HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » Trump's use of NDAs with ...

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 02:40 PM

Trump's use of NDAs with his staff breaks with precedent of past administrations

Sarah Hucklebuck Sanders just lied about this at today's briefing. One lie among a pretty constant stream.

https://www.bustle.com/p/did-obama-require-non-disclosure-agreements-trump-broke-precedent-again-10081835
After it became public information that Trump had required White House employees to sign binding NDAs that would last even after Trump's presidency ends, The Washington Post wrote that Trump was the first president to do this. According to Debra Katz, a lawyer who spoke to The Washington Post on the subject, demanding an NDA that includes a financial penalty as Trump's is reported to have is "an outrageous effort to limit and chill speech."

"Once again, this president believes employees owe him a personal duty of loyalty, when their duty of loyalty is to the institution," Katz told The Washington Post.

As Politico reported, Obama also didn't like leaks coming from the White House. However, he didn't use Trump's businessman's tactic of requiring NDAs in order to stop them.

7 replies, 1716 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply Trump's use of NDAs with his staff breaks with precedent of past administrations (Original post)
Gidney N Cloyd Aug 2018 OP
Sophia4 Aug 2018 #1
yallerdawg Aug 2018 #2
Thyla Aug 2018 #3
lagomorph777 Aug 2018 #4
Thyla Aug 2018 #5
lagomorph777 Aug 2018 #6
Gidney N Cloyd Aug 2018 #7

Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Original post)

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 02:44 PM

1. The idea that White House employees would be asked to sign NDAs beyond normal

 

security agreements is shocking. It is outrageous. It deprives the voting public from knowing the truth about what is going on in the White House.

Ugggghhhhh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Original post)

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 02:47 PM

2. They're obviously conflating...

classified material restrictions with "non-disclosure agreements" - just more bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Original post)

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 02:49 PM

3. I'm surprised you can have a binding NDA

In relation to a position of public office. National security aside, government workings are supposed to be at least somewhat transparent.
Not being from the US myself I can't really speak for the law there but surely these contracts are voided via transparency of public office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thyla (Reply #3)

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 02:53 PM

4. Contracts requiring illegal action are automatically invalid.

These NDAs require violation of the laws on government transparency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #4)

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 03:01 PM

5. This is what I would of thought

Thanks!
I just wasn't sure if maybe it is a quirk of the US legal system or constitution.
This is not my strong point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thyla (Reply #5)

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 03:02 PM

6. I'm no lawyer either, but that's what I've heard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thyla (Reply #3)

Tue Aug 14, 2018, 03:05 PM

7. The full article at the link gets into that somewhat.

Obama's counsel pretty much said what you're saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread