Kushner's security clearance restored, met with Mueller team a second time

a reply to: Sigismundus

Can you give a link to backup your opinion regarding the President can grant a TS clearance without a review? Or, is your post just BS?

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: introvert
I'm not entirely sure his clearance had anything to do with the status of the investigation.

Standard reply ...
Done so without forethought
For one to have a security clearance reinstated means there are no findings of any form of wrongdoings .
Otherwise , it will have still remained is suspended status until an investigation is over.
Now , you can be sure
My due diligence to the ATS motto has been performed

I don't believe that is necessarily true.

It appears the WH granted the security clearance and it had nothing to do with the FBI or DoJ.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: introvert
I'm not entirely sure his clearance had anything to do with the status of the investigation.

Standard reply ...
Done so without forethought
For one to have a security clearance reinstated means there are no findings of any form of wrongdoings .
Otherwise , it will have still remained is suspended status until an investigation is over.
Now , you can be sure
My due diligence to the ATS motto has been performed

I don't believe that is necessarily true.

It appears the WH granted the security clearance and it had nothing to do with the FBI or DoJ.

Believe what ya want . Beliefs are like fantasy. Still does not make it factual.
But , do research on my sig
Would do ya good

a reply to: Gothmog

That's not entirely true according to fas.org:

In fact, the security clearance system itself is an expression of presidential authority. Its scope and operation are defined in an executive order (EO 12968), and its terms can be modified by the President at will.

And if the President wished to grant access to classified information to a family member, for example, there would be no legal barrier to doing so.

So, if the intel community says, 'this person's a risk and shouldn't hold a clearance.' The president can turn around and say, 'nah, give him everything.'

Kushner lost his clearance, initially, because he lied to his investigators and intentionally withheld evidence about financial holdings. Now the White House, presumably the president, decided that wasn't fair and just gave him a security clearance.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Gothmog

That's not entirely true according to fas.org:

In fact, the security clearance system itself is an expression of presidential authority. Its scope and operation are defined in an executive order (EO 12968), and its terms can be modified by the President at will.

And if the President wished to grant access to classified information to a family member, for example, there would be no legal barrier to doing so.

So, if the intel community says, 'this person's a risk and shouldn't hold a clearance.' The president can turn around and say, 'nah, give him everything.'

Kushner lost his clearance, initially, because he lied to his investigators and intentionally withheld evidence about financial holdings. Now the White House, presumably the president, decided that wasn't fair and just gave him a security clearance.

No matter how you interpret something , the fact is it is not that simple.
Where did you read that Trump asked for it to be reinstated ?
There is a difference between the President asking for a security clearance and the person in question being under investigation

Facts are not subjective.

Mr. Kushner’s clearances were approved by career officials after the completion of the F.B.I. background check, and the president was not involved in the process, according to the person briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because clearance decisions are supposed to be secret.

www.nytimes.com...

originally posted by: BlueAjah

Mr. Kushner’s clearances were approved by career officials after the completion of the F.B.I. background check, and the president was not involved in the process, according to the person briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because clearance decisions are supposed to be secret.

www.nytimes.com...

Well that's just silly.

How does it make sense that the guy who owes $1.29 Billion to middle eastern banks, and has lied about over 100 things on his declarations form gets any kind of security clearance?

originally posted by: crtrvt
How does it make sense that the guy who owes $1.29 Billion to middle eastern banks, and has lied about over 100 things on his declarations form gets any kind of security clearance?

So why hasn't he been shot yet?

Before he got the TS clearance?

Ya got any proof?

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Gothmog

That's not entirely true according to fas.org:

In fact, the security clearance system itself is an expression of presidential authority. Its scope and operation are defined in an executive order (EO 12968), and its terms can be modified by the President at will.

And if the President wished to grant access to classified information to a family member, for example, there would be no legal barrier to doing so.

So, if the intel community says, 'this person's a risk and shouldn't hold a clearance.' The president can turn around and say, 'nah, give him everything.'

Kushner lost his clearance, initially, because he lied to his investigators and intentionally withheld evidence about financial holdings. Now the White House, presumably the president, decided that wasn't fair and just gave him a security clearance.

No matter how you interpret something , the fact is it is not that simple.
Where did you read that Trump asked for it to be reinstated ?
There is a difference between the President asking for a security clearance and the person in question being under investigation

Facts are not subjective.

It MIGHT have something to do with this:
Trump signs security clearance reform bill — but may not comply with it .

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Gothmog

That's not entirely true according to fas.org:

In fact, the security clearance system itself is an expression of presidential authority. Its scope and operation are defined in an executive order (EO 12968), and its terms can be modified by the President at will.

And if the President wished to grant access to classified information to a family member, for example, there would be no legal barrier to doing so.

So, if the intel community says, 'this person's a risk and shouldn't hold a clearance.' The president can turn around and say, 'nah, give him everything.'

Kushner lost his clearance, initially, because he lied to his investigators and intentionally withheld evidence about financial holdings. Now the White House, presumably the president, decided that wasn't fair and just gave him a security clearance.

No matter how you interpret something , the fact is it is not that simple.
Where did you read that Trump asked for it to be reinstated ?
There is a difference between the President asking for a security clearance and the person in question being under investigation

Facts are not subjective.

It MIGHT have something to do with this:
Trump signs security clearance reform bill — but may not comply with it .

Mite is what grows on a chicken's rear.

a reply to: Gothmog

Bestest reply possible..

Maybe-just maybe Mueller FLIPPED Kushner and now he's spying on Trump!It all makes sense now!Kushner looks like a weasel.