“So earlier we read about the 900 Fed workers’ petition against Trump.”
It seems you’re referring to the “dissent channel” memo. IMHO, the “dissent channel” seems to be a very worthwhile thing to have — especially in the State Department, where there are probably few clearly “right” or “wrong” strategies.
So long as the signatories, having communicated their opinions about a policy, dutifully act to carry out any legal orders, when the final decision has been made — then allowing them to express their opinions is a healthy thing.
From other articles, I note that the “dissent channel” has been around since Vietnam days. It seems that it has proven its value.
As for the 180, conspiring to put sand in the gears and wrenches into the works — yes, fire them.
“So long as the signatories, having communicated their opinions about a policy, dutifully act to carry out any legal orders, when the final decision has been made — then allowing them to express their opinions is a healthy thing.”
Ideally. But practically and actually, when a person has signed anything counter to what the organization’s management is doing, the signer is marked forever more. He will move to the “troublemaker” class and future work life in that organization most likely will be a living hell. As a retired H.R. employee I’ve seen it happen to many people.