Ryan Graves

There could be another way to approach it. So one thing, especially at the last hearings we've heard, is that there needs to be stronger whistleblower protection laws, right? Maybe you've heard that. I've updated my thinking on that. I've done a lot of research on whistleblower protection laws in the United States. And it's actually quite interesting.

There could be another way to approach it. So one thing, especially at the last hearings we've heard, is that there needs to be stronger whistleblower protection laws, right? Maybe you've heard that. I've updated my thinking on that. I've done a lot of research on whistleblower protection laws in the United States. And it's actually quite interesting.

You know, we've had whistleblowers from the executive branch whistleblow to the legislative branch in the past. We had the church committee. We've had thousands of people that have come forward and shared classified information with Congress outside the bounds of the executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. None of them have been ever prosecuted.

You know, we've had whistleblowers from the executive branch whistleblow to the legislative branch in the past. We had the church committee. We've had thousands of people that have come forward and shared classified information with Congress outside the bounds of the executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. None of them have been ever prosecuted.

You know, we've had whistleblowers from the executive branch whistleblow to the legislative branch in the past. We had the church committee. We've had thousands of people that have come forward and shared classified information with Congress outside the bounds of the executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. None of them have been ever prosecuted.

Now, they may have faced ramifications such as a loss of security clearance. They may have lost their job. Those are real risks. I don't want to downplay them. But the way the system is currently set up, there's an executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. You have the National Security Act that was created in Congress and signed by the president.

Now, they may have faced ramifications such as a loss of security clearance. They may have lost their job. Those are real risks. I don't want to downplay them. But the way the system is currently set up, there's an executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. You have the National Security Act that was created in Congress and signed by the president.

Now, they may have faced ramifications such as a loss of security clearance. They may have lost their job. Those are real risks. I don't want to downplay them. But the way the system is currently set up, there's an executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. You have the National Security Act that was created in Congress and signed by the president.

And these are the two laws that essentially allow for the creation of that type of information. So when a whistleblower goes to Congress and shares that information, the Congress people are just as susceptible and vulnerable perhaps to having classified information that they're not privy to. So they're in legal jeopardy in a sense.

And these are the two laws that essentially allow for the creation of that type of information. So when a whistleblower goes to Congress and shares that information, the Congress people are just as susceptible and vulnerable perhaps to having classified information that they're not privy to. So they're in legal jeopardy in a sense.

And these are the two laws that essentially allow for the creation of that type of information. So when a whistleblower goes to Congress and shares that information, the Congress people are just as susceptible and vulnerable perhaps to having classified information that they're not privy to. So they're in legal jeopardy in a sense.

For there to be prosecutions in Congress or from the whistleblowers themselves, the Supreme Court would have to step in and adjudicate that ruling between that executive order and and the National Security Act. And that's never happened. They don't want to step in on that legislation.

For there to be prosecutions in Congress or from the whistleblowers themselves, the Supreme Court would have to step in and adjudicate that ruling between that executive order and and the National Security Act. And that's never happened. They don't want to step in on that legislation.

For there to be prosecutions in Congress or from the whistleblowers themselves, the Supreme Court would have to step in and adjudicate that ruling between that executive order and and the National Security Act. And that's never happened. They don't want to step in on that legislation.

And they've had, you know, I don't know how many years, but decades and opportunities to do so, but they choose not to. So we're in this kind of stalemate where by action, by inaction, whistleblowers have this unspoken protection, if you will, to come in and share that information, lest the Supreme Court step in and change their precedent for the

And they've had, you know, I don't know how many years, but decades and opportunities to do so, but they choose not to. So we're in this kind of stalemate where by action, by inaction, whistleblowers have this unspoken protection, if you will, to come in and share that information, lest the Supreme Court step in and change their precedent for the

And they've had, you know, I don't know how many years, but decades and opportunities to do so, but they choose not to. So we're in this kind of stalemate where by action, by inaction, whistleblowers have this unspoken protection, if you will, to come in and share that information, lest the Supreme Court step in and change their precedent for the

So there's no reason that any of these potentially susceptible whistleblowers that do fear legal ramifications for those activities couldn't come into Congress, set up a very quiet meeting, share what they have with these Congress people, and allow them to then run with that information clearly away from any personal identification from that whistleblower. That's the world we live in now.

So there's no reason that any of these potentially susceptible whistleblowers that do fear legal ramifications for those activities couldn't come into Congress, set up a very quiet meeting, share what they have with these Congress people, and allow them to then run with that information clearly away from any personal identification from that whistleblower. That's the world we live in now.

So there's no reason that any of these potentially susceptible whistleblowers that do fear legal ramifications for those activities couldn't come into Congress, set up a very quiet meeting, share what they have with these Congress people, and allow them to then run with that information clearly away from any personal identification from that whistleblower. That's the world we live in now.