White House tries to deflect questions about Porter's security clearance

[riversedge]

Source: Politico




02/12/2018 07:20 PM EST


President Donald Trump’s White House on Monday said it relies on law enforcement to determine which background issues disqualify people from top jobs, as his administration seeks to distance itself from the controversy over a former aide who was accused of domestic abuse.

But people familiar with the process for obtaining clearance for senior officials said the FBI’s background check process does not include making any final decisions or recommendations — and that the White House should have been closely involved in any decision to give Rob Porter a security signoff.

The White House has come under scrutiny after it became clear that Porter, as well as dozens of other officials, had been working without a permanent security clearance. White House officials were aware of at least the broad outlines of the accusations against Porter by two ex-wives before the news became public last week and led to his exit.


...........................

But an FBI official said the bureau typically does not determine who receives a security clearance or even make recommendations........................




Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/12/porter-security-clearance-white-house-406531

---

Sarah needs to delve because this is not going away!

Link to tweet

Sarah Huckabee Sanders is pictured. | Getty Images

Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters she did not want to delve into the details of the clearance process, but she said the White House deferred to law enforcement on such decisions. | Win McNamee/Getty Images

[sprinkleeninow]

1. Twisted twisters. eom

[Cha]

2. Yeah, you shameful weasels..

slither under your hidey holes, ya Russian moles.

[mahina]

3. Thats a good pic of Sarah Slanders.

The angle captures something very “Honey! I’m home!”

[dewsgirl]

4. So proud of the WH correspondents, she opened with

basically saying, I have nothing more to say on the subject. Each question she attempted, to pivot/spin/lie into her patented, "I have nothing more to say on the subject", but they really held her feet to the fire, I wish they would do this more often, they would have a lot more viewers watching the pressbriefings.

[James48]

5. No, it doesnt work that way.

As somebody who has held a clearance previously, but thankfully now I no longer have to, I can tell you that it doesn’t work that way.

The investigating entity never makes the decision- only the actual hiring authority / employing agency does.

Most investigations find little or nothing adverse in the background. If that is the case, that’s what the report says, and the employing agency decides to issue the clearance.

If there is something found, that information is passed along, but it is never the decision of the investigator to issue or not issue.

That final decision always remains solely with the hiring entity.

What this tells me is that ol’ Huck here didn’t know the answer, and was winging it.