Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Julian Englis

(2,309 posts)
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 04:49 PM Mar 2018

Trump made senior staff sign nondisclosure agreements. Theyre supposed to last beyond his presidenc

Source: The Washington Post

Back in April 2016, when the notion of Donald Trump in the White House still seemed fanciful, The Post’s Robert Costa and Bob Woodward sat down with Trump, and Costa, at one point, raised the subject of the nondisclosure agreements for employees of which the candidate was so fond.

Costa: “One thing I always wondered, are you going to make employees of the federal government sign nondisclosure agreements?”

Trump: “I think they should. .?.?. And I don’t know, there could be some kind of a law that you can’t do this. But when people are chosen by a man to go into government at high levels and then they leave government and they write a book about a man and say a lot of things that were really guarded and personal, I don’t like that. I mean, I’ll be honest. And people would say, oh, that’s terrible, you’re taking away his right to free speech. Well, he’s going in.”

Reader, it happened. In the early months of the administration, at the behest of now-President Trump, who was furious over leaks from within the White House, senior White House staff members were asked to, and did, sign nondisclosure agreements vowing not to reveal confidential information and exposing them to damages for any violation. Some balked at first but, pressed by then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and the White House Counsel’s Office, ultimately complied, concluding that the agreements would likely not be enforceable in any event.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-nondisclosure-agreements-came-with-him-to-the-white-house/2018/03/18/226f4522-29ee-11e8-b79d-f3d931db7f68_story.html

29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump made senior staff sign nondisclosure agreements. Theyre supposed to last beyond his presidenc (Original Post) Julian Englis Mar 2018 OP
It's always something with that treasonous bastard...always trying to keep his sick actions secret. brush Mar 2018 #1
That is my new go to line........... trixie2 Mar 2018 #17
You are quite welcome. brush Mar 2018 #19
Does anyone besides Stormy Daniels have the guts to fight this shit? hamsterjill Mar 2018 #2
Doing citizen's public business under a NDA? Got to be illegal somewhere. bucolic_frolic Mar 2018 #3
That's what I'm thinking. TheSmarterDog Mar 2018 #5
Bingo! DemoTex Mar 2018 #6
Yes PatSeg Mar 2018 #8
The NDA for government is called a security clearance... tinrobot Mar 2018 #20
Such agreements are probably only binding before a person takes office otherwise they would be cstanleytech Mar 2018 #4
Can't be legally binding.. paleotn Mar 2018 #7
Im thinking an NDA will mean PunksMom Mar 2018 #9
You're correct. herding cats Mar 2018 #10
Thanks! PunksMom Mar 2018 #21
He thinks they owe him loyalty Progressive dog Mar 2018 #11
Ha ha ha nda vs subpoena: subpoena wins. Voltaire2 Mar 2018 #12
Good luck with that, Donnie. SergeStorms Mar 2018 #13
So would most all of us. Just be careful that these aren't read as other than metaphorically. erronis Mar 2018 #15
Agent Mike knows....... SergeStorms Mar 2018 #22
I thought it was the republicans that were always whining about people who file frivolous lawsuits Submariner Mar 2018 #14
Everyone who works in the government gets their paychecks from the US Treasury, procon Mar 2018 #16
I seem to recall NDAs can not be used to cover up illegal activity. Hugin Mar 2018 #18
unenforceable azureblue Mar 2018 #23
Are you forgetting who makes up the Supreme Court? 3Hotdogs Mar 2018 #24
Freedom of Information Act must trump an NDA meadowlander Mar 2018 #25
I doubt that is enforceable Lil Missy Mar 2018 #26
The point is to intimidate people into not testing whether it is enforceable. JHB Mar 2018 #28
Did he do that to these guys too? duforsure Mar 2018 #27
Not enforceable. Trump has no clue about the difference between government and business. Nitram Mar 2018 #29

trixie2

(905 posts)
17. That is my new go to line...........
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 06:44 PM
Mar 2018
It's always something with that treasonous bastard.


Thank you!

hamsterjill

(15,223 posts)
2. Does anyone besides Stormy Daniels have the guts to fight this shit?
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 05:10 PM
Mar 2018

Take his ass to court. Anything signed under duress is impeachable.

DemoTex

(25,400 posts)
6. Bingo!
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 05:24 PM
Mar 2018

Let the sunshine in! An NDA for government business seems, to me, to be very close to obstruction of justice.

PatSeg

(47,560 posts)
8. Yes
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 05:37 PM
Mar 2018

I cannot imagine this ever holding up in a court of law. The White House is not his personal business.

tinrobot

(10,913 posts)
20. The NDA for government is called a security clearance...
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 08:05 PM
Mar 2018

Apparently, nobody in the White House seems to have one of those.

cstanleytech

(26,310 posts)
4. Such agreements are probably only binding before a person takes office otherwise they would be
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 05:20 PM
Mar 2018

abused by numerous candidates to cover up things.
Thats not to say there are not federal laws preventing people from revealing classified information (unless your last name is Nunes in which case you can do it without fear of being held accountable since your party holds the majority) but in general a NDA made before the candidate took office would probably not be valid for anything that takes place once they are sworn in.

Progressive dog

(6,917 posts)
11. He thinks they owe him loyalty
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 06:04 PM
Mar 2018

They don't, morally or legally. The agreements are worthless, just like the psychopath who required them.

SergeStorms

(19,204 posts)
13. Good luck with that, Donnie.
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 06:14 PM
Mar 2018

They're public employees, not yours! I'd really, really, really, really, REALLY love to punch Trump right in his stupid looking orange face.

erronis

(15,324 posts)
15. So would most all of us. Just be careful that these aren't read as other than metaphorically.
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 06:32 PM
Mar 2018

Certain types of people don't understand metaphor or projection or deep hope.

Personally, I'd like to see much worse things happen to it than a bloody nose.

SergeStorms

(19,204 posts)
22. Agent Mike knows.......
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 09:04 PM
Mar 2018

I'm only kidding. We go back years, Agent Mike and I. All the way to the Reagan years, right, Agent Mike? I would never do anything to harm, or to bring harm to, our duly elected president, Donnie J. Trump.

Submariner

(12,506 posts)
14. I thought it was the republicans that were always whining about people who file frivolous lawsuits
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 06:14 PM
Mar 2018

and demanding Tort Reform.

Trump is the master of frivolous lawsuits. Example, suing Bill Maher for claiming Trump's father was an Orangutan. Whine...whine...whine..

procon

(15,805 posts)
16. Everyone who works in the government gets their paychecks from the US Treasury,
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 06:33 PM
Mar 2018

NOT Donald Trump. He can hire and fire, but they are still government employees who work for the American People and swear an oath to defend to Constitution. Trump can't force them to sign anything, If he used coercion, intimidation and extortion tactics to pressure them into complying with his demands, they could probably turn around and sue him for interfering with the lawful duties of govt officials.

azureblue

(2,149 posts)
23. unenforceable
Sun Mar 18, 2018, 09:32 PM
Mar 2018

they do not serve Trump. They serve either the office of the President or the country. Trump cannot use his office to make people sign personal contracts with him..

JHB

(37,161 posts)
28. The point is to intimidate people into not testing whether it is enforceable.
Mon Mar 19, 2018, 08:00 AM
Mar 2018

Until the courts rule it is unenforceable, people who sign one always have to consider the possibility that it will be judged enforceable and leave them liable for anything they say.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump made senior staff s...