Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

"Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President"
Quote | Reply
In response to the revocation of former CIA Director Brennan's security clearance (which Trump just admitted was because of his involvement in the Russia investigation: see WSJ interview), retired Admiral McRaven asked Trump to revoke his, too.

McRaven oversaw the SEAL operation that killed bin Laden.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i dont get this... security clearances are based on Need to Know. if they are retired, then they no longer have a need to know. what does any retired military for former WH employee not have their clearance revoked like the rest of us? If I left my current job, my clearance is good for 6 months if I left in good standing (to allow for transitioning to a new job), then poof, gone. Clearances get yanked all the time, for a bunch of reasons, mostly honest mistakes (not saying that's the case here).
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [tfleeger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tfleeger wrote:
i dont get this... security clearances are based on Need to Know. if they are retired, then they no longer have a need to know. what does any retired military for former WH employee not have their clearance revoked like the rest of us? If I left my current job, my clearance is good for 6 months if I left in good standing (to allow for transitioning to a new job), then poof, gone. Clearances get yanked all the time, for a bunch of reasons, mostly honest mistakes (not saying that's the case here).

I heard a piece on NPR this morning about this involving a guy who was retired from either the FBI or CIA. He was asked this question and responded by noting that often times, folks retired from government service are consulted by current government employees on a variety of issues related to their areas of expertise. He specifically mentioned a 6-month (unpaid) consulting stint he did in 2009. He said that former employees can't do that kind of thing if they don't have security clearance because details of the particular job can't be shared with them without it. It's important to allow them to do these consulting gigs because they often have specific historical knowledge of things that could be of particular help in addressing situations or events that occur after they leave office.

I don't know how true any of that is, but it sounded plausible to me.

''The enemy isn't conservatism. The enemy isn't liberalism. The enemy is bulls**t.''

—Lars-Erik Nelson
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [tfleeger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tfleeger wrote:
i dont get this... security clearances are based on Need to Know. if they are retired, then they no longer have a need to know. what does any retired military for former WH employee not have their clearance revoked like the rest of us? If I left my current job, my clearance is good for 6 months if I left in good standing (to allow for transitioning to a new job), then poof, gone. Clearances get yanked all the time, for a bunch of reasons, mostly honest mistakes (not saying that's the case here).

My understanding is that it is common practice for high level people to keep their clearance so that they can be consulted with by the people who take over their positions. If a former CIA director has been through a similar situation that you are seeing as a new CIA directory it is helpful to call on the only one who still has a clearance and can be read into whatever is going on and get some helpful advice.

I doubt that somebody like say a former WH communications director or similar would keep their clearance, but a former general, high level CIA or FBI person, etc. likely would.

Side note, they keep calling out Comey as one person who's clearance they want to revoke, but he has stated that he lost his clearance when he got fired. That makes you think that maybe it really isn't about taking away clearances as much as punishing or silencing opposition.

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
   Probably should, along with millions of others.

https://www.politico.com/...learance-list-100195

"In a directive obtained by POLITICO, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper questioned the booming rolls of security-clearance holders. At last count, more than 4.9 million people held clearances, of whom over 1.4 million were cleared for access at the “Top Secret” level."

"Clapper’s directive indicates that the Obama administration has not only begun to view the huge number of clearances as a security risk, but a serious budgetary stress. The federal government spends about $1 billion a year on background checks, according to the Government Accountability Office."
-
I suspect Trump is being a petty asshole, but Brenner (and Clapper) are out there getting paid to rip a new one in a sitting POTUS, so this is kind of a new age in politicization of intelligence agencies.
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [tfleeger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tfleeger wrote:
i dont get this... security clearances are based on Need to Know. if they are retired, then they no longer have a need to know. what does any retired military for former WH employee not have their clearance revoked like the rest of us? If I left my current job, my clearance is good for 6 months if I left in good standing (to allow for transitioning to a new job), then poof, gone. Clearances get yanked all the time, for a bunch of reasons, mostly honest mistakes (not saying that's the case here).

A retired General is still a General. The perks and obligations are for life.

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [Danno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You can keep your security clearance status for some [variable] amounts of time when you retire, or cease working as a contractor with clearance. When I retired from the military I went straight to work as a contractor at USPACOM at Camp Smith in HI so kept my clearance and just had to get 'read on' to some new programs.

When I had a break in work due to some intense personal/family issues I lost my TS/SCI clearance. So when I went back to work I still had my TS clearance but it took almost a year before I could get my SCI reestablished and then I could go work my current gig in Afghan.

Plus the whole automated clearance system data base was apparently compromised by the Chinese--so we've got that going for us too.

/r

Steve
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [tfleeger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
security clearances are based on Need to Know

Not exactly correct. Access is based on clearance + need to know. Many people have clearance levels for things they don't need to know, because clearance levels cover a broad variety of topics. There might be information about economics and information about missile technology, both at the same classification level. A person in the military might have the right clearance to see both pieces of information at that classification, but not any need to know about the economic data, for example.

Absent some reason to remove it, clearances are generally valid for a period of years before renewal is required (for military and federal employees). Lots of people will plan to renew their clearances right before they retire or leave service to ensure they have 4 or 5 years of time left on their clearances. It's helpful for people who intend to pursue jobs outside the government with companies that do govt contract work requiring clearances. That way the company doesn't have to pay to get a new hire cleared, which is expensive. For very senior officials, they tend to continue to do consulting work after retirement within the national security organization or for the military, so they need continued ability to access classified information.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [nslckevin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My understanding is that it is common practice for high level people to keep their clearance so that they can be consulted with by the people who take over their positions. If a former CIA director has been through a similar situation that you are seeing as a new CIA directory it is helpful to call on the only one who still has a clearance and can be read into whatever is going on and get some helpful advice.

I suspect it's not just similar situations, but also actual situations that the former official was working when in the position. Why did you take this action, what's your thought on this new development, is this plausible, do you find this person credible given the new circumstances, where did you hide the X files . . .? Not all transitions are complete by the time the former official leave and new one takes office, and without the proper clearance, the former official might not be able to participate in the conversations.

I suspect this happens quite often.
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [AlanShearer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AlanShearer wrote:
My understanding is that it is common practice for high level people to keep their clearance so that they can be consulted with by the people who take over their positions. If a former CIA director has been through a similar situation that you are seeing as a new CIA directory it is helpful to call on the only one who still has a clearance and can be read into whatever is going on and get some helpful advice.

I suspect it's not just similar situations, but also actual situations that the former official was working when in the position. Why did you take this action, what's your thought on this new development, is this plausible, do you find this person credible given the new circumstances, where did you hide the X files . . .? Not all transitions are complete by the time the former official leave and new one takes office, and without the proper clearance, the former official might not be able to participate in the conversations.

I suspect this happens quite often.


Yep.



If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd be good if both lost theirs. And about 10k other assholes working as consultants for think tanks that have no need to know. If they end up needing to know they can go through the investigation again.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [TheStroBro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheStroBro wrote:
I'd be good if both lost theirs. And about 10k other assholes working as consultants for think tanks that have no need to know. If they end up needing to know they can go through the investigation again.

That sounds like a kind of ridiculous way to waste money, time, and manpower.

We're already woefully behind in conducting clearance investigations. Why would we revoke clearances, and force ourselves to spend more resources conducting a new investigation for people we know still meet the requirements and are likely to be hired or asked to do work that requires a clearance?

Clearance doesn't mean these people have access to any classified information except when they have a need to know for some reason, such as a consulting situation. It's not like having a clearance means they get to just walk into any govt facility and access classified info. All it means is that, if they are asked to consult, or if they are hired into a job that does classified business with the govt, they are already cleared for a certain level of information.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [TheStroBro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheStroBro wrote:
I'd be good if both lost theirs. And about 10k other assholes working as consultants for think tanks that have no need to know. If they end up needing to know they can go through the investigation again.

What slowguy said. As a consultant or contractor, you can't have access to classified without: 1) Proper clearance; 2) Need to know; and 3) A contract that clearly spells out that classified work will be required (along with an associated form). Just because a consultant has a clearance doesn't mean he has access to any classified whatsoever. The only reason they get access to classified is while working on a contract with the government that requires it.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [TheStroBro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheStroBro wrote:
I'd be good if both lost theirs. And about 10k other assholes working as consultants for think tanks that have no need to know. If they end up needing to know they can go through the investigation again.

Sandy Berger would disagree with you.

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spot wrote:
TheStroBro wrote:
I'd be good if both lost theirs. And about 10k other assholes working as consultants for think tanks that have no need to know. If they end up needing to know they can go through the investigation again.


What slowguy said. As a consultant or contractor, you can't have access to classified without: 1) Proper clearance; 2) Need to know; and 3) A contract that clearly spells out that classified work will be required (along with an associated form). Just because a consultant has a clearance doesn't mean he has access to any classified whatsoever. The only reason they get access to classified is while working on a contract with the government that requires it.

Same for everybody. I'm a DoD civillian and have had a clearance for about 29 years and can probably count on one hand how many times I've actually seen anything that would be considered classified. The clearance is a requirement for my job and I saw two guys who lost their clearance lose their jobs because of that. I've been to sites where even though I have a clearance they "cleansed" the room, put away documents, etc. before I was allowed in because I didn't have a need to know that stuff. Or perhaps they just thought I looked shifty. :-)

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [nslckevin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nslckevin wrote:
spot wrote:
TheStroBro wrote:
I'd be good if both lost theirs. And about 10k other assholes working as consultants for think tanks that have no need to know. If they end up needing to know they can go through the investigation again.


What slowguy said. As a consultant or contractor, you can't have access to classified without: 1) Proper clearance; 2) Need to know; and 3) A contract that clearly spells out that classified work will be required (along with an associated form). Just because a consultant has a clearance doesn't mean he has access to any classified whatsoever. The only reason they get access to classified is while working on a contract with the government that requires it.


Same for everybody. I'm a DoD civillian and have had a clearance for about 29 years and can probably count on one hand how many times I've actually seen anything that would be considered classified. The clearance is a requirement for my job and I saw two guys who lost their clearance lose their jobs because of that. I've been to sites where even though I have a clearance they "cleansed" the room, put away documents, etc. before I was allowed in because I didn't have a need to know that stuff. Or perhaps they just thought I looked shifty. :-)

Yeah, it's very job dependent. The positions I was in, both active duty and retired contractor, required access to classified not quite every day, but close. For others, like you said, you could have the right clearance, but no need to know.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
" RED BADGE "

Steve
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
60 former high level CIA/dod write letter against trump abuse of power. Bob gates, petraeus, porter goss, mike Hayden...just a few. Proving once again what a dipwad Cadet bonespurs is.
Quote Reply
Re: "Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President" [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Looks like Bruce Ohr will likely be next based on Trump's "I think Bruce Ohr is a disgrace" comment today. Ohr is the one I mentioned in the Strzok thread as next for firing. Hard to believe he's still there actually. I'll post again the link that I referenced, and a new Mark Penn piece that looks at that new info and decries the lack of coverage.
-
http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/400810-opinion-how-a-senior-justice-official-helped-dems-on-trump-russia-case
-
http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/402131-press-needs-to-restore-its-credibility-on-fbi-and-justice-department
Quote Reply