Recording reveals new details on controversial DOGE employee
CNN
Less than three years before Elon Musk tapped him to help overhaul the US government, Edward Coristine, then 17, was the subject of a heated dispute among executives at cybersecurity firm over his alleged leaking of company information.
Less than three before Elon Musk tapped him to take part in a sweeping overhaul of the US government, Edward Coristine, then 17, was the subject of a heated dispute between two executives at the Arizona-based cybersecurity firm where he was an intern. At issue was whether to allow Coristine to keep his job even though he was suspected of leaking proprietary information to a competitor. “You’re willing to risk our entire network to a 17-year-old?” one frustrated executive asked the company’s CEO in 2022. “Are you for real right now?” In a recording of the call, reviewed by CNN, Marshal Webb, the CEO of Path Network, a company that offers services to protect businesses from cyberattacks, defended his decision. He said he wanted to allow Coristine to continue with his internship, in part, because he didn’t want to make him “an enemy” or have him “running amok” with information he was suspected of taking. Webb allowed him to stay with the proviso that the young employee “not be exposed to anything that’s really sensitive.” That was then.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a694/6a6943c0e8c2a42f138a5b99b15e771fa49359e0" alt=""
The Defense Department has temporarily paused a plan to carry out mass firings of civilian probationary employees until Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel can carry out a more thorough review of the impacts such firings could have on US military readiness, two defense officials familiar with the matter told CNN.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/43cc4/43cc43944432c661aea219bedea7b300a303bb53" alt=""
An executive order issued by President Donald Trump this week that seems to give him huge power to interpret the law is raising concerns among legal experts that it could dissuade military commanders from refusing unlawful orders and allow the president to exert influence over the military’s legal processes.