Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: semimojo
"The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018, which went into effect before Inspector General Atkinson entered on duty as the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community on May 29, 2018..."

The only problem with that statement is that the Form-401 form dated 24MAY2018 on its header is called “Urgent Concern Disclosure Form,” four words, not “Disclosure of Urgent Concern Form,” five words, on the un-numbered, “August 2019” (note, no specific date) form released on September 27, 2019 as a PDF where the meta data shows first creation dates only as early as September 25.

What we see here, in these statements from the ICIG’s office, is what is called “dancing” to cover their tracks. Note the name they use in this particular excuse sentence is the “preferred name” someone renamed the new form, NOT the name of the form the whistleblower actually used, a form of begging the question.

Whoever created the phony new form gratuitously and pleonastically renamed it to what they thought it should be called, rearranging the name and adding unnecessary word “of” (breaking the fewest-number-of-words-on-a-form-is-better rule), rather than using the perfectly good, previously used and already government approved, shorter four word name.

Some people cannot resist breaking that other rule of KISS. Keep It Simple, Stupid. The form forger should have taken the exact format of the original form and simply slipped the new wording into the old form, keeping the ICIG Form-401 number, changing the revision date in the correct format, and maintaining the name, and resisting the urge to amend the name, i.e., not made editorial changes to suit his or her peculiarities esthetic in writing style.

Government form creation is not the time nor the place to exercise one’s creative writing style, there is a style book one must adhere to. Another rule: when in government do as the government does. If the stupid forger had, the subtle changes would likely not have been noticed, instead, they stand out like they were intended to be noticed.

On the other hand, semimojo, perhaps that was the forger’s intent, similar to the more than fifty “Oh so obvious” unforced errors on Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate that just begged “Hey! Look over here! I’m a Fraud!”

Unless they handed this creation job to some highschool intern to create (anybody believe they are THAT stupid), then they handed this job to someone really stupid to do. . . A person who did make unforced errors in its creation that called attention to its fraudulent nature with big RED FLAGS that it can’t be an official government form.

85 posted on 12/29/2019 9:15:18 AM PST by Swordmaker (My pistol self-identifies as an iPad, so you must accept it in gun-free zones, you hoplophobe bigot!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: Swordmaker
...perhaps that was the forger’s intent, similar to the more than fifty “Oh so obvious” unforced errors on Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate that just begged “Hey! Look over here! I’m a Fraud!”

OK. For the sake of argument I'll stipulate that the form was fraudulent.

What earthly difference did it make given that the WB claimed, and the ICIG verified, direct knowledge?

87 posted on 12/29/2019 10:43:55 AM PST by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson