Ex-Navy admiral: Revoke my security clearance

Posted by $ nickursis 5 years, 7 months ago to Government
45 comments | Share | Flag

If anything confirms the deep state (which I think is what Ayn Rand was trying to warn us of), it is this, someone treading on their military service to appear offended because they want to keep their access so they can go on TV and be brilliant talking gasbags. Another corrupted senior officer. Ask yourself, why does ANYONE need a security clearance AFTER they leave the job? ALL security systems are founded on one basic principle: Need to know. How can someone who has left that position have a need to know? We ALWAYS terminated security clearances of people who left the submarine command precisely because of need to know, which no longer existed. The only reason anyone would WANT to keep one: access to secrets you can use to sell yourself, manipulate others and be a self important, pompous ass. Brennan is a traitor, Comey is one too. They abused their power, then set themselves up with their access to sell to the higest bidder. Brennan needed a high level security clearance so he could consult for CNN? Really? You think this is at all realistic?

If anything, this is concrete proof of what is going on, and how people get power and then abuse it for themselves, and will sell us out along the way. ALL clearances should be revoked immediately, if that person is not in the position for which it was granted. Common sense.
SOURCE URL: https://www.yahoo.com/news/bin-laden-raid-commander-trump-revoke-security-clearance-195909346.html


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by mminnick 5 years, 7 months ago
    I work in DOD or Defense contrators from 1968 to 1999. During that time I held SECRET and Top Secret clearences. the day I left employment my clearences were all terminated. No question asked. It is not the person that needs the clearance, it is the position he/she is occupying that needs the clearance. Anyone doing that job is required to demonstrate they have the necessary capacity to keep their mouth shut. For my TS I was investigated back 15 yrs. My family was also. This includeded in-laws and direct family. it was not easy nor was it cheap.
    As I said when I left DoD work, my clearences were withdrawn immediately. I no longer needed to have access. Some of the project I worked still have restrictions imposed on my ability to talk about them and to travel freely. Brennan et al shold just shut up and do what they know they should be doing, and not blabbering away.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
      Exactly mminnick, right on target. The fact this is even going on, and the fact they are making a public stink, thinking they can normalize such a security breach, is indicative of the arrogance of the other side, and their attitude of privilege. It is not too far a step to "I am above the law". That seems to encapsulate all the bad sides of government we see, add in the fact 60 "ex" CIA people protested he and Brennan should be allowed to keep it shows the depth of corruption and arrogance these idiots have acquired.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Snezzy 5 years, 7 months ago
        Bingo! I held Secret but never had a need to know, never knew anything, and even if I did, I would never mention it.

        True story: Our off-base site's security officer was asked by a snotty summer-help kid about the on-premises safe.

        "What's that safe?"
        -- "That's for keeping classified information."
        "What is in it?"
        -- "The answer to your question is NO."
        "Then you mean there isn't anything in it?"
        -- "The answer to your question is NO."
        "Then there is?"
        -- "The answer to your question is NO."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ProfChuck 5 years, 7 months ago
    Government issued clearances exist for the specific reason that access to sensitive information is essential to you doing your job.. When you no longer have that job you no longer need access to sensitive information. Typically a clearance includes "need to know" restrictions. Actually, and this is down in the weeds, once granted a security clearance never really goes away. What does go away is "need to know access". What Trump actually pulled from Brennan was his "need to know" status. The clearance remains in tact as does the penalty for violating your oath.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Thoritsu 5 years, 7 months ago
      I do not think you are correct here. Your clearance will expire after two years, if it is not reactivated. If you want a clearance again, you must reapply from scratch.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
        Clearance is different from access. I had perople whose clearances expired on board, so every offcrew I had to instigate requests for reneweal. Used to be SCI/TS was every 5 years and took an SBI (Special Background Investigation) which was the whole shebang, visits interviews, etc. Secret (which was the vast majority) was 10 years and required a BI (Background Investigation), which was just a records check. Maybe they shortened the intervals for SBI, but they took forever, sometimes over a year to get done. You could provide interim access, but in an inspection, I had to justify each one and why, which sucked, as I got no recognition for the huge amount of work I had to do.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Thoritsu 5 years, 7 months ago
          That all sounds the same as ours in civilian DoD contracting. I understand the difference. However, ProfChuck is saying you essentially have clearance for live, and it is all about “Need to Know”. This is incorrect.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
            That may be true, in a way, as if you work for a contractor who has extended govt contracts that need a clearance, it is transparent to the end user, a lot of times, as you still have to periodically update your application. The need to know is supposed to be the trigger that says you need the clearance and access. Need to know drives access, and consequently, the clearance needed to get that access. I wouldn't be too hard on that, the point still is that NO ONE should have a clearance or access once they leave the position that required it. You can place a clearance on hold, and then reactivate it if needed with an SBI short form update. In this case it seems they have built a system of keeping your clearance AND access, even when gone. One has to wonder how Comey got fired and his clearance and access was not revoked same day. Deep state in action. There are probably thousands of these creatures wandering around. Part of the swamp, access and secrets for sale....
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Thoritsu 5 years, 7 months ago
              That I wholeheartedly agree with. What makes these SES pukes special? Who thinks it is ok to have a clearance when you are a retired civilian.

              That is the part people should be asking about, not revoking clearances, but why retired people have then at all!
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
                That is the heart of the matter, the root cause for all this, and I believe it has been slowly and covertly growing the last 20 years or so, I do not recall it ever being done in the early 90's late 80's.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ Thoritsu 5 years, 7 months ago
                  I never knew about it, but did wonder how all these "experts" stayed in touch with things the public is completely ignorant of. Now I know. Ridiculous, part of the deep state.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
      Exactly, you retain the clearance but NOT the access, what turd head is saying is he wants both, even when no longer in that position, as well as Brennan, and all so they can have power and make money, not what clearances are for.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by bobsprinkle 5 years, 7 months ago
    nickursis sez
    ALL clearances should be revoked immediately, if that person is not in the position for which it was granted. Common sense.
    Otherwise, if you need to keep your clearance so that you can comment with "authority" on tv or wherever you become a VIOLATER of your PRIVLEGE to have access to secure information. IT IS SIMPLE!!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
      Thats the way it would seem. The obvious so often escapes the notice. Ayn Rand said it: “The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody has decided not to see."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by starznbarz 5 years, 7 months ago
    Brennan pulled the credentials from Paronto and others that refused to go along with the Benghazi BS cover story, who would you all trust with sensitive info - Brennam & company, or any of those shooters? “My principles are greater than clearances too John, especially when you and the @CIA kool-aid drinkers punishes us for not going along with the Benghazi cover-up story in order to protect you, @HillaryClinton’s & @BarackObama’s failures. You put your politics before us,” he tweeted at Mr. Brennan" . - K.Paronto
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 5 years, 7 months ago
    I know many family and friends who had clearances while they worked for the government in various capacities. The second they retired, quit, were laid off, or were fired their clearances were revoked. I don't see where some of these whiners like Brennan and the admiral are any different from all the other citizens.

    If they later have a "need to know", then the clearances can be re-instated.

    Now I hear all the crying about violation of the whiners 1st Amendment rights. Really? Hey, I'm a loyal born American citizen with zero criminal past, so why doesn't MY 1st Amendment rights allow ME to have all those clearances? To paraphrase former Governor Huckabee, if it's a 1st Amendment issue, then why not sell the clearance forms at county fair booths for a buck or two so we all can have one and help bring money into the mired-in-debt treasury to boot?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CTYankee 5 years, 7 months ago
    Another important factoid about clearance, is that one who possesses it would never actually reveal that they have more clearance than is necessary for any given need. e.g.

    Item XYZ requires SECRET clearance to access, and Joe Lunchbox has "SECRET, Top Secret, Eyes Only, and Ultra-Violet" clearances in his jacket, Joe would only reveal that he has SECRET clearance to gain access to the XYZ item.

    Which is to say that when the original possessor of the SECRET information was asked to disclose to Joe Lunchbox, this inquiry from the clearance authority would also only confirm that Joe has SECRET clearance.

    In other words, you DO NOT need to know how much clearance I have, you only need to know that I have sufficient clearance to receive XYZ item. Anything else is CLASSIFIED.

    Anyone who knows this also knows that Hillary belongs in prison. It's not a crime to receive classified information above your level, only to distribute it. And that's why Hillary is guilty.

    Because of certain inequities, we can also conclude that another aspect of security clearances is to punish political adversaries, and provide meat for the sausage grinders, while allowing the privileged few to eschew the rules with impunity. And that's not right.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 5 years, 7 months ago
    The most absurd claim is that removing a security clearance is a violation of the 1st amendment. You can't talk publicly about classified information, period, whether you have the clearance or not. Brennan has certainly been shooting his mouth off without any form of suppression.

    The explanation of the 1st amendment "violation" is that Brennan is being punished for criticizing the President, but the freedom of speech clause is about being able to express your thoughts without fear of legal suppression. It is not license with a guaranteed freedom from any consequences. Even Brennan himself had second thoughts about his irrational outburst accusing the President of committing treason by meeting with Putin.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
      Brennan is playing his part as directed, the idiocy is that this is even a discussion point in the media at all, when it is clear that security regulations require termination of access when you no longer need to know. When he left, he lost the need to know. But not the need to have access to sell, use for blackmail, bribes, and income. Criminal.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 5 years, 7 months ago
    I see absolutely no reason for any gov. employee to keep the clearance once they leave the job. Sure, some of them might be kept if they might be called upon to update their replacements or were highly involved in ongoing projects but it should not be a life long TS clearance and certainly not when they are in complete opposition of the current admin.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by TheRealBill 5 years, 7 months ago
      "Sure, some of them might be kept if they might be called upon to update their replacements"

      I've seen this claimed frequently, but it doesn't hold water. Clearance is needed to receive or learn of secret information. In that scenario what is needed is for the replacement to have the clearance and the former official/employee to be able to verify the replacement's authorization to be "updated".

      Then again, to me needing to do that signifies the outgoing employee failed to properly document and store the information necessary for their successor. As far as ongoing, either be under active contract or uninvolved.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by GaryL 5 years, 7 months ago
        Lots of businesses and gov. agencies keep the retiring big wigs on as paid consultants for a period of time. Many of the contacts and relationships they developed are invaluable resources. I do feel that some but certainly not all X employees may need to maintain the clearance for a short transitional period to get the new folks up to speed.
        If your removal was the result of some negative condition then the clearance should expire immediately.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by TheRealBill 5 years, 7 months ago
          I understand where you're coming from. In my view, however, you transition before leaving. There is no good reason why retirement in the S2 field is excused from executing a proper transition to your successor prior to leaving. This is especially true at the big-wig level.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by GaryL 5 years, 7 months ago
            That's usually an up hill domino effect. Top guy goes and either an underling moves up or some political hack gets appointed. I don't much like the structure but I do have a bit of understanding in it.
            When my wife retires she will sign a NDA saying she will not divulge company secrets or go to work for any competitor for 5 years and she will assist where necessary during the transition.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
            I'm with you in that respect Bill, also, as a former security assistant on a missile sub, where we had to apply for and get TS and SCI clearances for people, there was never a provision for keeping it afterwards, you could have the actual clearance, but when you left, you had :"Access Terminated", but the clearance itself was not revoked. Then at the next duty station, you could get access again, per your need to know. This whole mess is that they got to keep their clearances and access, despite no need to know. A clear, total breakdown of the system to facilitate insider information given for money at many levels. All pure BS, and a violation of the basic rules.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by GaryL 5 years, 7 months ago
              That actually touches across all entities where highly secretive info is only known to top officials.
              My late grandfather had TS clearance during and after WW 1 but I doubt he kept it all of his life but don't know for sure. It was listed as "Management Confidential" in my working career but not National Security.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
                That is indeed part of this whole mess, while Brennan and Admiral duffas may have had a clearance, that should NOT have automatically granted access, if they did not have a need to know, and brennan being able to spout aboutthings on CNN (where he was a licensed gasbag), does NOT constitute a need to know. This goes to the root of the evil lose in our government, they have manipulated everything to be a money maker, and the Clinton's, we actually owe them a thanks, because only their excesses led to enough angst to start the Q movement and discover all the really dirty stuff that is going to come out.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by GaryL 5 years, 7 months ago
                  Exactly! Brennan is guilty for monetizing his security clearance. Most of these nitwits were rode out of DC on a rail and that is where all their clearances should have ended. Hillary still has hers and so many others do as well. DJT should slam the brakes on this BS but not on an individual basis and only by an EO saying your clearance ends when you leave unless otherwise specified.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
                    Agreed, which I believe is not even needing an EO, since that was the rules when I was doing this, just enforce the rules, unless they got changed, but any change from that would be insane and reason to suspect someone using the system.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by seez52 5 years, 7 months ago
    Listened to an NPR interview of a retired Naval officer with top clearances. May have been this guy. The moronic interviewer asked several questions to which the retiree seemed to answer in a completely sublime manner and one most of the audience would find acceptable. But the question that need to be asked was never asked: "Being retired, why do you need a security clearance anymore anyway?" I was waiting, and waiting but it was never asked. Nothing but tools all of them.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 5 years, 7 months ago
    Agreed, nick. Revoke them all unless they are currently involved in active operations. That's how civilian contractors should be handled, too. In fact, every retired ex-military should be re-vetted before having access to national secrets at ANY time more than 3 months after retirement. Power corrupts. The system has too much power and it must be curtailed or freedom dies.

    Killed Bin Laden? Bull shit. Show me the body you statist liar.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago
    And here we go, John Brennan, who is the patron saint of all these clowns, threatening a lawsuit to be able to keep a clearance he should not have, access he should not have and a herd of cronies using the same system to scam money and power (or serve a specific group by leaking information) supporting him. Obviously, he does not understand the term "discovery". Go ahead John Boy, sue, please sue.....


    https://www.yahoo.com/news/brennan-ge...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo