Skip to main content

      Fire Dog Lake wrote an article trying to explain the unconscionable position of the Obama Administration to be able to fire a government employee who testifies under oath.  It would not matter whether or not that person is subpeonaed or not.

      Their flawed reasoning is that the employee would have information that was not available to the general public, and therefore exposing that information in a court of law is tantamount to treason of the employer and a firing offence.

      This position is key to their argument against whistle blowers who give information to the FBI or other agencies to bring forth corruption, fraud,  and other charges against their employer (the US government)  .  

      The first amendment is being challenged because the Obama administration doesn't feel that free speech should be extended to testifying under oath at court proceedings.  They are arguing therefore that it would be in an employees interest to LIE under oath in order to keep their job.  This leaves an employee in an untenable position to either follow the law to tell the truth about a matter or to lie and/or plead the 5th in order to keep their job.  

The case that was heard was Lane v. Franks and SCOTUS is struggling to come to terms with the Obama Administrations argument.  Links are below to the FDL article as well as the transcripts in the SCOTUS arguments.


    Do you think the Obama administration is right or wrong in their arguments?


Is the Obama administration right in trying to stifle free speech in a court of law?

21%13 votes
77%47 votes
1%1 votes
0%0 votes

| 61 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site