Midwest Chick's Place

(A.K.A. Non-Original Rants)

–Co-opting good stuff from all over the ‘Net and maybe some original thoughts—ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

________________________________________________________________________________________________

I don’t know why they had them in the first place

One of Day One’s Trump signings took away the security clearances of the 51 ‘intelligence’ officials that signed onto the Hunter laptop/Russia collusion letter.

What I don’t get is why they had those clearances in the first place. They were no longer in the positions they had where they were necessary for the job. Anyplace that I have worked (and there are many), once you’ve either moved into a different role or left the organization altogether, any access you had was removed as a matter of security and privacy.

It should be a regular modus operandi to do so in federal government as well, especially in those positions. Honestly there needs to be an audit and sweep of security clearances, including system access, etc. as well.

Midwest Chick's avatar

Posted by:

Midwest Chick

18 responses to “I don’t know why they had them in the first place”

  1. Steve Avatar
    Steve

    I had heard a few years ago, those “security clearances” were like “kewl kid tickets”. The folks that had them, and hadn’t been employed in those departments for years, ran into the thousands.
    But, those folks stubbornly hung onto the title/slip of paper so that they could use it as currency on the cocktail circuit.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Francis W. Porretto Avatar
    Francis W. Porretto

    Sometimes, persons formerly in national-security posts are allowed to retain their clearances in expectation of consulting later on. At least, that’s the rationale I remember from my years in defense engineering.

    Like

    Reply
  3. Midwest Chick Avatar
    Midwest Chick

    Steve–Right. So they had top security clearances for no reason other than bragging rights. That seems pretty dumb to me, from a true security point of view.

    Francis–So keeping a security clearance facilitates the revolving door from government to consulting as well as gives them an advantage that others don’t have in the job market. And gives them access to information that a civilian shouldn’t have.

    Like

    Reply
  4. Matthew W Avatar
    Matthew W

    Every job with the government is part of a scam and that clearance is one of their perks to continue the scam.
    You leave, your clearance should be gone as well.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  5. Terrytheterrible Avatar
    Terrytheterrible

    Apparently security clearance is not important, China is already inside.

    Like

    Reply
  6. avraham Avatar
    avraham

    In the Roman Republic [not the Roman Empire] no one could hold any public office without being voted in by the People of Rome. That mean every single public office from the tax collector up to and including the two consuls. [But when the senate voted, I believe their votes were more heavily weighed. ] That policy ought to be adopted in the USA

    Like

    Reply
  7. Hank Baird Avatar
    Hank Baird

    It is my understanding that, in most cases, they need the security clearances in order to be eligible for U.S. Government contracts. Without the clearances they are ineligible to hold a contract & that is where it screws them.

    Like

    Reply
  8. B Avatar
    B

    Often their next jobs require that they have a clearance….and those jobs pay pretty well, so they are allowed to keep them. It’s how the Harvard/Foggy Bottom folks take care of each other.

    Plus they are often consulted after they leave on some “situations” upon which they worked…or that’s the excuse that is used, anyway.

    Like

    Reply
  9. Nemo Avatar
    Nemo

    How does that go, there oughta be a law…another hole that needs to be plugged, but will be ignored by the people that are supposed to be making laws that protect the security of the nation.

    Like

    Reply
  10. Cederq Avatar
    Cederq

    I had a level 1 Top Secret with other clearance designators when I was in the Army. When I terminated I still had the clearance but was inactive, meaning I could not access that or any kind of information. The caveat is I am bound by the for life until I pass any information I was in possession or was familiar with. I would definitely be serving in a Super Max or Leavenworth if I divulged what I knew. The clearance could be reactivated if I took on a job that required a clearance after passing another background check.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  11. Scott W Warren Avatar
    Scott W Warren

    Inactive is correct after leaving the .mil or a contractor job, and yes the rules still apply about divulging info. I was told after my last review prior to leaving the contracting job was due to money The cost of renewing or reactivating a clearance was around 1/10th of the cost of starting one from scratch.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  12. Peaowed Avatar
    Peaowed

    There are legitimate and practical reasons for former agency/department heads to remain cleared. In the private sector, business leaders have access to a vast pool of retired institutional knowledge, experience and subject matter experts. The classified government sector is no different. Unfortunately, in the laptop fiasco these “intelligence officials” prostituted their positions by taking on a purely political function for the express purpose of protecting the Biden crime family.

    Like

    Reply
  13. Francis W. Porretto Avatar
    Francis W. Porretto

    Midwest Chick — That’s essentially correct, though the overt rationale emphasizes the conservation and retention of well-developed knowledge of specific NatSec-related domains. You’d think that if that knowledge were really that valuable, the persons who have it would be “stop-lossed” rather than allowed to retire. But clearly there are other agendas in play… which is almost always the case for any subject that includes the term “national security,” one of the political shibboleths of our time.

    Like

    Reply
  14. Midwest Chick Avatar
    Midwest Chick

    Matthew–Agreed!

    Terry–True that.

    avraham–It’s an option, not viable in this case, but definitely an option.

    Hank–Correct. But they should have to reapply for them.

    B–It’s definitely an incestual relationship.

    Nemo–Doesn’t even need to be a law. Just a change in policy.

    Cederq–How many folks don’t get that ‘inactive’ box checked?

    Scott–Indeed. But it should be the cost of doing business.

    Peaowed–In concept, I see what you are saying. Having the knowledge and contacts is one thing–they can’t take that away. Having inappropriate access to knowledge and systems (like if a CEO left but still could access his former company’s systems) is not good practice.

    Francis–Stop-lossing them might be a better option. Then they can’t go running amok–they would have to abide by certain rules and regs.

    Like

    Reply
  15. clayusmcret Avatar
    clayusmcret

    The 51 knew without a shadow of a doubt that their letter would be read as confirming the laptop was a hoax. And since a number of them had known for almost a year that the laptop was in fact legitimate, they also knew they were lying through their teeth when they suggested it might be a hoax. President Trump took appropriate action removing their clearances. Many of the 51 proved they should never have had one in the first place.

    Like

    Reply
  16. MrLiberty Avatar
    MrLiberty

    $$$$$$$$$$

    Like

    Reply
  17. Midwest Chick Avatar
    Midwest Chick

    clay–Exactly!

    MrLiberty–Always comes down to that…

    Like

    Reply
  18. Frank Avatar
    Frank

    Every so often I come across a comment or article referring to the democrats and or communists as “those folks.” What a nice thing to say..”Those folks.” Another choice of words for the female nut jobs on the left is, “Those ladies” or “That lady.” We might as well start referring to mass murderers, pedophiles and communists embedded within our government as, “Gentleman” or “Gentlemen.” Words are very important. So is grammar. The left knows how to craft words. Their propaganda is a powerful tool, swaying the less fortunate within the IQ department, including the mentally ill and those of the same persuasion. As it is, we now live in a very illiterate society in America that is far too lazy and criminally uneducated by government schools to critically think for themselves. I’m bringing all of this up because I am personally offended that the enemies from within continue to be treated as equals. They are the scum of the earth and the enemy of humanity and of the living.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Steve Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *