I'm not arguing the Hillary point, although I think your point there is valid. When you fill out your paperwork for a clearance, they want to know if you were ever convicted of anything. They also want to know if you were ever charged and not fully cleared (case ended in hung jury for example).
Obstruction
- Thread starter DvlDog4WVU
- Start date
I am more than familiar with the entire process.
1. President doesn't need or get a security clearance ... He is the President !
2. They ask alot of things that are not determining factors in getting a security clearance.
Understood on the first point, although your argument about Hillary is that any one of us would have been prosecuted for taking the same actions. Not applying that logic to many of the findings in the Mueller Report related to the obstruction issue seems inconsistent to me.
They ask about everything. They asked why I got a divorce over a decade ago. That wasn't going to bar me from retaining a clearance, but the question was asked. With respect to being charged or investigated for a crime, they are going to look pretty hard, and you are going to have to have good answers to tough questions.
Adjudication and does the Commanding Officer approve of you getting or keeping it. Security Manager overseas it all but C.O makes final decisions. President doesn't play by the same rules as the rest of us. Hillary was not the President she only slept with one maybe. :wink:
You sure about that? I’ve never been charged so maybe I reflexively answered no, but I don’t recall that the last round of my clearance renewal.
I remember seeing something, and it was oddly worded. That's why it stood out to me.