to impeach him currently...

Wouldn't that be a disservice to The American People and The American Rule of Law to wait for a Political Advantage in 2020?

Roseann

It's my opinion that she knows that Mitch is in Trump's back pocket and he will never let Trump be impeached no matter what crimes he commits.

She really has no options.

 

[Winston]

How do you come up with this stuff?

I read the law cited in your justsecurity.org link. I read that earlier today.

Within that link you gave me is a link to the ICWPA, which is where Schiff is making his arguments from.

This is the relevant statute:

‘‘(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. If the Inspector General determines that the complaint or informa- tion appears credible, the Inspector General shall, before the end of such period, transmit the complaint or information to the Direc- tor.

‘‘(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the intelligence commit- tees, together with any comments the Director considers appro- priate.

Says there that the IG shall determine whether complaint is credible, not the DNI and not Barr. He determined it was credible, so, then section (C) applies. The part where the DNI is required by law to forward the complaint to Congress. It's the law :shrug:

 

[AlbqOwl]

Trump admitted there was a conversation so now what?

Of course there was a conversation There probably isn't a week that goes by that the President doesn't have a conversation with a foreign official somewhere; in most weeks more than one. And it is imperative that the President and these officials are able to speak candidly and without fear their words will be distorted and advertised as something they didn't say, etc. Diplomacy and probably most cooperation between nations would be impossible if those conversations were open to public scrutiny.

 

[concernedpuma]

I dont know what to tell ya.. I cited the actual law. You cited an appropriations bill which also changed portions of the law, but not the entire law.
The actual Code is what counts.
BTW-- the law also says the whistleblower can also go directly to Congress if the whistling is rejected by the IG or DNI.

Of course you are correct. Spitting on the side walk is also against the law in Tampa. What difference does it make? The President has committed NO impeachable crime! If there is an iota of truth to the contrary, bring it! I wish Democratic leadership would take that physic and let's move this country forward! The real question becomes; how long will Democratic leadership pretend to care about America, and give a wink and nod to the dirty trick's performed by their own party with the dossier lie that keeps on giving? There is nothing wrong with that party saying we made a mistake about that silliness and then forwarding an appealing platform.
Regards,
CP

 

[AlbqOwl]

The law says the IG makes the determination, not the DNI.

The law specifies the IG will report to the DNI if he finds the issue credible/important enough. The DNI makes the determination of whether the matter should be forwarded to Congress. At the time the IG made his report, we had not heard from the Ukranians who say the issue is totally false--it never happened. That would change things wouldn't you think?

 

[Winston]

What you cited was changes to the law made in 1998- changes that were made as part of an appropriations bill. That's ok for a history report.

But what matters for the purposes here and now is the complete law in 2019. And that's what I cited.

Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act - Wikipedia

The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998,[1] amending the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 and the Inspector General Act of 1978, sets forth a procedure for employees and contractors of specified federal intelligence agencies to report complaints or information to Congress about serious problems involving intelligence activities.

Please show us where this law has been changed to exclude the obligation of reporting a credible and urgent complaint to Congress.

 

[Athanasius68]

I'm just citing the law. The law makes no mention of the DNI assessing a claim being credible or urgent. It also makes no mention of involving the AG.

No hypotheticals there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Within the authority and responsibility of the DNI.

 

[Winston]

The law specifies the IG will report to the DNI if he finds the issue credible/important enough. The DNI makes the determination of whether the matter should be forwarded to Congress. At the time the IG made his report, we had not heard from the Ukranians who say the issue is totally false--it never happened. That would change things wouldn't you think?

https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ272/PLAW-105publ272.pdf

‘‘(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. If the Inspector General determines that the complaint or informa- tion appears credible, the Inspector General shall, before the end of such period, transmit the complaint or information to the Direc- tor.
‘‘(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the intelligence commit- tees, together with any comments the Director considers appro- priate.

The law makes no mention of complaints being void if discredited by future information. That's for Congress to decide. The law also makes no mention of the DNI having the power to disregard the IG's investigation. The law only says that if the IG finds the complaint credible and urgent, he must forward it to the DNI, who must forward it to Congress. If it's a bull**** claim, Congress will find out.

 

[vesper]

Anyone hear that the "whistleblower" knowledge was second hand, e.g. that he had no direct knowledge what his complaint alleged?

Yes I have read reports stating such. And the same reporters that started the whole Russia collusion crapola that resulted in Trump being accused to be a traitor 24/7 are the very same reporters that started this latest garbage about a whistleblower.

And the same congress critter, Shifty Schiff that lied to the American people for years that Trump was a traitor and had proof is now pushing the whistleblower crap.

There is a clear pattern forming. Whatever the left accuse Trump of, you can bet, those associated with the Democratic party are actually guilty of what they accuse Trump.

 

[Winston]

Within the authority and responsibility of the DNI.

Which includes this complaint.

 

[Winston]

Of course you are correct. Spitting on the side walk is also against the law in Tampa. What difference does it make? The President has committed NO impeachable crime! If there is an iota of truth to the contrary, bring it! I wish Democratic leadership would take that physic and let's move this country forward! The real question becomes; how long will Democratic leadership pretend to care about America, and give a wink and nod to the dirty trick's performed by their own party with the dossier lie that keeps on giving? There is nothing wrong with that party saying we made a mistake about that silliness and then forwarding an appealing platform.
Regards,
CP

https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ272/PLAW-105publ272.pdf

‘‘(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. If the Inspector General determines that the complaint or informa- tion appears credible, the Inspector General shall, before the end of such period, transmit the complaint or information to the Direc- tor.
‘‘(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the intelligence commit- tees, together with any comments the Director considers appro- priate.

Here's the law. The law says that the IG investigates a claim and determines whether it's credible and urgent. If he determines it is, he forwards it to the DNI, who is required by law to forward it to Congress. Since the DNI refused to forward it to Congress, he is in violation of the ICWPA.

More here..

Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act - Wikipedia

 

[Athanasius68]

Which includes this complaint.

Well, as it all appears to be about Trump, no it isn't.
Trump is not under the authority of the DNI.

 

[Athanasius68]

Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act - Wikipedia



Please show us where this law has been changed to exclude the obligation of reporting a credible and urgent complaint to Congress.

I did.
Look under k 2(a) of the code I cited.

 

[Winston]

Well, as it all appears to be about Trump, no it isn't.
Trump is not under the authority of the DNI.

Doesn't matter who it's about. If the complaint is credible and urgent it must be forwarded to Congress or, the DNI is in violation of the law. We've been over this.

 

[poweRob]

We all want Trump impeached.

Well, Americans do at least.

 

[HumblePi]

Pelosi Warns of ‘New Stage’ of Inquiry if Trump Blocks Whistle-Blower Complaint - The New York Times

Without mentioning impeachment, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said President Trump’s refusal to hand over the whistle-blower complaint would trigger a “new chapter of lawlessness.”

“The administration is endangering our national security and having a chilling effect on any future whistle-blower who sees wrongdoing,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi wrote in a letter on Sunday.

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday called on the Trump administration to promptly turn over a secret whistle-blower complaint said to relate to President Trump’s attempts to press Ukraine to investigate his leading Democratic presidential rival, warning that a refusal to do so could force the House to open a new phase in its investigation of him.

In a letter to fellow House Democrats, Ms. Pelosi never mentioned the word “impeachment,” but her remarks appeared to hint at the possibility that the newest revelations about Mr. Trump’s conduct — and the administration’s refusal to share the complaint with Congress — might be enough to prompt her and other leading Democrats to drop their resistance to moving forward with official charges against the president.
==================================================
Now that this cat is finally out of the bag, I wonder where the country will go next?

Well.... If soliciting the interference of a foreign government into our U.S. election isn't an impeachable offense, then absolutely nothing is. How much lower can the bar for impeachment go?

 

[poweRob]

Oh :bs

:lamo

Then interpret the law. Here's the link.

Pelosi Warns of ‘New Stage’ of Inquiry if Trump Blocks Whistle-Blower Complaint

 

[poweRob]

No. Adam Schiff is demanding that the President violate the Constitution. The Constitution will win out every single time.

Blatant lie. No link of course backing up your lie.

 

[Winston]

I did.
Look under k 2(a) of the code I cited.

This is k 2(a)

(A) The Inspector General shall report immediately to the Director whenever the Inspector General becomes aware of particularly serious or flagrant problems, abuses, or deficiencies relating to programs and activities within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence.

That in no way invalidates the ICWPA.

 

[poweRob]

Danth's Law.

:lol:

So true.

 

[Athanasius68]

Doesn't matter who it's about. If the complaint is credible and urgent it must be forwarded to Congress or, the DNI is in violation of the law. We've been over this.

Of course it matters.
As I have said before, the president is not under the authority of the DNI. I am not understanding your claim to the contrary.
Furthermore, the president sets foreign policy, not Congress and certainly not the intelligence agencies.