Connect with us

Whistleblower Didn’t Follow Law: Went To Schiff’s House Intel Panel Before IG

Published

on

This pretty much explains the Democrat party. When do any of them follow the law? None of them have ever been held accountable for the laws they continue to break.

It is important for the American people to fight back. These politicians believe they are above the law. Time to stop allowing that.

Via Breitbart:

A CIA officer whistleblower failed to follow the law for protecting members of the intelligence community (IC) seeking to report government malfeasance by going to the Democrat head of the House Intelligence Community before the IC inspector general (IG).

On Wednesday, the New York Times (NYT) revealed:

The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistleblower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials.

However, the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) of 1998 explicitly requires an official concerned about wrongdoing within the government to go to the IC inspector general before the congressional panels in charge of oversight of the intelligence community.

Under a section titled, “Summary of Procedures for Reporting Urgent Concerns Pursuant to the ICWPA,” the official Director of National Intelligence (DNI) website states:

The employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee –

a. before making such a contact, furnishes to the DNI, through the IC IG, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and
b. obtains and follows from the DNI, through the IC IG, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with necessary and appropriate security procedures.

The CIA whistleblower in question went to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff’s office days before the intelligence community’s inspector general, the internal investigator, and watchdog.

Investigators from the office of the IC IG are expected to operate independently of political leadership in government.

Via Breitbart:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) knew about the “whistleblower” complaint days before it was officially filed, it was reported on Wednesday.

Schiff – who performed a dramatized version of President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky during last week’s hearing – was aware of the broad contents of the “whistleblower” complaint days before the partisan CIA official formally filed the complaint, the New York Times reported.

After the detailing his accusations to the “the agency’s top lawyer,” the “whistleblower” took his complaint to a House Intelligence Committee aide, who relayed the information to Schiff, who is largely leading the charge on the impeachment inquiry.

Per the New York Times:

Before going to Congress, the C.I.A. officer had a colleague convey his accusations to the agency’s top lawyer. Concerned about how that avenue for airing his allegations was unfolding, the officer then approached a House Intelligence Committee aide, alerting him to the accusation against Mr. Trump. In both cases, the original accusation was vague.

The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff or anyone else, an official said.

As the Times detailed, the “whistleblower” eventually brought the complaint to Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence community, as Schiff’s aide suggested. That move “gave the whistle-blower added protections against reprisals and also allowed him to legally report on classified information,” the Times reports:

While House Intelligence Committee members are allowed to receive classified whistle-blower complaints, they are not allowed to make such complaints public, according to a former official. A complaint forwarded to the committee by the inspector general gives it more latitude over what it can publicize.

By the time the whistle-blower filed his complaint, Mr. Schiff and his staff knew at least vaguely what it contained.

The complaint – based entirely on second-hand information – ultimately led to the release of the transcript, detailing the contents of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. The transcripts do not show the president engaging in quid pro quo for dirt on Joe and Hunter Biden, as Schiff suggested during his fabricated reenactment at last week’s hearing.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Judge Orders Hillary Be Deposed For Judicial Watch-Benghazi Lawsuit

Published

on

...

* By

We are lucky to have Judicial Watch. This is the only organization that is fighting for justice. This woman shouldn’t be walking free for the crimes she’s committed. No American citizen would be able to get away with these crimes. The left truly believe they are above the law.

It would be nice to see a Clinton in Prison.

Via Breitbart:

A federal judge on Monday ordered former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to deliver a sworn deposition in response to a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch over her role in the Obama administration’s response to the 2012 terror attack on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya.

U.S. District Court Royce Lamberth wrote in court filings that Clinton’s written answers to questions regarding the matter in a separate case were “incomplete” and “unhelpful” and demanded more information.

“As extensive as the existing record is, it does not sufficiently explain Secretary Clinton’s state of mind when she decided it would be an acceptable practice to set up and use a private server to conduct State Department business,” wrote Lamberth. “Simply put, her responses left many more questions than answers.”

The judge added: “Even years after the FBI investigation, the slow trickle of new emails has yet to be explained.”

Judicial Watch initiated the lawsuit in 2014 to uncover whether Clinton used her private email server to communicate about the Benghazi attack to skirt the Freedom of Information Act and whether the State Department reviewed records following an FOIA request from Judicial Watch. On September 11th, Ansar al-Sharia terrorists attacked the diplomatic compound, killing U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith.

FLASHBACK August 2019 Court Grants NEW Discovery on Clinton Emails!

Via Judicial Watch:

We have won a significant victory in our pursuit of the truth about Hillary Clinton’s misuse of official email and the Deep State’s efforts to cover it up.

A federal judge granted us seven additional depositions, three interrogatories and four document requests related to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private, unauthorized email server.

Hillary Clinton and her former top aide and current lawyer Cheryl Mills were given 30 days to oppose being deposed by Judicial Watch (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)).

The court rejected Justice and State Department arguments to protect Mrs. Clinton and the agencies from additional discovery and ordered agency lawyers to respond to our questions about their knowledge of the Clinton email issue. The court granted all of our requested discovery but gave Clinton and Mills 30 days to file any opposition to the requests to question them in person under oath.

The new court-ordered discovery allows us to take testimony and gather evidence of Clinton’s handling of emails, specifically in an “after action memo” drafted by Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s senior advisor at State and White House liaison. The memo was created in December 2014 to memorialize the Clinton team’s processing of the Clinton emails. The discovery also asks when Justice and State Department attorneys learned about Clinton’s private email use; and what senior records-keeping officials at the State Department knew about Clinton’s emails and when they knew it.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

VA Dems Introduce Bill To Take Pensions From Sheriffs Who Opposed Gun Control

Published

on

...

* By

Maybe it’s time we start taking pensions from all elected officials. Officials who are supposed to serve us. Not us serving them. These elected officials become millionaires in office. These people continue to take from the American people.

Democrat leadership is useless and dangerous. None of them should ever be allowed to have power. This is what they do with that power. The Founders warned us this would happen.

Dear American people..stop voting these people into office.

Via Breitbart:

During CPAC, Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins told Breitbart News that Virginia Democrats are punishing sheriffs who continue to stand against gun control.

On December 7, 2019, Breitbart News reported Jenkins’ announcement that he was ready to “deputize thousands” to defend Second Amendment rights had the Virginia Democrats passed gun bans and other controls that were being pushed.

He made clear he equated his actions with calling forth the militia to defend freedom. He quoted Richard Henry Lee from 1788, saying, “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men capable of bearing arms.”

Over the past weekend of CPAC, Jenkins told Breitbart News:

In early December I came out against the newly proposed legislation to restrict everything from ‘assault weapons,’ so-called ‘assault weapons,’ to ‘high capacity magazines…and said that if we’re going to take away weapons from law-abiding citizens I intend to swear in thousands of citizens as reserve deputy sheriffs so they can keep those weapons and be able to protect themselves and use them.

Jenkins said that he and other sheriffs who took a similar stand were threatened with having insurance coverage removed “from deputies and staff.” He said that sheriffs throughout the state were offered a $10,000 raise “if we would tuck tail and follow [the Democrats’] lead and stop the push-back.”

But Jenkins refused to cower, and said they responded by saying “they would take away the raises of the deputies if we didn’t stop.”

He said State Sen. Janet Howell (D) “introduced a bill for next session where she could remove the pension of sheriffs…next year for…saying that we won’t follow unconstitutional laws or that I would use my lawful powers as sheriff to swear in thousands of people as deputies.”

Virginia Sheriff Vows to ‘Deputize Thousands’ to Defend Gun Rights

Via Breitbart:

Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins says he will “deputize thousands” to defend gun rights should incoming Democrats use their legislative positions to enact more gun control in Virginia.

On December 4, 2019, Jenkins used a Facebook post to thank the Culpeper County Board of Supervisors for standing with the dozens of other counties that have declared their intention to defend the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

But his joy was mixed with somber warnings:

Every Sheriff and Commonwealth Attorney in Virginia will see the consequences if our General Assembly passes further unnecessary gun restrictions. “Red Flag” laws without due process will create enormous conflict as well.

America has more guns than citizens and murder has long been illegal. At best, the proposed gun restrictions will disarm or handicap our law-abiding in their defense and possibly cause a criminal to choose another tool for evil.

He added:

I remain very optimistic that our General Assembly will not pass the proposed bills. Obviously, if passed, there are many of us willing to challenge these laws through the courts. In addition, if necessary, I plan to properly screen and deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.”

In January, Sheriff Richard Vaughan vowed to defend the 2nd Amendment, also.

WATCH:

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Latest Articles

[ifform list="4174" submit="Subscribe"]

Send this to a friend