McKinneyMike Loc: Texas

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Disgruntled Federal Employee opting for early retirement by trying to sue for being fired for not doing his job...

Nothing to see here.

McKinneyMike Loc: Texas

No day in court? Good to know where you stand on justice. Why not let the evidence play out? I would want my day in court if I were wronged or felt that I was wronged. The courts will determine the t***h it looks like. Sounds interesting from what I have read so far.

McKinneyMike Loc: Texas

Come on Blurry let the courts do their job. If it's BS we will all find out. Do you have something other than he was fired for being disgruntled as your point of view? Have people never been fired for bogus reasons? Just asking why you believe that to be the case without knowing more about the case.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Sure he can have his day in court, if I am not mistaken he quit his job, he was not fired, but maybe I could be wrong, I find it interesting that he comes out claiming to be a republican which I question, but regardless, he comes out at the height of the scandal over her emails with this story of his... let him have his day in court, but I think that it goes nowhere.

McKinneyMike Loc: Texas

From this story:

"Gowdy previously said Podliska was terminated partly for mishandling classified information.

The suit cites Gowdy’s claim from a press release and an interview with NBC News, and argues it was a damaging line of attack, since allegations of such a “serious crime” have “ended the careers of many professionals in national security-related industries.”

But the charge was totally false, the suit says, because the information Podliska handled was drawn entirely from “sources from the Internet.” Podliska adds that the committee staffer who made the allegation later admitted the material “was not classified.” The committee has not withdrawn the allegation."

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Well of course there is another side to the story as reported in "The Hill".

"Gowdy and his fellow Republicans were quick to dismiss Podliska when his complaints first emerged in October.

At the time, committee Republicans said that Podliska was appropriately fired from the panel after extended efforts to create a “hit piece” on Clinton and other members of the Obama administration “that bore no relationship whatsoever to the committee’s current investigative tone, focus or investigative plan.”

On Monday, committee spokesman Jamal Ware said that panel will respond to Podliska’s allegations “in due course and in the appropriate forum.”

“We disagree strongly with those claims, which are meritless and which improperly strike at the heart of the committee’s legislative functions,” Ware said in a statement. “Further, we reiterate that the committee did not and does not discriminate or retaliate based on military service, military status or any other unlawful factor.”"

He will have his day in court.

McKinneyMike Loc: Texas

So "The Hill" article claims that Podliska’s attempted to focus on a "hit piece" about Hillary? And now after the fact he changes his stance? Given the "tone" the committee exhibited during the 11 hour grilling of Hillary, that seems at odds with the committee's contention in that article.
This should be interesting as it goes forward for sure.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

H

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

he is trying to be regruntled

McKinneyMike Loc: Texas

Outstanding reply Bob.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

You are only posting this because you are anti-Republican and nothing else.

McKinneyMike Loc: Texas

And you have never posted anything against the Liberals? I posted a news article that at this time has not end. I was looking for peoples thoughts. You did not offer anything.