David P. Marana v. Merit Systems Protection Board

What court, tribunal, and or investigative agency ensures that information with redacted infor­ mation when presented as evidence is valid, legal, * and not used for misinformation?

Is “..such that a reasonable person could con­ clude..” as used in whistleblowing retaliation cases and jurisprudence, valid, applicable, given signifi­ cant consideration, and fair, when applied to sub­ cultures - as in military healthcare is a subculture within the military, and military is a subculture of U.S. population). Subcultures often have unique highly specialized attributes, purpose and dynam­ ics - including communications and where the general population “reasonable person” may be de­ void of basic information and or familiarity of the subculture that a “reasonable person” of a subcul­ ture customarily possesses.

In retaliation cases where a common individual is involved, and or, several individuals with common interests and motivation are involved, in multiple situations suggestive of retaliation; why is “mer­ ger of factors” that constitutes a nexus not given consideration?

End justifies the means, and vice versa. Are mili­ tary federal agencies immune to legal liabilities for reporting and or submitting untruthful or mis­ leading information when action is backed by com­ mander’s discretionary authority? ' *. \