Clearance trouble for Barack Obama?
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Robert T. Molleur
Published: November 11, 2008
In my view, prior to Nov. 4, Barack Obama probably could not have acquired a routine confidential security clearance based on his past associations with radicals and domestic terrorists.
Regardless, as of Nov. 5, Obama has access to the classified daily intelligence briefing as president-elect.
On Nov. 6, Obama returned to the gym to get in shape so that he could shoot hoops with Castro and break pinatas with Hugo Chavez.
God save this great Republic.
ROBERT T. MOLLEUR
Manassas
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( raywilliams ) on November 12, 2008 at 7:50 pm
“The press were not interested into digging into Obama’s past.“
do right, is it the press’s job to investigate the security issues of a potential president?
I thought we had people like the FBI and CIA for that?
That goes for the famous William Ayers. If he is a threat, the FBI should swoop in and arrest the guy. Since the FBI does not seem to be concerned about him, I don’t think we should either.
There are a lot of bad people out there that I would not wish to associate with, but if they traveled in the same organizational circle I travel in, I would be courteous to them and not rude as some suggest.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( scorpio ) on November 12, 2008 at 12:41 pm
William Ayers, Frank Davis Marshall, Tony Rezko, ACORN, Jeremiah Wright, Rashid Khalidi…
With a long list like that is it really all irrelevant when it comes to Barack Obama’s ties with people most of us wouldn’t even shake hands with, let alone associate?!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Equality 7-2521 ) on November 12, 2008 at 10:20 am
Thanks for the response, pwanon.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( pwanon ) on November 12, 2008 at 7:37 am
“but I was just curious about the auto DQ”
Without being specific, I have seen people denied for far less, particularly when the applicant is not totally (100%) honest about past transgressions and associations.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Equality 7-2521 ) on November 11, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Thanks for the response, gwenandgary. I figured it might raise some flags, but I was just curious about the auto DQ. Any way, as you said, these points are all moot.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( gwenandgary ) on November 11, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Equality: as someone who’s been through the clearance process several times, I would think associations like Mr. Obama’s would at least flag his application or require an explanation, if not halt the background investigation altogether.
These points, however, became moot as soon as he was declared President-elect.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Equality 7-2521 ) on November 11, 2008 at 3:40 pm
“In the meantime, the author’s point…whether you like or not…remains true.“
I have no knowledge of how the security-clearance process works, but I am curious if you (pwanon) or Mr. Molleur (or any other people claiming knowledge about it) are decision-makers within that process. It’s one thing to have gone through the process, it’s entirely another thing to make decisions within it.
This isn’t meant as a snipe. As another poster pointed out, it’s pretty much water under the bridge. I’m just curious about whether it’s really that true that Obama’s past associations would have made it an automatic DQ.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( pwanon ) on November 11, 2008 at 12:38 pm
“I would have thought after he guaranteed a McCain win,“
Do me a favor…in between the dress fittings and tupperware parties that occupy your busy schedule, find where I ever stated that.
Thanks.
In the meantime, the author’s point…whether you like or not…remains true. If BHO were applying for even a basic security clearance in any part of the federal bureaucracy, the associations he chose to forge with terrorists and radical racists would disqualify him.
It’s embarrassing to those of us who consider character an important quality in a President that he’s going to occupy the Oval Office.
On the brighter side, though, at least Michelle Obama can be proud of her country for the second time in her life.
Shameful that you voted for “that one.“
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( rafaelva ) on November 11, 2008 at 12:16 pm
g&g;, exactly, no arguement there.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( gwenandgary ) on November 11, 2008 at 11:46 am
Perhaps in light of what Mr. Molleur has said about qualifying for a security clearance, we shouldn’t be too surprised.
Consider those sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Would we think there mught be a few problems there? How about the Senate Armed Services Committee? Anyone there who might be denied a clearance? Even the mysterious HPSCI panel has a few members that might not pass muster in the real world.
The Office of the President comes with need-to-kinow access. No argument there. The President will be receiving daily TS/SCI briefings and have access to any and all sensitive documents and/or information. No argument there, either.
My point is that the Office comes with the access needed, regardless of the person occupying the Office. It’s usually understood that he who occupies the Office of the President has the interests and security of this nation at heart.
We can debate the meaning of this association and that connection till we all grow old, but the door has closed on any meaningful attempt at redress. With the Office comes the access to TS information, and Barack Obama will be the occupant of that Office in January.
Report Inappropriate Comment