Depending on how their SJW censors feel on a given day, they might give you a ban for posting the name Eric Ciaramella.
no, that’s the Coup’s talking point to justify the changes they made. However, there is no paper trail for any of the changes made. The new form does not even have a proper federal Form ID. The original Form for the report was ICIG Form 401. The new form lacks that number. There is no trail in the record where it shows it has gone through any kind of editing, approval, and certification process required for adoption, something required of all Federal forms. Similarly, there is no paper trail showing the required steps for changing the Federal regulations for enforcing the IC whistleblower statute. None. No public hearings for input, no time period for input from those to be affected by the changes, etc, no submission to Congress, nothing. Zip. Just suddenly, there they are, appearing in the DNI’s website for public use, as was the new, unnumbered form, on September 27, 2019! Not only that, there are some very strange typos in both, typos that would have been found and corrected were they both submitted for editing and correction had the proper procedures been followed, instead of being created ad hoc to provide verisimilitude to the whistleblower’s second and third hand reporting when they suddenly realized it was going to be a problem. . . Creating the bogus form and regulations from whole cloth and backdating them for use in a hurry just after it became public knowledge on September 25.
They still cannot come up with earlier meeting minutes, earlier emails, previous revisions, etc., showing discussions where these regulation and form changes were discussed, because such meetings, emails, and revisions, never happened and do not exist. The only creation dates on the PDF files of the form and regulations are post September 25. Ergo, they are ad hoc, post dated frauds.
Thank you, Swardmaker, I believe what you are saying is what I have heard.
Of course, it’s possible that it has changed, but I think we would have made more of a fuss about it rather than just accepting. We are dealing with people who have ABSOLUTELY NO RESPECT FOR THE TRUTH.
Very dangerous.
The problem with your theory is the whistleblower didn't use the new form.
He used the old form and more to the point stated that he did have first hand knowledge, so your entire rant is moot.
Depending on how their SJW censors feel on a given day, they might give you a ban for posting the name Eric Ciaramella.