Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Dec 2, 17:22
2: Dec 2, 11:48
3: Dec 2, 08:21
4: Dec 1, 17:33
5: Dec 1, 11:23
6: Nov 30, 15:54
7: Nov 30, 09:41
8: Nov 29, 16:44
9: Nov 29, 08:01
10: Nov 28, 16:19
11: Nov 28, 09:42
12: Nov 27, 18:07
13: Nov 27, 12:04
14: Nov 27, 08:26
15: Nov 26, 18:06
16: Nov 26, 12:05
17: Nov 26, 08:29
18: Nov 25, 18:33
19: Nov 25, 11:12
20: Nov 25, 07:08
Posts: 160
In response to
"
You think the Administration-run State Department has it out for her? That's a level of paranoia that Ron Paul supporters ascribe to. -- nm
"
by
ML
I was thinking GOP, but to answer what you could do to a former employee, preventing future clearance seems like an answer.
Posted by
Max
Jul 7 '16, 16:22
But punishment doesn't have to be the only reason to relaunch an investigation.
Responses:
Oh right, that too. And for anyone working in any sort of job with a security clearance, that is a death knell. -- nm
-
ReluctantCynic
Jul 7, 16:39
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.