3 ms·

Let's break it down. He was about to under-go day 3 of whistleblower testimony. He had already given 2 days worth and they have found instances worth following

Let's break it down. He was about to under-go day 3 of whistleblower testimony. He had already given 2 days worth and they have found instances worth following up with criminal investigations. Guy's in a hotel (probably under his name) and is found in his car - shot to death in what appears to be a suicide. Then this, saying he stated that "If anything happens to me...", then Boeing "conveniently" overwriting the door bolt safety footage, etc has all the hallmarks of it being a hit. To protect Boeing from criminal investigation and costing the company potentially billions in fines and lost sales. I'm in the camp that they did, in fact, hire someone or someone within their organization did to protect their interests in this case. Whether it's from corporate or from just the group of folks that might/would/will be indicted from the whistleblowers testimony. You don't land on 21-black 3 times in a row and say it's luck.

alphabettsy 3y ago
He was not going into “whistleblower” testimony. He was suing Boeing for defamation And his claims were that Boeing retaliated against him for being a whistleblower. It might seem like the same thing, but it’s not. And the instances promoting criminal investigation are related to the 737 probes, not the 787 that he was a whistleblower about. There no evidence his civil case was the impetus for those criminal probes.
- reactordev 3y ago
  Ok, “private testimony against his company”… Also to say that Foo in Green is in no way connected to Foo in Blue is a farce. 737,777,787, they all share a safety process and protocol. To say he was talking about oranges when the probes are about apples when it’s all about the Grocery Store is absurd. It’s connected. May not be directly connected, but it’s connected. It’s bad management, bad practice, sus circumstances, a coverup on the left and a dead body on the right.

alphabettsy 3y ago

He was not going into “whistleblower” testimony. He was suing Boeing for defamation And his claims were that Boeing retaliated against him for being a whistleblower. It might seem like the same thing, but it’s not. And the instances promoting criminal investigation are related to the 737 probes, not the 787 that he was a whistleblower about. There no evidence his civil case was the impetus for those criminal probes.

reactordev 3y ago
Ok, “private testimony against his company”… Also to say that Foo in Green is in no way connected to Foo in Blue is a farce. 737,777,787, they all share a safety process and protocol. To say he was talking about oranges when the probes are about apples when it’s all about the Grocery Store is absurd. It’s connected. May not be directly connected, but it’s connected. It’s bad management, bad practice, sus circumstances, a coverup on the left and a dead body on the right.