do you know for a fact that Obama did not make his staff sign non-disclosure agreements?

I don't, but I haven't found any evidence that any other president has required them.

But even if it were the case that they existed under other presidents that doesn't change my position on them.

Do you know WHY NDAs exist?

In a word:  LAWYERS.

If someone works for you in any capacity, and they disclose private, proprietary or embarrassing information to anyone outside the organization, you have no legal recourse as long as they can claim they had no knowledge such information was protected, or that employees were prohibited from sharing the info.

By signing an NDA, employees acknowledge their responsibilities and the consequences of unauthorized disclosure.

Many agencies, including the White House under other Presidents, required NDAs of employees.  In today's climate of law suits and ethical "gray areas", it's a responsible policy.

I am aware of why they exit in the private business world. I do not think they should be allowed in a government job.

Why not have all government workers sign them. Maybe police should sign them so they can't give any dirt on what other police or the chief does wrong.

Obviously there is a certain amount of secrecy that can and should be mandated among Whitehouse staff. They are exposed to all sorts of sensitive information that has very good reason to be kept from the public both from a legal standpoint and an standpoint.

However that should not cover things like rude behavior or insults and such, dirty politics, etc. That is not transparent accountable government.

And we haven't even got into potential free speech issues. Is the NDA a private contract between Trump and the employees or does it represent a government contract that would then be subject to free speech protections.

I am aware of why they exit in the private business world. I do not think they should be allowed in a government job.

Why not have all government workers sign them. Maybe police should sign them so they can't give any dirt on what other police or the chief does wrong.

Obviously there is a certain amount of secrecy that can and should be mandated among Whitehouse staff. They are exposed to all sorts of sensitive information that has very good reason to be kept from the public both from a legal standpoint and an standpoint.

However that should not cover things like rude behavior or insults and such, dirty politics, etc. That is not transparent accountable government.

And we haven't even got into potential free speech issues. Is the NDA a private contract between Trump and the employees or does it represent a government contract that would then be subject to free speech protections.

Have you held a high level government position? If you did, you probably wouldn’t be asking this question.

I don’t know the basis for why Trump did, but in normal business at my level (not high at all), we include NDA prettt frequently and for a variety of reasons. Most are pretty simple and innocent. And pretty much common sense. Lots of speculation as to why, but if you don’t need to know, then you don’t need to know...

I don't, but I haven't found any evidence that any other president has required them.

But even if it were the case that they existed under other presidents that doesn't change my position on them.

then why didn't you write "So does it bother anyone that any president made Whitehouse staff sign non-disclosure agreements?"

Maybe police should sign them so they can't give any dirt on what other police or the chief does wrong.

your people refer to that as "code of silence"

So does it bother anyone that Trump made Whitehouse staff sign non-disclosure agreements?

Huh? Your question is either based on a false premise (ie not true) or you know some inside information about president Trump that no one else in the world seems to know. The fallacy to your premise is that you made the false assumption that everyone who signed an NDA was “made” to sign it. That can’t further from the truth. It is illegal to force someone to sign a document under duress. You know as well as I do that this did not happen. No one put a gun to anyone’s head, no one put a knife to anyone’s throat and no one was threatened with death or death of a family member to sign an NDA. If you didn’t know, there are legal ramifications for the president if he were to do this. Whitehouse staff sign NDA’s as part of their employment agreement. They don’t sign, they don’t complete their employment contract and are not hired. Everyone has a choice.

Unless you are capable to provide proof that president Trump “made” someone sign an NDA under duress, then I would correct your question here to everyone and see if it has the same or better response...

So does it bother anyone that Trump had Whitehouse staff sign voluntary non-disclosure agreements?

FOCUS

Huh? Your question is either based on a false premise (ie not true) or you know some inside information about president Trump that no one else in the world seems to know. The fallacy to your premise is that you made the false assumption that everyone who signed an NDA was “made” to sign it. That can’t further from the truth. It is illegal to force someone to sign a document under duress. You know as well as I do that this did not happen. No one put a gun to anyone’s head, no one put a knife to anyone’s throat and no one was threatened with death or death of a family member to sign an NDA. If you didn’t know, there are legal ramifications for the president if he were to do this. Whitehouse staff sign NDA’s as part of their employment agreement. They don’t sign, they don’t complete their employment contract and are not hired. Everyone has a choice.

Unless you are capable to provide proof that president Trump “made” someone sign an NDA under duress, then I would correct your question here to everyone and see if it has the same or better response...

So does it bother anyone that Trump had Whitehouse staff sign voluntary non-disclosure agreements?

FOCUS

Someone made him write that.

NDAs cause there are lots in his staff who probably would look for reasons to talk to the fake news.

Its all because of the unfair witch hunt. Blame the fake news.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

then why didn't you write "So does it bother anyone that any president made Whitehouse staff sign non-disclosure agreements?"

Because it was recently in the news about Trump and this is a Trump thread.

And because I haven't seen any evidence that any other president did.

your people refer to that as "code of silence"

That is not legally binding like a NDA. Regardless, are you saying that you are ok with it?

Huh? Your question is either based on a false premise (ie not true) or you know some inside information about president Trump that no one else in the world seems to know. The fallacy to your premise is that you made the false assumption that everyone who signed an NDA was “made” to sign it. That can’t further from the truth. It is illegal to force someone to sign a document under duress. You know as well as I do that this did not happen. No one put a gun to anyone’s head, no one put a knife to anyone’s throat and no one was threatened with death or death of a family member to sign an NDA. If you didn’t know, there are legal ramifications for the president if he were to do this. Whitehouse staff sign NDA’s as part of their employment agreement. They don’t sign, they don’t complete their employment contract and are not hired. Everyone has a choice.

Unless you are capable to provide proof that president Trump “made” someone sign an NDA under duress, then I would correct your question here to everyone and see if it has the same or better response...

So does it bother anyone that Trump had Whitehouse staff sign voluntary non-disclosure agreements?

FOCUS

Made, as in required as a condition to employment.

This is a common use of the word made and it does not suggest that Trump put a gun to someone's head or in any other way physically forced them to sign it.

So if I would revise my statement I would say
Does it bother anyone that Trump's made Whitehouse staff sign voluntary NDA as a condition of their employment?

Feel free to answer the question now that it is narrowed.

Someone made him write that.

Yes, there is an elaborate high level conspiracy to infiltrate 2aHawaii and cause a collapse of this network by posting differing opinions

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Form_312

Exactly... 

Standard form and not unusual. I’ve signed many NDAs over the years and nothing nefarious going on there.

That is not legally binding like a NDA. Regardless, are you saying that you are ok with it?

I am not ok with the "code of silence"

Quote from: punaperson on Today at 08:15:50 AM

Someone made him write that.

Yes, there is an elaborate high level conspiracy to infiltrate 2aHawaii and cause a collapse of this network by posting differing opinions

Just letting you try on your own language and see how it fits...

Every large organization has policies about who may and may not speak to outside agencies about the internal issues of that organization -- in particular to the press.

Information isn't always factual.  No organization can function if they are constantly stomping out fires caused by rumors, guesses, lies and unsupported conclusions.

Most big agencies have a PR office to provide the official responses to questions and announcements of public interest. To allow people outside of that loop to run to the press is ridiculous.

If the insiders have evidence or direct knowledge of illegal or unethical wrongdoings, that's a different animal. There are laws to protect whistleblowers.  But to allow employees the freedom to air every piece of dirty laundry, like private sex lives or gambling problems, isn't something the public requires.  It's not the public's job to micromanage organizations based on leaks that have nothing to do with the mission or accomplishments of the organization.

Nondisclosure agreements keep the external flow of information restricted to official channels.

That is not legally binding like a NDA. Regardless, are you saying that you are ok with it?

5-0 aint no different man--snitches get stitches

Made, as in required as a condition to employment.

This is a common use of the word made and it does not suggest that Trump put a gun to someone's head or in any other way physically forced them to sign it.

So if I would revise my statement I would say
Does it bother anyone that Trump's made Whitehouse staff sign voluntary NDA as a condition of their employment?

Feel free to answer the question now that it is narrowed.

My answer is NO. I would expect them all to sign NDA’s as a condition of their employment. What’s the big deal? Why do you even care? What business is it of yours anyway?