Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, if y'all knew anything about security clearances, you'd know that intense government criticism (regarding policy, leadership, etc.) is grounds to deny or revoke a security clearance. The thought process is that you're more willing to spill our country's secrets (a la Edward Snowden) to expose things that you disagree with. This is standard practice and the review is long done.
Actually, if y'all knew anything about security clearances, you'd know that intense government criticism (regarding policy, leadership, etc.) is grounds to deny or revoke a security clearance. The thought process is that you're more willing to spill our country's secrets (a la Edward Snowden) to expose things that you disagree with. This is standard practice and the review is long done.
I think quite a few of us here know about security clearances. And it's not a standard practice to revoke. Trump wants to revoke them only because they have openly opposed him. Trump knows nothing about national security so he needs to get rid of the ones who do to make him look better. It's all about the little man's feelings and ego.....looking out for himself and not our country.
I think quite a few of us here know about security clearances. And it's not a standard practice to revoke. Trump wants to revoke them only because they have openly opposed him. Trump knows nothing about national security so he needs to get rid of the ones who do to make him look better. It's all about the little man's feelings and ego.....looking out for himself and not our country.
While I'm doubtful that many posting in this forum know about security clearances (particularly at the TOP SECRET SCI level, which is what is at issue here), in today's post-Snowden world, yes it is. Especially when you're publicly vocal with your discontent about government/government policy/government leadership.
President Vows to Shut Down Security Critics
President Trump threatened on Monday to strip the security clearances of top former officials who criticized his refusal to confront Russia over its election interference, signaling a willingness to use the powers of the presidency to retaliate against some of his most outspoken detractors.
Here's what should be noted: He wasn't going to address the actual security problem - he was just threatening people who disagree with him, in his petty, vindictive way.
No reason for those Obama communists to keep their security clearance to make money for themsleves, should have been pulled long ago.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,562 posts, read 12,535,636 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945
Why should they have to get another security clearance when they already have one, and have had one for years ? You are the one complaining about the expense involved, how about we not double dip by having the whole process done again, for NO REASON.
It would be like if you retire and they made you reapply for your drivers license, when you already had one. Just them retiring changes nothing, they are still actively helping our government when called upon to do so.
BTW, what the Hell does politicized and monetized even mean ? Sarah Sanders may have blurted that dumb statement out, but I still don't get it.
Some may have kept their security clearance by accident(paperwork snafu) or intentionally when it should have been revoked(like Susan Rice). It should be a standard practice to revoke security clearances when someone is fired, quits or retires. That way those accidents, or intentions, don't happen. If they don't qualify for a new security clearance then their clearance should have been stripped to begin with. A drivers license is nothing like a security clearance, apples to oranges.
While I'm doubtful that many posting in this forum know about security clearances (particularly at the TOP SECRET SCI level, which is what is at issue here), in today's post-Snowden world, yes it is. Especially when you're publicly vocal with your discontent about government/government policy/government leadership.
Where have I been vocal about discontent with government policy.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,562 posts, read 12,535,636 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident
While I'm doubtful that many posting in this forum know about security clearances (particularly at the TOP SECRET SCI level, which is what is at issue here), in today's post-Snowden world, yes it is. Especially when you're publicly vocal with your discontent about government/government policy/government leadership.
Where have I been vocal about discontent with government policy.
Not you. I'm referring to the former high ranking Obama administration officials who are vocally and publicly expressing discontent with US government policy on MSNBC, CNN, etc.
Not you. I'm referring to the former high ranking Obama administration officials who are vocally and publicly expressing discontent with US government policy on MSNBC, CNN, etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
