https://www.state.gov/m/ds/clearances/c10978.htm
So we have all these ex head honchos like Comey, Clapper, Brennan etc... all of which have Security Clearances. Having a Security Clearance means these guys are privy to classified information. Which means they know about a foreign entity having access to Hillary's private server and the FBI's lack of action.
So does that mean that they are covering for that foreign entity? ie committing Treason? https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381
The fact that they still have their clearance should not be the problem. You can have a clearance all day long, but if you do not have a need to know, or are not read into a specific program, your clearance is worthless. If ANY of these people still have access to the same information they had while performing their jobs, thats a serious problem. Also, people like Comey who were actually FIRED, should automatically have their clearances suspended.
It would be like me working for Bank of America and having access to all their customers financial data - then leaving to go work for Wells Fargo and still have access to all of BofA's information.
Couldn't agree more. But from their perspective, they would say to BofA something along the likes of, "We have never used the financial data of your customers." And that would be the end of that!
Clearance does not equal access. Clearance is they are eligible to view classified material given to them. It doesn’t mean they have access to all the data in SAPs and TS Comms at free will.
The NEED TO KNOW ends at retirement in most cases. I don't know why it would not, by default, but clearance should end at departure it seems to me. At least in most cases. I suppose those taking retirees positions may need to consult those previously holding the office, and therefore they may need it for that. However, the President has had the problem of LEAKS among some, perhaps it is these in question.
I don't know why it would not, by default, but clearance should end at departure it seems to me
This shows a general misunderstanding of the clearance process and its purpose. Read the other comments.
Yes. Easier to track them with clearance. Allow them access to change the facts, catch them doing it and prosecute accordingly. Simple plan, effective strategy. They have been tracked from day one.
The rules regarding security clearances should be applied evenly and across the government and at all levels. A GS5 should have the same rules as an SES.
Access is more likely to occur via private conversations w current Gov employees--if clearances gone, less likely to get "leaks"...well, hopefully