August 12th the ICIG receives the WB complaint; I am STILL waiting for YOU to use Eric Ciamarella’s name, semimojo. You can’t bring yourself to use it in context.
You're confusing documents and events and they appear to be all jumbled up in your mind.
I am not at all confused, semimojo. The only one confused here and trying desperately to confuse matters is YOU. Your confused timeline is just another effort to do that very thing. Here is a corrected timeline:
- August 12th — the ICIG receives the
WB Eric Ciamarella’s list of hearsay and rumors (fixed it for you) complaint; - August 12th — the ICIG Atkinson, as the Meta Data shows, writes his letter of complaint to the Chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Oversight standing committees, asserting improper handling of the complaint by the DNI and DOJ for political reasons, two weeks before he could possibly have done any investigation on the complaint, or known about any improper handling. He also did not send a copy of the letter to Representative Nunes. Only the oversight committees were entitled to receive any communications, the Bureaucracy does not recognize party differences, so communications are sent via the chairmen of those committees.
- August 26th — at the end of the 14 calendar days specified in the ICIG Statute, the ICIG
notifies the ODNI of the complaint delivers the entire complaint package to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for the DNI’s determination if it should be forwarded to Congress, and says he has deemed it "credible" and of "urgent concern.” (At least now you are no longer claiming the ICIG confirmed he found the complaint actually contained “Direct Knowledge.” Aha, finally, factual progress!); - August 28th — the DNI, realizing the problems with the complaint package, involves both his career Legal Counsel, who then calls the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel for their input.;
- August 29th — the DNI Legal Counsel and DOJ Legal Counsel, working in concert, jointly inform Chairmen Schiff of the House and Barr of the Senate oversight committees that there is a potential “urgent concern matter,” without revealing what the matter might be, requesting more time than allowed by the seven days permitted in the statute for legal study before forwarding the matter to the oversight committees. Both chairmen grant in writing an additional SEVEN DAYS to the DOJ/DNI. The ICIG is kept in the Loop on the additional time grant.;
- September 6th — Three days before the extended time expires, ICIG Atkinson is informed by the DNI, in writing, that the DNI and the DOJ have determined that the complaint is not within the ICIG’s or the DNI’s jurisdiction and ordered to drop the issue, discontinuing all investigation, and due to the factual finding that it is not an IC urgent matter as a matter of statute, and classifying the it as a matter of Executive Privilege, it is not to be forwarded to Congress as being outside of the oversight committees’ purview;
- September 9th — On the morning of the day the extended time granted to the DNI and DOJ for determination, before it expired, despite the findings of his superiors, and the obvious statutorily exclusions he should know backwards and forwards, ICIG Atkinson sends his August 12th created letter to Chairman Schiff and
Nunes Chairman Barr, a letter complaining that the ODNI has not transmitted the complaint to Congress. Atkinson discloses the existence of the complaint but not its contents (This assertion on your part is false on its face; Atkinson admits he forwarded the complaint to Congress and even testified. The transcript of his testimony is the only one Schiff has refused to release to this day.) ICIG Atkinson forwards the entire complaint package to House Committee Chairman Schiff and Senate Committee Chairman Barr, along with his August 12th pre-written (meta data proof) letter (When question on September 30th by the Senate Intelligence Committee, on why he forwarded it when committee members could find no factual first hand knowledge in the allegations, Atkinson’s answer was essentially "I did it, because I wanted to!"); - September 13th — Schiff issues a subpoena to the ODNI for the complaint. If, as you claim, the ICIG had sent the WB complaint to to Congress the subpoena would be unnecessary, (A subpoena to the ODNI is not the same as having the same document, with a complaint of political wrong doing by the DNI, semimojo, and subpoenaing full documentation from the DNI is the first step in going after the DNI! That documentation subpoena was rejected. In any case, Schiff was already announcing what was in the complaint on September 10th, prior to any subpoena to the DNI! That alone proves your assertion wrong.) ;
- September 25th — House Intelligence Committee Chairman opens Rules Hearing with a totally fabricated rendition of the Trump/Zelensky phone call of July 25th;
- September 25th — In response to Chairman Adam Schiff’s wholesale creation of a false rendition of the content of the Trump/Zelensky phone call, late in the afternoon the White House releases the transcript of the call and declassifies the spy’s complaint;
- September 26th — Schiff releases the redacted complaint which was released at the direction of Trump, not the ICIG. (I never said the ICIG released anything publicly. He sent the complaint to the House and Senate Intelligence oversight committees with Meta Data that indicates that it was created on August 12th, the same day he ostensibly received the complaint from Eric Ciamarella. Releasing those data to the committees is not public.)
Why are you such a Schiff fan? You seem to believe everything that comes out of the Dem talking points. I still think you are a Dem shill.
You've added some useful detail to my timeline as well as two stunning, one could even say Bombshell!, claims.
First:
August 12th — the ICIG Atkinson, as the Meta Data shows, writes his letter of complaint to the Chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Oversight standing committees, asserting improper handling of the complaint by the DNI and DOJ for political reasons, two weeks before he could possibly have done any investigation on the complaint, or known about any improper handling.
Let's examine this claim. You're saying that in one day ICIG:
- received the WB complaint;
- researched the claim to the satisfaction of his legal and other staff;
- mapped out everything that would happen over the next 27 days;
- anticipated that the Chairmen would grant an additional 7 days beyond the statute;
- drafted the letter anticipating precisely the arguments that the ODNI and Administration counsel would make;
- had the letter approved by counsel, including researching and noting the specific statutory references in the footnotes;
- dated the letter 27 days in the future;
- signed the letter; and
- published the letter in a form such that you can today go examine the metadata.
Why did he do this heroic feat in no more than 18 hours? What did he have to gain by causing a huge fuss in the office of the ICIG and drawing his staff and counsel into his fraud?
Absolutely nothing.
He would have been much better off taking advantage of the next 27 days to get all of his ducks in a row, draft the letter in an organized way, be able to respond to actual events, etc., etc.
But no, in the best traditions of conspiracy theory we don't ask the actors to be rational. They don't do what's in their best interests, they do what fits our narrative.
I've asked you twice for links to the document that proves your claim. You've ignored both requests.
If what you've discovered is true you have completely demolished the credibility of Atkinson and provided Trump with a political WMD.
You've discovered something that's been missed by every other news organization in the world (well, there may be a blog out there somewhere...)
You'll be on the FReeper wall of fame, probably above Buckhead.
All we need is the metadata from that original letter, which you've analyzed.
Second:
September 9th...Atkinson forwards the entire complaint package to House Committee Chairman Schiff and Senate Committee Chairman Barr, along with his August 12th pre-written (meta data proof) letter
This is another earth shattering discovery.
Every source I can find says the specifics of the complaint weren't released until September 25th.
Can you please provide some links to back up your claim that Atkinson sent the complaint to Schiff and Barr?
Can you speculate on why, if they got the complaint package on the 12th, on September 25th:
"Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr told reporters his committee had received the whistleblower complaint shortly after 4 p.m. Members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees and party leaders streamed in and out of a secure hearing room on Capitol Hill late Thursday afternoon to examine the document, which one lawmaker said was 10 to 12 pages long."