As most know an Inspector General (IG) must deem a complaint credible, and the Intelligence Community IG deemed the Whistleblower complaint in affair Ukraine credible. But it appears the IG didn't even review the phone call transcript. Are there Departmental procedures for evaluating credibility, and if so what are they?
Are there Departmental procedures for evaluating credibility, and if so what are they?
The requirement, with respect to a whistleblower complaints of "urgent concern", is that "the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible." See 50 U.S. Code § 3033 (k)(5)(B).1 [Emphasis added.]
The Director of National Intelligence (DNI), the parent for the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, published the following definition.
Credible Information. Information disclosed or obtained by an investigator that, considering the source and nature of the information and the totality of the circumstances, is sufficiently believable to lead a trained investigator to presume that the fact or facts in question are true. (DoDI 5505.7, 7 Jan 2003) 2
There is a similarity between "appears" (seem; give the impression of being) and "presume" (suppose that something is the case on the basis of probability). Neither of these words suggest a requirement to investigate all possible evidence (or facts) to reach a "determination" (the resolving of a question by argument or reasoning) of "appearance" or "presumption".
IG investigations, not of "urgent concern", deal with more information and facts, rather than "appearance", and have much longer time frames to reach their conclusions.