the tons of the wins and pushes the heads with independence. he will do so with the support of the us military. one year ago, our congressional delegations arrival in taiwan sent an unequivocal message. america stands with k one as a defense itself and its freedom. the election is january 13th inauguration won't take place until may. so what we need to do as a country is to provide study on wavering resolve and support of taiwan democracy. and of course, we need to continue to critically enhance cross straight the currents showing that has a tuesday us of interfering in the election. and america certainly has a long track record of doing just that in many parts of the globe. beijing also fired a warning shot at washington over the military. a that's being provided to taiwan.

the us side leads to take chinese concern seriously and do more things that contribute to the growth of the military to military relationship. the chinese side emphasized that china will not make any concession or compromise on the ty, one question and demand that the us abides by the one china principal, owners relevant commitments stops and taiwan and does not support. so i want to use independence. china has sanctioned 5 us defense companies over on sales, which it says violate the one in china principal and also try latrell communiques. if the p p wins tensions in the region could blow up a wind by the d p. p could also see the bye didn't administration coming in to move pressure from not just the republicans, but also many democrats to took celebrate army deliveries to taiwan. a move that would make beijing livid and could provoke a major military crisis base here. but of course,

that's just one scenario as if i the k m t, all the t p. p. candidates not good the election will, may just be able to take a deep breath. well, at least for now that is uh, signing off from us. go for this uh we're heading on over state side to join junk reaction on the width of close. sit tight and enjoy the the in many cases perhaps and most whistle blowing is clear cut. the issues are simple, the response is simple. and the observer who is not steeped in the issue can still

understand what the story is, but some cases it wasn't blowing are complicated. the right and wrong of it may not be hard to understand, but the background, the regulations and the governmental response often is it's a special kind of width of lower. he keeps fighting in these complicated circumstances. it's a special kind of whistle blower who continues to fight for 30 years. i'm john kerry onto welcome to the whistle blowers the . 2 2 2 2 2 2 joe carson was born in brooklyn, new york, and earned a degree in mechanical engineering from the university of rochester. he was in head picked by admiral hyman, rick over the father of the nuclear navy to spend 6 years on a nuclear submarine. in 1982, carson moved into the private sector working as an engineer at several nuclear energy facilities. in 1990 he joined the department of energy as an engineer just

one year later in 1991, carson blew the whistle on wrong doing. for the 1st time. he reported d a. we was using paid consultants to supplement employees. he argued that this was designed to milk the system d a. we immediately retaliated by declining to implement his safety findings, which detailed serious workplace issues. in d, a we oak ridge, tennessee, nuclear facilities, putting lives at the danger. it's a 10 years, but the merits systems protection board found in carson's favor ruling that the department of energy quote retaliated against the appellant because of his whistle blowing by taking away critical duties from his job assignments, issuing letters of admonishment and by reassigning him from his home in tennessee to maryland. this retaliation, not surprisingly resulted in illness and stress, as well as necessitated the appellant to take a large amount of time from work to consult with his attorneys and other advisors.

and quote, a deal we was ordered to pay carson for $100000.00 for legal fees and costs, but the story doesn't end there. frankly, carson's complaints about d a. we were just beginning the m s p b is an independent clause. i judicial agency in the executive branch of the us government that serves as the guardian of federal merit systems. its mission is to protect the merits systems, principles, and promote and effective federal workforce free of prohibited personnel practices . in other words, it is precisely the place where a federal whistleblower should go to report evidence of waste fraud abuse illegality, or threats to the public health and public safety. but it doesn't necessarily work that way. carson told an interviewer this, he said, my 30 plus here, whistle blowing story has essentially 2 parts. the 1st part was against the we. the 2nd part is against the office of special council and m. s p b. joe carson,

welcome to the show. well, thank you john. it's so wonderful to be here with you and your audience. i wanted to begin jill with a nature of here with the blowing whistle blowing is of course, as i said a minute ago, bringing to light evidence of waste fraud abuse. so a gallery are threats to the public health and public safety. so tell us about how this all started. we're talking about 32 years ago now. what was the nature of your whistle blowing where you have to order for cry, but the time they hired me, it's a department of energy because i had a lot of dick's bad experience as a nuclear engineer. i started up several nuclear reactors in the navy and in the commercial world. and then the department of energy realize they didn't have technically competent people to do oversight of the contractors who actually operate a department entities, facilities. so in the problem, energy is unique in senior, in a number of ways that much so all $300.00 plus federal agencies and that stems from

its mission for nuclear weapons called it of corporate advantage. you. but the reality is it's it, it energy. yes, but energy and nuclear weapons, there's a, there's a big part of what do you, we has been about, you know, it's, it's, it's a successive to live in that project to the se. okay. and one of the biggest singular about the weight is that a self regulating source worker safety. when congress passed the workplace of health and safety was in the 4th 1970 in a well, the agencies exempt themselves from oceans during the section. the department of energy was the only agency to do so. so i was how are, in a sense to be in effect, the combination, osha, n, o c inspector with n d a we with oversight over do we use a facilities in oak ridge and elsewhere? and what i found it is um that because of secrecy because of fear of retribution. because honestly because the

a we lawyers. ready to put a target anyone's back, who forced any concerns and get away with it that do we was very unsafe, the facilities and i'm just not, it's not just my conjecture, my whistle blowing in the 1st 10 years of the saga, i played a positive role in the passage of the 2000 and the net, the type of. ready is entitled the energy employee occupational illness compensation program act of 2000 getting the past with a very close thing. i think by with a boeing another actually is quite a positive perhaps significant. ready in his passage at this point in time, way 2023. over a $135000.00. so i'm or d workers, are there somebody spouses have received over $20000000000.00 in compensation? oh my god, being safe and unhealthy. yeah. workplace condition without their knowledge, but that added protection in making and then do we facilities during the cold war

10 and the to that that's how you started though. it was about safety and it was about safety at the, at the workplace. and when you went, i, i'm even reluctant to say when you went public, but when you reported this, you weren't in that almost immediately with retaliation. what was this, that d a we did to punish you for this was the blowing and i, i'm going to add to, i've known you for a long time. you've always done this exactly the way we are trained to do it. you've always done it within the confines of the law to me, but i've been non wily resisting institutional legal now for 30 years. yes, and i think this are enormous. um, so what is the so yeah, you have to correct that initially they, they suppressed by safety findings because a voice concerns about the use of, of, of you know, consultants no support service contractors deal. we have contractors and

contractors and, and, and i'm, i'm on usual, i mentioned to you we use, i think single we're, i'm in the nuclear weapons mission. since you were in being exempt from osha and a c jurisdiction. it's also send your id is relies upon contractors. the term is called go co go co with the acronym i'm going to use, i'm sorry, probably a lot of acronyms go co stands for government own contract to operate it. so do you, we always use facilities, but it, it is, it has contractors in, in a long term contracts with big corporations to operate to the so what he's thinking that's what. ready the private sector should be doing as opposed to the federal government, but the we then go out, you know, does contract management. but when do we realize that these contractors have been making a ton of money, but dumping a lot of waste, believe it or not. and i'm going to open a lot of tangents. if you look at the, the, the debit with of the us government, you know, what? number 3 with the 3rd item on that was the is, i hate to add, simon. and of course for the department of energy. number 3, now estimated

a $500000000000.00 and every year we spent $10000000.00 to clean it up. but the, the estimated cost remaining cleanup goes up. you know, it's just, it's, it's, it's, you know, it's, it, it, and this is from the new, another legacy of creating 60000 nuclear weapons, you know, during the cold. ready or more now. okay, okay, so i would say because i voiced concerns about the sport service contractor. they started to suppress my safety findings and then put me on what's called a tip, a performance improvement plan. it was pretty amazing because one month i'm getting a $4.00 oh performance evaluation. then i get a special performance evaluation of point $57.00. and it's like college with a 4 point with a 4 point scale. and my responses i'm breathing isn't worth at least a point 5, you know. right. and over the years, joe, you've had, you've had a number of wins, including one early on in which the government was ordered to pay you $400000.00

for your legal fees. why does 0 into the case? why does your case remain in convention? well, okay, it's actually in the 1st 10 years, i have a bill notes here with an 8 times. now when i say prevailed them using that more legal term before that the government had to pay my attorney's fees because you have to be able to get attorneys fees. okay. so one time i, pavel by the end of a settlement, the time i prevailed by the end of unit, the will unit you know laterally withdrew the, the contents of personal action. and the 3rd time the time described in the intro was yes, i went on the merits in additionally, i mentioned this settlement agreement the we did not out of the settlement agreement. so in fact, the image be bigger damage debates with forces them agree when it must be be agree, do you, we have not kind of the settlement where and in the case you mentioned do you, we did not on of you. ready to, to restore me. so i had to go back to m as the b to get there must be beats with

get ordered dealy. with, with threatened d a. we to withhold the salaries of a d. we official if they didn't comply with the order. um okay, so that was the and during this whole time there's another entity and that's the us of the special council. and that's a small obscure agency which is specifically test to protect me from what repeatedly happens to me. right. so i'm going to make a distinction here. do you, we singled me out early on it is, i was, you know, i wish to explain to the very clearly the, the, the wires rules for a was if you will, for employment to be a week. and it was kind of like a good fellow, it's kind of a thing, joe, you're a great guy. what was your background? you got a nice family, blah blah blah blah. when i started a joke, you're going to do just fine. but let me tell you the rules here, okay? if you, if deal we, if it's legal is that can be a weak. if it's legal, it's that go into your way. if the attorneys get away with it, it's legal. and indeed,

we the only way you have joe is the right to seek employment elsewhere. the joe you go to just for ok. right. okay. and then here, when i asked the question, john, yes, is this, why is what 20000000 people on a new summary and it's really no, no, not at all. no. and i'm going to see, you know, then i'm gonna, you know, and you know, i'm having an ice light, but they're gonna take me out. you know, i mean, not, not, not go to the back of the head, but not going to be fired. we're going to make this, i agree. yeah. okay. and then 30 years later, here we are 30 years later and you're still in the same position then you were 30 years ago. this is 30 years after you begin your whistle blowing. so i know the for about half that for about a half that period, how have the issues changed during that time? and how has the government's response to your whistle blowing changed? or have we ever or have you ever gotten to the point where they've said okay, listen, this has gone on long enough. you're right, we're wrong. we're going to fix this. or have they just double down and fight you

this whole time? okay, well let me try to, um, you may say i was born in brooklyn. i'm showing here because got it on the screen. like a file anyways, my grandfather's ring. he was in new york city farm and i put it in front of my nose. i there it is. okay. and a name for him, a fireman. you know, it's a 100 years ago, but i grew up watching the rest of the world trade center work in a high school. i was in a numerous time. you know what it was there. mm hm. so my strongest, and i'm saying, you know, it might be a sort of my strongest initial. and what else do we actually 911, release. it wasn't no clear. right? going 1st about the corruption in the department of energy or the custodian, america's nuclear stockpile. and the weed federal way to secure a new collapse which it was around the world. ok. good point. so it's personal and i realized that was going down to spend a minute ago. do you?

we singled me out, reprisals the all the special counsel and failing to protect the time after time after time did not single but yeah, i always just know the space in the crowd and i realize that the reprisals are experiencing the way the war breaking of experience and do we had causes outside of deal with the failure of a suit of a tech, we enabled the we attorneys that basically polluted with a heavy uh personnel specialist and align management to engage reprisal. oh and then we seek discovery. they would invoke the attorney client privilege. you know, you can do that. a drug cartel can, can lawyers representing a drug cartel section to witness, and then a bulk attorney, client privilege, right? that kind of deal we, the custodian of america is looking stockwell creek. okay. so why am i still here talking to you daily attorneys? no, i got dirt on them. and so we have kind of a stand off, but i realize the returns can do what they do because, but what's the attorneys allow them to an image to be with readers?

allow them to sort of 5 d. a. we've heard that we've kind of futile and i so you know, i'm not, i'm not coming. i'm not always stating my reaction, 911, and then like more anxious, i have to take out what take down what was the as well breaking through and of a federal agency. that puts american civilization at a necessarily increased risk of a nuclear $911.00 or other special catastrophe. jo, hold that thought we are speaking with joe carson, an american was the blower from the us department of energy, who has been blowing the whistle on government wrong doing for more than 30 years. stay right there, joe. when we come back, we'll discuss joe carson's experience working with and fighting against the federal bureaucracy setup to address with the blower revelations, stating. 2 2 the,

the welcome back to the list of lawyers. i'm john curry, onto we're speaking with joe carson, the american was the blower from the us department of energy. joe, good to have you with us. i actually just did the back. thank you, joe and joe, to me the, the most complicated aspect of your whistle blowing has been this ongoing interaction with the merits systems production board. the m s p

b. can you explain to us exactly what the m s p b is what it's role is in whistle blowing and why you've had to fight it for so many years. let's go back to a little bit of history of the federal civil service and i'll try to get just the high points that was created in the of 1883 body assassination of present. garfield by a disappointed office seeker. prior to that all federal agency inform was patronage based, but there was so much corruption of the grads and the federal agencies or the federal government grossman. she was so. ready ready or that there was a push to make a federal employment marriage based on patronage space. the pedals inactivate 2 or 3 created. what does it allow the fed. ready civil service, the biggest singles legislative change in that 140 years and right is a so there was a form act of 1978. and the m s. b, b was created in by that was another agency created by the law was the officer,

special council and, and some, several others. but what was, what is the weight of objective? so the civil search or format was to kind of find more that the federal agency employment would be married base. not if you will corruption guys to look for, you know, if you're not falling married at this point in time, you're breaking the law as long as corruption from the merits. but it's actually, board is the name it would imply was to protect birth based employment practices. in federal agencies, the violations of marriage based before the marriage principles typed by the agency is a term regulated personal practices which include with a well reprisals. excuse me. the other special council has a positive do 3 to protect federal employees comprehended personal practices the american, but it's actually born in addition to is clause, i like to do to get the function as a duty to report to the president and congress, whether federal employees are radically protected from favorite pro surprises,

including but not limited to which the low reprisal and then the president has the duties. if i'm just to be sales, the want to take any action list or to correct it, right. all right, right. so, oh, it seems a fraud and what i'm saying it was through your mind. so it was for advocates and they would say well, who is the is good is, is well meaning and how can you reconcile well meaning with fraud? right. well, you are in a sense that it's close to you guys got a $120.00 employees. the police are federal workforce of 2000000. it just doesn't have the resources. that's right. so it goes all corners. so it may be more meetings, but it's still a fraud. sure. it's just, it's a viable. yeah. it is the same thing on capitol hill where you have these enormous federal departments and then you have a dozen staff members or 2 dozen staff members that are supposed to oversee them. it's just not tenable. and in your k right,

this is dragged on for so long that then you must have attracted the attention of at least somebody in congress right there. there are committees in both the house and senate that oversee the activities of the department of energy. yeah, surely somebody has said something. so what's, what's been the reaction in congress to your whistle blowing? well, the reaction of this papers and, you know, probably as low as i know how to show that. but, oh yes. and it would just be be, or what kind of stuart, i don't tend to get a lot of attention out of sappers as many other things, congress says 50 will outsource, is oversight to which the board advocacy groups. mm hm. and oh, okay. so when i talk to people, and as i say, what the westport odyssey group say, they really don't want to, they don't say i'm wrong, but they don't get involved. yes. and that's kind of discuss you. yeah, that's actually been that that's actually been my understanding of your situation. you and i have a lot of the same friends in washington, for example,

were acquainted with the same the same whistleblower advocacy groups we've worked with with several of the same groups. but um, but when you mentioned the m s p be there is just sort of glaze over it. and i, i've often wondered where are these outside groups and all this? why are they not advocating for you and be on the width of lower groups? what about the federal employees unions? why aren't they helping you? why haven't they jumped to your defense? okay, well option option a i'm just going into your cran wolf. yeah, there's nothing to say right? correct. so they're not going to connect goods, right? that's, that's an option. all right? option b, these advocacy groups and others, a great west organs of the government library benefits their business models and not so much. mm hm. not a very, pretty picture, but is there an option?

see, right, right there really isn't an option you see, besides that, besides assuming all you can do is to continue filing lawsuits. is that right? well, with the fragile appeals, you know, be it, but that goes, if i am as b, b is like a real. hm. oh, yeah, i've been, it was a grand 4 times 4 times. and so there's, you can imagine is range of documentation though. yeah. and is that paper, any way that says like, with a bar disclosures lack reasonable belief. yeah, it's all, it's all about the authorities trying to hide the world. right. yet my case is and various brands. so there's, there's no other termination of the merits, including the merits of my westport disclosures. so and then you get involved with the, you mentioned federal employee years. and then there's a um, they have a vested interest in a worth with. so lets see for the numbers to be then unable to have why. so because

the federal employee use the night, i'm a member of the board or you know, use the points where union affect the rest of the present. the suit of it. so years ago there opened shop and they cannot require federal employees to pay dues to them . so why would have federal point paid $3.00 to $400.00 a year to do is to a union right to stand behind quotes because the union reps will say it's insurance . what do you mean by insurance? there's something called election of remedy to view a wedge of prohibitive personal practice. yes. you can either file a grievance within the union or you can go to always cm's b b. you can do both. so what we're seeing, obviously be a scene is worth was then the, the, the grievance process through the union is, is, you know, relatively better which helps justify pay that insurance money for the dues, right? so federal a for use benefit from a broken over say, no matter what, hold on to america they, you know, they're,

they help set it up so you need memberships, and that's what they're interested in. mm hm. for, you know, an up st. john's only going to be, you know, and i'm going to be 70 a few months, have almost 40 years of federal service. the what to get to, you know, what personal costs 911 mission accomplished and put it by me. okay. yes. so early to see and my wife agreed, i could spend up to a $100000.00 to get a resolution. i was to go to school. your teens not now spend about $25000.00, but i'm going to put money on the table to say anybody file a complaint against be with the tennessee is very board me. allegations of, with the, of the, the wall breaking it always seems to be, are or not truth. what object is that i'm going to 0 quite well. and if that, if the, if the 0 boy in tennessee, thanks any display actually goes to be given you whatever money we've agreed to, it'd be like about me. and i've said just the coffee houses. and then we kind of the respective heads were covered at a m as b,

b and the former head of yours is special kind of who is now a nominee to become a member of m s b, b to no response, no response. but there's another risk, there's another angle that is also got the average send the board members of m s p b, or attorneys. a large majority of employees of all we'll see our attorneys. mm hm. by currently plastics. who is your clients in, in, um, in the, you know, attorney clara relationship has been essential to attorneys identity by currently the web ex if you're a government agency attorney, your employee ac is your clients. hello, cathy. hi. it was a discussion with the licensing authority. the dc bar, she is justified to do whatever you can get away with the prevent any resolution in my visible disclosure, right? in the, in the a protective her clients, the agency that she also leads the agents that are supposed to protect the integrity, the federal civil service. can you see where kind of a has like setting? yes. and so, yeah there's, there's an inherent conflict of interest here that you just can't get past the

right. and then the legal profession, legal ethics, just don't address the scenario of the, of a lawyer. the word spread, government agency who actually implemented that was right old address. right? a default to this. that's my client. my client is never wrong. i'm a hired gun. i'll do whatever i can protect my client a good. so here we are 30 years later and i must say my perception, i must have made some what's written in world in which trust them in federal and so these other institutions continues to decline. and i'm gonna post a job as to why it should look like. well, jo carson, thank you so much for being with us today. i want to thank you and i want to thank our viewers to patience and persistence are the keys to every thing. even if it sometimes feels like they constitute, instead the hard work that you have to do after getting tired of the hard work you've already done. still, it's all worth it. even if you have to fight for 30 years, like joe carson did. thanks for joining us for another episode of the whistle

blowers i'm john kerry onto we'll see you next time the. 2 2 the mortgage, which is on the line. so see what's printing, what was the other one? that's good. sounds good. just so basically of course we need the last name was needed. read it was can, will be used to live. imagine we have support for someone who is this we would show new people to the

the the on the wall of the us. yes. again, strikes that yemen capital just that was up to you web security council emergency meeting on fridays initial attacks. those will be outraged as the united states and this proxies documenting in yemen may result in, not only a fully fleshed war in this country, but a conflict that can spread around the world. moscow denounces because of some strikes on yemen as right close out of violation of international law. also, it's called the us state department confirms the death of a chilean americans understand you prayed with a mind spa, the claiming he was tortured to death in prison over his criticism of president polanski.