I am the very proud owner an autographed copy and he calls me a, "Great patriot."
#LoveToBrag
Bagster
Security clearances are commodities in the job market, because they are sometimes difficult to get and are expensive. A Top Secret lasts 5 years before a reinvestigation is required. Let’s say you are a Navy 0-6 who just retired. You have a TS. You apply for a job at Raytheon that requires a TS. If Raytheon hires someone without a clearance, Raytheon has to pay to have your clearance processed (Defense Security Service and FBI). Agents have to travel and personally interview your neighbors, former employers, friends, coworkers, and family members. You financial and personal records are vetted. It’s an exhaustive process.
Retired bigwigs, like State Dept deputies, CIA directors, and all the rest retain their clearances as well when they leave government service. The inherent assumption being, they were highly trusted to get the job, and the clearance is still valid.
Within Top Secret are compartments of different sensitivity. Just because you have a TS does not mean you get access to anything and everything. There is need to know and being “read in” criteria. Hillary had Special Access Programs (SAPs) on her unclassified server. Not only do you need and SCI billet to access each program, even Hillary didn’t have those, and she most likely sold this material to our enemies.
There are records kept on who sees what, and when. Q told us that this is why Brennan and other rats used foreign entities (British, Aussies, etc) to access material and get around the recording of who is accessing highly classified material. Hillary’s server was entirely predicated on her getting rich by selling us out, and there being no records.
So here is where it gets murky. How do political appointees get clearances? On paper, like everyone else. But the rules are often bent for them. See Gary Aldrich’s book “Unlimited Access.” That entire storyline is about the Clinton’s and their dregs. Gary said that Hillary and Bill should have denied clearances. Same with their underlings. But they weren’t.
I am the very proud owner an autographed copy and he calls me a, "Great patriot."
#LoveToBrag
Bagster
Key point! They were not denied because the investigation does not grant one a security clearance, it is only a yes/no recommendation based upon the investigation. The controlling authority accepts or rejects the recommendation. Since we are talking about executive office positions or appointments that clearance is at the sole discretion of the POTUS.
FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS, the election by the people is the authorization based upon the belief that an honorable, moral, informed electorate WOULD NEVER elect a person that was not TRUSTWORTHY and will honor the oath of office (A sacred oath).
The Clintons granted all their friends clearances, the Obama administration was even worse. These are the people Obama moved to the SES positions making them civil service (think UNION as well) so they could continue to serve him or the DS.
Security clearances were over 4000 behind when POTUS took office and are now 7000 behind. Pure Alinsky, overload the system so one can hide the enemy in the confusion.
However, we are Winning Bigly! WWG1WGA!
Wow! Thanks for explaining the security clearances stuff.
SkyPilot,
It never occurred to me that someone could have a security clearance but, there isn’t a need to know. So, would HRC still be allowed to freely go pretty much wherever she wanted to? Would she be the exception to the rule of need to know? Anyway, thank you very much for the information. Much appreciated.
Dave
After rereading your info, I believe that you already addressed my last post e.g. HRC etc.
Thank you for that explanation.
Thank you for that discourse on Security Clearances. A lot of that I didn’t know, or had not figured out.
Thanks for explaining those intricacies.