21 thoughts on “Conduct Unbecoming”

  1. Outstanding piece Rand. That section 147 link is very interesting.

    147.3:

    (b) Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include:
    (1) Involvement in any act of sabotage, espionage, treason, terrorism, sedition, or other act whose aim is to overthrow the Government of the United States or alter the form of government by unconstitutional means;

    (2) Association or sympathy with persons who are attempting to commit, or who are committing, any of the above acts;

    “Bill Ayers” must be a chapter title in Obama’s FBI report.

  2. I have to agree a bit with “Sage” in comments. From people I’ve met, there’s people with clearances that I’m shocked would be allowed any sensitive data. This includes an admitted hacker that had a TS:SCI with the CIA. I don’t know anybody denied clearance, but I certainly know rather meek and honest people who was worried about some or other slight problem.

  3. It always pains me when I have to explain to people that Clinton’s sin was not “merely sex”, and it was very serious business. I point out the fact that, when a reporter asked Boris Yeltsin what he thought of the Lewinsky scandal, he replied “oh, that’s old news.”

    I ask: how much do you think a chief executive’s freedom to act in the national interest would be constrained by the knowledge that a foreign power had the goods on him, and could scuttle his career? The ones who give it some thought often are nonplussed, as they never thought of it from that angle.

    Sex and national security do not mix. If you have been granted the privilege of having access to that kind of knowledge, remember that flies carry disease, so keep yours tightly zipped.

  4. Fast and Furious is a scandal. That firing of an Inspector General early on in the presidential term is a scandal. The taking of property of Chrysler bond holders in circumvention of bankruptcy law, where the bond holders included the pension fund for State of Indiana teachers (to channel Ed Schultz’ outrage on related matters, teachers!), that also is a scandal. Solyndra may not be a full-blown scandal, but there is a certain odor about it.

    What all of the above have in common is that they all flow from policy initiatives or actions of the President or hand-picked appointees. What also makes them scandalous is that each policy had a hidden and perhaps corrupt agenda — Fast and Furious is alleged to have had a hidden agenda to advance gun control, which led to an overzealous “sting” operation distributing guns leading to the deaths of Mexicans and Americans, the Chrysler bailout had payback and payout to unions (but not the teachers union!), the I.G. firing and Solyndra may have involved steering money to cronys, and so on.

    The Secret Service matter is a scandal for the Secret Service, but I don’t see it applying to Mr. Obama, unless however, Mr. Obama, say, appointed a crony to head the Secret Service or relaxed some rules to get something he wanted from the Secret Service, or perhaps failed in exercising reasonable oversight (OK, OK, the gate-crashers early in his term, but connecting the dots from the gate crashers to this is a stretch.).

    The Secret Service affair, also lacks a key element, that the Obama administration got some corrupt benefit that lead to what happened — I just don’t see that here. There are many potential Obama Administration scandals, but this isn’t one of them. It may be a Charlie Foxtrot happening on this Commander-in-Chief’s watch, but it isn’t a scandal.

    1. What all of the above have in common is that they all flow from policy initiatives or actions of the President or hand-picked appointees.

      And that none have resulted in criminal prosecution of anyone close to the President. Compare that with the Bush or Clinton years.

        1. A matter of time:

          Rep. Issa told me on Tuesday night to expect movement on the contempt charge towards A.G. Holder very soon.

          “We’re going through a process,” said Congressman Issa. “That process is going to take weeks but not months more.”

          As a point of comparison, George Mitchell spent 21 months compiling his report on steroids in baseball and now, 5 years after he started, is still trying to get a conviction against Roger Clemens. Eric Holder received his supoena in October 2011. It’s only April 2012.

        2. isn’t it handy for the president that his Attorney General is as corrupt as he is?

          And isn’t it handy that Wikipedia has an entry on the logical fallacy Rand is employing here?

      2. Yes, Jim, I agree with you that the prosecution and conviction of “Scooter” Libby was a scandal. When an overzealous and perhaps extra-constitutional special prosecutor set a perjury trap, when said prosecutor knew that the “outing” of Valerie Plame came not from the Vice President’s office where Libby worked, but that Armitage fellow blabbing, a guy who worked for Colin Powell. I agree with you, Jim, in characterizing this unjust prosecution as a scandal.

        1. The left and probably Jim still believe that crazy conspiracy theory that Cheney did it, after they saw it in a movie so it must be true.

    2. What the secret service agents did may not be a scandal. Indeed, it sounds like it had become routine, but it certainly implies that they may have been betraying the trust of high officials in the administration who unknowingly have been getting sloppy seconds.

      Only a full investigation will determine whether they were acting out of personal selfishness or whether JFK or Clinton had assigned agents to serve like Medieval wine and food tasters employed by paranoid kings, with the job of Presidential whore tester.

    3. The secret service had hookers while Clinton was out partying and Obama said he was scouting vacation spots for Michelle. It really looks like an attitude problem from the top down. Just another let them eat cake while Rome burns moment from the Obama.

      Good memory on Obama firing the IG that dared inspect an Obama crony. Doubtful any of them would risk their jobs after that.

  5. Perhaps it’s time to at least think about upgrading the Constitution with regard to this issue.

    I.e. to make the voters subordinate to a vetting office that will investigate and judge candidates’ associations? No thank you.

    1. I agree with Jim. The ultimate authority rests in the People, at least all those who get out and vote. The security clearance is bestowed by the People by virtue of election.

  6. Excellent piece, Rand. On the other side of the argument, working in DC you realize that a TS is about as difficult to get as an interim confidential was in the defense industry. It’s SCI where they get picky.

    Having said that, I wonder how many genuine secrets Clinton was actually read into. Seems like it could be limited very strictly by need to know, and I can think of very little a clown like that needed to know.

    1. On the other side of the argument, working in DC you realize that a TS is about as difficult to get as an interim confidential was in the defense industry.

      Having held clearances for over 30 years, that doesn’t surprise me. I’ve long noticed that the DC crowd is held to lower standards than the rest of us.

  7. Makes you miss J. Edgar.

    Clinton giving rocket secrets to the Chinese for election funds seems a big one to me.

    It really pisses me off when someone can get away with poo-poohing any concern.

    1. Well, Obama turned off the credit card security feature on his donnation form again so anyone can donate from anywhere in the world.

    2. Well, Obama turned off the credit card security feature on his donnation form again so anyone can donate from anywhere in the world.

Comments are closed.