President Trump today renewed his attacks on former White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman, calling her “disgusting and foul mouthed” and accusing her of going “for some cheap money” by publishing a book last year about her time in the Trump administration.
Omarosa’s book, Unhinged: An Insider’s Account of the Trump White House, was a highly critical account of her time with Trump on television and in the White House.
“I am currently suing various people for violating their confidentiality agreements,” Trump tweeted. “Disgusting and foul mouthed Omarosa is one. I gave her every break, despite the fact that she was despised by everyone, and she went for some cheap money from a book. Numerous others also!”
…Yes, I am currently suing various people for violating their confidentiality agreements. Disgusting and foul mouthed Omarosa is one. I gave her every break, despite the fact that she was despised by everyone, and she went for some cheap money from a book. Numerous others also!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 31, 2019
Trump’s attack on Manigault Newman came after he praised his former personal assistant, Madeleine Westerhout, who was fired Thursday.
Trump called Westerhout a “very good person” and said Friday that she was ousted after she made remarks about his children during an off the record dinner with reporters.
Trump said Saturday morning that Westerhout called him Friday to apologize, adding that he forgave her and did not believe there would “ever be a reason” to use her confidentiality agreement.
“While Madeleine Westerhout has a fully enforceable confidentiality agreement, she is a very good person and I don’t think there would ever be reason to use it,” he wrote. “She called me yesterday to apologize, had a bad night. I fully understood and forgave her!”
While Madeleine Westerhout has a fully enforceable confidentiality agreement, she is a very good person and I don’t think there would ever be reason to use it. She called me yesterday to apologize, had a bad night. I fully understood and forgave her! I love Tiffany, doing great!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 31, 2019
His comments came shortly after Politico published a report saying Westerhout was fired because she told reporters during an Aug. 17 dinner that Trump did not like appearing in photos with his daughter Tiffany because he thought she was overweight.
Countless legal experts have been pointing out for years, regardless of what their contracts state, public employees cannot be prevented from disclosing non-confidential information about their work for the government.
Manigault Newman had a high-profile departure from the White House in December 2017 and later revealed that she had secretly recorded then-chief of staff John Kelly firing her in the Oval Office.
Last year, Trump’s campaign filed for arbitration against Manigault Newman, alleging she violated a nondisclosure agreement by publishing a tell-all book. Her book, “Unhinged,” painted the president as a racist and an incompetent leader.
Manigault Newman, who worked both for the 2016 Trump campaign and in the Trump administration, released secret audio recordings of Trump, Kelly, and Trump associates Katrina Pierson and Lynne Patton that she says back up explosive claims in her book.
Trump has fumed over the extensive leaks that have marked his tenure and has sought to crack down on unauthorized disclosures from the White House.
The federal government also filed a civil lawsuit against Manigault Newman that alleged she failed to file a required financial disclosure report after she was fired.
Legal analyst Elura Nanos said regardless of the President’s blustering threats, confidentiality agreements against federal employees are almost certainly unenforceable.
“Trump may think Omarosa is another Stormy Daniels – but there’s a big difference. Omarosa was a federal employee. There is literally so much wrong with the idea of an Omarosa NDA that it’s hard to know where to begin. Let’s start with the First Amendment…[which] prohibits the government from imposing prior restraints on speech. An NDA would be exactly a “prior restraint on speech,” and Omarosa, as a public employee, would be protected by the Constitution,” Nanos wrote.
Nanos’ take is supported by legal precedent. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled in the 1983 case McGehee v. Casey, that former government employees cannot be proscribed from speaking about their public employment, holding that the government “has no legitimate interest in censoring unclassified materials.”