so for realsies
how did this happen?;
Quote
FIRST-HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED
In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.This includes information received from another person, such as when a fellow employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing. (Anyone with first-hand knowledge of the allegations may file a disclosure in writing directly with IC IG.) Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient legal basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA
I'm inclined to give the 'shallow state' theory more credit when that passage was conspicuously removed from the whistleblower complaint form at the apparent exact same time this complaint was filed. Now, its possible that internal deliberation within the IC led to that change after the CIA guy argued that section was improper based on the statute. That would be troubling enough because it would be a reinterpretation of the statute, but at least it could be handled through a legitimate process (ie, CIA agent wants to file a whistleblower complaint, sees this clause prohibits it, brings it to attention of the IC management or lawyers and argues there's no such requirement in the statute, they agree and change it).
the problem with that theory is that its been a couple days since people noticed this, and no such explanation has been provided and there has only been complete silence to reporters who asked. If it was changed "legitimately", why wouldn't they just say that?
which means someone with access to this form had to have edited it just to allow this complaint to proceed, which indicates the 'whistleblower' might have had help from politically aligned figures within the IC that wanted to advance this impeachment effort and remove any hurdles that would have disqualified it. Or maybe the guy himself had access to it and changed it. Its possible, but unlikely, that we're looking at a very shoddy guy who hacked the server or abused his own powers to change that, but its more likely that someone higher up agreed to do it.
But there's definitely meat to this thread of the story. There's a few people on twitter claiming that the form change was much older, but from what I can see they're linking to a different, but similar form ("IC IG ICWSP Form 401, vs ICIG CPD - ICWPA Disclosure Form).