Several people on OPP have been parroting a lie, and it is likely they aren’t lying themselves just that they have once again been conned by the I***t Pumpkinfuhrer’s crooked enablers. The lie is that the whistleblower law was changed in August allowing secondhand information, the t***h is that no such change happened it is just another lie told to give cover to Trumps crimes.
https://www.mediamatters.org/federalist/false-report-federalist-about-whistleblower-complaints-fuels-trump-defenders-impeachment

So give us an example of any other whistle blower complaint or claim that was based upon second hand information? It's pretty much implied that second hand information is not eye witness evidence nor is it even considered. Other wise, I'll have the cops across the city writing tickets for second hand information they are going to get from me about running red lights, driving drunk, littering, jay walking, etc, etc.

And just consider how this can come back to haunt our world when, like in the Kavanaugh confirmation and other campaigns, we will begin to see more and more "victims" coming forward with accusations of who knows what 20 - 30 years ago and even worse, from any political opponent, endless whistle blower accusations being made against any public official from Mayor to President of the US. Our gov's will be so tied up with bogus BS that nothing will get done.

So give us an example of any other whistle blower complaint or claim that was based upon second hand information? It's pretty much implied that second hand information is not eye witness evidence nor is it even considered. Other wise, I'll have the cops across the city writing tickets for second hand information they are going to get from me about running red lights, driving drunk, littering, jay walking, etc, etc.

And just consider how this can come back to haunt our world when, like in the Kavanaugh confirmation and other campaigns, we will begin to see more and more "victims" coming forward with accusations of who knows what 20 - 30 years ago and even worse, from any political opponent, endless whistle blower accusations being made against any public official from Mayor to President of the US. Our gov's will be so tied up with bogus BS that nothing will get done.

If the form was just changed recently to allow 2nd hand accounts, I don't think there could be ANY 2nd hand complaints prior to the form being changed. What I can't figure out, if the "whistleblower" was not a deep state operative in collusion with House and MSM Democrats sniffing around for any kind of "dirt" that could be dug up on the President, why didn't those other swamp creatures who HAD 1st hand information that they funneled to the "whistleblower" file their own whistleblower complaint based upon their own 1st hand knowledge?

If the form was just changed recently to allow 2nd hand accounts, I don't think there could be ANY 2nd hand complaints prior to the form being changed. What I can't figure out, if the "whistleblower" was not a deep state operative in collusion with House and MSM Democrats sniffing around for any kind of "dirt" that could be dug up on the President, why didn't those other swamp creatures who HAD 1st hand information that they funneled to the "whistleblower" file their own whistleblower complaint based upon their own 1st hand knowledge?

The controlling statute is 50 U.S. Code § 3033(k)(5)(G), which lays out the following requirements, none of which are firsthand knowledge:

(G) In this paragraph, the term “urgent concern” means any of the following:

(i) A serious or f**grant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters.

(ii) 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.

(iii) An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee’s reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.