Replies

There have been multiple assertions by semimojo that the complaint filed by the “WB.” Eric Ciamarella, contained “Direct Knowledge” and not just hearsay, second hand, and third-hand evidence, that was furthermore found credible and also FOUND to exist by Intelligence Community Inspector (ICIG) General Michael Atkinson.

In actual fact, the ICIG only stated he found the complaint to be “credible” and of “urgent concern,” but also that found the complainant to be “biased.” He did not actually state he found the complainant had “direct knowledge” as semimojo has repeatedly asserted, which the ICIG Form-401 and regulations at the time of filing REQUIRED be present for the complaint to be accepted by the ICIG’s office.

Toward that end, I have again gone through Eric Ciamarella’s filed, and now de-classified, complaint line-by-line, allegation-by-allegation, seeking any allegation of Direct Knowledge by the so-called “Whistleblower” that would have justified the ICIG’s acceptance of this complaint’s validity or credibility. I found not one single assertion, allegation, or statement that indicated Eric Ciamarella had direct knowledge of the events from his own observation of events, witness, or experience that justified in any way the adoption of this complaint.

I copied and pasted the source phrases Eric Ciamarella’s, or the WB’s, own words leading into to each and every allegation in the document so you can see for yourselves where he attributes his allegations:

I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials...
...more than half a dozen U.S. officials have informed me...
I was not a direct witness to most of the events described.
...multiple officials recounted fact patterns that were consistent with one another.
... a variety of information consistent with these private accounts has been reported publicly.
Multiple White House officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me...
According to the White House officials who had direct knowledge of the call...
The White House officials who told me this information were deeply disturbed...
They told me that there was already a "discussion ongoing" with White House lawyers...
...they had witnessed the President abuse his office...
Aside from the above-mentioned "cases" purportedly dealing with the Biden family and the 2016 U.S. election, I was told by White House officials that no other "cases" were discussed.
Based on my understanding, there were approximately a dozen White House officials...
The officials I spoke with told me...
...I was told that a State Department official, Mr. T. Ulrich Brechbuhl... (factually false)
I was not the only non-White House official to receive a readout of the call. (He was not authorized to receive such a readout anymore. It was leaked to him! — Swordmaker)
... I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior White House officials had intervened to "lock down" all records of the phone call...
White House officials told me that they were "directed" by White House lawyers...
One White House official described this act as an abuse...
Based on multiple readouts of these meetings recounted to me by various U.S. officials...
I also learned from multiple U.S. officials that, on or about 2 August...
The U.S. officials characterized this meeting...
Separately, multiple U.S. officials told me that Mr. Giuliani...
...but I was told separately by multiple U.S. officials that Mr. Yermak and Mr. Bakanov intended...
...according to a public account ...
It was also publicly reported that Mr. Giuliani ...
On or about 29 April, I learned from U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the situation...
Around the same time, I also learned from a U.S. official that "associates" of Mr. Giuliani ...
...the above-referenced articles in Bloomberg (16 May) ...
However, several U.S. officials told me that, in fact...
The New York Times reported
...named in the 22 July report by OCCRP...
See, for example, Mr. Giuliani's appearance on Fox News on 6 April...
Starting in mid-May, I heard from multiple U.S. officials that they were deeply concerned...
These officials also told me:
That State Department officials, including. . .
...multiple U.S. officials told me that the Ukrainian leadership was led to believe that a meeting...
...The Hill...
That State Department officials. . .
... ABC's George Stephanopoulos...
On 21 June, Mr. Giuliani tweeted: "New Pres of Ukraine still silent on investigation of Ukrainian interference in 2016 and alleged Biden bribery of Poroshenko...

CLASSIFIED SECTION:

According to multiple White House officials I spoke with...
According to information I received from White House officials, some officials voiced concerns internally...
According to White House officials I spoke with, this was "not the first time" under this Administration that a Presidential transcript was placed into this codeword-level system...
On 18 July, an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) official informed Departments and Agencies that the President...
During interagency meetings on 23 July and 26 July, OMB officials again stated explicitly that the instruction to suspend this assistance had come directly from the President...
As of early August, I heard from U.S. officials that some Ukrainian officials were aware that U.S. aid might be in jeopardy...

That’s all of them. . . Not a single instance where the complainant, Eric Ciamarella, or the WB, asserts a single direct knowledge complaint. It’s ALL hearsay, rumor, second-hand, third-hand, and innuendo based on absolutely no direct evidence except the obvious evidence of a desire to make trouble. Not once does the complainant say “I saw, heard, or observed X.” It is always “I was told this” by unnamed other persons. Hearsay, which is not admissible evidence in any court in the USA.

How could his allegations be found by the ICIG to be “credible,” much less within the ICIG’s jurisdiction, given the very explicit statutory exclusions in the law, which the ICIG had to be very familiar, unless the ICIG was complicit in this script.

It is my assertion that the WB, Eric Ciamarella, committed perjury by checking off the box on the Form-401 claiming he had “Direct Knowledge” and not just second hand knowledge from co-workers, especially since the form warned that such second-hand knowledge and rumors was insufficient for the complaint to be accepted and would be rejected. He filed it under threat of perjury anyway with complete awareness and knowing he did not have any first hand information. It was deliberate. It was also deliberate that ICIG Atkinson accepted it, and then passed on a fraudulent complaint, even after his own career legal counsel, the DNI’s determination, and the DOJ’s legal counsel ALL told him he could not do what he finally did, which was to send the complaint to Congress, to Intelligence Oversight committees which did not have authority over the President. It is my assertion this was scripted in advance by Adam Schiff-for brains.

There have been multiple assertions by semimojo that the complaint filed by the “WB.” Eric Ciamarella, contained “Direct Knowledge” and not just hearsay, second hand, and third-hand evidence...

If you can find one of those assertions please produce it. I've tried to be careful to say that the WB claimed, by checking the germane box on the form, that he had direct knowledge.

You may be right that he perjured himself, I don't claim to know and if I got sloppy and wasn't clear enough I'm sorry.

He did not actually state he found the complainant had “direct knowledge” as semimojo has repeatedly asserted

Except for this part where he says:

"The Complainant on the form he or she submitted on August 12, 2019 in fact checked two relevant boxes: The first box stated that, “I have personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved”; and the second box stated that, “Other employees have told me about events or records involved.”
As part of his determination that the urgent concern appeared credible, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct, and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix.

I know it's a subtle distinction but when I say the ICIG claimed something I'm not attesting to the veracity of his claim.

It is my assertion that the WB, Eric Ciamarella, committed perjury by checking off the box on the Form-401 claiming he had “Direct Knowledge” and not just second hand knowledge from co-workers, especially since the form warned that such second-hand knowledge and rumors was insufficient for the complaint to be accepted and would be rejected. He filed it under threat of perjury anyway with complete awareness and knowing he did not have any first hand information. It was deliberate.

____________

So if true, we can burn him if we can name him.