Bidden And Government Discrimination

 

Bidden discriminates!  Is it not discrimination to fire individuals who come forward to admit to an infraction (using marijuana) yet not fire others for the same infraction.  The individual in question being the Vice President (VP), who has admitted to using marijuana, an obvious exam of the prevalent open discrimination unchallenged that occurs in this case by the government who is suppose to protect individuals from discrimination, not perpetrate it.  This also substitutes the two face nature of the VP who prosecuted marijuana users, politician right what do you expect.  I actually believe that these individuals had ground to file discrimination suits but this is a very hard road that I plan on addressing later on in this blog.  Also I will address lawyers as leeches in regards to whistleblowing and that sham.

So you probably think discrimination is illegal.  That the Government is suppose to protect you from discrimination. Well your wrong.  You can look at Bidden's actions to see that it's alive and well.

To farther illustrate that discrimination is alive and well in the Government I'm including my awakening into this reality of faults belief that discrimination is illegal.   I actually wanted to post this later after I posted the events that led up to the discovery but it seems more applicable now due to the Bidden in the news proof.  I plan on detailing the events later but for right now I'll provide the short version.   Susan Davis officially wrote me up for inappropriate actions resulting from a meeting with her alone in her office. As I said I will provide all of this in detail in a later postings starting at the beginning.  This incident happened while we were alone in her office with no witnesses, which I pointed out to Susan Davis and management, I stated this in writing to her and everyone in my management chain that I would no longer feel comfortable meeting alone with Susan Davis to which I never received any response from management.   I denied the allegations then and continue to now.  So subsequently Susan Davis would order me to her office, alone, refuse to allow a witness to attended, even if I provided them.   I declined this meeting requests.  Susan Davis then started officially writing me up for "disobeying orders" ; to meet her alone.  As I said I'll be posting the relevant documents in the future.  I know for a fact management and have a witness, which was specified in my EEO filing, witnessed male supervisor meetings with a female subordinate with her as the witness.   The witness was a friend of mine and told me about the meetings.  My position to Susan Davis and everyone in my management chain in subsequent emails was that it was obviously discrimination to order me (a male) to meet with my supervisor (female) alone without a witness who had written me up claiming I exhibited inappropriate behavior.  When I had proof , the witness!  Who had been present when management provided a witness during meetings of the opposite sexes when deemed necessary.  I never heard anything from management and with Susan writing me up for failing to obey orders I felt it necessary to file a discrimination case.  The ruling is provided below claiming no facts to support my claim.  Discrimination is totally legal unless you can prove "harm or loss" which they determined I had now shown.   So discrimination is OK and only not OK if the victim can show harm or loss (also filed in 30 days! another catch to throw it out).  So you can be called anything.  They can treat you totally different than others because of your sex/color just as long as they don't harm you or cause you loss. The document below substantiating the allegations I have made in this blog. 

Discrimination is alive and well in the Government and even practiced by the President himself.