Last active
2 years, 1 month ago
  • It is unquestioned that the “merit principles” on the bedrock values for regulating the management culture in FBI. See 5 U.S.C. 2301,the Director of the FBI’s primary statutory duty to FBI employees is to “take any action…necessary” to ensure FBI “embodies” the merit principles.

    What is not clear, 35 years after passage of CSRA, is whether the definitions of “personnel actions” and “prohibited personnel practices (PPP)” of 5 USC 2302 apply, in whole or part, in FBI. Without this being established, the management culture in FBI cannot be properly regulated.

    A federal workplace that allows ANY kind of PPP (such as nepotism, favoritism in promotions (i.e. trade sex or money – or collude in corruption- to become the boss’s “favorite”), etc, will likely allow EVERY type of PPP, including reprisal.

    GAP exploits foolhardy FBI employees, that has been its business model for decades, across all federal agencies. The questions to ask, repeatedly, of FBI (as of every other federal agency) are:

    1) can FBI employees effectively bring forward concerns?

    2) are FBI employees adequately protected from reprisal and other types of PPPS?

    3) Is there an objective basis by which Director of FBI can say the answers to questions 1 and 2 are “yes”?

    Unless and until the answers to all 3 questions are “yes,” instead of the current “no” or “don’t know,” the primary statutory duty of FBI director to his employees is to “take any action…..necessary” so that the answers are all “yes.”

    GAP is the single biggest obstacle to this, its business model benefits by FBI’s management culture remaining broken, while it offers pretend answers.

  • Hi Kevin et al,

    Ms. Radack may be (rightly in my opinion) disgusted with how Gen. Alexander and other former gov’t employees now make lots of money by trading on their knowledge of classified things, but I think she should hold the mirror up to herself too.

    I say, publicly, at whatever risk to my professional engineer (PE) license, federal job and pension, that she – also out of “love of money” and professional status – enables decades-long, compounded, continuing, civilization-threatening law-breaking in the two tiny and obscure federal agencies – Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) – that have essential duties for the regulation of the management culture in every federal agency, including intelligence agencies. See for a 3 minute-long, professionally produced video, in which I call upon President Obama to comply with his primary statutory duty to 2.1 million federal agency employees by directing a lawful resolution of my well-evidenced claims.

    I say that Ms. Radack as GAP, POGO, etc are good watchdogs – until the gov’t law-breaking benefts them or their organizations – then “not so much.” I say John Kiriakou is not a convicted criminal absent how GAP and POGO have exploited, for decades, this gov’t agency law-breaking because it creates foolhardy souls as John Kiriakou doing foolhardy things – such as putting duty to the common good before one’s personal economy – a mistake Ms. Radack won’t make again apparently – whom they exploit as Ms. Radack exploits Mr. Kiriakou to advance her professional standing and the business model of her employer and client, GAP.

    I publicly invite her to file a professional misconduct complaint against me with my State PE licensing authority in TN if she thinks my claims are not truthful and objective – I welcome any opportunity to make my case.

    Joe Carson, PE
    Knoxville, TN

  • Kevin,

    Your post fails to mention Snowden had a statutory right to make his disclosure to U.S. Office of Special Counsel, confidentially, per 5 U.S.C. section 1213(g)(1). NSA employees have right to do so per 5 U.S.C. section 1213(b) and (c). There disclosures would be automatically transmitted to House/Senate Intel committees, per section 1213(h).

    The President’s directive on classified whistleblowing fails to mention the OSC disclosure channel, despite its being (on paper) the primary mechanism for such classified disclosures and the only one that has a statutory mandate to provide confidentiality to the concerned federal (or federal contractor) employee.

    See for extensive detail. For 25 years OSC has unlawfully denied federal contractor employees have a disclosure right with it per section 1213(g)(1).

  • Radack exploits foolhardy souls as Drake and Kiriakou and justifies it by saying “GAP is my client” because GAP’s business model depends on its “looking other way” at 35 years of gov’t lawbreaking at U.S. Office of Special Counsel and 35 years of enabling lawbreaking at U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board – which has, as one expected result, patriots at Drake and Kiriakou risking for the public good and becoming poster children for GAP’s shameless fundraising –shame on her and GAP.

    I challenge her or anyone at GAP to file a professional misconduct complaint against me with TN Board of Engineering if they consider my claims untruthful or non-objective. See for extensive detail. J

    Joe Carson, PE

  • jpcarson became a registered member

    2012-11-24 07:38:16View | Delete