Post #25913 by albaby1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (30)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 7

Let's take the 51 "intelligence" officials who abused their positions and openly lied via implication about Hunter Biden's laptop. These people should be, if still employed by the government.

Take that example. What actions do you think they took that could support a firing for cause under the Civil Service Act? My understanding is that you're referring to the then-former CIA folks who wrote an open letter claiming that the release of the emails "has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation." Leave aside the non-trivial question of whether or not the specific claims made in the letter were even false (some things can and will have "all the classic earmarks" of an information operation and not end up being an information operation) - if those folks are currently in government employment, how would authoring that letter violate the terms of their employment?

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (30)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.