Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Six White House staffers fired after failing security test
Washington Examiner ^ | 2/16/17 | Anna Giaritelli

Posted on 02/16/2017 6:14:29 PM PST by markomalley

The White House dismissed six aides on Thursday after the staffers failed FBI background checks. Some of the aides were physically "walked out of the building by security" a day earlier.

Those affected had failed the SF86, a Questionnaire for National Security Positions used to determine whether a government employee is eligible for a security clearance. The test takes into consideration a person's credit score, substance use and various personal subjects.

Caroline Wiles was among the six escorted off the property. Wiles worked as Trump's scheduling director and is the daughter of Susan Wiles, who managed Trump's Florida campaign.

Wiles had resigned on Friday before the results of the test were released. She had worked s deputy assistant secretary during the transition period. Sources told Politico she is going to work for the Treasury Department in light of her inability to return to the White House.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: backgroundchecks; fbi; security; sf86; trump; whitehouse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
They shouldn't be allowed to work anywhere if they failed background checks on an SF86. The adjudication criteria don't change just because of the level of clearance...the only difference is how hard the investigators look.
1 posted on 02/16/2017 6:14:29 PM PST by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

And yet Muslim Brotherhood members have been working in the White House for the last eight years....


2 posted on 02/16/2017 6:16:38 PM PST by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Probably the credit check gets some of them. Under Clinton it was drug use.


3 posted on 02/16/2017 6:16:41 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

dopers?


4 posted on 02/16/2017 6:16:58 PM PST by Oratam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Shows the TRUMP ADMINISTRATION only hires those who are qualified.


5 posted on 02/16/2017 6:19:14 PM PST by stars & stripes forever (Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. Psalm 33:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

...And yet Muslim Brotherhood members have been working in the White House for the last eight years...

There is a difference in the character of a man and a man child who is a cartoon character.


6 posted on 02/16/2017 6:23:18 PM PST by Sasparilla ( I'm Not tired of Winning)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Six? Let me guess...

Mohamed, Mohamed, Mohamed, Mohamed, Mohamed, and...Akbar.


7 posted on 02/16/2017 6:24:28 PM PST by moovova
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sasparilla

There is no test I’m aware of that reveals recent sexual activity with a goat.


8 posted on 02/16/2017 6:25:42 PM PST by ImJustAnotherOkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

It’s interesting that the three Muslims hackers the Democrats hired passed a background check since they had credit problems.


9 posted on 02/16/2017 6:26:16 PM PST by Bodleian_Girl (Trump: "I'm not going to tell you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Drug and credit background? Great! These surely are some indication of clearance-worthy or not. But what about past known subversive associates? That’s an even better indicator, certainly. obama himself, hillary herself could not have passed that one.
Oh, but those were special cases huh?


10 posted on 02/16/2017 6:26:40 PM PST by Migraine (Diversity is great- -- until it happens to YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Background check system changes c2016
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3471402/posts


11 posted on 02/16/2017 6:26:51 PM PST by piasa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piasa

Personnel Security Program Regulation (Appendix 8 has adjudication guidelines):

http://dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/520002r.pdf


12 posted on 02/16/2017 6:29:50 PM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: stars & stripes forever

Yet, when are we going to get news of the three Paki brothers, and wife who were hired by Rat congress critters and Debbie washerwoman Shultz, with full access to the government computer systems?

Are they on the streets, in jail, or fled to Pakistan?


13 posted on 02/16/2017 6:31:19 PM PST by Noob1999 ( r re)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

maybe Trump could pardon them.. who can pass a background check these days anyway? ;-)


14 posted on 02/16/2017 6:31:25 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi - Monthly Donors Rock!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noob1999

[when are we going to get news of the three Paki brothers, and wife]

Hopefully they are being interrogated.


15 posted on 02/16/2017 6:33:07 PM PST by stars & stripes forever (Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. Psalm 33:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Normal stuff. Many don’t pass the background checks for mundane reasons


16 posted on 02/16/2017 6:34:07 PM PST by pissant ((Deport 'em all))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piasa

Also, ICPG 704.2 - Adjudicative Guidlines https://www.dni.gov/Ffiles/documents/ICPG/FICPG_704_2.pdf


17 posted on 02/16/2017 6:34:58 PM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

How the hell do you “fail” a SF86? Are people reporting on this that stupid or do they think the people reading their work are that stupid?


18 posted on 02/16/2017 6:36:44 PM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pfflier
How the hell do you “fail” a SF86? Are people reporting on this that stupid or do they think the people reading their work are that stupid?

Try this:

So you tell me...

19 posted on 02/16/2017 6:42:37 PM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Must be some extreme vetting that got them.


20 posted on 02/16/2017 6:44:40 PM PST by TexasCruzin (Trump is the man. #TrumpPence16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Well maybe I should send in my resume.


21 posted on 02/16/2017 6:47:04 PM PST by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bodleian_Girl
It’s interesting that the three Muslims hackers the Democrats hired passed a background check since they had credit problems.

What makes you think they had their backgrounds checked? They did work for democrats after all. We already know in what high regard they hold National Security.

22 posted on 02/16/2017 6:47:39 PM PST by SunTzuWu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I’ve filled out 3 of them in my time.


23 posted on 02/16/2017 6:51:31 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

T T T T ! ! ! ©


24 posted on 02/16/2017 6:53:17 PM PST by onyx (DONATE MONTHLY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

no lie detector tests??


25 posted on 02/16/2017 6:53:27 PM PST by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Is this real news? If so, it’s a HUGE story, far bigger than Trumps combative Press Conference. This is an earthquake with few precedents.


26 posted on 02/16/2017 6:55:51 PM PST by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moovova

The article mentions “Caroline.”


27 posted on 02/16/2017 6:56:56 PM PST by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: elpadre
no lie detector tests??

From what I've seen, polygraphs are done after the background investigation is completed. In that way they can verify what they've found during the investigation.

See here: ICPG 704.6 - Conduct of Polygraph Examinations for Personnel Security Vetting

Since these people apparently failed the background investigation then there would be no need for a polygraph.

28 posted on 02/16/2017 7:04:56 PM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: lee martell

No, it’s a final firming up of the WH staff. Takes a couple months. He is operating with a TRANSITION staff, while he builds the PERMANENT one. Geesh.


29 posted on 02/16/2017 7:07:41 PM PST by txhurl (The LEFT are screaming at the Tsunami, and the Sky, trying to set fire to the Ocean- S.Tom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Some jobs you just don’t need a security clearance. If Caroline Wiles committed a minor offense sometimes in her past, Trump seems like he’s just trying to be fair-not heartless.


30 posted on 02/16/2017 7:09:28 PM PST by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I guess people’s memory are not what they used to be. Back when Billy Jeff Clinton, or as I call him, the Hillbilly Whorehopper, back when over half his nominations and hires could not pass drug screening, he changed hiring practices and hired all of them under some other classification that did not require any urine, hair, or blood samples. Creepozoids all.


31 posted on 02/16/2017 7:31:06 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus III (Do, or do not, there is no try.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
So you tell me...

You don't "fail" a SF86. The form itself has no "pass/fail" criteria. The document itself is information that you provide for background investigators to check out and validate.

The background investigation resulting from that information may result in prejudicial information and findings.

That information is then submitted to the requesting agency which ultimately decides whether a clearance is granted.

32 posted on 02/16/2017 7:39:23 PM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This is the way the system is supposed to work. Readers may recall that Ben Rhodes, Obama’s former Deputy NSA, ran into the same problem back in 2009. He was cleared anyway. I wonder how many other Obama staffers failed their initial background checks and were still given clearances.


33 posted on 02/16/2017 7:41:08 PM PST by ExNewsExSpook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elpadre

Not for the initial check; if they’re moving into specified TS/SCI billets, they will need a polygraph and receive periodic re-exams. Not all TS/SCI positions required a poly, or at least that was the case when I was a military intelligence officer and later, a DoD civilian.

Sounds like some of these folks were only going for Secret clearances, based on the types of positions they were holding. Once again, the system is working the way it should.

Big change from recent Democrat administrations. I remember the quote from Gary Aldrich, the former FBI agent who exposed some of the blatant security problems in the Clinton White House. As he said, famously: “We’re clearing people we ought to be putting handcuffs on.” As he noted, some of the stuff on SF86s from the Clinton staff was absolutely mind-blowing, and the vast majority were still cleared.


34 posted on 02/16/2017 7:48:43 PM PST by ExNewsExSpook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“So you tell me...”

I never before heard the SF86 referred to as a test, like you have to get so many correct answers to get a passing grade. It was never presented to me as a test. I don’t see how it can be viewed as a test except maybe as a test of one’s honesty and memory.

It’s been awhile, but I don’t recall that you pass or fail the SF86. You pass or fail the security check for which the SF86 provides information.


35 posted on 02/16/2017 7:51:22 PM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Bill Clinton wouldn’t have passed a security check.


36 posted on 02/16/2017 8:12:46 PM PST by Pining_4_TX (For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind. ~ Hosea 8:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
I’ve filled out 3 of them in my time.

I filled one out for my step-son (autistic) a few years back... for a "secret" clearance when he got a job (with other handicapped guys) at the Trident Sub base in WA. Somehow he managed to get approved... has no credit history at all since he can't even read/write.

37 posted on 02/16/2017 8:14:53 PM PST by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pining_4_TX

There is no security clearance process for federal elected officials.


38 posted on 02/16/2017 8:54:38 PM PST by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“Forgetting about a drug conviction (yes, I’ve seen that before)
Claiming to have graduated college when degree withheld due to unpaid debts to the school (yes, I’ve seen that before)
Claiming no financial problem but forgetting about having a house foreclosed and two cars repo’d (yes, I’ve seen that one before too)
Being married and giving a on-the-side girlfriend as a reference (yes, I’ve even seen that one once)”

Yeah but the rest of my SF86 was pristine!


39 posted on 02/16/2017 9:19:57 PM PST by Shark24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: elpadre

LOL!

An unverifiable test with zero credibility at all.

The only way you can tell if someone is lying when hooked up to a lie detector is if they tell you they are lying.


40 posted on 02/16/2017 9:33:38 PM PST by FreedomStar3028 (Somebody has to step forward and do what is right because it is right, otherwise no one will follow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The SF 86 is the basic application for Federal service. From there, all fed employee applicants have a basic back ground check. Then more as clearance requires. The SF 86 Is not a security questionnaire.


41 posted on 02/16/2017 10:34:24 PM PST by HollyB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pfflier

That’s exactly what I thought too. Journalists are truly stupid these days. They didn’t even bother to check what an SF86 was.


42 posted on 02/16/2017 10:36:16 PM PST by HollyB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Migraine

“Wiles had resigned on Friday before the results of the test were released. “

The SF86 is not a test. It’s an application. The journalist is referring to this incorrectly. It appears these employees were hired expecting there not to be an issues. But, there were - perhaps even some that you mentioned. But, it wasn’t a test.


43 posted on 02/16/2017 10:43:31 PM PST by HollyB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: marron

I don’t like the credit check system...if a person self discloses a bad credit number prior to hiring and has submitted to a program to repair their credit and to repay their debt, it should not preclude a good job at the white house, especially a loyal to the president sort of worker. Also credit scores are easy to correct once old debts are addressed, often within a year, especially if a person has had a history of making their payments on time over a period of 6 months!


44 posted on 02/16/2017 10:55:30 PM PST by mdmathis6 (BEWARE THE ABORTION POLITICAL INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie

If Habib remembers to take the bell off the collar nobody should know. :)


45 posted on 02/16/2017 10:57:33 PM PST by Proyecto Anonimo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: marron

Under Obama most of his top advisors and staff couldn’t pass a real security check. Jarrett? You’ve got to be kidding. Axelrod, all redded up from Chicago. Van Jones - you’ve got to be kidding. Anita the Maoist Dunn - No Way.

I’m worried the most about Ben Rhodes who is as close to a traitor as I’ve seen yet, despite the competition for that title.


46 posted on 02/16/2017 11:43:16 PM PST by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie

..the goat,....he lies...


47 posted on 02/16/2017 11:52:44 PM PST by Cvengr ( Adversity in life & death is inevitable; Stress is optional through faith in Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

On the other hand, I have seen SF86’s where they honestly and openly talked about previous drug use and “passed” the background check.

And if you are completely open and honest about the foreclosure, that will get a “go” also. It is when you “forget” the incident, or slightly change the facts, that it gets you in trouble.


48 posted on 02/17/2017 12:50:05 AM PST by wbarmy (I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HollyB
The SF 86 is the basic application for Federal service. From there, all fed employee applicants have a basic back ground check. Then more as clearance requires. The SF 86 Is not a security questionnaire.

Form: SF86 Questionnaire for National Security Positions

49 posted on 02/17/2017 12:56:51 AM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: wbarmy
It is when you “forget” the incident, or slightly change the facts, that it gets you in trouble.

Exactly. I always tell any new person that he/she needs to pretend that this is like going to confession (particularly with an SSBI). It's far better to list everything and be overly scrupulous than to leave something off. There are always mitigating factors for everything except one: attempting to deceive.

50 posted on 02/17/2017 1:00:26 AM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson