Is the NYT op-ed Sedition and Treason

a reply to: Krazysh0t
sorry for your daftness
blabbing to the nyt is in no way a protected activity under the act you so gaudily brandished here

originally posted by: roadgravel

Yes, the president hires his cabinet to advise him, not to surreptitiously steal papers from his desk, not to "thwart" or "frustrate" the leader, not to leak or spread propaganda to the NYT.

So he is hiring the wrong people.

Precisely where I think this story ends. And at worse, they get fired.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t
sorry for your daftness
blabbing to the nyt is in no way a protected activity under the act you so gaudily brandished here

Really? Where is it spelled out that whistle blowers can't blow whistles to the news? I don't see anything you posted that corroborates this point. It looks like you are talking out your ass to me.

a reply to: roadgravel

So he is hiring the wrong people.

Yes. The argument that Trump was hiring obsequious loyalists and those who only want to appease him was false.

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: roadgravel

So he is hiring the wrong people.

Yes. The argument that Trump was hiring obsequious loyalists and those who only want to appease him was false.

This would then make a poor statement about his ability to choose the right person for a job.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
perhaps a reading comprehension tutor is in order?

ok junior here is the spoon fed version

en.wikipedia.org...

The Supreme Court has ruled this protection only applies to government workers when the disclosure is not directly related to the job. The U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) uses agency lawyers in the place of "administrative law judges" to decide federal employees' whistleblower appeals. These lawyers, dubbed "attorney examiners," deny 98% of whistleblower appeals; the Board and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals give great deference to their initial decisions, resulting in affirmance rates of 97% and 98%, respectively.[23] Whistleblower Protection does not always protect federal workers. The Supreme Court ruling excludes whistleblower actions covered in the job description for federal workers. Job related issues must go through the hierarchy of the organization

much like other civics related things you do not understand, a federal worker has a venue to use when "whistleblowing" and guess what....it aint the nyt

a reply to: roadgravel

This would then make a poor statement about his ability to choose the right person for a job.

No, it would be to blame Trump for the actions of someone else.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I'm not sure you understand what you just posted. None of that says a whistleblower can't blow the whistle to a news organization.

PS: Take a gander at this text:

Issues that exist outside the job-description are not prohibited by Garcetti v. Ceballos. Public disclosure of the work environment not related to work assignments does not compromise essential functions like national security and law enforcement. In theory, criminal penalties apply to managers that discipline employees for public disclosure of situations outside the job description.

This article which is blowing the whistle on the work environment under Trump falls under this text.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: shooterbrody

I'm not sure you understand what you just posted. None of that says a whistleblower can't blow the whistle to a news organization.

wallow in your ignorance
your choice
have fun with it

a reply to: shooterbrody

I am having a blast proving you guys wrong today. Thanks for you concern.

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: roadgravel

This would then make a poor statement about his ability to choose the right person for a job.

No, it would be to blame Trump for the actions of someone else.

There should be much information on these people's background to make a decent judgement. I suppose it could have been easy to fool Trump and secure a position. Given the number of people he has gone through, I think some of the problem is him.

originally posted by: roadgravel

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: roadgravel

This would then make a poor statement about his ability to choose the right person for a job.

No, it would be to blame Trump for the actions of someone else.

There should be much information on these people's background to make a decent judgement. I suppose it could have been easy to fool Trump and secure a position. Given the number of people he has gone through, I think some of the problem is him.

That's a massive assumption. I refuse to make such a leap.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

How is the author of the article a whistleblower?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: shooterbrody

I am having a blast proving you guys wrong today. Thanks for you concern.

www.workplacefairness.org...

3. How do I "blow the whistle?"

There are three common ways for federal employees to blow the whistle:
Report to a supervisor
Contact the Inspector General - IG
Contact the Office of Special Counsel

lol
you may now return to the spreading of your ignorance

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How is the author of the article a whistleblower?

Because he's blowing the whistle on Trump's incompetence and inability to act Presidential and he's supposedly speaking from a position of authority within Trump's administration. It's really not that hard to understand.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Would you care to do the same? Care to explain how you believe someone working within the Government to subvert the lawful Constitutional authority/duties of the POTUS is a "whistle blower"

Just because they are also writing anonymous OP-ED's does not immunize them from their professed acts of subverting the Constitution. IE: they are a domestic enemy. Even if their written work qualifies under the whistle blower protections you described, they are not immunized from criminal liability in regard to other crimes committed.

Treason, sedition and insurrection are not laughing matters.

also, it seems the NYT could possibly be compelled to reveal the source under penalty of 18 U.S. Code § 2382 - Misprision of treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

It is clear several other laws also may apply, outside of Constitutionally defined treason.

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

Like I said "may apply"

Either way, I support all lawful remedies to this person's confessed conduct. Observe due process, afford the accused all rights, and generally prosecute it like any other crime. Follow the law. If they are charged and subsequently convicted then they deserve the punishment proscribed by the law.

What is so difficult about that?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sure, and in that limited regard he may be "whistle blowing"

However, that doesn't have anything to do with his/her working within the administration to subvert Constitutional rule/legitimate government.

You do realize how big of a deal this is don't you? This verifies everything Trump has been saying about DEEPSTATE while simultaneously rebuking all of the left wingers who mocked/jeered Trump voters for believing our President when he warned us about the DEEPSTATE conspiracy.

Edward Snowden, for instance, was certainly a whistle blower when he leaked NSA mass spying secrets to Glen Greenwald. He was certainly acting as a whistle blower. Your logic is flawed however, because if Snowden would've killed somebody or robbed a bank while fleeing the country, he would still be a whistle blower and a suspected murderer/robbery suspect. The two are not mutually exclusive, is my point. And you're attempting to conflate the two.

You're attempting to say that if any of his/her actions constitute "whistle blowing" then all of their other acts/crimes fall under that umbrella and you are wrong

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: roadgravel

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: roadgravel

This would then make a poor statement about his ability to choose the right person for a job.

No, it would be to blame Trump for the actions of someone else.

There should be much information on these people's background to make a decent judgement. I suppose it could have been easy to fool Trump and secure a position. Given the number of people he has gone through, I think some of the problem is him.

That's a massive assumption. I refuse to make such a leap.

Sure, they don't check into people backgrounds before getting jobs at this level or security clearances.

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson

Trump doesn't find them and Trumps get impeached
Trump gets impeached by the deep state, will it lead to Americans using their 2nd amendment rights against the deep state?

I don't know how you can fight the deep state, since they're protected, behind a patchwork of laser beams and quadruple steel doors, in their deep underground lair. This sounds like a job for Bond. James Bond.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How is the author of the article a whistleblower?

Because he's blowing the whistle on Trump's incompetence and inability to act Presidential and he's supposedly speaking from a position of authority within Trump's administration. It's really not that hard to understand.

none of which are a crime
not that you would understand such
continue pulling things from your backside and pretending they are relevant