"What difference does it make?"
Wasn’t Tea Party, liked Obama.
FINE..! I mean that means he’s SPOTLESS, right?
Arizona nut was a member of Gifford’s Synagogue, and he was LIBERAL —so he, too, was okay.
Security Clearance had nothing to do with the shooting.
When I filled out my clearance form, I had to list if I had money, drinking , or drug problems, plus any criminal activity - even those which have been adjudicated.
Perhaps he put down Sandy Berger as a reference?
"What difference does it make?"
Some civilian workers have had their security clearances for years or decades. How can the system ever predict that somewhere along the line after many years or decades of honorable service, a person will suddenly go cuckoo-bananas?
I’m relieved this guy is dead but, he was never convicted of anything that would result in his being denied to purchase or own a weapon.
There have been numerous attempts by Democrats to do away with pre-employment screening as it tends to weed out, primarily, blacks. They claim that any arrest record for which a sentence was served has been paid for and should not count against an applicant.
I have filled out the form this man filled out. (It took roughly 9 hours as I had to research my father’s citizenship papers from 1943 and find information on my parents that I didn’t have.) It only asked for convictions and, as I recall, current court issues. I don’t have any issues, but I could have had a long, long history with the police but no convictions and no court record. None of that would appear on this form. Now, for my first security clearance an FBI agent contacted my former teachers and interviewed people living on the street where I grew up. That would have a better chance of finding any issues.
translation: There just weren’t a whole lot of people in the DC Metro willing to do this low-level IT work for twenty-five bucks an hour. Plus we have diversity targets to meet. So we had to make damned sure that he passed it somehow.
8 misconducts?? 3 arrests??
And that didn’t set off alarm bells in the Navy?
Were affirmative-action passes also in play here?
“Alexis admitted to shooting out the tires, but told police he had acted while in an anger-induced “blackout.”
People subject to “anger induced blackouts” that involved shots fired should not be allowed to own firearms or be eligible for jobs involving national security clearance.
Security Clearances USE to be hard to obtain, however during the Clinton Administration the requirements were greatly relaxed (rumors at the time were that it was because a lot of Clinton’s top people had a history of drug use and/or a history of contacts with anti-american organizations and simply would not have qualified for a clearance under the old system). Now about the only thing that will disqualify you is a pattern of criminal history or just outright lying on the SF-76 form.
Somehow, I suspect that for members a certain unprotected class of people, being "a heavy drinker with anger issues and a history of run-ins with both the military and the law, including eight instances where Navy superiors cited him for misconduct and three occasions when he was arrested on a variety of charges, including possible gun crimes" would STILL prevent them from obtaining or maintaining a security clearance.