The article gives the full story. Not just the hacked, outraged tweet from the former employee.I'm not sure your point with that Fox article. It depicts Merrick Garland warning DOJ personnel to not talk to lawmakers. A clear case of discouraging whistle blowing. It you're admitting that he discouraged whistle blowing, and you're fine with that, OK.
Maybe it's perfectly lawful to discourage whistle-blowing and maybe you think that's good policy.
I'm not sure what other point you would have.
Is it that the tweet is incomplete? Is there a such thing as a tweet that is not incomplete?
Context.