Reposted by Jake Tapper 🦅
The statement appears to engage in public discourse as it addresses a public issue involving an investigation by the Department of Justice and its implications on public administration and governance. The tone suggests a critical stance towards the investigation, implying it is coercive rather than justified.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but implies coercion, which could be seen as harmful to public trust. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy and dignity as it does not engage in personal attacks or reveal private information. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement criticizes the investigation but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement exercises free speech and uses the platform to question the integrity of the investigation, which is a responsible use of free speech. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.