The Bush-appointed head of the agency that is responsible for protecting government whistle-blowers has been charged with retaliating against his own employees, closing hundreds of whistle-blower cases without any investigation, withholding vital information from Congress, and of destroying evidence to cover up his actions.
Is this any surprise, considering that the Bush administration was willing to out a CIA agent in retaliation for her spouse’s whistle-blowing to expose administration lies?
This is really disturbing. Bloch closed hundreds of whistleblower cases without investigating them, each one representing an employee putting their ass on the line to expose potentially serious wrongdoing.
This guy’s Orwellian mindset is perverse: He wiped data on his computer in order to “protect” it, and dismissing all those whistleblower complaints allowed him to boast of “cutting a backlog in cases”!
I’ve not seen this anywhere else, and unfortunately the link is to a news site with a well-recognized slant. To make this more damning, I would recommend also linking to news sites with a variety of slants and with more MSM credibility. (In other words, do you know if the BBC picked this up? 😉 )
The MSM has credibility? What are you drinking?
But here you go:
An article from the AP: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ibkN2b4AbXpzhmatOH2B0gTZq68gD9F8C2C80
An article about Bloch pleading guilty to charges that he withheld information from congressional investigators: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/22/AR2010042205724.html
Maybe I’m not drinking enough coffee–we’re moving at the moment and both the tea and the coffee are not available until we’re done. 😉 (These are the times when one becomes grateful for even Starbucks’ burnt beans.)
Nevertheless, you do receive lots of visitors, many of whom could see that your source is the Huffington Post and immediately ignore it as either too new or too slanted. By also including a variety of MSM sources you might better appeal to the expectations of some of that crowd.
I suspect that the crowd you refer to won’t believe anything unless it comes from Fox News. Sigh. They already don’t believe CNN or MSNBC. Heck, many of them still don’t believe Obama was born in this country.
Actually, I was thinking more of internet n00bs and confused folks (like my new landlady–who is very much an old-style lady who gets everything from broadcast and easily found websites).
The Fox crowd is, in the aggregate, too loyal to Fox to bother with in this medium. But there’s a smaller, less experienced crowd that can be reached (like my older students when I was teaching at the local community college). This second crowd are not urban or urbane, and they are often just discovering their way around the internet. This crowd can be influenced by Fox, but they are not yet loyal to it–I’m specifically thinking of several of my students from a Communications class a couple of years ago. They knew of Beck, but were just discovering the internet. Such people can be reached.
So, yeah, that’s where that thinking was coming from. That and packing boxes. And needing coffee. Lots of coffee. 😉