Trump said:WHO CHANGED THE LONG STANDING WHISTLEBLOWER RULES JUST BEFORE SUBMITTAL OF THE FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER REPORT? DRAIN THE SWAMP!
This has already been debunked. The whistleblower rules weren't changed, and, of course, if you look at the whistleblower statute, it never had a requirement limiting complaints to those with first-hand knowledge.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1178651638313226240
Federal records show that the intelligence community secretly revised the formal whistleblower complaint form in August 2019 to eliminate the requirement of direct, first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.
Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings. This raises questions about the intelligence community’s behavior regarding the August submission of a whistleblower complaint against President Donald Trump. The new complaint document no longer requires potential whistleblowers who wish to have their concerns expedited to Congress to have direct, first-hand knowledge of the alleged wrongdoing that they are reporting.
Are you quite certain? I would like to see a citation, because I'm still seeing the opposite, like this from The Federalist:
The kernel of fact near the center of the conspiracy theory is that there is, indeed, a new version of Form 401 dated August 2019.
A question on the form explicitly anticipates tips based on secondhand information, and asks the whistleblower to check a box: “I have direct and personal knowledge,” or, “I heard about it from others.” The Federalist used a screenshot of that field to illustrate its story.
What the article didn’t mention or screenshot is a nearly identical field gracing Form 401 since at least May 2018, making it impossible that it was added as an easement for Trump’s whistleblower. The major difference in the fields is that the old form includes three options instead of two, subdividing secondhand sources into outside source and “other employees.”
There’s a reason the form has allowed secondhand reports all along. The requirement for firsthand whistleblowing only is completely made up.
“There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have firsthand knowledge of what they’re reporting,” said Irvin McCullough, an investigator at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project (and the son of a former IC IG). “They need to have a reasonable belief. The firsthand information is usually gathered by the inspector general, as I believe did occur here.”
When the IC IG receives an urgent report, it has 14 days to conduct a preliminary review under the law. If that investigation produces enough direct evidence, the IC IG can rule it “credible,” which triggers the legal requirement to forward the report to the director of central intelligence (DCI), and from there to Congress.
The Federalist and supporters of the Atkinson smear also point to a two-page information sheet distributed as part of the May 2018 version of the form but not the August 2019 version. It’s unclear when it was dropped, but a paragraph in that now-excised preamble was headed, “First-Hand Information Required,” seemingly contradicting the form itself. “In order to find an ‘urgent’ concern credible, the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information,” the text read in part. “The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.”
Though the text is confusingly drafted—which may be why the entire preamble was canned—a careful reading shows it’s not erecting a new hurdle for filing a whistleblower complaint, but rather describing the type of evidence the IC IG has to gather to judge the complaint “credible” at the end of its 14-day investigation.
I know you specified "good link", but the source doesn't matter when the facts seem to be facts.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-s...h-trump-inspector-general-whistleblower-smear
So it seems more like a selective framing of what one side wants the modified date to imply.
Not discounting the likely fakeness of this entire situation, but he/they are participating in a little fakeness of their own.
INVESTIGATIONS
The OIG investigates a wide variety of allegations of waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct involving NSA/CSS programs, operations, and personnel.The OIG initiates investigations based upon information from a variety of sources, including complaints made to the OIG Hotline; information uncovered during its inspections, audits, and reviews; and referrals from other Agency organizations.Complaints can be made to the OIG Hotline online, by email, regular mail, telephone, or in person, and individuals can do so anonymously or identify themselves but indicate that they wish to maintain their confidentiality.
Whistleblowers play a critical role by reporting what they reasonably believe to be waste, fraud, and abuse in government operations. Under Agency policy, whistleblowers have a duty to report wrongdoing. It is critical to the work of the OIG that they report any concerns without fear of retaliation. The NSA OIG Hotline provides a mechanism for whistleblowers to make a protected communication to the OIG.
The OIG investigates all credible claims of whistleblower reprisal and has a statutory obligation to maintain complainants' confidentiality. The FISA Amendments Act of 2017 extended whistleblower protections to Intelligence Community contractors.
Lawful whistleblowing is getting the right information to the right people. When you have a reasonable belief that wrongdoing is occurring, you have a duty to report it.
...
Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) of 1998 provides a secure means for employees to report to Congress allegations regarding classified information. The ICWPA is a statute that provides a process by which employees, or contractor employees, of IC elements can report matters of "urgent concern" to the .
An "urgent concern" is defined as:
- A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinion concerning public policy matters.
- A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity.
- An action constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal in response to an employee reporting an urgent concern.
Whistleblowing is the lawful disclosure of information a person reasonably believes evidences wrongdoing to an authorized recipient. It is the mechanism to relay the right information to the right people to counter wrongdoing and promote the proper, effective, and efficient performance of the Intelligence Community’s mission. Whistleblowing in the IC is extremely important as it ensures that personnel can “say something” when they “see something” through formal reporting procedures without harming national security and without retaliation.