It's contemptible that White House counsel or other senior White House aides would even ask staffers to sign an NDA in violation of their First Amendment rights that WH counsel/senior staffers knew was unenforceable just to placate trump. Placating helps erode democratic norms and embolden trump. If the emperor has no clothes, WH counsel should tell him he's naked, not endeavor to maintain the myth of his sartorial splendor.
25
What's the problem?...Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Saddam and others have also required NDAs.
4
Who gets free speech? Influence-buying corporations, anti-women's-reproductive-rights employers, homophobic cake artists, tax-exempt religious/political leaders. Who does not get free speech? The employees of the "defender" of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Meanwhile Republican members of Congress have all sworn to non-disclosure agreements with the Russians. Enforced by blackmail.
2
How is this remotely legal? These are not Trump's personal employees, they are yours and mine.
5
It's just idiotic that anyone placates this child. "Sure Donny, we'll do that, here's your TV remote and some ice cream." Hey, look, a squirrel...
3
TRUMP: “I really value my reputation and I don’t hesitate to sue.”
Jan, 15 1979: Trump interviewed by The Village Voice. To Trump the purpose of a non-disclosure agreement is to intimidate his staff by suing.
TRUMP: “My motto is: ‘Hire the best people,
and don’t trust them.’”
2007: Trump’s book “Think Big”. Trump explains his dysfunctional management style.
3
The Presidents staff, work for the people of the US not the President! Forcing them to sign a non disclosure agreement, is totally illegal. This President has to be made aware that he, is answerable to the people. He is not the head of a corporation, or a reality tv show! He has no right to insist his staff, adhere to any kind of secrecy!
1
I am comforted by the thought that White House counsel drafted these essentially fake agreements in order to placate the President. He must have known (1) that Trump's absurd demand for NDAs was unconstitutional, and (2) that Trump would be unable to read or understand the documents McGahn actually drafted.
2
What!!! More silence from Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan. Nothing from any Republicans about this NDA matter? Is Congress on spring break?
2
Marco Rubio on the leaks about trumps congratulations to Putin: "I get they don't like him. they shouldn't work for him." first, they ALL work for us and the leakers understand that. The leakers are patriotic whistle blowers. if rubio and the rest of the GOP had a collective spine, they would be thanking the leakers and enlisting them in impeachment proceedings.
2
Does the Staff work for the US Taxpayers or Trump Inc.?
3
Trump's bilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin ran for more than two hours at the G-20 summit in Germany in July 2017.
It wasn't clear what the two leaders discussed in the highly anticipated meeting which took place behind closed doors.
The meeting was strictly limited in its participants, with only Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Putin, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and two interpreters allowed in the room.
They all had probably signed non-disclosure agreements in Russian and English but we the people never learned anything about what was discussed. Is there any way that Rex can break his now that he is out of government and let us know what was going on?
4
In September 2016, for a lark, I looked into what it would take to volunteer for the Trump Campaign - not because I supported him, but because I'd heard a strange news story about the requirements to volunteer for Trump et al.
Upon going to the campaign website and clicking the link to volunteer, before I was even able to enter my name, I was immediately redirected to the offending document: a Non-Disclosure Agreement for volunteers, canvassers and phone bank operators!
At the time I thought nothing of it, assuming any info the volunteers had was public knowledge being used to sway voters. So why worry about a purposeless contract, right?
Now comes the publication of NDAs signed by WH staff, and I'm not surprised. If anything, there was a part of me expecting that news.
However, with all these Cambridge Analytica stories coming out, I'm wondering much more now about what info Trump volunteers were given access to during the election - perhaps it was data mined illegally from our social media over-sharing...
2
These NDA's, unless involving matters of National Security which are covered in the issuance of a Security clearance are very hard to enforce even in the civilian world.
It's complicated since there's no exact parameters on what can be disclosed and what can't, so they are too broadly written to address in a legal forum as if applied with the intent Donald Trump has in mind, one couldn't talk about anything at all, a clear violation of the First Amendment.
Moreover their intent is challenged in court every day just like those agreement that demand if an employee leaves the corporate entity he's with he or she won't seek employment in the same industry he or she is leaving. That's too broadly written and impossible to enforce since the employee can simply take a similar job in the industry and then challenge the language in the original NDA.
In this case however Trump is simply trying to stifle speech involving his corrupt and criminal behavior which in and of itself could be considered obstruction or complicity in illegal activity.
Like every other policy decision dripping from this White House, these NDA's are a dismal attempt to deceive the public and the dear leader has no understanding that he represents the nation and not just himself.
What a moron.
8
Jared counselled Trump to fire Comey, Ivanka supported the idea of forcing White House staffers to sign NDAs, Cohen coerced women who had personal relationships with Trump into signing lopsided NDAs: Trump is an idiot who is surrounded by idiots. None of these people should be anywhere near the Whit House.
9
This reeks to high heaven. What is going on? What is the Trump administration hiding from the American people???
He and his administration are fully accountable to us! That means full transparency. I’ve never heard of another administration doing this.
1
I really don't understand why this comment wasn't posted the first time. I was an intern in the Obama White House and I have a distinct memory of everyone signing an NDA. I think this article lacks a lot of context about their history in the White House. Maybe senior staff didn't sign them, but we did, which seems to have a lot of the same issues about FOIA and agreements meant just to intimidate.
2
Could you possibly provide some facts which support this claim?
1
Trump who insults and mocks others incessantly attempts to insulate himself within a paper wall where he silences others. This bullying tactic may have worked when he ran a private company, but until he personally signs the paychecks of all in the White House, he is not their boss.
The American citizens are the ones whose taxes pay all the salaries in the White House as well as for the third of the time that Trump spends at his private resorts on the taxpayers' dime.
There are laws about transparency: the Federal Records Act and the Presidential Records Act. The National Archives retains the documents and tapes. The Presidential Records Act was passed after Watergate by Congress and affirmed by the Supreme Court and applied to all materials, tapes, and documents. I imagine that Mr. Mueller's office and other investigations have already legally required that all documents and materials related to Russia and the election be kept.
The president is not above the law. The future Trump Presidential Library will contain tweets, TV clips, and evidence logs no doubt, and be positioned in some Trump private property so that the drain on taxpayer dollars will continue.
Trump's handlers are copying the Chinese model of government which seeks to avoid unnecessary anxiety among the population.
Private matters being debated by President Xi Jiping and associate/staff at his office at the Forbidden City are never revealed publicly.
Of course, in the case of Trump avoiding wee hours emotional tweeters is the first step to bring order and discipline to a White House out of control.
1
The public needs to see these NDAs. How much has Trump demanded as payment if the staff member who signs an NDA violates the agreement? That payment is itself a domestic emolument in violation of the constitution.
Add one more item to the growing list of Trump's impeachable offenses.
We need to turn congress blue and prosecute this despot.
4
What happens in the White House when business of the country is conducted is our business and we have a right to know.
However, if the “president” does not want gossip appearing in the media about wandering around in his bath robe while attempting to insure himself that Fox and Frinds, along with Hannity are boosting his ego, then he shouldn’t.
Or, he does not want us to see that he is totally unhinged.
1
Well, this is what happens when you put a businessman, especially one who suffers from paranoia, into office. Personally, I think that he ought to give them all at least $130,000...however, my real world thought leads me to believe this may be a violation of the Constitution (First Amendment) and is at the very least a very slippery slope toward our country being led not only by a plutocrat, misogynist, prevaricator, narcissist, but an autocrat as well. Wonder if there is a "loyalty clause" in the NDA as well. When Trump looks into a mirror, he can see only himself. A REAL president can see only his country.
While all those who work for him in the White House are there because they chose to be and I don't feel particularly sorry for them, I hope every one of them writes a book and makes enough to have a comfortable retirement.
1
There was a time when one had to go The Onion for such hilarious stuff.
And who and how will these so-called NDAs enforced? Where will the certified check for the penalty mailed to?
Enough already with the placating of a president who knows nothing and needs to be schooled constantly !!!!- “But he privately told senior aides that it was mainly meant to placate an agitated president, who was convinced that the people around him had to be pressured into keeping his secrets” McGahn and others need to stand up to the president not placate him. They work for the country as does Trump - something they need to be made aware on constantly it seems.
4
Is requiring Executive branch staff to sign an NDA a Constitutional violation of the 1st Amendment and, therefore, an impeachable offense? Government is not private business, This must break free speech laws at some level.
This is how he rolls. The two women currently battling non-disclosure agrees are likely only a very small number of the total. Why not investigate this?
1
When Trump goes down, anyone who signs such an agreement should go down with him, all the way to the bottom.
1
The buffoonish character of this WH is hilarious, I can't help but laugh out loud at any Trump-related story highlighting his impossible-to-hide shenanigans. So nonenforceable ND agreements to "placate an agitated" president, why not?
Maybe those that signed under pressure can get together and get a group rate from Stormey's lawyer.
1
Legal or not, Donald Trump thinks he is running his private Company of the United States. As CEO, he answers only to those who voted for him. In his President Trump Company, NDAs are acceptable, he can do anything he wants the same as when he ran his business in Trump Tower. As president, he has not recognized that there is a difference between private and public - or shown any evidence that he recognizes that he himself is an employee of anyone. He’s fine with the people of the United States IF they showed their loyalty by voting for him. He is Donald Trump, it’s all about him. If possible, he’d probably insist on NDAs from all the legal US citizens.
23
Broadly-worded non-disclosure agreements; mandatory binding arbitration: I do not accept that the Bill of Rights is subservient to everything from an employment agreement to an internet service contract.
5
Most Americans evidently don't understand that the poorly-named "Bill of Rights" is actually a list of restrictions on how Congress can use the powers delegated to it in the Constitution as drafted when presented to the original states for ratification.
Employer-employee NDAs and non-compete agreements are usually not negotiated.
Non-disclosure agreements are routine in the business world, which explains why Trump uses them. They are readily enforcible in that world.
But I’m not sure if they translate into the political world or even the personal one. It raises many issues that space here won’t allow.
I think the best course of action is to assume that anything you say or do won’t be protected and confidential, and avoid risky behavior.
1
This Republican Congress will go down as the worst in history, cause they enabled this national disgrace.
17
No, the folks who pushed Hillary as the Democratic Party nominee will go down as the biggest idiots in history. They enabled a corrupt liar who was such a bad candidate that she could be defeated by the vulgar barbarian.
1
Well, maybe, but in every other democracy where every citizen's vote counts, she would have won by 3 million votes, so don't forget that the "biggest idiots" actually had the candidate that the majority of Americans chose.
2
These nondisclosure agreements are not worth the paper they are written on. White House employees are paid by us -- the tax payers. As far as I am concerned, they can say whatever they want. Trump has no control over them.
12
...and who would the penalty fines be paid to? Who is the agreement with? The president? Then he would be the collector, the beneficiary of the fines? Ah, yes, The Presidency for Profit.
Will he affix his personal signature to each signed agreement? Enter Stormy.
Or is the agreement between employee and the US Government with the fine paid to the US Treasury? Golly, that sure does sound like government suppression of speech. What precedes the holiest of holies, the Second Amendment? Why, yes, by gosh, the First Amendment.
I hear the government lawyer arguing for the government. (One cannot say arguing "for the people," as is customary by US Attorneys): May it please the court, the government will argue the defendant violated his non-disclosure agreement when he divulged the president impolitely spoke with food in his mouth.
8
You can't make this stuff up. Just one more way to make sure you get the best people to work for you.
5
Why, oh why, are people unwilling to tell this little man that his stupid ideas are stupid and his illegal ideas are illegal? Does no one around him have a conscience?
9
Donald, let me spell it out for you. You are a
P-U-B-L-I-C official, as well as a public S-E-R-V-A-N-T. Don't like it? Leave, you overgrown bully. This stunt isn't about him defying "the norms." It's about him refusing to acknowledge there are limits on his authority; that it's not a scripted TV show, and that he can, in fact, be told no. Nobody should've drawn up a dummy document to placate him. They should've said no and let the little child learn to deal with it.
80
Trump’s attempts to impose NDAs on federal employees is at once absurd, disturbing, and unsurprising. As a point of curiosity though, I wonder to whom Trump imagines the penalties for violating such NDAs would be paid? To Trump’s legal fund? To his re-election fund? To one of his hotels or golf clubs? To silence another one of his accusers? To commission another six-foot portrait of himself?
4
Any rational plan for everyone should be no secret to anyone.
2
Here again where are the Republicans in all of this? Not a word of outrage about this from Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell or anybody else, the silence is deafening. All I can say it appears that in in order to save their own skin and avoid being called out and rediculed by Trump they play the "get along" game.
This is just more evidence that presently most Republicans in Congress and of course Trump are NOT there for the people but only there to serve and protect themselves and are certainly not there for the benefit and protection of ordinary Americans. What a sham!
4
Donald Trump is obviously a man with a great deal to hide.
9
The most insidious thing about NDAs is that they effectively bind all but the rich, simply because those who are not wealthy or politically connected to wealth cannot afford to speak and fight even if they are in the right, even if what they would reveal are crimes. NDAs are a central enforcement mechanism of the emerging American oligarchy: Free Speech to protest "the government," but Costly Speech to say a word about those who buy, control, and occupy government office.
12
We the people have rights to know everything what is doing on the job, not just what he choses us to know, because we employ him. Second, we should impose $10 million fine on him for each lie and, in the meantime, put all his assets in an escrow so we can be assured that all his lies have monetary coverage.
7
What a pitiful little man, so insecure he requires everyone in his orbit to pledge not to disparage him, so lacking in personal charisma he would compel loyalty with threats of litigation and multimillion dollar damages. And so ignorant of the constitution he actually believes he can curtail government employees' first amendment rights, that he can hush them just like he hushed his former wives and former employees and is trying to hush a parade of women he bedded.
Don McGahn knew this question wasn't even close, knew these NDAs were not remotely enforceable against White House staffers. Yet he went along with the charade to humor the president and knowing--as the president himself acknowledged--that these pieces of paper still carried enough of a threat they would operate as de facto gag orders, regardless whether they were gag orders de jure.
So here's a shout-out to Don McGahn: You swore on oath to protect the office of the presidency and not the man who keeps defacing both it and the consitutional principles on which it is based. So if you really care about the office, go protect it. Before you go home tonight, find all those NDAs and run each of them through the shredder and return the pieces to the individual staffers who were required to sign them. And rest easy knowing you have been true to your oath, even if the current president has not been true to his.
12
They would receive whistleblower protection provisions by the FBI this is an overreach by a conman
4
Time's up for this would-be tin pot dictator. This summer is going to be very hot. The public mood is reaching a boiling point.
11
Trump seeks to think these people work for him exclusively and aren't on the federal payroll; therefore, they work for us and are accountable to the American people. Transparency in a democratic government is essential. These NDAs are nonsense and Trump is a fool who doesn't understand the limitations of his authority.
8
Boy, those NDAs have worked miracles
5
That is absurd. The taxpayers pay for Trump and his employees. Nuts.
3
What really need are disclosure agreements, with Trump at the top of the list. I also think that NDA's should be voided if the one asking for them has been convicted of fraud, money laundering, sexual assault, tax evasion, collusion, conspiracy, treason, and high crimes and misdemeanors.
7
No one can be forced to do anything here. Act like it.
5
This would be shocking, if it were not so silly. These are public servants, they are not the personal employees of Donald Trump. NDAs are invalid.
7
Any self respecting person would not work for this administration regardless.
8
Look at the photo and remember those who swore allegiance not to our nation or constitution, but to the forces of destruction, greed and evil.
8
Our Enfant-Tyrant sure has a fixation with BIG numbers: $10,00000 for each NDA violation; $20,00000 in damages against Stormy Daniels... Little children love to place zeros behind numbers.
3
Absent a nondisclosure agreement, White House officials freely disclose non-confidential and/or favorable information. They disclose confidential and/or unfavorable information anonymously. With a nondisclosure agreement, they freely disclose non-confidential and/or favorable information and they disclose confidential and/or unfavorable information anonymously. Which is to say, this is a big todo about not much.
I’m wondering, didn’t anybody tell Donald that running for President meant he would be a public employee? Silly as it sounds, I’m not sure he understands that..... still. And yet he was elected President.
4
Since POTUS is the big leaker, will he also sign one?
Omertà /oʊˈmɛərtə/ (Italian pronunciation: [omerˈta])[1] is a code of honor that places importance on silence, non-cooperation with authorities, and non-interference in the illegal actions of others.
Is The Donald a mobster who needs to insure a code of silence because what he does is illegal? Or is he just a totally insecure bully monster?
Mobster.....Monster......
A person who has values and is a believer in law and order and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights does not need to have NDAs. Certainly not public servants who should be answering to the people, not The Don.
3
As invidious a demand as this is, I also fault every single man and woman who agreed to sign. What were you thinking? How can you serve such a loathsome human being?
3
And only yesterday David Brooks was blithering on about what a great democracy we had.
2
You'll have to excuse Donald Trump on this one. This is his first real job.
8
no wonder ... so very much to hide ...
2
The fact that Donald F. McGahn II, the *White House* counsel drew up NDA documents he knew to be illegal (unenforceable) is itself unethical and possibly criminal: What does David J. Apol acting director of the United States Office of Government Ethics have to say; what do Congressional Republicans have to say?
1
There's still an OGE? What do they do there? Hope they find some?
Anyone who has ever been forced to tow the line, keep quiet, or otherwise shut down their agency - their freedom to voice concerns - understands implicitly that rebellion will ensue. Not only does absolute power corrupt absolutely, but absolute control inevitably breeds absolute chaos. Never a day goes by that shows #45 has never cracked open a history book.
1
Nondisclosure agreements were also a preoccupation of Mr. Trump during his presidential campaign, ...
Among the supporters of the move were his daughter, Ivanka, and Jason Greenblatt, his longtime lawyer ....
Copyright law includes:
17 U.S. Code § 101 - Definitions
A “work of the United States Government” is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties.
17 U.S. Code § 105 - Subject matter of copyright: United States Government works
Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, ...
The logic of these laws is that OUR TAXES paid for the generation of the document, so WE THE PEOPLE own the document.
An NDA cannot protect anything in the public domain. That would mean an NDA cannot cover anything written down in the White House by any employee as part of their job (as long as the document is not “classified” which is a different limitation on disclosure).
Any employee who makes notes in a meeting as part of their job, for example, to make sure they had all the duties they were being assigned, would be generating a “work of the United States Government.” If that person put some personal comments in the document, those would also be in the public domain as part of the document.
No NDA that Dopey Donald insists on having people sign would cover such a document.
Dopey Donald, Ivanka, and Jason Greenblatt DO NOT HAVE A CLUE HOW THE GOVERNMENT WORKS.
6
If any other president(President Obama), had told his people they had to pledge this oath, they would have said in resounding voices " no thank you sir , we give our oaths to the country, and right quick the republicans would have called for his head. And would never let democrats live it down.
4
If any former White House aide is writing a book, that person ought to include in the marketing for the book that its writing violated the nondisclosure agreement. That ought to increase sales. If the White House aide is lucky, Trump will publicly threaten to sue.
2
This comes as a no surprise at all. Based on his past lie, it was suspected from the day one that Trump would ask for a blanket non-disclosure agreement from his staff. US Congress must ask Trump attorneys to explain the reasons and take it all the way to the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of this unprecedented behavior.
2
It doesn't sound like a non-disclosure agreement to me, it sounds like a loyalty oath.
5
I remember one World War II leader who forced his civil servants and military to swear an oath to him and not to his nation. It ended badly.
2
Trump "demanded"? Really? Seems to me he made it a policy and those who signed it did so willingly. No one would work for Trump if they weren't true believers, and whoever supports this president probably has no problem with a NDA. They're all working to demolish our government and our democracy. Who cares what happens to them?
2
The point is that a policy requiring a federal employee to hand over something of value in return for his job might amount to a demand for a bribe as well as a violation of the Domestic Emoluments Clause. Not to mention the unconstitutionality of the thing, especially the part about owing loyalty to Trump after he leaves office. And the shocking revelation that McGahn crafted the toothless NDA simply to satisfy Trump's absurd demand.
A thought: Everyone who has an experience(s), with this sleazy man who is currently president should all have a "coming out week" where they tell of their encounters with Trump within a short period of time. Line the reporters up. Their numbers will be legions. Trump won't have enough lawyers to handle the floods of people willing to tell of his miscreant deeds. There won't be enough lawyers or courtrooms available to Trump to sue them. Come at Trump ten times harder than he comes at them. Spread his resources thin. Bring him down before he fouls our democracy any further.
7
It shouldn’t be necessary to point out that people working at the White House work for for the American Citizens, not Donald Trump. Asking them to sign non-disclosures concerning non-classified information is essentially asking them to not report to their employer. This is completely at odds with open government and may be asking government employees to sign illegal documents.
3
Rather than placate Fauxtus, I wish McGahn had simply refused to draft the document. I also wish everyone to whom one was presented had simply refused to sign.
But I wish even more that everyone who did sign an NDA has been taking notes, and would choose a day to divulge, publicly and simultaneously, all the behind-the-scenes wrongdoing and bad behavior they've witnessed -- to us citizens of the United States, their true employers. We could call it Trump Trump Day.
8
NDAs part of his DNA.
Trump- Jan. 2017:
“As president, I could run the Trump Organization, great, great company, and I could run the company (after a brief pause he catches himself) uh the country."
The Tell.
That, right there was the harbinger of things to come. Many of the centrists that voted for him thought he would "become more presidential."
NDAs/pressure tactics/secrecy they may save him from some compromising material being exposed to the press or in legal proceedings (Stormy may have something to say about that).
NDAs, pressure tactics,etc. all useless when one of his staff members testifies under oath to Robert Swan Mueller III.
1
Those NDAs should not be legal. These people are working for the U.S. government, not for a private company!
3
"Mr. McGahn made it clear the agreement could not ultimately be enforced, according to several people who signed."
If this is true, when will someone file a disciplinary complaint against Don McGahn with the DC Office of Disciplinary Counsel?
3
What if I observe my boss doing something illegal? Don’t I have a right to protect myself?
16
Not to mention that you have a moral obligation to report said illegal act.
4
Someone please remind me how 61 million Americans think this guy is suitable for the office (of the president, not "The Office")?
35
Let me count the ways leading us to impeachment. Add this to the list.
Trump thinks he is a dictator, oligarch, and controller of everything , but he is not.
These "federal" employees paid by US Taxpayers (but probably not Trump) are not his chattel. They work for us. They have 1st Amendment rights....and hopefully, a conscience and a moral compass.
First Amendment, Democracy, WILL outlive Trump!
21
The Texas Tribune features a version of a Trump NDA that is 4 1/2 pages long - and the Trump name features 45 times in the agreement.
It seems quite obvious Trump cannot distinguish between being CEO of a family-run company and POTUS.
14
There are two contrdictory parts of the NDA:
In the preamble:
You have requested that the entity signing below (the "Company") engage you (as an employee or an independent contractor, as applicable) to perform services, ... and you desire in your capacity as an employee of such independent contractor to perform all or a part of such services. ...
Those promises and agreements are part of what the Company is receiving in exchange for agreeing to engage you ... and to permit you to perform all or a portion of the subject services, and the Company is relying on your fulfillment of these promises and agreements.
In section 9:
9. Miscellaneous. ...
Relationship. Nothing herein contained is intended to, nor shall it be construed as, reflecting any employer-employee or independent contractor relationship between you and the undersigned or any other individual or entity. ...
So the NDA id presented as part of a deal in which you sign up for work, but in Section 9, it explicitly says that "Nothing herein contained is intended to, nor shall it be construed as, reflecting any employer-employee or independent contractor relationship between you and the undersigned or any other individual or entity. ..."
So you do not work for the person who signs, (Trump's flunky), "or for any other individual or entity." That would include "the entity signing below" that you do not work for.
But if you are not employed, the NDA is VOID, for lack of consideration.
Trump is an idiot.
1
Actually, the name "Trumo" appears 47 times in that document.
Here is the link to it:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4414993/FILE-0202.pdf
Read it for yourself. Have fun.
1
Those who voted for him thought that it would be a good idea to run the US like a business. And I am sure that there are tens or hundreds of thousands of fair-minded business-owners who are intelligent, serious, moral, decent, honest, honorable, upstanding, and law-abiding citizens. The people who voted for Trump as the Business President really should have taken a closer look at the CEO for whom they were voting. Trump is not and has never been one of the better-sort of business-people. All of his foibles (a lifetime of womanizing, multiple bankruptcies, cheating creditors, sleazy business practices, racist and sexist rants, classlessness, mean-spiritedness, hypocrisy, cheapness, pettiness, dishonesty, con-artistry, I could go on and on,) were on full display and were well-publicized before he ran for President and while he was running for President. And since he got elected, he has been running the government like a business- his. What on earth would make anybody think that he would run it differently?
3
Where I come from, there is no reason to require NDAs or operate behind a thick curtain, veil, cloak or blanket of secrecy if one has nothing to hide. And if one does insist on a thick curtain, veil, cloak or blanket of secrecy, especially if the other person is punished for violating it, this literally screams nefarious goings-on.
9
Want to plug the leaks?
1. For some of your staff you’ve surrounded yourself with, stop encouraging and rewarding backstabbing and sabotage.
2. For the career staff and holdovers, try inspiring loyalty (means don’t binge Fox News when you’re supposed to be leading the country).
5
American has a long tradition of loyalty being to the US Constitution and the People, not the current President. The President is not a Kink, but the Chief Executive.
These persons work for the US government, not Trump. This NDA hasno validity. It is meaningless, just a typical Trump ploy.
11
When you " work " with Trump, you get the blame. For everything. And that's the entire point.
5
We need a new law preventing this.
2
He continues to labor under the delusion that anyone other than his personal lawyers works for HIM.
6
So everyone who signed the "NDA" was told that it really meant nothing but that signing it was necessary because The President could not be persuaded that it would not help. This is the type of foolishness that makes an organization leaky. People have to respect who they working for and their purpose, and they need to not believe they are being asked to do meaningless tasks to placate unrealistic expectations. The leaks are a sign of lack of leadership, and it seems the problem is from the top.
13
The White House Counsel violated basic tenets of legal practice when he gave ANY advice to the victims of the agreement. He is not the President's personal lawyer - he is the White House's lawyer, and is required to protect the people's White House, not the President. Also, a lawyer is ONLY allowed to recommend to the other person that s/he obtain their own legal counsel. McGahn needs to be disbarred.
19
Maybe Mr. Trump should ask himself why his employees are so eager to leak every detail....
8
Remember this the same Donald Trump who does not a visitors' log. The man tweets like a leaking faucet likes others to keep mum.
5
The guy is such a hobby lawyer. He doesn't pay anyone's salary in the WH, it's the grateful nation that does. Unless he can convince a court that his bathrobe habit is a state secret, he's got no standing to sue anyone, with or without NDA.
5
His attorneys and direct reports may not directly or indirectly commit treason. Trump needs to be tried and jailed for treason.
Yes jail time, no gold bars...
Why hasn't he been impeached yet? Congress this continues to be the time to show some backbone.
6
Trump's efforts at intimidation by NDA are of one piece with his attacks on the press, unreleased tax returns, "fake news" tweets, the absence of visitor logs at Mar-a-Lago, and Scott Pruitt's soundproof room: so much to hide from public view
6
Trump thinks all of this is about him, the big cheese. He and his sycophant lackeys have a big surprise coming real soon. The price, I am afraid, is too high for Trump to pay...his ego, his name-brand, his wealth, and ultimately his freedom.
8
Just look at the lead photo for this article. How many of those people are gone now? Hicks, Priebus, Bannon, Spicer, Flynn, Porter, Conway, Omarosa, Scaramucci, etc...and it gets longer every day. Kushner is way overdo to join this list of weasels. This whole NDA farce proved to have all the teeth of a Rhode Island Red, given the very recent "Don't Congratulate Him" debacle. The leaks are becoming floods, regardless of how much Don tries to inhibit free speech.
4
Conway still there.....for now.
1
Trump is running the country like it is just part of his corrupt family business. Trump started breaking the law when he took the oath of office without having divested his personal business interests that receive funding from both foreign and domestic sources in violation of the Constitution's emolument clauses. These laws are are very clear-cut and need to be enforced. He changed his ideas about China policy once the Chinese agreed to grant him 38 new trademarks worth untold millions or even billions.
Trump has spent his entire life immersed in lies and deception. It is all justifiable to an extreme narcissist like Trump. It is a means to an end: more self-entitled wealth and more public recognition. The Birther lies, the Trump U fraud, the Flynn lies, Sessions perjury before Congress, the refusal to divest his business interests before taking the oath of office, the false claims of Obama wiretapping...it is all of a piece, it is all part of the distorted and unethical world that Donald Trump lives in. He has no knowledge or regard for the Constitution, nor the rule of law. He is joined in his total disrespect for the American way of life by his cabinet, advisers and the Republican Party leaders.
12
“I pledge allegiance to Donald Trump and to all his holdings and affiliates, and to the syndicates for which he stands,...”
Right.
15
Take this as a signal. Don't work in the White House.
5
But it's rated "Best Place to Work" by Subpoena Magazine.
6
Maybe someone should remind Trump that he and his staff work for us, the people of the United States of America, and not Putin's Kremlin, the Trump Organization or the GOP.
Then again, it comes as not surprise that Trump would treat a porn star the same way he treats of Chief of State and Secretary of State. In his eyes, they're all just a means to an end -- that of satisfying his ever-hungry ego.
4
Why doesn't Congress investigate and subpoena the NDA? It should be available for any of us. In fact, we should be able to get it with a Freedom of Information request as it potentially abridges our (as citizens) right to know how our government is being run.
4
Probably because the Republican Congress is far more loyal to the Republican Party than it is the Constitution of the United States.
1
Law School 101. He can only place fear in the public servant working in the Government while Trump is in office. The mighty supposed billionaire will sue some of the unwitting public servants making them think he'll ruin them financially. He won't and can't. I'll pro bono any one he sues. I could use some legal comedy relief.
8
White House Motto: so many to abuse, yet so little time. The nondisclosure agreement in such an environment should be the expectation but one wonders how many more books will be written.
1
Invoice Trump personally for the salaries, benefits and other expenses of everyone who had to sign the NDA, if he thinks they work for him. That'll run him $37 million per year, minimum. They are government employees who work for the American people, even if Trump is given the authority to hire and fire, and there are already rules in place for what they are and aren't permitted to say. And file McGahn for going along with the charade and threatening the free speech rights of those who work at the White House, simply to placate Trump (and keep his own job).
6
A government takeover is in the works. They should all quit.
1
First - all presidents and candidates need to sign a DISCLOSURE agreement before being allowed to run or hold office. Taxes, corruption, harassment, criminal behavior, etc.
Second, as widely noted, public officials are employees of the government, which is us, the citizens, and therefore any NDA would not apply to telling us, the employer, whatever we want to know. Trump is the boss, but a third party to the employee arrangement. so buzz off
Third, Trump did the same thing with campaign workers at every level, which is probably legal since it was a private org. Doesnt make it right in a democracy.
Fourth. Even a legal NDA is not a shield against reporting crimes like, hmmm, TREASON.
5
Feels like a prior restraint on speech by a government actor. Sounds like it would be subject to some serious constitutional headwinds to justify.
3
It's completely unenforceable under simple contract law. He's not their employer.
2
What is going to happen when they figure out that there is supposed to a presidential library where researchers can come and dig through the records of this administration for generations to come?
2
If a president is doing a conscientious job of taking care of the citizens best interests ,why would he ever need a nondisclosure agreement?
6
I was reading this because of today's story about Trump being upset that there were leaks regarding his call with Putin. It came out that his advisers told him not to congratulate, and to keep pressure on Russia for the attack in England and interference with our election. Trump ignored all of that and simply said "nice job" (or something equivalent). But, the focus is on the leaks. Can we have a discussion about the quality of the leadership instead of the leaks? We're missing the important stuff.
1
Trump's obsession with non-disclosure agreements reveals his foreknowledge of actions he doesn't want anyone to find out about.
6
The US Government is not a private business. All who work for the government work for us, we the people. Requiring NDAs of government employees should be illegal. This latest move certainly suggests Trump has something to hide.
2
It certainly seems to raise different issues when it is a government office and not a private business. Can the head of a local branch of the FDA ask his employees to sign non disclosure agreements? If not, why can the President? If he leaves office, does the government enforce on a government employee (who works after Trump left) or does Trump enforce in civil court? What if a WH employee continues to work under the next President who asks for something, and the employee says he can't give the answer to the question to the President or DJT would sue him? How could you work in another branch of government (in the WH this year and for FDA next year) and never say anything related to anything you heard in WH?
1
I would sign an NDA just to prevent disclosure that I was in any way associated with Trump.
3
The only reason I accepted an invitation to go on a White House tour was that I knew that Trump was keeping the visitors list secret.
MOre fuel for Mueller. As someone stated, this is the 1st in a conspiracy, and should be treated as one.
2
Requiring staff to sign NDA's is either another example of Trump's "consciousness of guilt" or a red flag of dangerous and pathological paranoia, In Trump's case, forcing government employees to sign secrecy pacts or risk firing, or in the case of a "breach" civil damages, stinks of star-chamber politics. However, it's nothing new, really.
We saw what happened (or didn't, depending on your "take") when Dick Cheney met in secret with a group of shadowy "energy policy" individuals right after Bush II's election. We'll recall that Cheney refused to disclose any details about this meeting, including who attended and what was discussed/decided. So much for "government in the sunshine". Not too terribly long after that "secret" conclave, we had a war of conquest against Iraq based on false premises where seizing Iraq's oil assets was the true (if thankfully unrealized) goal.
Moreover, we shouldn't forget how many government whistle-blowers were aggressively prosecuted by the Obama administration. So while Trump's NDA "policy" reeks of authoritarianism, we shouldn't forget that the prior administration was quick to stifle those would expose the "dirty laundry" of within government, and when they weren't stifled, they faced criminal penalties. How can citizens trust ANY government that sneaks around and seeks to hide the truth from its citizens?
3
Well, like all Trump programs, it’s not working. Looks like a pattern of failure.
2
Are these even enforceable?
1
The Government belongs to We the People, and those who work in the White House are employed by us. Of course you should not be allowed to disclose classified information, and of course no one who advises the President should be required to testify if the President claims Executive Privilege. But forcing people to sign a secrecy agreement is just plain wrong. What is the White House trying to hide from We the People?
8
Executive privilege does not include gagging his staff. And he cannot classify his daily moronic behavior under our national intelligence rules even if they do present a clear and present danger to our nation and its citizens.
Those of you who voted for this knave - take pride that you are complicit, knowingly or unknowingly, in ruinous damage to our democracy.
Any non-disclosure agreements should certainly not be enforceable since these people are employees of the United States Government and not personal employees of Donald Trump. Their salaries are paid by us, the taxpayers.
Furthermore, any work, decisions, agreements etc., unless highly secret, must be available to the public at any time since it is all paid by us, the taxpayers.
The only caveat would that Donald Trump, also an employee of ours, the taxpayer, reimburse the federal government for all his weekend trips to Florida or New Jersey for his golf weekends. I believe the reimbursement amount is in the tens of millions of dollars and certain to increase.
34
For once I actually agree with Trump: anyone foolish, disingenuous or dishonorable enough to take a job with this man should be required to cede every right that the rest of us take for granted. If they're just doing it for the money, the power or the "prestige," they should know up front what it's going to cost them down the line.
5
The fact that you are working in the Trump White House indicates questionable judgement to begin with. A suggestion: Make sure the agreement is reciprocal. Then if Trump ever mentions you or alludes to you, the agreement is void and you may publish your notes (you are taking notes, right?) for millions.
21
Well, if the old boy is going to run the country in the same way that he ran his businesses, he is off to a good start. He (via Tweets and bodyguards) fires people on a whim. He will do anything to make the Russians happy. With his arbitrary tariffs, he is hitting a lot of little guys. And his love for debt will blow a massive hole in the nation's deficit and long-term debt.
He apparently never suffered any long-term repercussions for his numerous bankruptcies so if the country goes belly-up, he will still come out of it just fine. Of course, he never really cared much about the livelihoods of the little people so why change now? Finally, he never reported to a Board of Directors. If any one ever expected this Congress to assume that role with Trump, believe me, it won't happen. They have more important things to do...like naming post offices and calling donors. Believe me.
22
McGahn should be sanctioned by the bar for bullying employees into signing agreements while reassuring them that the agreements are unenforceable.
35
These agreements are enforceable in some states but not others. Equal protection of the law is a mirage in the US.
3
This situation could be a serious, recurring conflict of interest violation for the White House Counsel considering his multiple instances of the dual representation of people who all work there, but possess disparate interests. McGahn, as that institution's in-house lawyer is not the President's private lawyer. Although the N.D.A. may not specifically refer to Trump, its intent is to benefit him for a private and personal, non-official purpose, the avoidance of potential embarrassment, scandal, or worse. At the least, McGahn probably owed a duty to inform all prospective signers to seek independent legal advice before signing the document, considering the considerable power differences between Trump and these federal employees and the inherent intimidation factor to sign this document, or risk not being employed. His side, private assurances to prospective signers of its unenforceability failed to address the primary ethical dilemma, while also deceiving Trump in the process.
2
Enforceable against federal employees??
1
There must be some provision in United States Constitution which renders these NDA's unconstitutional, and thus point to the fact that Trump's perjured himself from the beginning when he recited the oath to uphold the Constitution when he was sworn in.
11
Technically, an NDA is considered a negotiated contract.
And meanwhile, we're still waiting for those tax returns....
23
In a smarter country, Trump would still be waiting for anyone to vote for him.
6
Three Branches of US Government:
The Constitution created three separate branches of government. Each branch has its own powers and areas of influence. At the same time, the Constitution created a system of checks and balances that ensured no one branch would reign supreme. The three branches are:
Legislative Branch - This branch consists of the Congress which is responsible for making the federal laws. Congress consists of two houses: the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Executive Branch - The Executive power lies with the President of the United States who is given the job of executing, enforcing, and administering the laws and government. The Bureaucracy is part of the Executive Branch.
Judicial Branch - The judicial power of the United States is vested in the Supreme Court and the federal courts. Their job is to interpret and apply US laws through cases brought before them. Another important power of the Supreme Court is that of Judicial Review whereby they can rule laws unconstitutional.
And now including Non-Disclosure Agreements with a bozo called Dennison for the purposes of illicit sexual encounters.
4
The President is intentionally misleading citizens regarding their First Amendment rights. This guy has no clue on how to make America great.
20
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is the most neglected law of this land.
2
But lots of ideas on how to make a continent wide prison, with us as the prisoners.
There's nothing more insulting to intelligence than being "led" by some slinking worm whose words and objectives cannot stand the light of day.
10
Trump is figuring out a way to plant mines in his own path and then to step on every one of them. This might be amusing were he a private citizen, but this orchestrated self-destruction is his ultimate expression of nihilistic rage, and with it Trump is going to cause as much damage to himself, his family, and his personal brand as he can. This man has broad powers to start a war abroad, and to foment civil unrest at home. We are all in the cross-hairs. The Republicans are traitors if they continue to permit this.
12
It has been written on several occasions that White House employees serve “at the pleasure of the president”. It might be worth reminding said president that he serves at the pleasure of the people and those people are owed a debt of service and, barring matters of national security, transparency as to what goes on in government. It is their money he is spending, it is their wives/husbands/sons and daughters he is committing to war zones and their country who’s reputation he is supposed to uphold.
12
How could this possibly square with the Freedom of Information Act? Ut-oh... (Has it been repealed already or is it something else that's going to bite the dust in Trump's WH along with any illusion of governmental transparency?)
7
any such agreement should be held unenforceable absent clear applicability of the executive privilege doctrine. the illustrious Mr Drumpf apparently doesn't understand that his current residence doesn't belong to him m
3
The emperor wears no clothes, once again.
8
I think trump is counting on the cost of defending oneself. It is cheaper to fold. And isn't this the way trump uses the law.
Question to the lawyers out there: Is this use of the law ethical? legal?
5
The cost of litigation is why it works for extortion and extortionists. Not to mention the interminable delays that outlast the staying powers of mere mortals.
1
This is what happens when you elect a paranoid person. Trump can have people sign all the non-disclosure agreements, and he can sue if he wants. The reality is that they either won’t be enforced or he sues people who do not have millions like he does. If he sues, those people being sued can take a page from Trump’s past. They can file bankruptcy. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
6
I don't think this article makes clear enough how fundamental NDAs have been to DJT his entire career: his real estate ventures were always dominated by heavy handed legalese that built up his brand and image. The recent dust-up in Coast Rica about the Trump Hotel is a perfect case in point: Trump licensed the Trump name to any project he could find, but basically lawyered it all up to where there was a simple dividing line in the deal: other side all the risk and effort, outcome who cares, Trump brand all cash in and nothing but smiles allowed
6
Imposing a condition for being employed by the U.S. government that does nothing but preserve the President personally from disclosure of information that is not legally classified or otherwise legally confidential seems an awful lot like solicitation of a bribe. Why not just open the jobs up to the highest bidder?
7
It's not only like a bribe, but like an emolument.
Trump needs to look in the mirror- he took an oath to uphold the US Constitution. It is not clear yet that he is doing that.
6
Trump has boiled the whole thing down to "Me first!".
It’s very clear he hasn’t on any day since he too the oath, which he broke before the day was over.
The American people deserve better than this.
Effective government does not require secrecy. It may require internal deliberations to be conducted in private, but the American people deserve to know what their government is doing. It is a key tenet of our democracy.
The American people deserve better than this.
28
The need to explain and account for one's decisions in the contexts they are made keeps one honest.
4
TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT
I [name] voluntarily and patriotically agree to never, ever, disclose anything I hear, say, or do, while working here in any capacity as a Federal employee for the best President ever of the United States - Donald Trump.
I also agree to never, ever, tell anyone living, or heaven forbid near death, anything about the great things that take place here in the White House on a daily basis. I even furthermore voluntarily agree to relinquish all my legal rights as a citizen of the United States for the term of my employment – and another twelve years thereafter.
I even further than furthermore agree that I am incredibly honored to be even slightly considered for employment with the most awesome President of the United States, the most Honorable Donald Trump - and Sarah Sanders.
[date & signature]
11
Let it be known, American government is no longer of the people and by the people.
An opaque government - this is damning evidence that trump has no place in government. This is not at all in the spirit of a free country.
13
Trump represents the real estate developers and their lawyers who control most state governments in the US.
5
Trump's extreme defensiveness, including this latest disgraceful effort, suggests guilt. When are Republican women going to take to the streets over his moral pulchritude? When are Republicans in Congress going to stop their silence of assent to this man's increasingly apparent "high crimes and misdemeanors"?
12
Donald Trump has to be the most fearful man on the planet. So afraid of his own dark personality that he must try to control all others to not disclose a thing about him. The irony is that his White House (oh, how I hate to say that) is the leakiest on record. And he's done a lot of leaking himself! A lot of leaking of lies mostly. Donald Trump is a leaky liar who cannot keep his mouth shut and he projects all of himself onto others who are nothing more than mirrors to him, and if they don't reflect back his self-love, they're gone. Gone after he's poisoned them and ruined their reputations and lives.
Can't wait for all the non-disclosures to fall, an avalanche of Donald Trump's life is going to start down the mountain at him, he's going to be buried. It will take a while, a few months, but those non-disclosures will have no effect.
Thank you, Summer Zervos for your courage to take him to court for defamation. Thank you, Stormy, for pushing for your rights. Thank you, Karen. Thank you to all he has groped and hurt for coming forward and attempting to hold him accountable. It didn't happen then. But it will happen.
15
Reminds me of the Nixon WH.
12
My profile name says it all. He can ask people to sign away their 1st amendment rights, but he can't make them abide by his vanities. This man's actions scream "FELONY!" The GOP looks like a bunch of sniveling cowards while he destroys our democracy.
#Excercise25
16
trumps House Of Frauds has more leaks than a soaker hose...
Honestly, trumps comes to this office not with a yearning to serve, to be a good, decent American but with the unabashed purpose to get what he can from it - enrich his family, market his "brand" and get out of debt from his Russian masters (Russian mafia?).
With all the trinkets and junk his family is selling now that he's president, they've reduced the office to the level of the HSN... "As-Seen-On-TV".
And what are the republicans doing? Nothing. Absolutely NOTHING! And they won't even provide protection to Mueller for when trump fires him.
GOP... don't you understand? This is why you're going to lose!
10
ummm.....accountability, anyone?
4
There was Dispicable Me, and with Trump its Dispicable Him. Also, Disreputable and Reckless.
4
Those agreements need to be thrown out with the idiot that wanted them.
The people who work for the government owe their loyalty to the people of the USA, not some idiot that has to hire a new lawyer very week.
Now more then ever we need to protect the whistle-blowers from that idiot and his followers.
11
This is becoming the successor state to the Third Reich...fast. I never forgot the content of Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" from first reading around 1963. It seems almost like a template for the Trump Administration, but, then again, he never denied his bedtime reading was a volume of Hitler's speeches. Indeed (and again, from Shirer), in 1938 the German General Staff had to take an oath of personal loyalty to Hitler. The results of this turned disastrous in the autumn of 1941, when the invasion of the USSR, launched that July, began to bog down. Experienced generals knew even then that the invasion would backfire and would result in a German defeat, but could NOT say it or risk firing or worse. By the time this snowballed (1944) and Operation Valkyrie was tried, it was too late.
11
This is disgusting, unethical and clearly counter to the spirit of genuine honor as a public servant. Private sector do this all you want but not in the public sector.
5
Bunch of lackeys holding their hand up to take an oath to serve someone I believe is mentally unstable.
By the way, study this photo and pick out the numerous faces who are no longer there.
9
trump is no more then an evil person who wants all for self.
7
...and no less than such a person, too.
He must be trying to hide something.
6
Oh, so now an oath of office is no longer enough to serve the Great Leader?
You must swear an oath of PERSONAL allegiance to HIM, above all, with the threat of non-disclosure violation penalties? (To be brought by Trump, NOT a US attorney!)
This sounds eerily like the sort of thing that self-styled "great leaders" or "great fathers" have often insisted on to get loyalty for their illegal actions, often contrary to the policies of their governments!
Hitler (and others) made underlings, generals, and officers swear a personal allegiance to him, which surmounted their oath to the government and the people; that's generally cited as a key signpost in the road to despotism. I'm NOT of course saying that Trump = Hitler, but rather, pointing out (yet another) disturbing parallel in their actions, which is really common to ALL autocrats, dictators, and disdainers of democracy for being so "weak"!
9
transparency transparency transparency...
4
And people say nothing gets done in Washington. While we are at our jobs toiling away....he's doing the same. Getting people to sign is a pesky business but you have to get it done, just like any other job.
Calgon (Mueller).....take me away...
Whosoever is afraid that his activities won't pass muster....while in public service within a democracy, becomes suspect of graft. And vulgar Trump, a well known liar and crook in his financial dealings in real estate all his adult life, seems intent in using the White House as a springboard to do likewise, a dereliction of duty and ill-intent. That's why he thinks he can muzzle his staff and bully them into subservience and loyalty, independent from their competence and need to know and comment at times so the citizenry can know things are being done in their interests...instead of self-serving (as seems the case with the unscrupulous demagogue in the Oval Office). Being a narcissist, he'll never admit mistakes and certainly never feel an apology is necessary in spite of constant trampling of the law, order and basic decency. He'll always find scapegoats for his ineptitude, 'shoot the messenger' at will so the chaos needing repair goes unattended. Nondisclosure agreements are spurious and likely not enforceable...when malice is shown.
3
When he personally pays their salary, then he can limit the speech of federal employees. We pay their salaries; we have a right to know non-classified functions of our government and behavior of the officials whose salaries we pay--regardless of how vile and disgusting they are.
13
Trump thinks he's an Emperor. If only he had done just a little bit of homework between the election and inauguration, he might have actually had a vague idea of what the job entailed. Instead he went on 'Thank You' tours, which were just a continuation of the campaign, meant to stave off actual learning and to pump up his already overinflated ego.
Sorry, Trumpty-Dumpty, but you are headed for a great fall. Here's hoping you don't take us all down with you. It's going to be a big mess. As if you care. tiyu
6
These NDA's have the same value as the permission slips, with hold harmless clauses, that our parents signed before we could take school field trips. They are worthless. When that school bus was involved in an accident, everyone - top top bottom - was sued.
I pray that someone blabs pretty quickly and the NDA's are tested. Rex????
5
See, this is where Trump has it all wrong. "His" aides are not there to serve "him". They are there to serve us. As Trump's boss the public has every right to know how he conducts himself at work. Why nobody is pushing back on that is why we're in this mess.
6
Remember, Trump also made his campaign workers sign NDA's. We have no idea how many people were disenchanted by his campaign but felt muzzled by the NDA they signed. We won't ever know unless Congress passes a law invalidating those agreements. There MUST be a law agains NDA's for campaign workers going forward, and it should be backwards as well.
2
When you have this much bad news and history to re-write, you gotta start early and the employees are logical first step. And who cares about history, historians or history books, anyway. Donny don't do books, Donny don't know history--all of that is for losers.
4
Trump never pretended to be anything other than a strong man dictator. And way too many Americans were fine with that. Because he released their inner demons and validated them. Terrifying.
5
Here's a fun game: look at the picture accompanying this article, and check off who is under indictment/charged with a crime, who's resigned, who was fired...
5
Get out while you can or be forever tainted by Trump! With few exceptions less than a handful, the Republican Party is absolutely complicit in this greatest of all injustices perpetrated against American people and our Democracy in the history of our country Why, what could possible justify these actions or inactions? The astonishing revelations of rich donor and special interest funded media campaigns as well as Russian meddling demonstrates that we did not have a fair and free election. Rich Republican donors, the NRA and the Russians make strange bedfellows. Who would have ever thought this possible? In another era any part of this would be deemed un-American. Mike Pence is tainted too; he is not a fit replacement. Sign a NDA at your own peril unless you are all in with the liars and traitors.
4
The NDA violates federal transparency laws that apply to all public sector workers. This NDA is a worthless piece of paper, and will not be upheld by any court.
Another example of why DJT is an exerable commander in chief, wholly unqualified for office.
5
Preplanned obstruction of justice; invalid on its face in view of 1st amendment rights
I'm sure that ole prez's legal advisors know this but took this action to intimidate personell from disclosing the horrendous interplay of dark forces moving this administration once they are canned.
Because they will have personally witnessed madness and mayhem they will of course think that this man will stop at nothing, even frivolous law suits for damages for having told anyone how shabbily they were treated and how perfectly monstrous was the man.
Impeach him now; he is a danger to himself and others ergo legally insane
6
The fact that Trump routinely requires everyone around him to sign agreements so that he can act without any accountability whatsoever- shows what a disreputable, untrustworthy con-man he really is.
6
Lest there was any doubt, he clearly has something to hide.
7
Obviously, the NDAs go against the Whistleblower Protection Act. No surprise though that they have been drafted and handed to staff by the bully in the White House with assistance from his gang of lawyers.
4
These are public employees not corporate ones who are concerned with competitive advantage. This is truly nuts. Our democracy is just gone.
4
Are the NDAs required as a condition of the employees getting / keeping their jobs?
If so, and since the NDAs purport to/ could be interpreted to extend to info about Trump personally, does that mean that Trump extracted a personal benefit from persons as a condition of their employment by the government ? If that is what it means, are those illegal quid pro quo since they are a personal and valuable consideration to Trump in exchange for his taking government action ?
6
Perhaps one of his many attorneys should show Mr. Trump another important document, the US Constitution. I know he hates to read, but maybe one of his aides, especially one who doesn't have top secret clearance but still keep their jobs, can read it to him. It's fascinating reading, especially the part of Freedom of Speech.
5
Clearly we need a comic book version of the constitution. Bright colors, little words, few pages. Is that so hard?
2
I have little doubt that such an agreement would be held void as against public policy. Even if not, it would not be enforceable to preclude production of information in response to a validly issued subpoena; and it could not be enforced in aid of a fraud or other crime.
This is just one of many examples of Mr. Trump's fundamental lack of understanding of the law - despite his constant chest thumping about 'law and order - and of his role as an elected public official.
The Federal government is not a private sole proprietorship, partnership or limited liability company. That, alas, is the only world Donald Trump has ever known - and even at that, he was much better at play acting 'The Boss' on television than he ever was at running a business in the real world. Trump's long history of squandered wealth, wretched excess, inability to realistically gauge risk, serial bankruptcies, unethical and illegal business methods and wasteful, frivolous litigation used as a 'business tactic' tells a sordid tale of a man singularly unsuited to any role in public service, much less the Presidency.
And the chaos that reigns throughout the executive branch, from the White House to the cabinet to the various agencies they are duty bound to manage, is the inevitable result.
3
Trump works for us, all of us. Let's fire him! Vote in November and again in 2020.
5
"Non-Disclosure Agreement" in general should be illegal, and so should "arbitration" agreements forfeiting the right to sue in a court of law. This should be obvious.
2
THIS IS SO, SO WRONG. This is the president of our nation, using with intent, a document, drawn up & distributed at his behest, which he knew to be unenforceable and likely violated the First Amendment protection of speech, for the purpose of intimidating employees of the federal government.
This is a violation of his oath of office.
It ought to be added to the impeachment charges.
4
I wish all the people who have signed NDAs and other agreements that limit their ability to tell the truth, would collectively build a pile and burn them all - and then start talking. Who knows how many secrets and appalling truths have been buried by these cynical ploys to subvert the truth. If everyone starting revealing all the secrets they are supposedly not allowed to reveal our nation might be a better place. And I'm not just talking about Trump's NDAs - I mean all of them. Legally depriving someone of the right to tell a true story is anti-American and anti-democratic.
2
Another distraction, albeit a bit humurous. It's like the captain of the Titanic requiring his senior officers to sign non-disclosure agreements after the ship had already hit the iceberg. The ship is going down regardless.
Stay focused on November 6, everyone.
Mobilize. Vote.
Cast out Trump's Republican enablers.
The future of our democracy depends on it.
4
This effort by Trump is not merely a break with tradition. The man has no understanding of what it means to serve the public good. White House staff are not Trump employees. They work for the people. And the people's government is best served when secrets are severely limited.
2
Illegal -- these are federal employees who work for us, the American people, not for trump. He has no right, no legal standing, to require an NDA or a loyalty oath.
Remember when we used to elect lawyers, governors, and legislators to high office? It's so much better when they've actually *read* the Constitution, or respect it at least.
2
I guess Mueller has to ask of witnesses and those others testifying if they signed those.
It seems like yet another attempt to thwart truth and justice by Donald the Elder.
1
I second Jon's thoughts--NYT PIcks
"One way to get around these sorts of agreements is to argue that they violate public policy. I think the whole idea of requiring NDA's for people IN PUBLIC SERVICE violates public policy. These people work for us not Donald Trump. There are other laws protecting presidential work product, etc. My right as a citizen to know what the people who work for me trumps Trump's right to conduct his presidency in secrecy. He's just breaking all the rules."
3
I could swear I recall, when this first came up - possibly as far back as the transition - that some government ethics person sent a letter indicating that all government employees have the right to speak out on matters of concern (so long as they not classified), so that no NDA can be expected by an government supervisor, including any president.
I tried to google for that information but did not find it a couple days ago when Ruth Marcus’ Op-Ed appeared in the WaPo. (Perhaps the Times can find the article on that.)
In any case it was clear from whatever I read that the letter sent to government workers was a reminder that no one can mandate their silence about working conditions or anything else, with the exception of classified matters of national security.
It is simply outrageous that Trump or anyone else expects he can muzzle those who work “for the government” - even if appointed by him.
This whole thing makes me want Congress to subpoena every single White House employee or appointee to testify about whether they signed such an agreement and to affirm under Oath to Congress that their allegiance is to the Constitution and We the People - not to Donald Trump!
Day by day outrageous things like this - Trump-related outrageous things! - keep coming out. In the light of day it’s looking worse and worse for this administration - this BADministration!
Mueller cannot work fast enough for the sake of our Republic and the Rule of Law - by this Mischief-Maker in Chief
4
What are the legal ethics of asking people to sign something that you know is unenforceable?
2
These agreements cease to exist the moment they are entered into. One cannot sign away one's constitutional rights, the first amendment in this case, even if one wants to. Such a contract dissolves on contact.
2
There has got to be a watchdog group bring a lawsuit regarding this. They are public servants and should be working with transparency. The Freedom of Information Act means nothing all of a sudden? Trump is not above the law.
3
Are NDA's, where mutual assent has been coerced or extracted under duress, enforceable?
1
1. It should be illegal to require government employees or contractors to sign NDAs about their work for the government. Allowing those types of NDAs is contrary to the principle of transparency in government, an essential component of a democracy.
2. A a legal condition of a candidate filing to run for President or Vice-President should be to render null-and-void any claims the candidate would have to require counter-parties in some or all types of NDAs they've signed not to share the information in those agreements with the public. Being a candidate for leader of the nation should mean, as much as possible, being an open book. The public should have the right to know as much as possible about their potential Presidents and Vice-Presidents in order to choose truly freely and wisely.
At the very least, these candidates should not be allowed to keep unlawful actions, civil or criminal, secret from the voters. At the very least, any NDAs involving keeping information about violations of law secret should be rendered null-and-void upon filing to run for President or VP with the FEC.
2
This excerpt is telling: "One former official said that he recalled being told that the document was merely meant to reassure the president." Another of the innumerable instances where this little man blatantly and wrongly believes It's all about him. His misplaced arrogance and narcisscim will never let him acknowledge that everyone--including himself--works for the Federal government and therefore all the American people?
After more than a year in office he still believes--or behaves as if he believes-- that he can do as he pleases. He is a spoiled rich kid who grew up surrounded by privilege and with the opinion that somehow the rules of a civil society do not apply to him.
4
How is this legal? The President is our employee, not the other way around.
3
Did Donald Trump imagine that any aide who violated the terms of the NDA would pay monetary damages to him? That’s ridiculous. He’s the president, not the CEO of a private company.
Unfortunately.
40
No, they'd have to pay the federal government.
1
@sophia: That would be logical, but it’s equally ridiculous. The president of the United States doesn’t have unilateral authority to impose a financial penalty on government employees.
2
Isn't this a curtailment of White House employees First Amendment rights? Will it be upheld in court? This is not Putin's Russia or Erdogan's Turkey or Duarte's Philippines.
40
Second amendment - sacred! First amendment, not so much...
90
Did I miss something? Who is paying the salaries for Trump's aides? His own personal funds or the American taxpayer? If it's us, then a nondisclosure agreement should be illegal.
133
Chilling to see the photo of staffers (many now gone) with their right hands raised, knowing they're all going to be liars and NOT taking the oath seriously ("I, (state your name), do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.'') Maybe they were all mumbling the Girl Scout Promise instead. Hey Sarah! "...without any purpose of evasion" - does that ring a bell?
Disgusting.
20
It's now appropriate to fly the US flag upside-down, as this nation is surely in distress.
31
Mr. Trump forgets that he isn't a CEO but an employee. He works for us, as does all of his staff. We are paying their paychecks. So unless there is a issue of National Security, everything Mr. Trump says and does within his capacity as POTUS is and should be PUBLIC record.
319
Said document, or documents, having been drawn up by the White House Council would be subject to retrival and public disclosure through the "Freedom of Information Act". Coming soon, no doubt.
17
Before reading and / or replying to the following message, you must sign an NDA. Since I am unable to force paper and a pen through my computer to your computer, phone, tablet, etc, you will need to press the word *Recommend* at the bottom of this message. Thank you.
Now for the message...
Get out and vote in November; for yourself, for your freedom, for your country, and the for human race.
57
"Get out and vote in November...." but make sure you only vote for Democrats! Vote the Party Over Country (or POC) OUT! Every single one of the traitors.
3
Is the 10 million dollar penalty to the benefit of the US government ... or Mr. Trump himself?
21
What I don't get is why the WH staff are subordinating themselves to this despicable man in every way. It's bad enough that they are willing to work for him in the first place, given what he stands for. But they go further. When told by McGahn that the NDAs were probably unenforceable, they signed anyway, just to make their insecure boss happy. I guess it's the same mentality that prompts millions of people to reveal every detail of their lives on Facebook and other social media, without a thought or care to how they might be used or compromised. Don't people value their own privacy and rights? So in addition to the lack of character and integrity in the Trump administration, there's no sense of basic dignity or self-worth either? How pathetic.
16
I think part of the answer to your question is that since Trump can't attract competent staffers, only the incompetent and otherwise unqualified are willing to take those jobs. They may not be smart enough to realize that NDAs aren't allowed.
2
This is about upholding GOP power at all costs. It's very desperate and lawless, which tells me their rein is over already. Last gasp.
1
Something smells fishy.
Hello? 'tap' 'tap', is this full disclosure of elected officials thing working? Hello? Democracy? Hello?
Putin definitely has something on him, no doubt. Bye bye.
10
We have lost our minds......and his supporters will see nothing wrong with this.....How can people keep a blind eye such a blind eye to this guy? Do they really want an authoritarian dictatorship? I'm thinking the answer might be " Yes."
10
Not all of us. Trump's supporters seem to be marked by either insecurity or intellectual laziness. They seem to be needing to be told what to do whether it is from Faux news, their religion or the dotard in chief. If that's what they want, then let them join the Taliban.
2
Is this another agreement put together by Mr. Cohen and will Mr. David Dennison sign with his real name this time (or at all)?
11
And will everyone be threatened by Mr. David Dennison or Mr. Cohen, being thugs and all. Mr. Dennison.....I mean Trump came into office threatening our allies, "Pay up or no protection for you!". He and his 'best people' are thugs. Just like Putin's thugs.
1
So sad! We have a president who thinks he can control everything federal employees say in order to keep everything about him and his administration confidential so he can produce his reality TV presidency.
10
Rex Tillerson, you have a moral duty to tell all you know about how this administration functions. You were working for US, the American People, not the detestable Trump.
30
So if someone breaks the NDA, do they get sued by POTUS for a monetary damage of $10 million!!!? That’s an innovative way to make money off the backs of government employees for the private benefit of the president!
He could become a real billionaire that way. Perhaps pay off his debts to Putin, NOT.
What are the NDA penalties Putin imposed on trump, I wonder. Poisoning?
13
If this is illegal why am I not reading about a civil liberties lawyer suing the government over this?
16
Word got out that Trump ignored his security advisors of calling to congratulate Putin.
And little Marco Rubio, says the "leak" is more disturbing. (BTW Marco, its not a technical 'leak when the info aint classified.)
Huh? Why shouldn't we know POTUS is ignoring advice of better informed men and women...?! The best and brightest he promised to rely on...
The Repubs are so lost...its amazing they can still find their offices. But then they can follow the coins their donors leave as trails...
14
But aren’t they public employees not private hires?
13
Trump thinks he owns the government and the nation.
12
If Mr. Trump wants secrecy he should resign and move to Russia.
Vlad Putin will keep ALL of Trump's secrets secret
25
That's quite the rogues gallery in that group picture. Fewer and fewer remain as each day passes. How embarrassing for the whole lot of them.
8
Trump is an autocrat. He is a control freak who himself is
uncontrollable. But his attitude and personality is anathema to the openness required in a democracy.
No wonder he admires and emulates Putin and would love a secret deep state for himself and his enablers.
10
Although Trump, as usual, has gone overboard about leaks, our elected officials need to feel secure in their private lives and in their policy deliberations. Realistic fears of loss of privacy prevent good people from entering public service. Realistic fears of leaks prevent government officials from open-ending problem-solving. People are not willing to throw out novel ideas if those ideas are going to be printed in the Times the next day. Problem-solving requires freedom to express even ideas that turn out to be naive upon discussion. The public need not know the process, just the outcome. The Times should admit that it has an inherent bias on this issue, because a news organization benefits from leaks.
2
The American people..at least the patriots among us..benefit from the disclosure of this kind of information, because it exposes the jackal on the throne
2
Requiring any public employee, whether politically appointed or a member of the civil service, to sign an agreement not to discuss unclassified information about our government, our leaders, or decisions that get made is unconstitutional.
I am astounded that any president or any White House chief of staff would have the slightest confidence that such a suppression of speech could stand up. Of course, maybe Trump is just being deceptive and cynical. You think?
14
Trying to cover ones tracts hardly every works. Whether its with a signed document or threats, they always leave a trail that eventually backfires. Is the WH defending the constitution with NDAs or the first family's interest? A word to the wise is sufficient: Read the constitution!
5
Lordy, I hope there are lawsuits.
10
The article suggests President Trump knows the NDA's are not enforceable against federal employees but insists on using them anyway as they might deter most signors from discussing their White House observations, both while working there and subsequently. In many jurisdictions (I don't know about the District of Columbia) this tactic - deterring someone from exercising a legally-protected right by using a contract term that the employer knows to be unenforceable - is itself a violation of the law, with potential criminal consequences or as a basis for punitive damages in a civil lawsuit. Perhaps Mr. Trump will learn that bullying tactics used in the world of reality television don't work when you are President and ultimately may backfire on him.
19
I’d think there would be a constitutional argument against such an agreement, if it does not carve out certain exceptions. While national security secrets, internal matters, and purely personal information should not be released, I do not need to know who wears a bathrobe when. The government employees work not for the President but the people and where the matter is of great public interest, it should be released and indeed such release is constitutionally protected.
5
Trump insistence on hiding behind non-disclosure agreements indicates that he's hiding something that he really doesn't want people to know about. Of course "The Donald" is drawing attention to whatever secrets he's hiding by trying to hide them.
9
Since it's a known fact that the President never reads anything put in front of him the only sure way his aides can be sure he learns about it is to leak it. The media will report it, he will get mad but at least he is aware of it.
9
"But he privately told senior aides that it was mainly meant to placate an agitated president, who was convinced that the people around him had to be pressured into keeping his secrets." You see..."private" means private. THe article then cites 'Two officials said in interviews that a document..." and "One former official said that he..." You just showed why NDA's are a good idea.
1
Trump is not paying these people's salary. We the people are. He has no right to force them to sign a nondisclosure agreement.
16
It would seem that if the NDA was between the staffer and the Office of the White House, the next president could easily nullify them.
1
Did these aides not get a copy if the document they signed??
2
If I work for a government entity, I should not be forced by my boss to sign a non disclosure agreement. This is Trump running a federally funded government entity like his Trump organization. One would think no one is above the law in America but I guess one person is indeed above the law.
8
I pledge allegiance
to the King
of the United States of America,
And to the Trump Corporations for which it stands,
One nation, under Trump,
Completely divided,
with liberty and justice for those who swear this oath.
God Bless Trump's America.
Amen.
7
"Mr. McGahn made it clear the agreement could not ultimately be enforced, according to several people who signed."
That is straight up unethical. Even if it's not a breach of loyalty because he's not Trump's personal lawyer, it is flat out dishonest, which is a breach of, for example, the American Bar Association Center for Professional Responsibility Rule 8.4(c), which provides that, "It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: ... engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation." https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publicati...
23
The ironic saving grace in your comment, Ann, is that the very fact that several people who signed "leaked" the information about the NDAs to begin with. I don't admire anyone who would willingly work for this "president", but just like the tweets he pollutes our ethernet with, it is a good thing that some of them at least have the decency to expose what is going on. Just as we are probably better off with Donald, who we know, than we would be with Spence who is much closer to the vest with his activities.
1
Trump apparently has never entertained the thought of being above-board or honest as a solution to his never-ending fights with trying to stifle the speech of others.
Apparently it is more reasonable in TrumpLand to pay someone 130K for stuff you "never did". With Trump Org. letterhead.
9
This does not make much sense. And the President knows it. Either, this is a fake item, or almost a fake item meaning it lacks the requisite momentum to be of any use in practice. The aides working in WH are not Mr. Trump’s employee, they work for the country. One can wishfully demand their personal allegiance but to a point; ultimately, the security and welfare of the country preempt all such personal demands. The form they were alleged to sign are for companies only; WH is not a company by any stretch of imagination, and President knows it when he took an oath for the office. No CEO of any company ever takes an oath - unless it is a mafia organization – in front of the entire country.
5
This is an interesting point of view, because a non-disclosure agreement is only enforceable through trade secrecy laws, which are administered by the various 50 States. Furthermore, the UNIFORM TRADE SECRETS ACT defines a 'trade secret' only as something from which 'economic value' might be derived. The loss of anything else of value would be excluded. It provides for civil, but not criminal, penalties (i.e. the White House employees could be sued for monetary damages, but there could be no jail time).
According to the UNIFORM TRADE SECRETS ACT WITH 1985 AMENDMENTS: "(4) "Trade secret" means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use, and ..."
4
This is hogwash. NDAs are not dependent upon trade secrecy laws to be enforceable.
It has gotten to the point (and it was plainly obvious, say on Jan. 21, 2017, but why quibble) why any "sane" person would ever want to work in Trump's White House. Then again, despite irrefutable evidence that playing tackle football causes brain damage, millions of Americans continue to play on all levels of the sport. Perhaps those who continue to work in the White House should wear football helmets. Just a suggestion.
2
Trump bends the Constitution to his own needs. He sees the 1st Amendment as an inconvenience, the 2nd Amendment perversely as he cowers to the NRA. Either he has not read our Constitution, or he has no respect for it or any of the laws of the land. Sooner or later it is going to get him in real trouble; it may already have.
5
The law already refuses to enforce illegal contracts and contracts that are considered to be void as against public policy. The law also limits causes for libel and slander as they apply to public figures on the principle that debate about public figures is vital to democracy. Why shouldn't it be against public policy for a public figure to enforce a contract that restricts the release of information relevant to public discourse?
Every citizen needs to use all relevant information in judging the character and competence of a political candidate or office holder. No private agreement limiting that information should be legally enforceable.
6
Again, I benchmark every day with President Trump where we would be if Hillary Clinton had been elected. Everyday, I'm seeing that our nation is much better with Trump as President as opposed to Hilary. I'm not aware of anywhere in the US Constitution that the NYT editorial board and writers are charged with being the soul of the nation. We are one nation under God, whose alternative name is "I am", and, as of today, "I am" has President Trump as our President.
It would never occur to Mr. Trump to conduct himself in a way that made disclosure agreements unnecessary.
8
This is just another indication of how unfit Trump is to be president. We have an open government in this country. Trump doesn't get it
7
I find it hard to believe the leaker can’t be identified. It must be that other President Trump he is tweeting with during his executive time. Our President seems to be pro at providing leaks to the press. He certainly has experience.
3
Yes, in past years, Trump was notorious, posing as "John Barron" to leak information and fauxformation to the press about his doings and plans. Anything, to get attention!
1
Of course President Obama did not subject White House employees to this forced abdication of the Bill of Rights.
That's because Obama was a real President and what we have now is a horror show version of one.
11
It is strikingly ironic that the White House, which should be in the business of protecting the first amendment, is trying to block it.
8
Innocent people do not insist on non-disclosure agreements.
6
As I recall, the president (the most senior officer of the executive branch) is required to enforce law not to abuse law. Writing an Non-Disclosure Agreement by an officer of the federal government to silence a subservient member of the federal government about information that is not "For Official Use Only" or Classified is an abuse of power that is easily a "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" per the impeachable offenses in the constitution.
The Muller investigation should note this.
I was a military officer earlier in my life, and had I tried this on a lower ranked person, especially one I had charge of, I would have been court martialed under the Unified Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which is derived and aligned with the US Constitution.
9
Correction: Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
2
So, not being able to gain a security clearance was no big deal to this administration but it was critical to sign a NDA on what goes/went on in the administration. S.H. Sanders has repeatedly touted "transparency." I suppose this document is why so many of his present and former staff members felt they could quote "executive privilege" at Congressional Investigations and the House GOP let them get away with it.
This is outrageous.
6
Anyone who has worked for any government agency knows that you have to sign non disclosure documents when you're hired. Those documents or document, depending on where you are in the food chain, state that you are prohibited to discuss any details you are privy to or details of your work environment in public, including with family. Most employees sign the document without reading it but it is standard procedure.
What Trump's regime is doing is illegal, or borders on it, for he is forcing government employees to swear loyalty to Him above and beyond their duty to serve the citizens of America and respect the rules of governance. That may be acceptable in the private sector but in the corridors of government it is a clear indication that a dictator is passing himself off as president.
5
Besides the freedom of speech concens and the public's right to know, it seems to me there is an issue of basic contract law that renders these agreements unenforceable. As i understand it, for a contract to be valud and binding, there must be some kind of valuable consideration exchanged. It appears that Trump used for such valuable consideration the position being offered itself, the value of which was not Trump's to trade.
5
All part of the same sleazy and un-American theme: No visitor logs for whomever comes to the White House. NDA's. Untracable political contributions. Visitors to the WH who then loan hundreds of millions to the Son-in-Law-in-Chief that they just spoke with
Please, Trump voters, explain to me how this man was going to 'drain the swamp' when he in fact IS the swamp?
Mr. Trump's staff don't work for him and they aren't paid by him. They work for you and me, and they are paid by you and me. Mr. Trump may have found that his sleazy silencing bullying worked when he was busy declaring bankruptcy six times while inflating his name, but it cannot -- and must not -- be implemented in the House the people pay for against people who are supposed to serve the people, not their boss' ego.
Again, Trump Voters: How is it a 'straight-shooter' who 'speaks his mind' wants so very fiercely to silence anyone who would dare speak against him? Oh, because he's a huge hypocrite. And if you voted for him, you're one too, so congratulations.
When will this stupid, simple-minded and sick group of frauds, liars and con men be swept from the White House we all pay for?
153
A lot of what goes on in the policy realm is covered under various secrecy laws. Every item in the situation room is top secret and on 'need to know' basis. Only items not covered are Trumps various peculiar habits of eating cheese burgers in bath robe while watching Fox news to select another adviser/employee for White House.
Trump is paranoid and possibly more concerned about his personal privacy than any top secret issues of his Presidency - we all remember his bravado to Lavrov and Kislyak on May 10 2017 in the Oval Office firing Comey for Russia investigation (http://nyti.ms/2IG82tx).
These vague Non-Disclosure agreements would not hold up in the courts.
15
And if this isn't an indication that Donald Trump has something to hide -- nothing is.
30
Would not such NDAs be public documents? If so. let's get'em.
74
Sounds like all he did was provide "plausible deniability" to those who did leak information!
5
If you want know who Trump really is, unseal the NDA's. I'm surprised there isn't a fund to insure against any legal indemnity accruing to those who speak out. Money - it creates unequal opportunity for all.
13
Ahhh ... but the reality and genuine irony is.... according to several attorneys interviewed on NPR today from multiple disciplines NDA's in general when it comes to any sort of criminal / litigation case are not worth the paper they're written on ( I can attest to that fact first hand ) ... and .. even better ... forcing any Federal employee .. which all WH staff etc are .. to sign an NDA .. is UnConstitutional
Question is ... when does someone put Trump's feet to the fire over this circumvention of the US Constitution which he publicly swore to uphold ?
7
Congress...oh, Congress where are you? Come out, come out from where ever you are hiding? Why are they hiding from another call to do their job?
76
Interesting Ivanka pushed it. Shows how ill-informed she is.
41
Or maybe well informed - about things she and Donald don't want us to know.
1
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. She is as corrupt as he is.
1
Simple...she's "Daddy's Girl".
1
Word that Trump is trying to decide between a bow at the waist or a straight arm salute cannot be confirmed at this time because no one is willing to disclose such a choice is being considered.
38
These people are employed by the federal govt, not DJT. They are paid by taxpayer money. The notion Trump thinks everyone and everything is beholden to him, even in public office, is astonishing. Lastly, why is it that every single photo of Kushner depicts him w/ a sly grin....as if “I’ve got something over you,”....we’ll, maybe because he prob does (until he doesn’t). This admin is as unpredictable as March Madness. Wonder who will make it to the Final Four?
34
One word describes the man: Toxic.
46
By calling attention to concerns about disclosures the White House is trying to plug a hole with a funnel.
18
Norm Eisen frames the legal issue as a Free Speech question. That is one part, the right of current and former employees to speak. But a more crucial legal issue involves the right of We the People to know about the business of the Executive Branch. Not his personal family stuff in the bedrooms, but in the offices of the East and West wings as well as 'business' interactions with guests in the central residence including its famous bedrooms. Is an NDA (a civil contract between people and/or legal 'persons') binding if there is a public and historical interest in what is discussed and agreed, given that rules of classification already apply?
I don't care if he wears a (closed) bathrobe 'around the house'. If, though, he uses the Lincoln Bedroom to discuss Trump Organization business with his sons in violation of his promised separation, or conducts diplomacy from the Master Bedroom phone, there is a compelling national interest in his actions as President. That would also have been true of Hillary, had she won.
If we want to silence the White House staff during and after their tenures, preventing 'tell-alls', that is a matter for their oaths and/or a new law, not for a bunch of individual NDA's.
31
Trump is essentially a dictator and cares little for democracy.
38
Yet again - imagine the screams and cries of "impeach him" - had Obama done this.
42
Nothing says I'm a crook like requiring folks to gag themselves when you walk into a room. Now who's gonna clean this mess up?
31
I wasn’t aware you could force a NDA in a government environment, except for security reasons?
11
When it comes right down to it, what reason other than security would require secrecy? I'm sure that other common reasons that might require confidentiality (medical records, personnel records, census files and the like) are already addressed by federal law.
1
There are plenty of reasons Trump would want an NDA for reasons other than security.
Would you want to go to jail for a crime that SOMEONE ELSE saw you commit?
"Of the people, by the people, for the people." This non-disclosure "agreement" amounts to a word processing find-and-replace: "Trump" for "the people." Lincoln would say, THIS is what we saved the country for?
10
One more nail in the coffin of our democracy, thanks to Pseudo President Trump.
25
Trump would most likely have done even more damage to our country if he was able to silence any leaks from his White House. I consider anyone who is willing to shed any light on his dark, devious presidency an asset to democracy and I am thankful for their service.
Marco Rubio was shown on camera this morning venting his anger and disgust toward the unknown leaker. I wonder how Mr. Rubio would have reacted if he was present at the Mai Lai Massacre. How would Mr. Rubio have dealt with Karen Silkwood, Frank Serpico, Jeff Wigand, Sherron Watkins and others? Seems to me that Mr. Rubio should recognize courage when he see's it. Even if he is a republican.
22
The non-disclosure agreements are invalid because they violate employees' First Amendment right to speak about unclassified information. They are also invalid because they abrogate employees' obligations to respond to freedom of information requests, subpoenas, and litigation discovery. And they violate employees' rights under whistleblower protection laws.
Also, to be binding, a non-disclosure agreement (like any contract) must involve an exchange of value between two or more parties. What value did employees get for signing these? If the value they received was being allowed to keep their jobs, the agreements almost certainly violate federal personnel rules and procedures.
Finally, since McGahn apparently acknowledged that the agreements are not enforceable, and since Trump apparently insisted on them as a "deterrent," the obvious purpose of the agreements was intimidation. Since the intimidation was not limited to classified information, asking for the agreements constituted a First Amendment violation even if they are unenforceable.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
91
OMG, STOP! It's like Oprah's birthday all month LONG! I can't take anymore evidence this man will soon be gone! Gong him already!
11
I'm sorry, but I have not an ounce of sympathy for those who compromised their constitutional rights to sign on with Trump and might now regret it.
[Not sure how much 'constitutional rights' played into their professional calculations, but, whatever!]
They knew what they were enlisting in, revered the sort of man they were engaged to work for, were comfortable with the hollowness of their oath and his.
With due diligence and other democratic forces at work in the future, they won't have to be muzzled forever.
9
The one characteristic of this unusual White House that is abundantly clear is that they are inept, injuriously so.
The NDAs he was told would never work were foisted on the WH staff. All this to soothe poor Donald's fevered brow, using an instrument of admitted emptiness.
12
Forget the Ides of March. These are high tides, folks!
I am disgusted to the point of glee, this man is a menace to decency!! Book him, Brutus!
11
Trump has no morality.
Anyone who voluntarily works for Trump has a suspect morality.
It makes perfect sense that in such a pit of vipers, you might need to take exceptional care.
9
White House counsel and staff figured they could deceive Trump because he wouldn't read or be able to comprehend their nondisclosure documents. Their only mistake was forgetting that the deception would be leaked.
12
I'm no constitutional expert, but it appears to me that any federal employee -- of which the president is one -- requiring other federal employees to sign an NDA is in violation of the First Amendment. Is this not grounds for impeachment?
38
I guess we can add this to the already way too long list of impeachable offenses.
1
All those that took a job in the White House swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution against both foreign and domestic enemies. It seems to me that leaking information that shows abuse of power or a disregard for the constitution, takes precedence over any agreement that says you cannot abide by your the oath you took when you decided to take this job.
10
I completely agree that classified information should remain out of the public arena. As for non-sensitive or non-confidential information, as long as the subject acts ethically and with a standard of acceptable decorum, that person would have nothing to hide or be ashamed of. Then again, acting ethically and with a sense of acceptable decorum seems to be a missing component in the current White House.
5
So wait, the White House counsel asked people working in the White House, people in PUBLIC jobs, to sign a legal document that he knew full well was a complete fiction?
More profiles in courage in the Trump White House.
20
People who work in the White House work in the federal government and serve US - the people. All federal workers are protected by the 1st Amendment. A non-disclosure agreement is non-enforceable. Period.
10
Most absurd is McGahn's strategy to mollify the president by putting together an invalid document. President Trump still does not understand rule of law or the constitution he swore to uphold.
20
... and McGahn should rightly be disbarred.
9
All bark and no bite. Americans have rights guaranteed by the constitution. Even a president can't supersede that indefinitely and without cause. #resist
6
My concern is not for this presidency. Trump has violated so many basic norms that most people, even his supporters, have wriiten off his behavior as freakish.
But subsequent presidents may feel entitled to some sort of NDA from White House employees, and that will feel less extreme after Trump. Believe me, attorneys are watching to see what happens on this.
We need to stay focused on the bounds of executive power, no matter who is in the White House. Obama expanded his executive power priviledges on top of what Bush sought. Even good presidents want as much control as possible, and we need to pay close attention to how our ability to monitor our elected officials at every level.
6
I wonder about so many legal questions that will arise out of this regime. One that I have not heard anyone ask is this: The President fired the last 2 FBI directors because he said they were liars and not to be trusted. How long before defense attorneys of clients who were charged by the FBI during Comey and McCabe's tenure will say "all charges against my client must be dropped because the FBI was being run by highly dishonest men who were fired by the President for dishonesty." It is only a matter of time before this occurs.
3
An American citizen’s first allegiance is to the Constitution and to the rule of law—not to an individual office-holder, and certainly not to an office.
This is government, not business, where such things may be permissible and legal. A loyalty oath is given to a person and binds the individual to his (or her) word. This is the first step on the road to fascism; a fanatical belief in a person, not the laws and customs that bind a society together—for good or ill.
12
The corrupted GOP leadership again demonstrates the party is willing to overlook presidential behavior that's so egregious one can only wince at it. What could they possibly hope to gain by their incomprehensible failure to hold him to account for conduct that's so far outside the bounds of ordinary human decency that it boggles the imagination?
5
Our nation is rudderless and subject to the whims of an unbalanced, possibly traitorous, sociopath. Were we ever so vulnerable to enemies from within?
5
The picture of Michael Flynn taking an oath is hilarious in retrospect. I just wish this was happening to some other country instead of our own that way I could look on in amusement rather than tears.
7
Political appointees and civil servants are completely different creatures. They are like a different species. It's only natural that the political critters be required to act like professionals.
I would never sign a separate non-disclosure agreement beyond what was required for access to classified information. The fact that anyone even signed one is a testimony to their unprofessionalism. It appears that those who did are no longer working in the White House.
2
Neither political appointees nor civil servants sign an NDA.
1
Any federal employee who signs a White House NDA is tendering a bribe to Donald Trump at his request. The fact that Trump requested it is obviously much more important than the fact that the employee tendered it.
Trump and his supporters say that leaks are a proof that the Deep State is alive an well and are intent on bringing him down, when Trump's words and actions have created a Deep State to bring him down.
3
Unless it is about classified information, I cannot possibly see any advantage for us as a nation if presidential aides are not allowed to talk about their work in the white house.
2
When an individual takes a job at the White House (or within any executive branch department) he/she swears an oath to the Constitution and the laws of the US - NOT to the President personally. These employees are paid by taxpayers, not by Trump. There is a VAST difference between a private company in which the "owner" can demand any kinds of loyalty protections he wants (subject only to discrimination protections), and the federal government where the President himself is an employee despite the power he holds.
Frankly it seems to me that requiring every employee to sign an NDA - after they have already been working within the White House for months - was in indicator of Trump's concern that information he doesn't want released will become public, i.e., the NDA was for his own personal protection. Kind of a red flag that there are things he needs to hide....
9
Muzzling American citizens' right to speak their minds about ANYTHING is unconstitutional - it's why we still have to get barraged by Donald Trump's tweets every day.
5
Mr. Trump appears to be the master of non-disclosure.... isn't that audit of his tax returns done yet ?
6
Has anyone ever told him that neither the USA nor the WH are his private companies. I am betting that allowing him his delusions works in their favor. And his daughter was on board for it too.
There are of course many valid reasons for NDA's (e.g. intellectual property) but there are equally as many, especially as regards confidentiality, which are just an excuse to carry on being irresponsible, abusive, even criminal - in effect a get out of jail free card.
6
Trump made his shoeshine man sign an NDA when he was a cadet in Military School, it seems. However, Trump is the single greatest leaked in the history of the Republic.
3
Does this also permanently compel Trump to not disparage a former employee? Good luck with him on that one. Sounds like he just created a lifetime's worth of lawsuits against himself.
5
One way to get around these sorts of agreements is to argue that they violate public policy. I think the whole idea of requiring NDA's for people IN PUBLIC SERVICE violates public policy. These people work for us not Donald Trump. There are other laws protecting presidential work product, etc. My right as a citizen to know what the people who work for me trumps Trump's right to conduct his presidency in secrecy. He's just breaking all the rules.
493
Non-disclosure agreements are a prelude to conspiracy, and the use of these restrictions on one's First Amendment rights should be carefully scrutinized and limited by law to legitimate needs of a company, a person or a government agency. Secrecy is not compatible with a government "of the people, by the people and for the people". While the government may have good reason to conceal some information from its constituents by branding it with a designation of secrecy, we need a law that would punish the use of these designations to conceal mistakes or crimes committed by government officials.
220
To state the obvious, if this were Obama or Clinton the Republicans would be apoplectic.
4
What a baby bully The Con Don is. No wonder his Dad distanced himself from "the crazy one". Too bad he left him money - otherwise The Con Don would just be an average, demented bully.
The article says, "Mr. McGahn made it clear the agreement could not ultimately be enforced, according to several people who signed."
Sure, Mr. McGahn, but what you didn't say is that you and The Con Don can sue the employees and make them pay for defense against a non-binding agreement. Very lawyerly of you. Very Robber Baronish. Very crooked.
113
I suspect that being crooked is one of the requirements for a position in the WH. No honest person with a sense of integrity would go there.
2
Was there a swearing-out ceremony? We'd like that photo too.
22
Why is everything Trump does such a secret? Why does Trump feel that freedom of speech his right alone? He can slander and denigrate anyone he wants. He talks about anything he wants. But woe be it anyone in his orbit do the same.
The White House/Oval Office staff work for the federal government NOT Trump but the Office of the Presidency.
It makes one suspicious. Why not release the Visitor Log for the White House?
Is Trump purposely hiding it because he knows he is not conducting himself in an ethical manner?
If you are doing your job to the best of your ability with best efforts to be honest and open there is no need for NDA's.
231
Trump is plainly guilty of verbal abuse of the nation and must be prosecuted to end this continuing pattern of abuse. Start with a restraining order.
Verbal abuse is the excessive use of language to undermine someone's (or a nation's) dignity and security through insults or humiliation, in a sudden or repeated manner.
It is an infringement on an individual’s (nation's) sense of security and their physical and psychological integrity, which are protected under federal and provincial charters of rights and freedoms as well as under the law.
Serious verbal threats may constitute a violation of the Criminal Code.
8
How many names on that vistor's list are Russian? What crimes are being committed in the Oval Office? What corruption is stinking so much that it needs to be hidden under a pile of non disclosure agreements? Most of all, what is wrong with the people working in the WH?
What do the Russian have on the Republican Congress?
2
I hope cabinet members and top aides got pre-imps signed by Trump. You know, pre-impeachment agreements promising to cover their legal expenses. And pensions.
26
CD: "... pre-impeachment agreements promising to cover their legal expenses. "
A brilliant "retort of the day"!
4
I wanted to say that this is the most incredible thing I have ever heard of. But then I realized where it was coming from.
Still -- forcing government employees to sign a non-disclosure agreement with a $10 million penalty is true Trump. And even truer is that the White House will not release the NDA!
18
Is there a reason that no one, NO ONE, steps forward to assure the American people that such tactics don't apply? Trump works for the American people. All those employed in the White House work for the American people. We pay their salaries. Who oversees this type of behavior? Where are they?
70
The people who oversee this are Ryan and McConnell and they are awol. They check their ethics, duty to country, and morality at the Capital door when they go in.
2
I have found it very interesting that there are so many leaks indicating poor judgement, indecisiveness and untruthfulness on the part of President Trump. No much loyalty there. Or maybe the environment is more toxic than anyone can tolerate.
10
Why is it that Trump and other Republicans love the second amendment but not the first?
320
I have been pondering the same thing.
5
How can a president require public servants staff to sign NDA's?
His staff does not work for him, they work for the US government. His staff are government employees all working, not for Trump, but all of us, the US. Their paychecks are not issued from the Trump organization they are issued from the US government.
This is a very scary precedent, and I feel grounds for impeachment because these agreements are not to protect the country from enemies foreign or domestic. These agreements are in place to protect Trump himself and ONLY Trump.
Trump is asking his staff to place his, Donald Trumps, interests above those of the country. That I feel is a violation of his oath of office; grounds for impeachment.
This is further evidence that he is not in the white house to serve the American people, but to serve himself.
885
Because our educational system is currently in the thrall of conservative dogma, a large swath of our citizens are not aware that the White House staff and the President work for the public and not Donald J. Trump. An ill informed electorate can not maintain a Democracy.
27
Trump, and anyone paid by the US Treasury works for you, and me, and not Trump, not Trump's family, or his minions of the moment.
Will it help if Trump took a middle-school US Government course, just to get some basics on how the government actually works? I am sure there is at least one school in DC that Betsy DeVoss can get him enrolled in. I hope it is not too late. And while she is there, she might get herself enrolled as well. A little knowledge never hurt anyone.
28
Yes, how does Trump swear to uphold and defend the constitution, then demand that White House government employees sign away their First Amendment rights for no legitimate reason? And how can we trust these same government employees who were willing to compromise themselves for Trump's ego? It's bad on all sides.
215
Trump continues down the road of authoritarianism...stifling freedom of speech....
This all emanates from the psyche of a person whose self esteem is so low that he must feel that he needs protection from himself.
29
Donald is so fearful and anxious of anybody talking about him. I wonder why?
42
With all the chaos engulfing this administration- the Russia investigation, the claims of sexual harassment, Stormy Daniels, charges of obstruction of justice, tit-for-tats with North Korea, sinking poll numbers, your own Secretary of State calling you a moron, the loss of respect from about every country in the world that isn't ruled by a dictator, dog whistles to white supremacists, etc., etc., etc.- one wonders what possible joy any person could take from having this job? I realize that some personality types thrive on adversity, but this is ridiculous. I guess getting to play king of the world is worth it to Trump.
20
Our president has so much to hide! He's "scared straight" that the people he hires are going to tattle! I hope they get backbones and start doing that soon! What a mess our country is in. What's more scary is that there are still a lot of people that think things are just great with the new person masquerading as a president of our nation. I was wondering when our country would be run like a reality show!
26
How much longer are we going to temp the hand of fate by dutifully abiding the fiction that the trump administration is abideable. Again and again we are told that measures that are violative of principals edenic to the Office Of The Presidency are being routinely taken in order to constrain the adolescent temper tantrums on the man child in whom’s hands WE THE PEOPLE have placed the fate of Mankind?
16
If that NDA was issued and signed by White House staffers in their official capacity, which seems to be the case, shouldn't it be subject to the Freedom of Information Act request?
226
Any contract to which the federal government is a party is subject to freedom of information disclosure, with redactions as required to protect classified information, private parties' personal or proprietary information, and so on. Also, any documentation of a federal employee's terms and conditions of employment is subject to freedom of information disclosure.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
9
Did TASS sign an NDA before covering the US-Russia delegation meeting at white house? They are probably more used to signing such documents.
21
The article's photo of White House staff from 2017 shows a number of people already indicted, likely to be indicted or to be called to testify. Of course Trump wants them to keep quiet. They've seen crimes.
132
Yet again, not qualified, not prepared for the office, and no idea what being "president" means, or requires....
Thanks, Electoral College and Flyover Land.
Putin, Stormy Daniels, and others....really ?
123
Crying out loud, stop with the flyover land stuff. I'm smack dab in the middle of it surrounded by tons of progressive people. Gosh, I think we even have an atheist.
5
Hear, hear! There are a number of very progressive cities in the middle of the country whose citizens definitely did NOT vote for Trump.
@Casey NY,NY :"Yet again, not qualified, not prepared for the office, and no idea what being "president" means, or requires....
"Thanks, Electoral College and Flyover Land."
The "flyover land" helped to elect this cretin. A part of the reason? Folks who dismiss everyone who doesn't live on the Coasts. It's THAT attitude that floats trash Like DT.
BTW-I spent the first 20 years of my life and education in NYC. The second decade was spent in San Francisco getting and education. I live in Kansas City Missouri (fly over country) because of the cheap cost of living,and the affordable cultural opportunities that make KC an undiscovered gem. The money I save,will pay for our departure in Feb 2019 from this failing nation you call "home".
Fond regards from the land of your contempt,fly-over nation.
1
Mr.Trump cannot earn the trust or loyalty of those who work with him so he demands that they sign agreements to enforce loyalty.He has gotten in trouble insisting that government employees be loyal to him. He missed the memo that these employees owe their loyalty to the Constitution.Mr.Trump got in trouble asking Mr.Comey for loyalty and fumes that his attorney general is not loyal.This fixation on loyalty befits an autocrat.This should give us all pause.
87
Thank god the tea party cleaned up the swamp, right?
83
Nothing but bottom feeders left to see at Trump's blight house.
3
Why would anyone want to work in the Trump White House? Probably the most toxic working environment on the planet.
105
"Probably the most toxic working environment on the planet."
Our EPA Chief is working day and night to change that.
13
Are these WH NDA's even worth the paper they are written on?
So if it's not classified, it appears WH staff are covered by the First Amendment or whistle-blower protections.
23
How is this legal, the individuals that work in the White House work for the public, the tax payers, not Trump.
379
Sammy...it’s NOT legal.
That’s why our Criminal-In-Chief loves it.
10
I bet this is what kept the good lawyers from working for this iceflow. They know these NDAs can't stand up to US Justice in state courts.
8
Once again, Mafia Boss Donald Trump tries to break Constitutional Law as he defecates on the 1st Amendment and American freedom of expression.
Thank goodness this Moron-In-Chief brought his rip-off values to the Oval Office to try to rip off democracy and free speech.
Anyone who voted for this Russian-Republican oligarch needs to lower that American flag in their front yard and raise the Russian flag.
Vote on November 6 2018.
Use the Presidential EJECT voter button.
290
If it is not illegal to demand disclosure agreements like this, it should be illegal. Our government needs to be accountable to the taxpayers. I want more transparency, not less.
665
Actually, as the lawyer is for the White House, not the President. It is unethical for him to demand, require, or suggest that White House employees sign NDAs.
2
It is illegal.
2
You are correct. Those employees of the government are paid for by all of us taxpayers and hence they actually report to us and not only to those demigods in the White House.
1
Trump wages war on rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights and balances codified by the Constitution every single day. Transparency, accountability, free speech, free press, an independent judiciary have all been blatantly ignored by this administration.
The people who support this would probably find the Philippines or Saudi Arabia more suited to their political and religious inclinations.
244
At least he defends the second amendment.
Trump does not defend the Second Amendment. He only defends the second half of the Second Amendment. He rejects the first half, as do his cronies in the Republican Party and the NRA.
18
The only right Trump believes in is the Second Amendment, which he takes to an extent that would be unthinkably exaggerated for the Founders.
And for all his efforts to stifle employees and former girlfriends, Trump is the one with the loosest lips of anyone. ;)
8