Absolutely yes. There is no "can't be hearsay" requirement or exception in reporting.
There is a requirement that the report must relate to an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence.
50 USC 3033 : Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
(g) Authorities ...
(2)(B) The Inspector General shall have access to any employee, or any employee of a contractor, of any element of the intelligence community needed for the performance of the duties of the Inspector General. ...(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-- ...
(k) Reports ...
(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. ...(G) In this paragraph, the term "urgent concern" means any of the following:
(i) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters.
(ii) A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity.
(iii) An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee's reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.
Approximately 100% of the isues that make big news are reported and treated in ways that are clearly outside of the law. Once a subject makes big news, everybody including prosecutors and Congress starts to wing it. The direction of flight is unpredictable, but guarnateed it will not follow, show, or teach the law.
See the immediate example, "the hearsay canard." What, good for two whole days already, and no sign of abating.
That, even though there is an OFFICIAL and well-explained (albeit in jargon) letter of September 13. Count on good information being ignored. It's the American way.
The Mysterious Whistleblower Complaint: What Is Adam Schiff Talking About? - September 17, 2019
On Sept. 9, Inspector General Atkinson apparently wrote a letter (which has not been made public) directly to Schiff and the Intelligence Committee's ranking member, Devin Nunes, informing them of his determination regarding the complaint. (Notably, the inspector general appears to have written this letter to Schiff under his own general authority rather than under authority delegated by the whistleblower statute: This type of letter is not contemplated by the statute ...
Atkinson is the pivotal triggering skunk.
Of course the key phrase in that is the following: “...concerning the existence of an activity within the authorities and responsibilities of the Director of National Intelligence...”
Since the president doesn’t fall with the authority or responsibility of the DNC the statute doesn’t apply. Some congressmen have already stated this...but it gets ignored.
thanx. Great explanation and layout of facts of the law. The 9/13/2019 letter from Jason Klitenic does the same.
Doesn’t this bru-haha go away if the whistle blower files the complaint with the proper authority ?
which is what\who ? Office of Special Counsel?
I can’t expect you to keep doing my home work, so I started here:
https://www.workplacefairness.org/federal-employee-whistleblowers
I’ll be busy for awhile
thanx again