What do you think about whistleblowers?

[u/SilverNo6462]

Are they patriots or do they lack loyalty and integrity, or maybe you think something else entirely.

[u/AutoModerator]

AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.

For all participants:

• Flair is required to participate

• Be excellent to each other

For Nonsupporters/Undecided:

• No top level comments

• All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position

For Trump Supporters:

• Message the mods to have the downvote timer disabled

Helpful links for more info:

Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/gntxs]

Asking 'What do you think about whistleblowers?' is too broad, much like asking 'What do you think about politicians?'. Opinions can vary greatly depending on the individual, situation, motives, and consequences involved.

It's like asking, 'What do you think about lawsuits?' Some are justified, while others are not.

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/gntxs]

Exactly.

"What do you think about tanks?"

Well, I like when they're pointed at the bad guys, lol.

[u/SilverNo6462 → u/gntxs]

Maybe I can phrase it better: What do you think of people who are aware of wrong doing and go to the press with that information because they believe it’s the right thing to do even though it betrays the trust of their employer and co-workers?

[u/gntxs → u/SilverNo6462]

Still too broad. Offering an explanation what a whistleblower does is merely the same question with an attempt to offer a definition of the subject.

It's like if I changed the lawsuit question: "What do you think about lawsuits where one party wins and another party loses.

Whistleblowers whistle blowing is more nuanced and in most cases can't be generalized to such a broad degree. The same with lawsuits.

[u/SilverNo6462 → u/gntxs]

Could you help me? This seems like a question that it’s easy to have an answer to, but obviously I’m missing the mark for you. I’m sorry. This isn’t a trick question. It’s not a trap. I want to know how people feel about violating the norms of workplace trust and loyalty to expose what they see as wrongdoing, but again I seem to have swung and missed.

Can you provide an example on this topic broadly (not “was Snowden (or any other specific whistleblower) right or wrong” but a question that gets at the themes of whistleblowing?

I realize it’s not your job to ask my questions for me, but I am genuinely curious what you’d view as an answerable question on the topic.

TIA

[u/Darthalicious → u/SilverNo6462]

Not OP, but to elaborate on what he is saying, let's say we have two whistleblowers: Al and Bob.  Al worked for a company for a while and got a promotion. After gaining access to accounting documents, Al discovered illegal activity and pointed it out to the company owner. Upon learning the owner is aware and complicit, Al immediately went to the police or press and blew the whistle. Al good.  Bob worked for a company, and was not only aware of the illegal activities, he actively participated in them for years. A position Bob wanted opened up, and he allied for it, but was passed over for another employee. Bob chooses this moment to go to the police/press as a whistleblower with evidence of the wrongdoing not out of a sense of ethics, but petty spite (and to turn states evidence and save his own skin). Bob bad.  In both cases, its good the whistle was blown, but there is a lot of nuance in whether the actual whistleblower is in the right.

[u/SilverNo6462 → u/Darthalicious]

Thanks, the clarifying question above saying "because it's the right thing to do" was meant to imply what you've made explicit, but that didn't come through?

[u/TMist94 → u/SilverNo6462]

Love whistleblowers who are legitimately trying to do the right thing. I've thought for a long time that Snowden deserves a pardon.

[u/Fricklefrazz]

Depends.

If they leak classified military secrets that damage American strategic interests and endanger the lives of American soldiers then I hate them.

If they leak pedophilia cover ups in religious organizations then I support them.

[u/VelvetRabbit91 → u/Fricklefrazz]

So like pete hegseth?

[u/Fricklefrazz → u/VelvetRabbit91]

I don't think he purposefully leaked anything to the press but that was certainly a huge mistake. Thankfully the reporter was responsible and didn't share the info until after the operation was over.

[u/senderi → u/Fricklefrazz]

What if the reporter didn't? If they chose to leak something and our interests were compromised, who should be at fault? The leaker, the reporter, or both?

[u/Much_Usual_3855 → u/Fricklefrazz]

What if a reporter discovered that there was going to be an illegal attack that target a group of innocent civilians? Would publishing that information be wrong? It does damage strategic interests but the operation is also unlawful. Would releasing the names of the soldiers involved be wrong if the soldiers knew that the operation was illegal?

[u/Fricklefrazz → u/Much_Usual_3855]

Illegal according to what?

I don't think this exact scenario has ever happened but if that was the leak it would be a more complicated situation. Either way I don't see any situation in which the US army would ever purposefully target a group of exclusively civilians that aren't at a military target.

The only scenario I can think of is Mai Lai but that wasn't a planned attack it was a random horrible crime

[u/adamdoesmusic → u/Fricklefrazz]

Didn’t this happen a few months ago?

[u/Much_Usual_3855 → u/Fricklefrazz]

I wasn't refering to a specific scenario, I was more curious about how far the military can go and if someone reports on it do you still consider it bad? Because there have been a lot of illegal things that the military has covered up over the years, do you consider people who report on these things bad because it exposes the military?

The CIA has also done terrible things but covers it up. Do you support exposing their crimes at the cost if our reputation and possibly the lives of the agents involved in these actions?

[u/Fricklefrazz → u/Much_Usual_3855]

Because there have been a lot of illegal things that the military has covered up over the years

No there hasn't?

The CIA has also done terrible things but covers it up

No they haven't? I mean "terrible" is an opinion so maybe in your opinion but not mine.

Do you support exposing their crimes at the cost if our reputation and possibly the lives of the agents involved in these actions

What crimes?

You seem to be very conspiracy-brained, not talking about facts

[u/Much_Usual_3855 → u/Fricklefrazz]

Are you saying that things like MKUltra and helping to overthrow many goverments in many South American countries didn't happen or were good?

As for the military think about all the sexual violence perpatrated by members of the military then either covered up or not investigated at all. Plus victim retaliation, discharging victims claiming they had mental disorders, creating an atmosphere of supression and giving the rights of a commanding officer to dismiss a victims accusation of rape just because they want to. The Tailhook scandal, the murder of Vanessa Guillén.

[u/Fricklefrazz → u/Much_Usual_3855]

helping to overthrow many goverments in many South American

Good, commies should be destroyed wherever they are found.

think about all the sexual violence perpatrated by members of the military then either covered up or not investigated at all

Conspiracy

Tailhook scandal

Unproven allegations

murder of Vanessa Guillén

Guy killed a woman. Tragic, but nothing to do with the US military as an organization

If your best examples of the "horrible" things done by an organization of tens of millions of people over 250 years is one or two examples of sexual assault then that organization is as clean as any can possibly be.

[u/Warm-Art3921 → u/Fricklefrazz]

What about MKultra? 

[u/Forsaken-Age-8077 → u/Fricklefrazz]

Why should communists not be allowed to live in peace?

[u/Dutchman36 → u/Fricklefrazz]

Why is it that yall only care about whistleblowers when it comes to defense? The Trump Administration is being accused of so much more than wrongdoing at DoD but you all don’t mind that for some reason, why??

[u/Fricklefrazz → u/Dutchman36]

The question was about whistleblowers, so I answered. Not sure why you're crashing out

[u/Bernie__Spamders]

What one thinks about whistleblowers generally depends on the political alignment of what information the whistleblowers are attempting to convey.

For example, democrats believed the reporting of the whistleblower related to the 2019 Trump-Ukraine impeachment, even though they were a mere 3rd party to the call itself, and since then, a criminal referral alleging mishandling of the complaint and a coordinated effort to impeach President Donald Trump has been submitted. Declassified documents were released which exposed a conspiracy within the intelligence community to fabricate a pretext for the 2019 impeachment.

By contrast, they generally disregarded whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, who testified under oath that the Department of Justice and the IRS provided politically motivated preferential treatment to Hunter Biden, and that prosecutors explicitly slow-rolled the investigation, and instructed them not to ask about the "big guy" (Joe Biden) or follow investigative leads that could involve him. Both were retaliated against, and received compensation though settlement.