Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on September 27, 2016, 11:07:37 PM
-
Only one in five State Dept employees with security clearances went through mandatory training. That includes initial, not just refreshers.
I find that extraordinary. While I think I didn't get the refresher training one year (because they didn't hold it), I would not have been allowed to get my clearance without the signed initial training documentation.
I wonder if they'll use this as another excuse for Clinton.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/27/fewer-than-one-in-five-state-dept-employees-with-security-clearance-completed-classified-info-training.html
-
That's not good (:duh:), but it doesn't help Clinton. She got the training and she signed for it.
-
I wonder if they'll use this as another excuse for Clinton.
So you're assuming it wasn't planned that way?
-
Clinton was the boss for four years -- wasn't it her job (and Kerry's after her) to ensure that all employees received the training?
-
As Hawkmoon said her signature is on the training document. But even if it wasn't, the fact that an agency (or its head) in charge of representing our country to the world uses their own incompetency as an excuse for mistakes would be laughable if it wasn't so serious a matter.
-
Folks wonder why I always hold a special seething hatred for the State Department. Let's see... Riddled with communists forever. Blatantly anti-American. Regularly screws over the US in treaties and negotiations. Incompetent. Overpaid and over-privileged, except for the poor bastards that actually do the work. Said poor bastards are usually left to die rather than offend host nation countries by implementing practical considerations. Take offense to the notion of providing any timely customer service. Are probably sad that as new technology is purchased because the old crap finally died, it's exceedingly faster.
I do admit, some of what they do isn't their fault. ITAR is properly Congress' cluster. That said, their implementation aren't always the best. Why hire a couple dozen more folks when you can just spend that equivalent of cash on a single mahogany table? Also, move State Department offices out of DC to somewhere more economiocal? lolno, why would we EVER do that?
-
Why hire a couple dozen more folks when you can just spend that equivalent of cash on a single mahogany table?
Well, the table is likely to be smarter.
Also, move State Department offices out of DC to somewhere more economiocal? lolno, why would we EVER do that?
If DoJ had the guts to do anything, a fair chunk of it would be relocated to a Federal prison somewhere.
-
Also, move State Department offices out of DC to somewhere more economiocal? lolno, why would we EVER do that?
Because the rule of law and this federal republic is dead (although too stupid to fall over), so we've revert to the imperial model of everyone wanting to be a close to the throne as possible...
-
" “Hanley was informed by DS (Department of State) that the briefing book and document should have never been in the suite,” the document said."
Uhm.... No, DS is not Department of State.
At State, DS means the Bureau of Diplomatic Security.
I've been a contractor at DOS (that's the proper acronym of Department of State) for over 5 years. If a contractor doesn't complete the mandatory training (it's date specific), there's a small grace period window, and then your system access is suspended.
-
That's not good (:duh:), but it doesn't help Clinton. She got the training and she signed for it.
She signed for it.
Doesn't mean she got it.
In the Navy, we called that gun decking.
-
She signed for it.
Doesn't mean she got it.
In the Navy, we called that gun decking.
True. Not only true, but quite likely. But she's not likely to come out and admit that she signed for having received critically important training without having taken the training. This is one hot potato that's a no-win for HRC if Trump can play it correctly. (Which, of course, he can't.)
-
State just rolled out a very interestingly timed training video on maintaining email for federal records purposes...
Hummmmmmmmmm...
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk