Confidential Information For Your Protection: Fill & Download for Free

It’s a ridiculous request and the GOP knows it. There are laws specifically meant to protect whistleblowers and the GOP is pretending they don’t exist to defend their criminal president. The whistleblower was told by senior White House officials about corruption with Trump and Ukraine, so he/she went to their IG to get guidance on how to deal with what they viewed as an issue of concern. The IG, who was appointed by Trump, found the complaint to be “urgent and credible,” the legal standard for taking it to Congress. After the House Intelligence committee followed up on the whistleblower complaint by deposing career civil servants with knowledge of this matter, the complaint was not only corroborated in its entirety, but more damaging information about Trump has come to light. Now the GOP knows they need to defend their useful idiot, so they’re going to do whatever they can no matter how ridiculous or dishonest to gaslight the American public. The truth is the whistleblower isn’t even needed anymore. There’s more than enough evidence to impeach the president and remove him from office, and no matter how many similarities exist between a criminal proceeding and impeachment, they’re not the same thing. Even if this were a criminal proceeding, if a confidential informant relayed the information to the police or the FBI to trigger an investigation, the defendant will never find out who they are. After they’re indicted and their lawyer files a discovery motion, the most they’ll find out is the number assigned to the confidential informant by whichever law enforcement body is prosecuting them.

The answer to your question is YES, you should always make sure your sensitive information is adequately protected. Since in your case it seems that the other party is also about the disclose some confidential information, the best decision is to sign a mutual NDA, which gives equal obligations to the signatories as to how to threat disclosed confidential information.If you have further questions or need helping reviewing or drafting an NDA, do not hesitate to send me an email at: [email protected]

Generally speaking, in the US, non-managerial employees are legally protected when criticising their employer's work practices and products. Google's policy follows that law.There are some important exceptions. You can't leak confidential information. You must clearly state that your opinions are your own and not your employers. You can't suggest that you have or intend to violate the law or company policies.So, for example, I can read about a controversial project in the news and post my opinion here. But I can't read about something confidential internally and leak it to the press, and I can't say, “On Monday I'm going to burn the building to the ground!”I am actually a manager so the legal protections don't apply to me in the same way, but Google generally allows low level managers to comment freely.Note that this is my personal opinion and neither Google's opinion nor legal advice. Also, there are a bunch of nuances in labor law that I'm ignoring here, such as protections for certain kinds of whistleblowers. Realize, though, that those exceptions are pretty narrowly tailored to specific situations generally involving illegal activities. Just disagreeing with a confidential business decision or practice is not sufficient grounds for whistleblower protection. Again, if this is practically relevant for you, see a lawyer.