Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(146,288 posts)
45. Typically, the organization in question makes the final decision.
Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:49 PM
Jun 2013

Security clearance investigations are primarily done by the FBI, and for high-level security clearances, are quite thorough. For the highest level clearances, which include Top Secret and Top Secret with additional endorsements, that investigation will include criminal background checks, a thorough life history assessment, and personal interviews with people who know the person being investigated.

Today, a good deal of the investigation involves online investigation, but the footwork is still done, as well. When I got my security clearance in the USAF, at the tender age of 20, the FBI went to my little California home town and interviewed a couple dozen people, including teachers, clergy, employers, neighbors, and more. The application for that clearance was very detailed and involved a huge number of questions that required truthful answers. Each one of those questions was investigated. They even included details of mail I had received from foreign countries during my life, and all organizations I had ever belonged to. They checked each answer carefully.

In my case, for example, I had been an avid short-wave radio listener in my teens. In doing that, I had sent reception reports to many, many foreign radio stations so I'd receive the pretty QSL post cards acknowledging my reports. Some of the countries were Communist countries. Some of those also sent literature to me beyond those QSL cards, including subscriptions to propaganda magazines. During that time, all mail from the Soviet Union, China, and other communist countries was recorded and the recipients added to a list of people who received such mail. I disclosed that on the security clearance form and got questioned in detail by an FBI agent who visited me at the USAF base a week later. They also asked my parents to show them any such mail I had retained. Apparently, my explanation of why I had received such mail was satisfactory, since the clearance was granted and enhanced several times during my enlistment. But the investigation was very thorough.

That was the process in the mid 1960s. They didn't have online resources then. Now they do, but the process is, I understand, still similar. FBI field agents do a lot of the legwork, and then make recommendations. The issuing organization makes final decisions, but I doubt they would go against the FBI recommendations.

Same here, thanks for articulating this so well. emulatorloo Jun 2013 #1
I guess I'm too old to believe that instant judgments make sense. MineralMan Jun 2013 #2
"I can't do anything about it, anyhow" kentauros Jun 2013 #6
Well, that's always a consideration. All of these programs MineralMan Jun 2013 #9
Yes, we should still express our opinions to them. kentauros Jun 2013 #12
Absolutely. We should express informed opinions, MineralMan Jun 2013 #15
I agree with the waiting part. kentauros Jun 2013 #17
Whatever Cruz says will be listing heavily to starboard. MineralMan Jun 2013 #20
I'd say for him the boat's been capsized to starboard! kentauros Jun 2013 #23
Certainly I would not expect any positive change from ... ananda Jun 2013 #39
Well, that makes sense. MineralMan Jun 2013 #40
We've been burned too many times by speculative "Instant Analysis" in the media emulatorloo Jun 2013 #7
It's not just DU, of course. It's the Internet. MineralMan Jun 2013 #10
Agreed. But of course the factual info won't get media airtime, only the bullshit speculations. JaneyVee Jun 2013 #3
True. Factual information, however, can be weeded MineralMan Jun 2013 #4
Always wise liberal N proud Jun 2013 #5
It's always tempting to jump into such things with MineralMan Jun 2013 #8
I agree whole heartedly. janlyn Jun 2013 #11
I doubt we'll ever know what's really going on. The Velveteen Ocelot Jun 2013 #13
That is most certainly true. No matter how much MineralMan Jun 2013 #16
It could be a carefully controlled plan at this time and it is quite possible that the NSA doesn't.. spin Jun 2013 #14
Actually, Nixon did exactly that, given the technology MineralMan Jun 2013 #18
I'm with you. Better to wait and allow this to unfold before jumping on either bandwagon. n/t Avalux Jun 2013 #19
agreed RainDog Jun 2013 #21
Yup. Everyone should stop and consider before posting. MineralMan Jun 2013 #22
But what fun is that? nt geek tragedy Jun 2013 #24
I'm waiting until 2016 Autumn Jun 2013 #25
hear hear creon Jun 2013 #26
Meanwhile Greenwald can take this to the bank flamingdem Jun 2013 #27
The 24/7 news cycle... TommyCelt Jun 2013 #28
I have concerns mick063 Jun 2013 #29
Another Classic Example... KharmaTrain Jun 2013 #30
There are also thoughtful threads on DU, not just emotional ones. MineralMan Jun 2013 #32
A very measured OP. I think before the end of the week we will have a much msanthrope Jun 2013 #31
Good points! I agree! DrewFlorida Jun 2013 #33
Oh, you and your whole "not jumping to conclusions" thingy... Jeff In Milwaukee Jun 2013 #34
I know. I should be waving my arms around. MineralMan Jun 2013 #35
One of my favorite lines from M*A*S*H Jeff In Milwaukee Jun 2013 #36
This bit of doggerel comes to mind: MineralMan Jun 2013 #37
Exactly what I've been thinking. Thank you for Raven Jun 2013 #38
Me too. moondust Jun 2013 #41
You seem a good person to ask... DURHAM D Jun 2013 #42
Terminology nitpick jeff47 Jun 2013 #44
So the Director of National Intelligence is likely DURHAM D Jun 2013 #47
See my explanation below, as a reply to your original question. MineralMan Jun 2013 #48
Not directly, but he set up the system under which such people can receive clearances. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2013 #49
Typically, the organization in question makes the final decision. MineralMan Jun 2013 #45
Do you think the FBI is actually involved in granting clearance DURHAM D Jun 2013 #50
The FBI recommends for or against the clearance. MineralMan Jun 2013 #51
Well said; nicely played. longship Jun 2013 #43
The only thing new is this guy was able to find an interesting PowerPoint presention. DCBob Jun 2013 #46
I hope you will consider my piece in developing a clearer picture. It takes into account facts... stevenleser Jun 2013 #52
Thanks. I'll have a look at it. MineralMan Jun 2013 #53
Me, too. I have to admit I haven't really kept up on this newest "scandal". kestrel91316 Jun 2013 #54
Well, so far there hasn't been that much to keep track of. MineralMan Jun 2013 #55
Same here. His interview was weird, but also compelling so I too will apples and oranges Jun 2013 #56
So far, I don't think they reveal anything that violates MineralMan Jun 2013 #57
Thanks for this post Mineral Man. Everyone NEEDS to read this post and do a lot of thinking. Auntie Bush Jun 2013 #58
This is not one of the things that I tend to get instantly outraged over Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2013 #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I'm waiting a bit before ...»Reply #45