[W:90]Whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG.Why is it being withheld from Congress?

[prometeus]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Instead of butting into a conversation

Its a ****ing open forum and your moronic deflection still has nothing to do with the topic.

 

[bubbabgone]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Yes it was. Read the letters. Here's the relevant statute: 50 U.S. Code SS 3033 - Inspector General of the Intelligence Community | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute See (k)(5)



It helps when you read the documents.



No one. I didn't claim that.

The whistleblower filed a complaint through authorized internal channels, as prescribed by law. IC IG reviewed it, found it credible, forwarded it to DNI. DNI ignored it, ignored the law, so the IC IG sent a letter to Congress informing them of a complaint that DNI is refusing to forward as required. That is where we are now.

Where does it say the IG sent a letter to Schiff

So you don't know what the law is and don't care enough to read the letters and figure it out. See above. It's not the DNI's prerogative to investigate a complaint involving his own agency and find it "wanting." That's the job of IG, he did, found it credible, and DNI "shall" forward that complaint to Congress within 7 days. My gosh, do you really think this is how whistleblower complaints ought to work? It's the government equivalent of asking the fox to guard the henhouse, then to investigate missing chickens, and when the fox says - nothing amiss here, move along - that's the end of it.

After a full investigation, last year IG Horowitz sent a report to the DOJ about Comey and the Clinton affair.
In this instance,
"The inspector general determined upon preliminary review that the complaint was credible and that it related to a matter of “urgent concern” (a statutory classification). The inspector general then transmitted the disclosure to the director of national intelligence (DNI), as required by law."
Does "preliminary review" sound like a fully completed investigation? What did he expect the DNI to do? Ask Adam Schiff to investigate for him?

Oh, and the DNI doesn't have his own agency.

 

[JasperL]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

First, if you see the law, there is no requirement for a legislative purpose, but they have been told several times that there is such purpose. Secondly, since the GOP has "loaded" the judiciary with GOPers who will do the bidding of the GOP no matter what the law, you are probably right about the suit not getting settled before the next election, but does that mke it right? I guess you do not care if the laws are broken, just like in the case of the Whistle blower. The law in that case states that the whistle blowers info will go to the House intelligence Committee in 7 days and yet the Trump Administration refuses to follow the law and give up the info. There is no exception you can try and hang your hat on, the law is straight forward and yet you back the people violating the law. Isn't that interesting.

It is pretty fascinating watching the Trump clan on this thread. No one is citing the law, except to misstate it. "Shall" means "shall" and they are claiming "shall" means some version of "if we decide we want to, and if we don't wanna, Congress can go pound sand."

What is a bit mystifying is why the GOP members of Congress want to establish "**** you Congress!" as the proper oversight standard. It's as if the GOP is now openly authoritarian, and contemptuous of checks and balances. Even GOP members of Congress are apparently fine being reduced to nothing but shills to serve the interests of the President. What do they think will happen next time a Democrat sits in the WH?

 

[bubbabgone]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

First, if you see the law, there is no requirement for a legislative purpose, but they have been told several times that there is such purpose. Secondly, since the GOP has "loaded" the judiciary with GOPers who will do the bidding of the GOP no matter what the law, you are probably right about the suit not getting settled before the next election, but does that mke it right? I guess you do not care if the laws are broken, just like in the case of the Whistle blower. The law in that case states that the whistle blowers info will go to the House intelligence Committee in 7 days and yet the Trump Administration refuses to follow the law and give up the info. There is no exception you can try and hang your hat on, the law is straight forward and yet you back the people violating the law. Isn't that interesting.

The Supreme Court ruled ...

“there is no congressional power to expose for the sake of exposure.” Rather, if Congress wants to collect information from the executive branch or other outsiders, it must do so in connection with its legislative power. That is, a Congressional attempt to investigate an official or request information from him is valid only to the extent it serves proper legislative purposes.*** Congress cannot simply engage in “a fruitless investigation into the personal affairs of individuals.” Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 195 (1880). Thus, for example, it seems unlikely that Congress could properly request the tax returns of all civil rights leaders solely for the purpose of harassing them, even if there were potential non-discriminatory reasons for making those requests.​

That's from your own earlier link that I told you didn't say what you thought it said.

 

[Condor060]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Its a ****ing open forum and your moronic deflection still has nothing to do with the topic.

If you bothered to check the conversation string you would have known I didn't bring it up, I was asked the question. Try and keep up

 

[Condor060]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

First, if you see the law, there is no requirement for a legislative purpose, but they have been told several times that there is such purpose. Secondly, since the GOP has "loaded" the judiciary with GOPers who will do the bidding of the GOP no matter what the law, you are probably right about the suit not getting settled before the next election, but does that mke it right? I guess you do not care if the laws are broken, just like in the case of the Whistle blower. The law in that case states that the whistle blowers info will go to the House intelligence Committee in 7 days and yet the Trump Administration refuses to follow the law and give up the info. There is no exception you can try and hang your hat on, the law is straight forward and yet you back the people violating the law. Isn't that interesting.

Can you find one statement where I backed anybody? You just made that assumption. I was stating how subpoenas work and what information is not required to provide in a subpoena.

 

[JasperL]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Where does it say the IG sent a letter to Schiff

Either you are trolling or just don't care about any of the easily established facts in this case. I provided links to the letters. Here is the link, again. See FN 3 on page 1 of the second letter.

Schiff Letters to Acting Director of National Intelligence - Lawfare

After a full investigation, last year IG Horowitz sent a report to the DOJ about Comey and the Clinton affair.
In this instance,
"The inspector general determined upon preliminary review that the complaint was credible and that it related to a matter of “urgent concern” (a statutory classification). The inspector general then transmitted the disclosure to the director of national intelligence (DNI), as required by law."
Does "preliminary review" sound like a fully completed investigation? What did he expect the DNI to do? Ask Adam Schiff to investigate for him.

Schiff expects the DNI to comply with the law and forward the complaint to Congress as the law requires within 7 days of receipt. I guess you didn't read the law the first time so I'll quote it, again.

(k)
(5)
(A)An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.

(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. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.

(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 congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate.

Is that big enough for you or will you ignore it again. "Shall" means "shall" - "within 7 calendar days" means "within 7 calendar days." There is no "after a full investigation, the DNI can decide whether to forward it along, or not, whatever" clause.

Oh, and the DNI doesn't have his own agency.

OK, thanks for splitting hairs. That and concerted efforts to remain ignorant are a great argument, very persuasive!

 

[JasperL]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

BTW, for those interested in the issue, here's an excellent piece by Lawfareblog.

The Mysterious Whistleblower Complaint: What is Adam Schiff Talking About? - Lawfare

It's a long analysis, but the takeaway is there do exist conflicts between open ended demands by Congress for classified information, and there might be reasons to limit the disclosure to Congress. But there is no justification for simply withholding it, as they did. The constitutional remedy is for Congress and the WH to come to an agreement that serves the interests of all parties and the public.

In the current circumstances, so far the Trump administration is honoring neither the letter of the law nor the spirit of good faith cooperation that the relevant case law contemplates. Maguire seems not to have notified the committee, in any form, that a credible issue had arisen. He blew through the statutory deadline with seemingly no attempt to communicate with the committee. It seems the only reason the committee found out about the issue was because of a letter sent to the committee chair by the intelligence community. In addition, from what is public about the communications between Schiff and Maguire, it seems that the agency head is not calling the shots here—as Clinton’s and Obama’s statements about the legislation seemed to envision—but, rather, some “higher power” outside of the agency is doing so. None of this looks good.
....
As I wrote earlier this year, the precise contours of any executive privilege are contested, and the executive branch, the courts and Congress tend to take divergent positions that favor their respective constitutional roles. The current situation before the House Intelligence Committee goes further—and not in a positive direction. Going forward, if the information the whistleblower provided to the inspector general implicates sensitive national security issues, the right path forward is for the executive branch to follow the framework of United States v. AT&T and seek “optimal accommodation through a realistic evaluation of the needs of the conflicting branches” in this situation.

If the information is being withheld based on a theory of some other type of executive privilege or some other reason, the administration treads on considerably less solid legal ground. In the face of a statute that already self-limits the required reporting to instances of “particularly flagrant or serious” problems, the administration will need a very, very compelling reason that is rooted in the public’s interest—not the interests of a particular individual—to justify not providing the relevant information to the committee.

 

[bubbabgone]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Either you are trolling or just don't care about any of the easily established facts in this case. I provided links to the letters. Here is the link, again. See FN 3 on page 1 of the second letter.

Schiff Letters to Acting Director of National Intelligence - Lawfare

Ah yes. There it is. In the 3rd footnote on page 1 of 4. Thanks. Any idea what was in the letter from the IG to Schiff?

Schiff expects the DNI to comply with the law and forward the complaint to Congress as the law requires within 7 days of receipt. I guess you didn't read the law the first time so I'll quote it, again.



Is that big enough for you or will you ignore it again. "Shall" means "shall" - "within 7 calendar days" means "within 7 calendar days." There is no "after a full investigation, the DNI can decide whether to forward it along, or not, whatever" clause.

My point was that the Intel Community doesn't depend on the Intel Committee to do their internal investigations and the IG didn't fully investigate the complaint.
Your point was that the DNI should have told Schiff what the complaint was within the required timeframe . That's true.
I guess although the acting DNI was new to the job he still recognized what a leaking schmuck Adam Schiff is so he decided to stonewall him because he tries to make everything into Watergate.
He shouldn't have done that.
And because Schiff was never told he wasn't able to leak it so we still don't know what the complaint was.

OK, thanks for splitting hairs. That and concerted efforts to remain ignorant are a great argument, very persuasive!

You're welcome. I thought it was important for you to know the DNI has access to upwards of 17 organizations that do investigations so Adam Schiff can remain focused on partisan politics.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

It is pretty fascinating watching the Trump clan on this thread. No one is citing the law, except to misstate it. "Shall" means "shall" and they are claiming "shall" means some version of "if we decide we want to, and if we don't wanna, Congress can go pound sand."

What is a bit mystifying is why the GOP members of Congress want to establish "**** you Congress!" as the proper oversight standard. It's as if the GOP is now openly authoritarian, and contemptuous of checks and balances. Even GOP members of Congress are apparently fine being reduced to nothing but shills to serve the interests of the President. What do they think will happen next time a Democrat sits in the WH?

Authoritarians have no need for congress?

 

[prometeus]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

If you bothered to check the conversation string

I did and it was you who introduced the irrelevant crap about attorney client privilege, etc.

I was asked the question.

Why lie?

Try and keep up

Try to show some integrity.

 

[Condor060]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

I did and it was you who introduced the irrelevant crap about attorney client privilege, etc.

Why lie?

Try to show some integrity.

You know, it is the "LAW" that this report be given to the House intelligence Committee. The committee is not supposed to have to even request the information, it is by "law" required to be given to them before the end of 7 days. Of course you Trump cultists do not think that the Trump administration has to follow the law. You seem to think they can pick and choose what laws they follow depending on how those laws help or hurt their politics. You Trump cultists are worse for this country than Trump ever could be.

This keeping the information from Congress actually breaks the law as did keeping Trump's tax returns from the House. I would think this alone meets the meaning of a felony or misdemeanor required for impeachment.

You know less about the law than you do politics. You don't get to review attorney client privilege information just because you sent a subpoena. Just like you don't get copies of someones tax return from the IRS just because you sent a subpoena. Hence why they don't have a copy now.

Wanna take another shot or are you good now?

 

[prometeus]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

I guess although the acting DNI was new to the job he still recognized what a leaking schmuck Adam Schiff is so he decided to stonewall him because he tries to make everything into Watergate.

Can you even fathom how retarded that comment is? If Schiff broke the law he should be prosecuted, but it is clear that the only one breaking the law in this case is the DNI and you are pathetically attempting to excuse the illegality.

 

[prometeus]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Wanna take another shot or are you good now?

So where is the question that you were asked and still how is your drivel relevant to the law that is being broken?

 

[JasperL]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Ah yes. There it is. In the 3rd footnote on page 1 of 4. Thanks. Any idea what was in the letter from the IG to Schiff?

It's classified...no I haven't been informed.

My point was that the Intel Community doesn't depend on the Intel Committee to do their internal investigations and the IG didn't fully investigate the complaint.

You've read the law. Whether they did or didn't doesn't affect their legal obligations under the law. Where in the law does it say, "after a full investigation and if we want to, we will forward it on over to Congress. If not, then f you congress." The words seems simple to me. If you think they mean something other than the plain meaning, fill us in, citing the law.

Does "shall, within seven calendar days" not mean "shall" and within that time frame? Is "shall" a mere suggestion meaning - if you want? Where's the "after a full investigation" clause?

Your point was that the DNI should have told Schiff what the complaint was within the required timeframe . That's true.
I guess although the acting DNI was new to the job he still recognized what a leaking schmuck Adam Schiff is so he decided to stonewall him because he tries to make everything into Watergate.
He shouldn't have done that.
And because Schiff was never told he wasn't able to leak it so we still don't know what the complaint was.

The law requires him to forward the entire complaint to Congress, not tell them about it.

Why are you expending so much effort feigning ignorance of the law when it's been cited and you can read it for yourself?

 

[Bodi]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Nah, just ignore it like y'all do with anything negative about this president.

You wrote stuff that was negative about the President? What did you write? I would love to read it.

 

[Bodi]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

This smells like yet another stunning abuse of power by Trump and his band of merry criminals.....laughably referred to as his Administration.

How so?

 

[Bodi]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

I expected, based on that dishonest response, that you are probably one of the many who has no idea what the Mueller Report says.

Trump and his minions know that putting those witnesses and facts on live television for the average American (who doesn’t read) will have a powerful impact, dispite your weak but belligerent denials.

That’s how it worked on 1973 and 1974,

And Donald Trump has no legal argument for ordering witnesses not to testify, or financial institutions from providing documents.

We’re just waiting till he loses those fights. He’s trying to run the clock out by doing so.

The US Literacy Rate is in the high 90's.

 

[Bodi]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

It looks long but the paragraphs are really short. You can do this Bodhi!

Can you just give me a few bullet points?

 

[lurchadams]

Whaddaya wanna bet Trump is behind this, that the whistleblower's whistleblowing implicates the White House?

Yet, every accusation of "Trump is a tyrant" falls on deaf ears by the right.

Of course it's trump and of course he's a criminal. He's "Individual #1" in the "Stormygate" scandal and the reason Cohen is in prison right now.

 

[Condor060]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

So where is the question that you were asked and still how is your drivel relevant to the law that is being broken?

It was a post I responded to from independentusa. I showed you the list of responses to my post questioning my provision. If you can't divine my answer from the provision I made in RESPONSE to independentusa then there is no use stating it again.

No go find a thread you can contribute to instead of butting into a conversation that you have no clue about. Just what does any of your BS have to do with the thread? Move on.

 

[lwf]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

how many documents collected?

how many interviews conducted?

Trump doesnt have to help you....nor should he

You wouldnt volunteer to sit in an interview room with detectives without attorneys...who are going to tell you to keep your mouth shut

same principle....

the only things you guys havent got is his tax returns.....BFD.....he DOESNT HAVE TO RELEASE THEM

maybe the laws will change and the next presidents will have to....but it isnt a requirement as of RIGHT NOW

what i see is a lot of people who dont like Trump still trying to change an election from 3 damn years ago

i didnt vote for him either.....but i didnt vote for Hillary either

it isnt going to work....i suggest you change tactics, and really damn quick....

you got 16 months to get someone up to speed to beat him...otherwise it is going to be a LONG FIVE YEARS

Did you actually read the Mueller report? Trump didn't plead the fifth. He obstructed justice. He attempted to shut the investigation down and the people he ordered to do so ignored the order because it was illegal. Why do this if you are innocent?

 

[Gina]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

Just read your warning. Not sure if im one of the people its directed at or not but i posted before seeing this. As much as i vehementally disagree that me posts are whataboutism i wont be posting snymore links to other examples of stonewalling.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Moderator's Warning:

Please do not quote and reply to mod boxes. If you have questions or concerns, please PM a mod or use the Contact Us button. Thank you.

 

[TomFitz]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

doubt all you want silly boy

you guys want to put on a circus act just hoping that something else pops out

not gonna happen....

but be our guests....

the floor is open....take the LEAP

Do you think this up by yourself, or do you just parrot it off the talk radio.

Your comments make it clear that you know nothing about the Mueller Report.

And even if you’re not worried about what will happen when the clowns get before the committees, but Trump is deathly afraid of it, even as his minions are beating their chests.

 

[prometeus]

Re: A whistleblower filed a complaint to the intelligence IG. Why is it being withheld from Congress

It was a post I responded to from independentusa.

With irrelevant drivel and I pointed that out. Other than that the thread is nothing more that pathetic attempts by you and some others to excuse illegal acts by Trump and his administration.