Why did Broadwell have access to classified information?
“I was embedded with Gen. Petraeus in Afghanistan and it was a little confusing for some of the folks there because I’m also a military reservist with a top secret/SCI clearance and then some. So, a lot of my former peers didn’t know how to treat me. Was I journalist Broadwell or was I Major Broadwell?” she recalled. “I had to follow very clear lines of non-disclosure and signed non-disclosure agreements like my colleagues. I felt like I was almost held to a higher level of accountability because I could lose my clearance.”…
Journalists embedded with the military often have access to some classified information. The practice falls into a kind of gray area. Many embed assignments would be hard to undertake without knowing some sensitive information about tactics and upcoming operations. But, journalists don’t have security clearances and are not subject to background investigations.
In any event, Broadwell said she did not consider herself a journalist. In her remarks to the security professionals, journalists and government contractors at the Aspen event, she repeatedly used language that stressed how familiar she was with secret matters. During her relatively brief comments, she spoke of working for a Joint Terrorism Task Force, of her top secret clearance “and then some,” and of familiarity with “Five Eyes” efforts—lingo for U.S. Government intelligence information shared only with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United Kingdom.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
ummmm….maybe this is the reason that these affairs are taken seriously? I mean it’s not like it’s an intern or anything…blackmail, or just giving up classified info to women is part of the oldest profession…
right2bright on November 12, 2012 at 12:16 PM
There you go
faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Might regret that.
forest on November 12, 2012 at 12:20 PM
Perhaps Petraeus really thought they were little nothings when he whispered them in her ear.
Shy Guy on November 12, 2012 at 12:21 PM
oh, the hell you say….
ted c on November 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM
Lsm focusing on this instead of the attack
Cripe
cmsinaz on November 12, 2012 at 12:23 PM
yeah, so what.
ted c on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM
It’s shocking that someone with top secret clearance would have top secret documents.
Oh my! I’m getting the vapors!
faraway on November 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM
Why? This is a self-compliment to anyone nowdays.
Shy Guy on November 12, 2012 at 12:26 PM
Because they can’t hide behind “freedom of the press”, she has to answer where and whom…
right2bright on November 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM
Maybe she was working on the OBL movie with Kathryn Bigelow.
MayBee on November 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM
No ‘Freedom of the Press’ defense anymore.
Washington Nearsider on November 12, 2012 at 12:48 PM
Doubtful she had an operational “need to know.” One of the primary criteria for dissemination of classified material.
Newsflash – neither do elected officials. Think President Obama would be a able to get the clearance he has without being elected to the highest civilian post in the land? Not with his background and associations, he wouldn’t.
Mitoch55 on November 12, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Because she won’t get a “free pass” from the LSM now.
IrishEyes on November 12, 2012 at 12:51 PM
One other thing, those who take their security clearances seriously don’t go around blabbing about them.
Mitoch55 on November 12, 2012 at 12:52 PM
A TS and then some? A TS is about it, everything else depends on need to know. Just because someone has a TS with access in one, or a few areas, in the performance of their duties does not mean they get access to something outside that arena. Having a clearance does not mean she should have been granted access to operations she was not involved in, especially in the capacity she was in, as a writer/journalist. I think one thing many people with clearances get confused with too is if you require a TS for one job and you move to another billet that only requires a secret, you no longer get access to TS, even if your TS was adjudicated 1 year ago. Everything depends on your need to know, not your want to know.
Russ86 on November 12, 2012 at 1:00 PM
Hmmmm..then you’ve probably heard the term “Need to Know” there toots…
BigWyo on November 12, 2012 at 1:56 PM
This is interesting:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/11/12/confirmed-us-was-holding-prisoners-at-benghazi-consulate/
Plus, the Daily Mail is running a story about Broadwell’s family, in which her father claims that the revelation of the affair was deliberately used to provide cover for a much bigger scandal. A scandal about the CIA holding prisoners, or about Obama secretly running guns to the Syrian opposition, or . . . what?
AZCoyote on November 12, 2012 at 2:31 PM
Who will write the expose of Benghazigate- “ALL OUT“?
profitsbeard on November 12, 2012 at 3:13 PM