The Pentagon Leaker

[[DHT]Osiris]

I think you have much higher expectations for backgrounds than reality. I have a Russian speaking coworker, with family somewhere over there, and goes to Russian telegram channels. He was approved in less than 3 weeks. For a secret, not TS.

Spoiler: secret gets you to a lot of goodies. A lot.

 

[hal2kilo]

I bet the leaker subscribed to this ideology...

MSN

www.msn.com

Ain't that what's the real itch in the 2A is.

 

[DaaQ]

And I can’t even get access for my team to delete temp files on a test box where I work because of our security policies.

Lol

IKR I can't even copy paste a mac address from email to see if it is on or offline.

 

[interchange]

I guess one question on everyone’s mind right now—how does a 20-21 year old pass the necessary background check for Top Secret clearance?? Did they interview his high school guidance counselor?? How is it possible to clear someone so young??

It's not that remarkable. When I was 19 or 20 the NSA offered me a job that required TS clearance and sent me one of those mammoth tell us everyone you've ever met forms and tried to get me to take a polygraph.

I never filled out the form or took the polygraph, so I can't comment on how easy it actually might have been to obtain such clearance.

Funny story. I also never interviewed for the job before they offered me. I also never applied for the job either...

 

[Muse]

I uh, don't know if those are strictly disqualifying. Compromised, potentially compromised/compromise-able, or untrustworthy. I think those are the things they care about.

Being of bad character makes a person inherently untrustworthy.

 

[Muse]

Never had to get one myself, but when I was in my late teens, a friend of mine was applying for a job at a defense contractor in Silicon Valley. I got at least two calls, I think from different agencies, asking me all kinds of questions about him, including highly personal questions. I recall struggling with whether I should tell him that the guy had smoked weed or not. I didn't want to kill the clearance but I was afraid I'd get in trouble if I lied.

If they don't put you under oath I presume you don't have to tell everything you know about a person. IOW, you might know something and pretend you don't. Not that I've ever been asked about anyone I know. IIRC, it's never happened.

 

[woolfe9998]

It can be expensive if you tell the truth as you believe it to be. In your case I would have lied because I believe my judgment on whether I would consider a person a risk to national security would have only a tangential relationship to whether he had smoked weed. He might have smoked it but decided it wasn’t for him, as one example. If pot and national security have any diagnostic counter indications at all, I would say a person who knows it’s not for him would be safer with secrets than one who could take it up.

Right, I had the same opinion. However, being about 18 years old at the time, I was concerned about the consequences of lying. Bear in mind I didn't know what he had written on his application. In any event, he ended up getting the clearances anyway.

Off topic, but all that was so that he could be a security guard for a defense contractor (he later became an engineer), and so that he could be on duty when a mass shooter showed up and gunned down 7 people. Fortunately he was never fired upon.

 

[Moonbeam]

Right, I had the same opinion. However, being about 18 years old at the time, I was concerned about the consequences of lying. Bear in mind I didn't know what he had written on his application. In any event, he ended up getting the clearances anyway.

Off topic, but all that was so that he could be a security guard for a defense contractor (he later became an engineer), and so that he could be on duty when a mass shooter showed up and gunned down 7 people. Fortunately he was never fired upon.

If only she will love me I will know I am worth something. This is an endless issue for men who hate themselves. Hate is the result of ego rejection. Others must bow down to the front we project that says, not that I feel worthless, but that I am just great. When that gets challenged out comes the killer rage.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Being of bad character makes a person inherently untrustworthy.

Not necessarily. Someone can be morally bankrupt and follow rules. Hell half the people I knew in the military fit that bill.

US military is fine if you're lawful evil/neutral, as long as you're lawful.

 

[Pens1566]

I think you have much higher expectations for backgrounds than reality. I have a Russian speaking coworker, with family somewhere over there, and goes to Russian telegram channels. He was approved in less than 3 weeks. For a secret, not TS.

Well, if that's an accurate account, I can tell you it's certainly not typical. Are you certain it was a full clearance and not an interim? There is a difference and that timeframe wouldn't be too odd for an interim.

I previously had an intern (who had zero real issues) that was delayed forever because their SO had a roommate from a foreign country. And that was also just for a SECRET.

 

[Pens1566]

If they don't put you under oath I presume you don't have to tell everything you know about a person. IOW, you might know something and pretend you don't. Not that I've ever been asked about anyone I know. IIRC, it's never happened.

Knowingly providing false statements to the investigators (whether you're the applicant or someone they're interviewing about said applicant) is a felony. Believe it's up to 5yrs in prison if convicted.

 

[dank69]

There's no way they investigated him without checking his online posts/profiles. His antisemitism and racism should have been disqualifying.

No that's a plus.

 

[HomerJS]

Imagine the human outcry if the soldier had been black and espoused antisemitism and anti-white semtiment and Ilhan Omar defended him.

The tectonic plates would have shifted.

 

[Muse]

Not necessarily. Someone can be morally bankrupt and follow rules. Hell half the people I knew in the military fit that bill.

US military is fine if you're lawful evil/neutral, as long as you're lawful.

But can you trust someone who's morally bankrupt? No. They will let you down sooner or later, it's bound to happen. It would be best if such people did not get security clearances. Our government would be solid instead of sordid.

 

[Muse]

Knowingly providing false statements to the investigators (whether you're the applicant or someone they're interviewing about said applicant) is a felony. Believe it's up to 5yrs in prison if convicted.

How can this be? How does this happen? You get a call? You are mailed a letter? An "authority" asks you if you know so_and_so? You say, yes, I know that person. They say is he/she such and such, have they done such and such? How can they make you tell them everything?

For instance, you might have smelled pot when you walked by their bedroom. You might have even seen a bong or hash pipe that you figured belonged to them. If they ask if that person partakes of pot you can honestly say you don't know. Having a pipe doesn't guarantee they use it. Smelling (or thinking you are smelling) pot when you pass their room isn't proof they are a user. Maybe it was someone else, smoke that was blowing in their window, or possibly there was someone else in their room using. Even if you saw them smoking something how can you be sure it was pot? See what I mean. You can refuse to answer in the affirmative (if you so choose), without lying, if you don't have incontrovertible evidence. How then can they prove you were lying. Some things are more clear cut, of course, like did they live with you.

 

[purbeast0]

How can this be? How does this happen? You get a call? You are mailed a letter? An "authority" asks you if you know so_and_so? You say, yes, I know that person. They say is he/she such and such, have they done such and such? How can they make you tell them everything?

On the SF86 you put contacts down for people that know you well for like at least 10+ years or something like that, and they will go interview those people. Typically if you put the people down on the form, you will give them the heads up that an investigator is going to meet with them. And the meetings are done in person face to face.

You can see exactly what is on the form that is filled out. I posted it a while back. It's a long ass form.

 

[K1052]

Just checking google at work where I do my criming to see what's going public about my massive crimes.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1646888738679672832

 

[Muse]

On the SF86 you put contacts down for people that know you well for like at least 10+ years or something like that, and they will go interview those people. Typically if you put the people down on the form, you will give them the heads up that an investigator is going to meet with them. And the meetings are done in person face to face.

You can see exactly what is on the form that is filled out. I posted it a while back. It's a long ass form.

I have never even considered applying for a job that required any kind of security clearance. I did have a job that gave me unlimited access to names addresses and credit card numbers for thousands of employees (many of them high ranking) of many of the largest and richest organizations in the USA (and some foreign). I was the sole developer and database administrator for a company that serviced these folks. I guess my resume was sufficient reason for them to trust me. It was jobs like that that made me realize that security is a big field but to say it's problematical is a gross understatement. Our data was encrypted but the encryption algorithm was breakable by someone with chops in our software (I didn't write it). It was nothing special.

 

[Pens1566]

How can this be? How does this happen? You get a call? You are mailed a letter? An "authority" asks you if you know so_and_so? You say, yes, I know that person. They say is he/she such and such, have they done such and such? How can they make you tell them everything?

For instance, you might have smelled pot when you walked by their bedroom. You might have even seen a bong or hash pipe that you figured belonged to them. If they ask if that person partakes of pot you can honestly say you don't know. Having a pipe doesn't guarantee they use it. Smelling (or thinking you are smelling) pot when you pass their room isn't proof they are a user. Maybe it was someone else, smoke that was blowing in their window, or possibly there was someone else in their room using. Even if you saw them smoking something how can you be sure it was pot? See what I mean. You can refuse to answer in the affirmative (if you so choose), without lying, if you don't have incontrovertible evidence. How then can they prove you were lying. Some things are more clear cut, of course, like did they live with you.

There are several sections on the SF86 (relevant form for S/TS) where you MUST list people and their current contact info for several situations. All close family members. Someone at all employments for the last 7-10 years. Someone at each residence in the last 7-10 years. All of those names have to be different people, no duplicates. Those people then get a call/visit from an investigator that asks probing questions about the subject on all things from money/spending habits, drinking/partying/social settings, drug use, anything they really want to.

I get these all the time as references for the employment part as I've spent my entire career in the "cleared" world.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

But can you trust someone who's morally bankrupt? No. They will let you down sooner or later, it's bound to happen. It would be best if such people did not get security clearances. Our government would be solid instead of sordid.

You can trust them to serve their own interests. Why do you think punishments are so severe in the military?

Yeah it should be but humanity is sordid and Uncle Sam needs meat.

 

[hal2kilo]

Well, if that's an accurate account, I can tell you it's certainly not typical. Are you certain it was a full clearance and not an interim? There is a difference and that timeframe wouldn't be too odd for an interim.

I previously had an intern (who had zero real issues) that was delayed forever because their SO had a roommate from a foreign country. And that was also just for a SECRET.

Biggest delays I've seen over the years are due to indebtedness.

 

[Pens1566]

Biggest delays I've seen over the years are due to indebtedness.

I've just seen general delays in actually processing them. Usually 6+ months in just getting to the investigation after submitting the forms.

 

[Meghan54]

There are several sections on the SF86 (relevant form for S/TS) where you MUST list people and their current contact info for several situations. All close family members. Someone at all employments for the last 7-10 years. Someone at each residence in the last 7-10 years. All of those names have to be different people, no duplicates. Those people then get a call/visit from an investigator that asks probing questions about the subject on all things from money/spending habits, drinking/partying/social settings, drug use, anything they really want to.

I get these all the time as references for the employment part as I've spent my entire career in the "cleared" world.

And remember, that list is just a starting point for the investigators. They have very , very wide latitude to follow things wheee they may lead. Mine, back in 1972, overlapped 72 and 73. Of course, I was going to get access to nuke secrets, so there’s that.

 

[Pohemi]

How can this be? How does this happen? You get a call? You are mailed a letter? An "authority" asks you if you know so_and_so? You say, yes, I know that person. They say is he/she such and such, have they done such and such? How can they make you tell them everything?

I don't know if the interviewers are technically "Law Officers" but I imagine it'd be similar to lying to regular old police and being charged with Obstruction of Justice if/when they find you are lying.

I don't know this for sure, but it's what I imagined to be the case. You don't have to be under oath for police to charge you for lying to them in the course of performing their investigative duties.

 

[Zorba]

Well, if that's an accurate account, I can tell you it's certainly not typical. Are you certain it was a full clearance and not an interim? There is a difference and that timeframe wouldn't be too odd for an interim.

I previously had an intern (who had zero real issues) that was delayed forever because their SO had a roommate from a foreign country. And that was also just for a SECRET.

He told me it was his Final. I've also gotten my final in less than 3 week both times I get a new clearance, but I led a pretty boring life.

If they don't put you under oath I presume you don't have to tell everything you know about a person. IOW, you might know something and pretend you don't. Not that I've ever been asked about anyone I know. IIRC, it's never happened.

It's against the law to lie to the FBI. You can choose to not answer, but you can't lie.