HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » TomSlick » Journal
Page: 1 2 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Arkansas
Home country: USA
Current location: Arkansas, USA
Member since: Mon May 15, 2017, 09:46 PM
Number of posts: 10,616

About Me

I'm a lawyer primarily representing clients who are being sued. I am a retired Army Judge Advocate. Nothing I post here, including any comments about legal topics, should be construed as legal advice or creating an attorney-client relationship.

Journal Archives

On security clearances.

Both a Secret and Top Secret security clearance require a background investigation. The background investigation for a Top Secret clearance is more in-depth than a Secret clearance. My expectation would be that if someone with a Secret clearance failed the more in-depth investigation for a Top Secret clearance, not only would the Top Secret clearance not be granted, the Secret clearance would be revoked.

Jared, being a novice to government service, Jared did not have a Secret clearance when the more in-depth Top Secret clearance was conducted. Because Jared could not pass a background check for a Top Secret clearance, my expectation would be that he also would not get a Secret clearance.

My understanding is that Jared has not received a Secret clearance but is simply being given access to Secret material without the clearance. While I appreciate that the President can give access to any classified material to anyone he wants, what is really being done is that the President is giving a person who could not pass a background check access to Secret material. IMHO, such a blatant disregard for the security of the U.S. to benefit a family member, while not criminal, is an impeachable abuse of power.

Trump Twitter Storms

I was listening the Chris Hayes a few minutes ago talking about Trump's most recent Twitter Storm.

I don't Tweet and was curious about the term "Twitter Storm." The only definition I could find on the Google-machine referenced tweets by numerous posters. Was the term "Twitter Storm" used about one person's Tweets before Trump?

Don't screw with the spooks!

It took awhile, but I've carefully read the indictment.

The extraordinary thing is the level of detail, especially in laying out information that could only have been gotten from the the intelligence folks - NSA, CIA, etc. Moreover, in setting out that level of detail, it tells the Russians - Hey, Ivan, we're reading your mail, even the mail you thought we couldn't read.

Why would the intelligence agencies give up this information? Why would they agree to release this information in the indictment? What could possibly cause them to agree to release this information? The only thing I can think of is that Trump has gone out of his way to attack or discount the intelligence agencies - they don't like that.

You screw with the spooks at your peril.

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

There a several posts and responses today either calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment or arguing the "well regulated militia" clause of the Second Amendment limits "the right to bear arms" to members of the militia. As has been proven too many times, something has to be done about guns in this county. It is my fear that insistence by liberals on the repeal of the Second Amendment or otherwise getting to the complete elimination of firearms, will doom the common sense things that need to be done.

SCOTUS made it very clear in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that the Second Amendment right is a personal right not dependent on the "well regulated militia" clause. IMHO, that opinion was misguided. However, absent a constitutional amendment, the elimination of all firearms cannot be supported. A constitutional amendment is not going to happen anytime soon. Even if it was an attainable goal, do we really want to open the door to repealing parts of the Bill of Rights?

However, Heller does not say the the Second Amendment right is not subject to reasonable regulations. What must be the goal is common sense regulation. These common sense goals would include the restoration of the assault weapons ban, closing the background checks loopholes, banning large clips/magazines, etc. Demanding the repeal of the Second Amendment or some other complete ban of firearms is insisting on the perfect at the cost of obtaining the good.

Please, this is really serious, children are dying. We need to focus on attainable goals.

I'm simply furious.

Rick Scott and the local police chief just finished a presser about today's school shooting in which they keep calling for prayer while assuring us that nothing can be done to prevent such tragedies.

We all know that something can be done. Can we stop all shootings? Of course not. Can we stop some, of course.

I used to think that there would surely come a point where enough people - children - had been killed, that something would be done. It's now clear to me that nothing will be done until We The People demand that something be done.

I am opposed to single issuer voters and political purity - but - enough is enough. If you're the only Democrat in an election, then yeah, I'll vote for you even if you resist gun regulation as the lesser of evils. However, if you want my money - or time - you have to support some kind of common sense gun law.

A small ray of hope?

I have an friend - and cranky, old white guy and big Trump supporter. I think we have enjoyed arguing with each other since Trump got the GOP nomination.

Today he asked - apparently sincerely - cogent, relevant questions about the Carter Page FISA warrant and why it was important. He was fact-checking what they were selling on Faux News.

Is he converted? Does he regret his vote? Is he rooting for Mueller? No, of course not. Is he, for the first time, questioning the nonsense being pushed by Faux News? Yeah, I think so.

Adam Rippon.

Wow - just wow!

The shirtless Tonga guy!

Shirtless again - at the Winter Games - it's 28 degrees!

I hope he has a coat waiting for him in the stands.

NBC Sports - give me a break!

I finally decided to switch from MSNBC, where I was listening amazed at all of today's big news, to watch the Olympics opening ceremony. I love the opening ceremonies. We're now twenty minutes in and nothing but silly puff pieces. Give me a break!

Switching back. Someone let me know if NBC decides to show the opening ceremonies.

Congressman Tim Walz on Lawrence.

A retired Command Sergeant Major. The highest ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in the Congress.

Schooling Cadet Bone Spurs on calling folks like CSM Walz a traitor.

Go to Page: 1 2 Next »