Posted on 07/07/2018 9:34:16 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[FULL TITLE] Yes, Its True: Peter Strzok Failed His Polygraph Yet Retained Security Clearance and Position on Two Investigations
I have been asked about this repeatedly:
Paul Sperry @paulsperry_ BREAKING: Strzok himself posed a national security risk while he was investigating Trump & his campaign aides for national security threats. Strzok flunked a 2016 internal polygraph by FBI, yet retained access to TS/SCI classified info & continued to run 2 major espionage probes 4:59 PM - 6 Jul 2018
Validating Paul Sperrys tweet. Yes, FBI Agent Peter Strzok failed his polygraph and his supervisors were notified on January 16th, 2016, his results were out of scope. Meaning he failed his polygraph test. Yet he was never removed from any responsibilities; and against dept policy, he did not have his clearance revoked until he could clear.
This was discussed during the Rosenstein testimony and overlooked by most.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
I guess I stand corrected. With the various projects I was running there was no question that polys were required every few years for everyone involved.
Oh, really?
45 years in Aerospace.
TS/SCI/SAP
(UAP)
Policy is not subject to your opinion, no matter the sources supporting your opinion.
At the end of the day policy, for an agency, is what the head of an agency says it is, and you cannot indict the head of an agency for not following the rules he made. But you fools out there try to play barracks lawyer with little knowledge and less wisdom.
And I am not excusing anything that the subject of this thread did. I am just trying to educate some folks - you are impervious, obviously - as to some realities in this world.
Oh and don't go dangling your clearances out there. It is wrong, it isn't as impressive as you think it is and it's an effort to establish an authority you don't have to get around the fact that you don't have a good argument for the point you are trying to make.
I’ve worked with folks who have had their clearance pulled for failing multiple poly’s.
What’s your “authority” on that?
Go to the top and find my link to the National Academy of Sciences Report on Polygraphy, read it and then get back to us with your take on it. It’s junk science as many others on this thread have also stated.
The “science” is NOT the issue here!
It is the POLICY!!!!
Do you have a copy of FBI POLICY regarding employees who fail their Poly?
More to the point for petty pedant tyrrants like you, like I said, if the director of the FBI did not follow his own policy, so what? It may in this case be morally reprehensible, but you cannot throw him in jail for something that is within his discretion - namely to approve exceptions to standard policy. I have a general rule, a policy, but I may vary from that as circumstances dictate.
And I am not defending the subject of this thread.
You sure do a lot of name calling for someone pretending credibility.
According the the House Cmtes today, he did NOT fail, as “out of scope does not mean “failed.”
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.