jmm:

Forgive my dragging you into legalese, but its seems to me that had Van Buren brought legitimate claims of waste, fraud and abuse, instead of just righting about his wacky adventures related to them, he would have full whistleblower protection.

The explanations by Tom Englehardt (American Empire Empresario) seems to co-mingle individual constitutional protections, press rights, and governmental employee duties (of one with a clearance) pretty freely and incongruously.

Why wouldn't State ask a cleared employee, for example, who writes the blog bearing his name which references a secret cable? What they do about it is a separate issue than whether they should investigate it. No?