Analysis: U.S.’s History Of Protecting Whistleblowers | NBC News Now

Analysis: U.S.’s History Of Protecting Whistleblowers | NBC News Now


WHISTLE-BLOWER TESTIFY FROM A REMOTE LOCATION AND DANNY REMOTE LOCATION AND DANNY CEVALIS LOOK AT WHAT PROTECTIONS CEVALIS LOOK AT WHAT PROTECTIONS THERE ARE FOR WHISTLE-BLOWER. THERE ARE FOR WHISTLE-BLOWER.>>ON THE ONE HAND YOU HAVE THE>>ON THE ONE HAND YOU HAVE THE PRINCIPLE THAT CONGRESS DOESN’T PRINCIPLE THAT CONGRESS DOESN’T NEED TO KNOW EVERYTHING THE NEED TO KNOW EVERYTHING THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS DOING, BUT EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS DOING, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, OUR ON THE OTHER HAND, OUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD GENERALLY BE GOVERNMENT SHOULD GENERALLY BE OPEN. OPEN. WHAT HAPPENS FOR WHISTLE-BLOWERS WHAT HAPPENS FOR WHISTLE-BLOWERS WHEN THESE TWO PRINCIPLES WHEN THESE TWO PRINCIPLES COLLIDE? COLLIDE? CONCERN ABOUT WHISTLE-BLOWERS CONCERN ABOUT WHISTLE-BLOWERS HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE THE REF HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE THE REF REVOLUTIONARY WAR. REVOLUTIONARY WAR. PRESIDENTS OF ALL POLITICAL PRESIDENTS OF ALL POLITICAL PARTIES HAVE LONG MAIN IT AND PARTIES HAVE LONG MAIN IT AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH SHOULD BE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH SHOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP SOME SECRETS FROM ABLE TO KEEP SOME SECRETS FROM CONGRESS. CONGRESS. THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH DATES BACK THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH DATES BACK TO THOMAS JEFFERSON WHO SAID THE TO THOMAS JEFFERSON WHO SAID THE SENATE DOES NOT NEED TO KNOW SENATE DOES NOT NEED TO KNOW EVERYTHING THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH EVERYTHING THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH DOWN. DOWN. PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT AND PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT AND PRESIDENT TAFT ISSUED GAG PRESIDENT TAFT ISSUED GAG ORDERS, FORBIDDING MEMBERS OF ORDERS, FORBIDDING MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO SPEAK TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO SPEAK TO CONGRESS UNLESS THEY GOT CONGRESS UNLESS THEY GOT APPROVAL FROM THEIR DEPARTMENT APPROVAL FROM THEIR DEPARTMENT HEADS. HEADS. LAERTS ON DANIEL ELLSBERG LAERTS ON DANIEL ELLSBERG CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS TO “THE NEW CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS TO “THE NEW YORK TIMES.” YORK TIMES.” HIS CASE OF THROWN OUT OF THE HIS CASE OF THROWN OUT OF THE PROSECUTOR’S ETHICAL VIOLATIONS. PROSECUTOR’S ETHICAL VIOLATIONS. THE SUPREME COURT DECIDED THE THE SUPREME COURT DECIDED THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF THOSE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF THOSE WHO RECEIVE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS WHO RECEIVE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS BY WHISTLE-BLOWERS. BY WHISTLE-BLOWERS. IT LEFT OPEN THE QUESTION, IT LEFT OPEN THE QUESTION, HOWEVER, OF WHETHER HOWEVER, OF WHETHER WHISTLE-BLOWERS THEMSELVES ARE WHISTLE-BLOWERS THEMSELVES ARE ENTITLED TO PROTECTION. ENTITLED TO PROTECTION. THE LINE BETWEEN WHISTLE-BLOWER THE LINE BETWEEN WHISTLE-BLOWER AND TRAITOR CAN BE A REALLY FINE AND TRAITOR CAN BE A REALLY FINE ONE DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF ONE DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE INFORMATION LEAKED AND THE THE INFORMATION LEAKED AND THE CONDUCT OF THE INDIVIDUAL CONDUCT OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHISTLE-BLOWER. WHISTLE-BLOWER. CONTEXT AND THE INDIVIDUAL FACTS CONTEXT AND THE INDIVIDUAL FACTS ARE KEY. ARE KEY. OFTEN A WHISTLE-BLOWER IS OFTEN A WHISTLE-BLOWER IS PERCEIVED AS A HERO BY SOME PERCEIVED AS A HERO BY SOME AMERICANS AND A VILLAIN BY OTHER AMERICANS AND A VILLAIN BY OTHER AMERICANS. AMERICANS. TACK EDWARD SNOWDEN. TACK EDWARD SNOWDEN. ON THE ONE HAND YOU CAN SAY HE ON THE ONE HAND YOU CAN SAY HE STOLE GOVERNOR SECRETS ENTRUSTED STOLE GOVERNOR SECRETS ENTRUSTED TO HIM. TO HIM. ON THE OTHER HAND SOME PEOPLE ON THE OTHER HAND SOME PEOPLE SEE HIM AS SHEDDING A LIGHT ON SEE HIM AS SHEDDING A LIGHT ON GOVERNMENT PRACTICES THAT ARE GOVERNMENT PRACTICES THAT ARE REALLY ETHICALLY DUBIOUS. REALLY ETHICALLY DUBIOUS. EDWARD SNOWDEN BELIEVED HE HAD EDWARD SNOWDEN BELIEVED HE HAD TO LEAK SENSITIVE GOVERNMENT TO LEAK SENSITIVE GOVERNMENT INFORMATION TO LET THE PUBLIC INFORMATION TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS KNOW THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS INTRUDING ON THEIR PRIVATE LIVES INTRUDING ON THEIR PRIVATE LIVES IN WAYS THEY NEVER IMAGINED. IN WAYS THEY NEVER IMAGINED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ON THE OTHER HAND, THE GOVERNMENT DIDN’T SEE IT THAT GOVERNMENT DIDN’T SEE IT THAT WAY AND CHARGED HIM WITH CRIMES WAY AND CHARGED HIM WITH CRIMES OF ESPIONAGE. OF ESPIONAGE. AS WE SIT HERE TODAY, SNOWDEN AS WE SIT HERE TODAY, SNOWDEN LIVES IN RUSSIA IN EXILE. LIVES IN RUSSIA IN EXILE. SNOWDEN SAYS HE’S NOT ASKING FOR SNOWDEN SAYS HE’S NOT ASKING FOR A PASS, JUST LOOKING FOR A FAIR A PASS, JUST LOOKING FOR A FAIR TRIAL. TRIAL. EVEN IF THEY BELIEVE THE ACTIONS EVEN IF THEY BELIEVE THE ACTIONS ARE JUSTIFIED, THEY WILL ALMOST ARE JUSTIFIED, THEY WILL ALMOST SURELY FACE ALEGAL ACTION. SURELY FACE ALEGAL ACTION. THE MERIT SYSTEM’S PROTECTION THE MERIT SYSTEM’S PROTECTION BOARD IS DESIGNED TO ADJUDICATE BOARD IS DESIGNED TO ADJUDICATE CLAIMS OF WHISTLE-BLOWERS, BUT CLAIMS OF WHISTLE-BLOWERS, BUT HISTORICALLY THEY ALMOST NEVER HISTORICALLY THEY ALMOST NEVER RULE IN THE FAVOR OF RULE IN THE FAVOR OF WHISTLE-BLOWERS AND YET EVEN WHISTLE-BLOWERS AND YET EVEN MORE INCENTIVE TO MORE INCENTIVE TO WHISTLE-BLOWERS TO WANT TO STAY WHISTLE-BLOWERS TO WANT TO STAY QUIET. QUIET. WHETHER THE CURRENT WHETHER THE CURRENT WHISTLE-BLOWER’S NAME WILL BE WHISTLE-BLOWER’S NAME WILL BE KNOWN OR FACE ANY NEG IF I HAVE KNOWN OR FACE ANY NEG IF I HAVE CONSEQUENCES REMAINS TO BE SEEN CONSEQUENCES REMAINS TO BE SEEN BUT WHISTLE-BLOWERING IS NOTHING

7 comments

  1. Scruffy looks don't make you an expert on American history. And anyways, you are just rading from script written by the democrat party propaganda squad.

  2. You don’t have to worry about the “ Blower “ The EU are sending an Ukrainian mountain goat who might have munched on a piece of government paper to testify at this absolutely fascinating “ trial” 🇩🇰

  3. Most of this was very good and insightful but to even call the current whistle blower an actual "whistle blower" is non-sense. They had only 2nd hand knowledge of a phone call that has since been made public. Therefore, all of us have far more factual knowledge of Trump's phone call than the person calling themselves a "whistleblower".
    Also, everything they said turned out to be BS… and we've since learned it's just a disgruntled Democrat.

  4. Ask: "Why was the whistleblower form changed for this particular person?"

    Ask, "Why did the so-called whistleblower meet with Adam Schiff's staff before filing his report?"

    Ask, "Why did this come out the same week as the DOJ inspector general's report on FISA abuse was making the rounds of those who were found to be abusing their positions of power?"

    Ask: "Did Joe Biden bribe Ukranian officials?"

    Ask: "What is this Crowdstike thing that Trump asked the Ukrainian president to look into?"

    You claim to be journalists. Ask the questions that matter or go home.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *