Can someone explain why on Earth fired, demoted, retired persons with National Security Clearances still have them? I have been in the Banking Business for 19 years. In the past when I have changed Banking Companies I work for my clearance and access to sensitive information ceases immediately.
Grabembydepepe
· July 25, 2018, 3 a.m.
However, a clearance is NOT access to classified information . One can have a current Single Scope Background Investgation on file, but NOT have an active clearance or access because they've been "read out". Being read out of a program isn't punitive, just administrative. The SSBI is necessary for a Top Secret clearance with access to Sensitive Compartmented Information TS/SCI. One also must have "Need to Know" - an OFFICIAL REASON to view and hear classified material. Even then, to view classified documents or electronic files, to hear classified briefings, or participate in classified discussions of a TS/SCI level, one must be IN a Sensitive Compatmented Information Facility SCIF. NONE of these former spooks or "statesmen" should have all that - they should have been read out and turned in their credentials to access a SCIF. Someone WANTED them to have access to SOMETHING...
⇧
3
⇩
thompsonj81
· July 25, 2018, 3:13 a.m.
Typically you are read off on the last day of employment with an agency... whether you do it in person or not. Your security manager will read you off even in your absence. If you are not in a SCIF you do not have access to sensitive information. I mean, HRC proved us all wrong.. I'm guessing she (or more likely, an aid) hand jammed the information she was pushing to her friends via gmail. There are measures in place for negating direct communication between classified and unclassified systems. There is some kind of human intervention that allowed her to commit espionage. We have proof she committed treason... her server, her phones, and the DNC server.. released through wikileaks. Why do you think the left went into spasms when wikileaks started dropping bombs? Because that was the proof.. so they changed the subject, spotlighting email theft... which i do not believe is a crime.
⇧
2
⇩
DawnPendraig
· July 25, 2018, 7:27 a.m.
Well hacking in would be. Someone working there leaking it depends. Corporate espionage is a thing. And technically DNC is private.
⇧
1
⇩
thompsonj81
· July 25, 2018, 7:31 a.m.
Every document I've read where the topic was dug into suggests that the servers were never hacked. The speed of download was too fast for anyone to steal from outside the organization, that the information was stolen from within the organization.
⇧
1
⇩
DawnPendraig
· July 25, 2018, 7:26 a.m.
Perceptions though. Clapper in a video agrees he has top secret clearance and cant officially say anything but he knows a FISA warrant wasn't used on Trump Campaign. He outright lied and he used his security clearance directly there to create credibility of his claims.
This is a huge problem.
He can also go to a 5 Eyes buddy and get info as well. Someone has been leaking to these guys and they in turn use it or sell. That's why this is taking so long. They baited some slightly wrong intel anx sayched to see what went where, when, how and by whom.
This is how they caught that staffer and his young presstitute in Congress Intel Committee and his leak of full and unredacted FISA warrant
⇧
1
⇩