- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: McCarthy, Nunes, Jordan Demand Answers on Whistleblower Complaint Form Changes McCarthy an
Posted on 10/1/19 at 6:21 pm to Mulat
Posted on 10/1/19 at 6:21 pm to Mulat
I wonder if they will inquire as to why it was also changed in 2018.
McCullough explained that to file a complaint a whistleblower is required only to have “reasonable belief” of wrongdoing and that, once the complaint is filed, it is up to the inspector general to acquire first-hand information and whether to deem the complaint credible.
“What the old form purported to explain to the whistleblowers was that the ICIG could not find their information credible unless they obtained first hand knowledge of the wrongdoing,” McCullough said.
“The whistleblower submitted the appropriate Disclosure of Urgent Concern form that was in effect as of August 12, 2019, and had been used by the IC IG since May 24, 2018”...
“Complainant was not a direct witness to President’s telephone call with the Ukrainian President on July 25, 2019,” the IC IG wrote on Aug. 26. “Other information obtained during the preliminary review, however, supports the Complainant’s allegation that, among other things, during the call the President ‘sought to pressure the Ukrainian leader to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid.’”
McCullough explained that to file a complaint a whistleblower is required only to have “reasonable belief” of wrongdoing and that, once the complaint is filed, it is up to the inspector general to acquire first-hand information and whether to deem the complaint credible.
“What the old form purported to explain to the whistleblowers was that the ICIG could not find their information credible unless they obtained first hand knowledge of the wrongdoing,” McCullough said.
“The whistleblower submitted the appropriate Disclosure of Urgent Concern form that was in effect as of August 12, 2019, and had been used by the IC IG since May 24, 2018”...
“Complainant was not a direct witness to President’s telephone call with the Ukrainian President on July 25, 2019,” the IC IG wrote on Aug. 26. “Other information obtained during the preliminary review, however, supports the Complainant’s allegation that, among other things, during the call the President ‘sought to pressure the Ukrainian leader to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid.’”
This post was edited on 10/1/19 at 6:24 pm
5
Posted on 10/1/19 at 6:24 pm to bmy
Does the WB law cover the President, cause I thought it was only the intel agency
Posted on 10/1/19 at 6:37 pm to bmy
quote:
“The whistleblower submitted the appropriate Disclosure of Urgent Concern
And the evaluation (by who, exactly) was that there actually was an Urgent Concern to follow through with an investigation??
In the scheme of world and domestic events, what actually was the "urgent concern" as you understand it to be??
Serious question.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:52 pm to bmy
quote:
“Other information obtained during the preliminary review, however, supports the Complainant’s allegation that, among other things, during the call the President ‘sought to pressure the Ukrainian leader to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid
Wuuch was obviously not the transcript.
Didn't you say in the other thread facts are what matters?
The transcript is FACT.
The complaint is second hand bullshite.
Posted on 10/1/19 at 7:59 pm to bmy
quote:
bmy
Bless your heart
Posted on 10/2/19 at 6:24 am to bmy
quote:The form was not changed. Apparently ICIG compliance with the ICWPA statute was.
I wonder if they will inquire as to why it was also changed in 2018.
quote:
In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG 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. (Anyone with first-hand knowledge of the allegations may file a disclosure in writing directly with the IC IG.) Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than secondhand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News