To: elhombrelibre
You fail the E quip and out you go!
2 posted on
02/17/2017 12:04:28 AM PST by
Az Joe
To: elhombrelibre
3 posted on
02/17/2017 12:06:10 AM PST by
Vendome
(I've Gotta Be Me - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wH-pk2vZG2M)
To: elhombrelibre
This from the same bunch who cleared tax cheats, deadbeats, and towel snapping perverts. Timmy Geithner really was amazing.
4 posted on
02/17/2017 12:21:18 AM PST by
blackdog
To: elhombrelibre
Too bad they don’t require such checks of candidates running for office?
5 posted on
02/17/2017 12:23:33 AM PST by
blackdog
To: elhombrelibre
Bottom line, even if the previous administrations were given the benefit of the doubt, you can’t expect that for your choices.
It’s a raw but legit deal. They’re holding us to our standards, while we give them a pass.
6 posted on
02/17/2017 12:34:18 AM PST by
Fhios
To: elhombrelibre
Certain positions require a minimum of Top Secret clearance. However, I routinely saw the duties of various positions modified to allow political appointees to retain their jobs. The "Duties" were then written into their subordinates' positions and, information on those duties was not to be discussed with the uncleared bosses! (Carter and Reagan Administrations....) At the Whitehouse I doubt this is possible!
8 posted on
02/17/2017 12:46:25 AM PST by
ExSES
(the "bottom-line")
To: elhombrelibre
Standard SF86 check. Nothing new.
13 posted on
02/17/2017 1:09:25 AM PST by
Theoria
(I should never have surrendered. I should have fought until I was the last man alive)
To: elhombrelibre
I am glad that finally, an administration is following standards!
20 posted on
02/17/2017 3:12:52 AM PST by
Redleg Duke
(He is leading us in Making America Great Again!)
To: elhombrelibre
Makes you think how many were admitted during the a@@clowns reign
To: elhombrelibre
LOL! "Marched" - they probably would have like to have said "Duck walked"....I was a security manager for a long time and knew many good people who failed to get security clearances for pretty mundane reasons - in some cases a commander could waiver the person as long as they wouldn't be in contact with classified but that was mainly used for folks who had been on board then failed a re-check due to financial woes, etc.
The implication is that these people were serious mistakes when some old minor lapse may very well be the reason.
27 posted on
02/17/2017 4:19:50 AM PST by
trebb
(Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
To: elhombrelibre
“marched out”
Sounds more like N.Korea.? I am sure they were escorted out of the building by security.
31 posted on
02/17/2017 5:14:07 AM PST by
Leep
(Cyclops Network News (CNN). The Most Trusted Source Of Fake News.)
To: elhombrelibre
Peace, elhombrelibre,
Too bad we can't apply this same standard to members of Congress. We'd get rid of a lot of bad apples if they actually had to pass a security background check.
James R. McClure Jr.
Jeffersonian Anti-Federalist Democrat
To: elhombrelibre
How many of Obama’s failed?
(or did he just grant them all waivers?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson