The form was clarified to reflect the law, which specifically states that hearsay information is OK.
It doesn't matter, however, because this whistle blower used the old form and claimed to have first hand knowledge of some of the allegations.
Changing the form had nothing to do with this claim.
Thank you for your clarification. Nobody has articulated this issue in such a clear fashion before.
Is it possible to see some evidence or proof that what you claim is true?
Actually, it doesn’t. It’s silent on the subject of second hand information, so they just imputed that it’s OK. The regulations promulgated by the ICIG, to avoid chasing wild gooses, prohibited hearsay and rumor in reporting information. They changed both regulations and form without going through the required procedures for changing either. Both are required to go through certain steps before either can be altered, going through several layers of approval before being accepted, a several month long process. Atkinson changed both the regulations and the form in ad hoc in mid August to allow Eric Ciaramella to comply with the regulations and form in his complaint. Changing the forms ad hoc was beyond his authority.
However, even with new regulations and new form, the filing still did not meet the law because Ciaramella was filing the complaint against someone who was outside of the the Intelligence Community’s and therefore the ICIG’s jurisdiction. The ICIG just arrogated jurisdiction, even after both his and the DOJ told him he did not have jurisdiction, and sent the complaint to the Intelligence oversight committees of the House and Senate. That was beyond his authority.