Oh boy: should Hillary Clinton keep her security clearance during the FBI investigation?

posted at 1:21 pm on February 4, 2016 by Jazz Shaw

Somewhere in New Hampshire, deep inside the inner recesses of a Hillary For America regional office, a communications director is putting his fist through the sheet rock wall.

As if Hillary Clinton doesn’t have enough to worry about with the FBI combing through her emails and picking apart her server, now some wise guys on the Hill are wondering if maybe she’s proven herself too much of a risk to keep her security clearance while the investigation plays out. It’s certainly a fair question, since others have lost their clearances for less. But would anyone really do that to the likely Democrat nominee? (Bloomberg)

Now that several e-mails on Hillary Clinton’s private server have been classified, there is a more immediate question than the outcome of the investigation: Should the former secretary of state retain her security clearance during the inquiry? Congressional Republicans and Democrats offer predictably different answers…

Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Clinton should not lose her security clearance for receiving information that was not marked classified at the time. “I’m sure she does hold a clearance, and she should,” he told us.

Representative Mike Pompeo, a Republican member of that committee who also has read the e-mails, told us, “It’s important, given all the information we now know, that the House of Representatives work alongside the executive branch to determine whether it’s appropriate for Secretary Clinton to continue to hold her security clearances.”

At least back when I was in the service it was typical for anyone with a higher than Secret clearance to have it at least downgraded (if not removed) when they either left the service or rotated out to a new assignment where it wasn’t required. In the Navy, one good example was the IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) technician, who had to renew a higher level clearance every time he transferred from shore duty back to sea duty. But that’s the military and I’m sure things are handled differently in the civilian world.

The linked Bloomberg article quotes a State Department spokesperson has saying there is a “long tradition” of Secretaries keeping their clearance after they leave the office so they can access their archives, work on their memoirs or whatever else it is they do. I suppose that’s not much of a risk most of the time, but we could be in some uncharted waters here. Clinton’s records – if not the Secretary herself – are part of an active investigation which involves the storage of Top Secret data in an unsecure location. When there’s a question of that nature hanging in the air, wouldn’t you err on the side of safety? Also, Hillary Clinton currently holds no office of any kind with the government. What does she need the clearance for to begin with?

The answer is probably found with the comments from Mike Pompeo. It’s a question which will have to be sorted by the White House and the National Security Council to determine “what they’re comfortable with.” It won’t come as any surprise if something that potentially embarrassing to the Democrats’ frontrunner will be well within their comfort zone.

HillaryBenghazi


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

She still has her clearance?

tej on February 4, 2016 at 1:24 PM

Why does she still have security clearance anyway, she no longer works for the State Department?

Cosmop on February 4, 2016 at 1:26 PM

She’s an unemployed private citizen, right?

rogerb on February 4, 2016 at 1:26 PM

She still has her clearance?

tej on February 4, 2016 at 1:24 PM

This.

You’d think the old hag would have been stripped of it almost immediately.

Aizen on February 4, 2016 at 1:27 PM

Who gets to decide that? If the intelligence community is ticked off at what Hillary’s done a great rebuke would be to cut off her security clearance. Make Dear Liar personally restore it in a way that shows he doesn’t care about national security.

rbj on February 4, 2016 at 1:27 PM

Nope
But obama will give her a pass

cmsinaz on February 4, 2016 at 1:28 PM

Why would Hildabeest still have a clearance? She doesn’t hold a government job and a clearance requires a need to know.

Kennyraisin on February 4, 2016 at 1:28 PM

She should have lost it the moment this server’s existence was confirmed!

Of course, if this were still America and there were no such thing as Royals she’d be cooling her heels in a jail cell awaiting trial OR have spent a couple million bonding herself out…

ConstantineXI on February 4, 2016 at 1:30 PM

The fact that there is any question of at least suspending all her clearances shows how unequally the ruling class is treated compared to the ordinary citizens.

‘Equal justice under the law’ — just another one of those Constitutional principles that seems to have been pruned away from our founding documents by modern judges and ‘legal experts’ who take the ‘living document’ approach to allow interpreting the meanings any way they see fit.

By their interpretation this special treatment of ‘important people’ by the people entrusted to administer justice fairly is no problem, since ‘some people are more equal than others’.

s1im on February 4, 2016 at 1:32 PM

just like they told the Border Patrol, STAND DOWN.

as long as the perp is a lefty Dem, the order is to look the other way.

Senator Philip Bluster on February 4, 2016 at 1:32 PM

Who gets to decide that? If the intelligence community is ticked off at what Hillary’s done a great rebuke would be to cut off her security clearance. Make Dear Liar personally restore it in a way that shows he doesn’t care about national security.

rbj on February 4, 2016 at 1:27 PM

It’s already proven he doesn’t care about national security.

31giddyup on February 4, 2016 at 1:32 PM

Wait, did she have to maintain clearance after she quit her job in order to keep that computer full of State-level secrets in her guest bedroom closet?
 
That makes sense if so. Opens another conversation, though.

rogerb on February 4, 2016 at 1:32 PM

They haven’t arrested the IT Guy yet?

ConstantineXI on February 4, 2016 at 12:29 PM

:)

ConstantineXI on February 4, 2016 at 1:33 PM

‘Equal justice under the law’ — just another one of those Constitutional principles that seems to have been pruned away from our founding documents by modern judges and ‘legal experts’ who take the ‘living document’ approach to allow interpreting the meanings any way they see fit.

By their interpretation this special treatment of ‘important people’ by the people entrusted to administer justice fairly is no problem, since ‘some people are more equal than others’.

s1im on February 4, 2016 at 1:32 PM

Equal justice has been replaced with Social Just-Us.

There no longer is any such thing as limited or self government.

The right to keep and bear arms requires permits and licenses. To commerce in the 2nd Amendment requires a FEDERAL license even if you are one gun shop within a state…

See where this is all headed?

ConstantineXI on February 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM

NBC NEWS: Condoleezza Rice Aides, Colin Powell Also Got Classified Info on Personal Emails…

there is the newest Clinton/dem line of defense

“they did it too”

Senator Philip Bluster on February 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM

Again, here’s the double-standard. For ANYONE else – literally anyone else – of course their security clearence would have already been suspended.

Atlantian on February 4, 2016 at 1:37 PM

It’s a question which will have to be sorted by the White House and the National Security Council to determine “what they’re comfortable with.”

Val Jar the Iranian is going to have fun with this one.

antipc on February 4, 2016 at 1:38 PM

Should have been removed the moment she was no longer in a position with “need to know”. In other words, when she left the position of SOS.

If she were still functioning as some level of Obama cabinet position or something along those lines, I could see her keeping it if it were required to perform those duties.

To my knowledge though, she’s currently nothing more than a private citizen who’s access to classified material would only benefit her own interests.

Regardless of any of the above, once the investigation turned toward potential leakage, the clearance needed to be removed to prevent potential further damage to national security.

Oxymoron on February 4, 2016 at 1:39 PM

she should be wearing an orange jump suit, and I don’t think those folks generally get clearance. But with this Admin, who knows? As long as she’s furthering the progressive agenda of making America the bad guy and promoting Islamic terror.

kirkill on February 4, 2016 at 1:40 PM

NBC NEWS: Condoleezza Rice Aides, Colin Powell Also Got Classified Info on Personal Emails…

there is the newest Clinton/dem line of defense

“they did it too”

Senator Philip Bluster on February 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM

A liberal, a neocon, and a commie. Get the three of them into the same cell for all I care.

Rix on February 4, 2016 at 1:41 PM

Any of us peons who were under investigation for security lapses would have our clearance suspended until the investigation was over. But, of course, none of us are HRC.

GWB on February 4, 2016 at 1:42 PM

Keep her clearance?

HILL NO!


Thought experiment:
Edward Snowden is INNOCENT of ALL charges and allegations made against him – he didn’t steal data from disparate government systems. Snowden has stated,

“I, sitting at my desk, had the authority to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email.”

.
Snowden used XKeyscore to download the entire contents of Hillary Clinton’s private email server onto a thumb drive. This would have been a perfectly normal part of his job – even if he did it as a sysadmin test the validity of the latest release of the program prior to releasing it for use.

This also addresses the absolute impossibility of of Snowden getting hold of the the FISA Verizon warrant which was on a separate, air-gapped server inside a vault. Snowden didn’t have any means of accessing that server – but Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills DID.

This does not mean there are not administrative, regulatory or legal problems Snowden will have to answer for if the returns to the United States. It just means he didn’t “hack the NSA on a global basis” – he just took it off the private server of a known security risk.

Why is Snowden in Russia?

Where would you go if Obama and Shrillary BOTH wanted you DEAD?

PolAgnostic on February 4, 2016 at 1:42 PM

She still has her clearance?

tej on February 4, 2016 at 1:24 PM

That was my reaction. It’s been years since she served in the State Department and now she’s under FBI investigation for grossly mishandling highly classified information. She’s the last person who should have clearance.

forest on February 4, 2016 at 1:42 PM

It should have been removed as soon as she resigned her post.

ConservativePartyNow on February 4, 2016 at 1:43 PM

NBC NEWS: Condoleezza Rice Aides, Colin Powell Also Got Classified Info on Personal Emails…

Dan Rather, Salon and Brian Williams all helped to scoop this….

Goodie on February 4, 2016 at 1:45 PM

She still has her clearance?

tej on February 4, 2016 at 1:24 PM

Zactly, even a Little Orphan Annie decoder ring ought to be above her security clearance level.

antipc on February 4, 2016 at 1:45 PM

She is a Civilian who is not authorized to have a security Clearance and has absolutely zero need to know anything classifed. Not sure why this is an issue.

Johnnyreb on February 4, 2016 at 1:46 PM

Not only is Clinton a nasty and arrogant piece of work, but her poor acting ability reveals her as phony.

grumpyank on February 4, 2016 at 1:47 PM

Just blah, blah, blah so Hillary can say “If I did anything wrong they would have taken my security clearance away”…..

albill on February 4, 2016 at 1:47 PM

Why is Snowden in Russia?

PolAgnostic on February 4, 2016 at 1:42 PM

I thought being in Russia was part of his punishment.

Rix on February 4, 2016 at 1:48 PM

work on their memoirs

Wouldn’t that be a reason NOT to allow her a clearance? If she is going to put state secrets into a book . . .

Nobody is taking Clinton’s crimes seriously. My god, she is not just still walking free, she is still not just running for president, but she actually still has access to state secrets?

Holy shit. America is the stupidest country on earth. It has to be.

HugoDrax on February 4, 2016 at 1:50 PM

Personal email accounts much different than personal server

Apples and oranges

cmsinaz on February 4, 2016 at 1:51 PM

Next we will find out Bill still has the launch codes.

HugoDrax on February 4, 2016 at 1:51 PM

No.
Next question?

Galtian on February 4, 2016 at 1:52 PM

IF she survives the fbi investigation, as the nominee of her party, she’ll be given all kinds of secrets to keep her up to date on the goings on in the military, cia, nsa, and prezzy daily briefs. It’s part of being the queen bee in her party.

Kissmygrits on February 4, 2016 at 1:53 PM

Now that several e-mails on Hillary Clinton’s private server have been classified….

And, of course, they keep feeding that lie…..

Now that several e-mails on Hillary Clinton’s private server have been marked correctly as containing classified information….

*THAT* would be accurate.

GWB on February 4, 2016 at 1:53 PM

Oops. Let me revise that.

No.
Yes.
Next question?

Galtian on February 4, 2016 at 1:53 PM

Galtian on February 4, 2016 at 1:53 PM

Never mind. Double negatives and all that.

Galtian on February 4, 2016 at 1:54 PM

Big nothing burger. She can do anything she wants to do. She is political royalty and as such, has immunity from any and all criminal acts she ever has and ever will commit.
Glad to see some are waking up to the fact that we are just another Banana Republic.
Remember when Ted Kennedy went to prison for DUI manslaughter, failure to render aid, evidence tampering, and fleeing the scene of a fatal accident? Ruined his Senate aspirations too.
If we could only go back to those days when the elite suffered like us.

Exninja on February 4, 2016 at 1:54 PM

Ho hum. Not the droids you’re looking for. Move along, citizen.

Imo, this just adds to the seemingly inexhaustible pile of “Things Hillary Gets Away with Because Liberalism Uber Alles/By Any Means Necessary/You Will Be Made to Care/America’s Abuela.”

I dont believe for one minute that anything of legal consequence will happen to her or any member of Team HomeBrewServ for at least the duration of the Locust Years Obama administration.

Sacramento on February 4, 2016 at 2:00 PM

What do you mean, “keep”?? What the fcuk is she still doin with a security clearance????

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 2:00 PM

Freedom for me but not for thee’.

Scorched_Earth on February 4, 2016 at 2:00 PM

Jazz. Gettin ready to settle in to a nice dirty grey goose martini at applebees. Im having it made in your honor. :-D

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 2:02 PM

Where is Dreadloc the Pigeon and his comments about Killary picking out drapes.

22044 on February 4, 2016 at 2:02 PM

Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Clinton should not lose her security clearance for receiving information that was not marked classified at the time. “I’m sure she does hold a clearance, and she should,” he told us.

It’s so very sad that this ideologue is far more concerned with protecting the former SecState / wannabe anointed Democrat Presidential Nominee than with this nation’s classified information.

Schiff, in particular, should know that intent / accidental mishandling / deliberate mishandling are all ultimately immaterial in the eyes of Federal law when it comes to handling classified information. It’s either kept secure, or it’s insecure and there’s a breach.

Anyone involved in a breach should have their clearances suspended until cleared of any mishandling.

Schiff, a hyper-partisan, would be taking a far different stance if this involved a senior Bush Administration cabinet officer.

Athos on February 4, 2016 at 2:02 PM

Senator Philip Bluster on February 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM

Senator PB,

NBC News is conveniently omitting the tiny, but critical, detail that they may have used a private email account, while “Her Thighness” set up a separate, illegal, unsecure, private email system and conducted all of her official government on that system. Apples and oranges, but you already knew that.

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 2:02 PM

Col. Flagg: “Colonel, what’s your clearance?”

Lt. Col. Henry Blake: “Oh, I go through the door with about an inch to spare.”

Del Dolemonte on February 4, 2016 at 2:05 PM

Vice Adm. Ted “Twig” Branch, Chief of Navy Intelligence, had his security clearance suspended (since November 2013) when the Navy learned from the Justice Department that his name had surfaced in a giant corruption investigation involving a foreign defense contractor and scores of Navy personnel. Following the same rules (lol), HRC should have had her clearance suspended, or revoked, as soon as the State Department learned from the Federal Bureau of Investigation that her name had surfaced in a giant classified material and corruption investigation involving an illegal, unsecure, private email system she had set up, and corruption involving the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Criminal Foundation.

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 2:08 PM

She still has her clearance?

tej on February 4, 2016 at 1:24 PM

more importantly her staff still have theirs.

RonK on February 4, 2016 at 2:08 PM

She still has her clearance?

tej on February 4, 2016 at 1:24 PM

more importantly her staff still have theirs.

RonK on February 4, 2016 at 2:08 PM

Plus they gave her lawyer a temporary one just to “hold” the thumb drive with all of those classified emails on it.

I wonder how many copies of that there are running around? I am sure the FBI and others would love to know that.

Johnnyreb on February 4, 2016 at 2:15 PM

Hmmm. Troll free
??

CWforFreedom on February 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM

Oh come on… where are the ostrich (tlaloc) and everditzy to explain this all to us with their circuitous logic and straw men, all while shifting the goal posts and redefining the argument?

Neitherleftorright on February 4, 2016 at 2:27 PM

Del. The wind just jumped thru a window and broke his leg….

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 2:31 PM

Oh come on… where are the ostrich (tlaloc) and everditzy to explain this all to us with their circuitous logic and straw men, all while shifting the goal posts and redefining the argument?

Neitherleftorright on February 4, 2016 at 2:27 PM

Waiting for their talking points from the DNC and the Clinton Campaign.

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 2:34 PM

Dang. Hate it when I not the wrong tag.

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 2:35 PM

not hit

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 2:35 PM

Take Hillary’s security clearance away?

Hah! You pitiful fools cannot stop the omnipotent Hillary Clinton!

If she wants access to ultra beyond-top-secret data that she can dispense around the globe to the highest bidders, then taking away her security clearance will be at best a minor inconvenience to Her Greatness, she of the grotesquely swollen ankles.

Where there is a will, there is a way — and Hillary’s will cannot be thwarted. She will obtain that data with or without clearance. She need only snap her fingers and it will be so.

It is high time you conservative knaves learned this lesson: even from her jail cell on Alcatraz Island (reopened as a penal institution just for her), she will rule over us all.

FlameWarrior on February 4, 2016 at 2:36 PM

A little clarification from someone who holds a “SECRET” clearance-

Having a clearance does not give you access to anything, it merely allows information of a certain classification to be shared with you if you have a ‘need to know’. That ‘need to know’ maybe as simple as the people who are currently dealing with a situation feel you have valuable input or advice on how to handle that particular situation. This would certainly apply to former government office-holders; they keep their clearance so that they may be called for counsel without a lot of procedure proceeding the meeting(s). No clearance, that I know of gives anyone random, at-will access to classified information. Everything is always ‘need to know’.

M240H on February 4, 2016 at 2:37 PM

Why does she have any kind of clearance at all, she’s not employed by the government.

Cindy Munford on February 4, 2016 at 2:37 PM

A little clarification from someone who holds a “SECRET” clearance-

Having a clearance does not give you access to anything, it merely allows information of a certain classification to be shared with you if you have a ‘need to know’. That ‘need to know’ maybe as simple as the people who are currently dealing with a situation feel you have valuable input or advice on how to handle that particular situation. This would certainly apply to former government office-holders; they keep their clearance so that they may be called for counsel without a lot of procedure proceeding the meeting(s). No clearance, that I know of gives anyone random, at-will access to classified information. Everything is always ‘need to know’.

M240H on February 4, 2016 at 2:37 PM

At least this is how it is supposed to work; Bradley Manning demonstrated that vigilance by all in ‘the system’ is of paramount importance.

M240H on February 4, 2016 at 2:41 PM

Tlaloc is slacking on his job.

HilLiary threads are his.

Barred on February 4, 2016 at 2:42 PM

Has the FBI recommended to indict, yet?

CivilDiscourse on February 4, 2016 at 2:48 PM

^genuinely asking—I thoughts that’s where we left off, and it was imminent?

CivilDiscourse on February 4, 2016 at 2:49 PM

* stupid cellphone

CivilDiscourse on February 4, 2016 at 2:50 PM

Has the FBI recommended to indict, yet?

CivilDiscourse on February 4, 2016 at 2:48 PM

Of course not – they won’t indict their own.

dentarthurdent on February 4, 2016 at 2:50 PM

She shouldn’t have any security clearance now, she’s a damned civilian.

WHY does she have any clearance?

She’s NOTHING.

Andy__B on February 4, 2016 at 2:53 PM

Seems to me that every job I left..the first thing that goes is your security badge and your computer access. I could still visit and see old friends and coworkers (always left on good terms) but I could not enter the facility or log on to a company computer. I would think that her clearance would be revoked and her ability to access State Dept offices would be revoked as well, but hey, this is government for you. They talk a good game and act all serious about this but in the end they’re all so screwed up that even Hillary can look like a POTUS candidate.

jaywemm on February 4, 2016 at 2:55 PM

Colonel Flag. “Hey, close up your a guy”. Corporal Klinger ” far away, too.”

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 3:23 PM

Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Clinton should not lose her security clearance for receiving information that was not marked classified at the time.

If she can’t figure out that Top Secret/SAP material is classified, and take appropriate steps to secure it, WITHOUT needing to see the markings, then she shouldn’t qualify for a clearance in the first place.

GrumpyOldFart on February 4, 2016 at 3:27 PM

M240H on February 4, 2016 at 2:37 PM

Just a note, but specifying what clearance you hold is an EEFI.

GWB on February 4, 2016 at 3:36 PM

Too funny! Major Iowa newspaper that endorsed Hillario! calls for recount!

Des Moines Register calls for audit of Sanders-Clinton result in Iowa

Del Dolemonte on February 4, 2016 at 3:48 PM

Just a note, but specifying what clearance you hold is an EEFI.

GWB on February 4, 2016 at 3:36 PM

I swear, I was making it all up.
.
.
.
.
.
thanks

M240H on February 4, 2016 at 4:07 PM

Col. Flagg: “Colonel, what’s your clearance?”

Lt. Col. Henry Blake: “Oh, I go through the door with about an inch to spare.”

Del Dolemonte on February 4, 2016 at 2:05 PM

Del. The wind just jumped thru a window and broke his leg….

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 2:31 PM

Colonel Flag. “Hey, close up your a guy”. Corporal Klinger ” far away, too.”

Indiana Jim on February 4, 2016 at 3:23 PM

Hawkeye: [to BJ] “I told you he was the wind. You said he was the stars.”

B.J.: “No, I said he was the moon.”

That show would never make it on the air today.

Del Dolemonte on February 4, 2016 at 4:36 PM

Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Clinton should not lose her security clearance for receiving information that was not marked classified at the time. “I’m sure she does hold a clearance, and she should,” he told us.

That’s no problem, since that’s not what happened.

There Goes the Neighborhood on February 4, 2016 at 6:11 PM

A little clarification from someone who holds a “SECRET” clearance-

Having a clearance does not give you access to anything, it merely allows information of a certain classification to be shared with you if you have a ‘need to know’. That ‘need to know’ maybe as simple as the people who are currently dealing with a situation feel you have valuable input or advice on how to handle that particular situation. This would certainly apply to former government office-holders; they keep their clearance so that they may be called for counsel without a lot of procedure proceeding the meeting(s). No clearance, that I know of gives anyone random, at-will access to classified information. Everything is always ‘need to know’.

M240H on February 4, 2016 at 2:37 PM

Yes, the “need to know” should no longer exist, and therefore retaining the security clearance is not a breach of security.

It’s very commonplace now to leave the military and go to work for a DOD contractor of some type, where having a security clearance is a valuable commodity. In such a case, that person may then have the “need to know” certain details for their contracted job. So it wouldn’t make sense to just automatically remove the security clearance.

Of course, I personally have not done this, so I have no first-hand knowledge. I just know some people who have, and I know that a security clearance is a very valuable thing to have for certain civilian jobs.

There Goes the Neighborhood on February 4, 2016 at 6:20 PM

Hillary may not HAVE a security clearance at this point, and her campaign refuses to comment.
So, I don’t think she has one.
Can you imagine a President without a security clearance?
Kinda like our CURRENT head of the Navy?

Snowshooze on February 4, 2016 at 10:07 PM

What the…
So now the Dem’s are going spread the slime on the only two Black American Secretaries of State that we have had.

Disgusting!

kugelfisher on February 5, 2016 at 8:06 AM

Stripped or not, she would still continue to “share” classified information for money. Does she still have hidden emails with classified information for her rainy day lacking money?

Roselle on February 5, 2016 at 11:12 AM

Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Clinton should not lose her security clearance for receiving information that was not marked classified at the time. “I’m sure she does hold a clearance, and she should,” he told us.

A clearance only remains active for two years after the need for it expires. As of now, Secret clearances (the type I have knowledge of) are good for ten years unless you screw up and do something to lose it. If whatever job or duty that created a need for a clearance ends, after two years that clearance expires and becomes void. If you fond yourself with a need again after that two year period, you have to do all the paperwork again and start from scratch. So since she’s been out of the job that required the original clearance for more than two years, she shouldn’t be holding one anyway. Also, even after the clearance has expired, the holder is duty bound to protect the classified information that they had access to in perpetuity. But then, rules only apply to us little people.

Big John on February 5, 2016 at 2:01 PM