- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Well Well.... Looks like the Obama Admin scrubbed security clearances 2013
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:54 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:54 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Would having a clearance pulled not limit the types of jobs you could take in the private sector? Would you also not have to answer in the affirmative if ever asked if you have had a clearance pulled?
This post was edited on 8/20/18 at 1:54 pm
2
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:54 pm to Tiger Prawn
quote:
I hope all this hoopla about security clearances leads to Congress acting on it and passing a law that persons in government positions that require a security clearance for their job will automatically have that clearance revoked upon their exit from government. If they eventually return to a government position, then they can have their clearance reinstated. John Brennan is a private citizen. He no longer has a need for any security clearance.
Holy shite. You apparently don't know anything about security clearances.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:55 pm to boosiebadazz
Yikes. You think private sector jobs/influence is a good reason to allow retention of clearance. I think just the opposite is true.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:55 pm to Shiftyplus1
quote:
I actually don't see anything wrong with that.
Every person should lose they clearance they hold when they leave the position they held that requires it.
This post was edited on 8/20/18 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:56 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Would having a clearance pulled not limit the types of jobs you could take in the private sector? Would you also not have to answer in the affirmative if ever asked if you have had a clearance pulled?
Do you think that anyone who is likely to hire John Brennan will A) not already be aware of what happened and B) give a crap?
John Brennan has limited his own hiring potential by acting like an unhinged lunatic, losing his security clearance isn't going to change that.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:58 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Did they do it for expressing an opinion regarding politics?
Just like Bruce Ohr. He's been all over CNN bashing Tru.....wait. Oops! There goes that narrative.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:58 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Did they do it for expressing an opinion regarding politics?
Are the people losing security clearances guilty of treason and about to be indicted?
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:59 pm to asurob1
quote:how is it punishment?
gets to punish enemies
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:00 pm to asurob1
quote:
Shhh...Donnie gets to punish enemies...it's okay now
I think you got Donnie confused with Lois.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:00 pm to BBONDS25
That's not what I said. I said I wonder if given the private sector opportunities afforded by a clearance if a person doesn't have a pseudo property right vested in retaining the clearance.
I'm a VP at Lockheed, and I go on a talk show and say I disagree with policy x, y, and z of the Administration. Should I lose my clearance and therefore my job?
Is this not a slippery slope to go down where you pull the clearances of anyone who disagrees with you and results in a cleared national security apparatus of simply yes men?
I'm a VP at Lockheed, and I go on a talk show and say I disagree with policy x, y, and z of the Administration. Should I lose my clearance and therefore my job?
Is this not a slippery slope to go down where you pull the clearances of anyone who disagrees with you and results in a cleared national security apparatus of simply yes men?
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:03 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I'm a VP at Lockheed, and I go on a talk show and say I disagree with policy x, y, and z of the Administration. Should I lose my clearance and therefore my job?
Is there 1 person at Lockheed who can look at your comments and see that they hurt the company stock value by undermining faith in the leadership? And can that 1 person fire you? If yes, then you gone
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:03 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:This, this, and this. Any leftist think tank or Netflix would hire him in a second. Hell, Brennan is free to pen a book and say IF I DID IT, IF I helped unseat a sitting President and used political espionage and make millions.
Do you think that anyone who is likely to hire John Brennan will A) not already be aware of what happened and B) give a crap?
John Brennan has limited his own hiring potential by acting like an unhinged lunatic, losing his security clearance isn't going to change that.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:04 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I'm a VP at Lockheed, and I go on a talk show and say I disagree with policy x, y, and z of the Administration. Should I lose my clearance and therefore my job?
If you are a VP at Lockheed you have security clearance because your CURRENT job requires it.
That is the difference here , the government REQUIRES the VP of Lockheed to carry said security clearance as a contracter, John Brennan is not a contractor with the government, nor is he likely to be as long as Trump is President, and the bottom line is a security clearance is about what the GOVERNMENT needs, not about what the individual needs. If the government needs John Brennan to keep his clearance fine, if they don't then why does he need to? All Trump has said here is "the government no longer needs these people to be able to access classified material" the fact that they would all still like to be able to say "we are cleared to see classified material" is wholly irrelevant to the discussion.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:05 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
pseudo property right vested in retaining the clearance.
Woh.
quote:
this not a slippery slope to go down where you pull the clearances of anyone who disagrees with you and results in a cleared national security apparatus of simply yes men
Then change the rules. Though this could already happen. Not one person, except those saying clearance is a first a.m. right, say the president doesn’t have this power. Isn’t the slope already slippery. Maybe let’s see what happens. Though, I would imagine if you worked for Lockheed.
As for Lockheed. I doubt they would be excited to hire someone who goes on CNN and accuses their former employer of crimes. With no basis.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:06 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Did he misuse any classified info? Did he disseminate it unlawfully? That should be grounds for losing your clearance
Not needing security clearance should be grounds to lose your clearance.
Brennan was director of the CIA when all of this supposed meddling occurred. He is at least partially responsible for allowing it to happen.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:06 pm to Vecchio Cane
Lockheed is a private entity, not the government. That's an important distinction.
At this point, why have the Hatch Act or any civil service rules at all?
At this point, why have the Hatch Act or any civil service rules at all?
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:06 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Thanks for your time in posting but in 12 minutes boosie will go to the OT and brag that he ruffled feathers on the poli board and we are all loons and he is some great brilliant mind trolling us. He has done this before...So save your breath.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:07 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
and the bottom line is a security clearance is about what the GOVERNMENT needs, not about what the individual needs. If the government needs John Brennan to keep his clearance fine, if they don't then why does he need to? All Trump has said here is "the government no longer needs these people to be able to access classified material" the fact that they would all still like to be able to say "we are cleared to see classified material" is wholly irrelevant to the discussion.
I like this framing of it, even if it still raises red flags for me. I just see it as a slippery slope to go down, and I hope it doesn't progress (or regress) any further.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:08 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Did they do it for expressing an opinion regarding politics?
Everyone does have a right to express their political opinion.
But, having a security clearance is not a “right”.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 2:08 pm to cajunangelle
I'm happily married. Please stop chasing me around the playground trying to pinch me.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News