This is news, but it's about 1/3, if that, of whatever the story is. Hard to know what this means; why it mattered; and, if it was "concerning," why he was OK with moving him to another job.https://twitter.com/adamgoldmanNYT/status/958088620618993664 …
I don't disagree as to process, but I do think this proves my point as to how this limited info clouds rather clarifies for many.
-
-
That’s the way it is with personnel actions for public servants tho. If the info is problematic the agency can take action but can’t say publicly what the info is or why they chose that action because of the employee’s rights. So to the outside world it’s unclear, but that’s SOP.
-
McCabe could clarify it; he’s free to say what he wants about his own personnel action but Wray can’t. Of course, there’s no upside for McCabe to talk, so he won’t, at least not yet. So, unless someone leaks info, details are unlikely to come out until OIG publishes its report.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.