Trump pressured WH officials to grant Ivanka security clearance

[Anonymous]

What's one more illegal order and act of obstruction? Note the phrasing, these people just said a judicial order would also not be binding if a contradictory executive order is issued afterwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There really can be no justification for this. It’s really bad. Unfortunately not a basis for prosecution (afaik) but certainly a basis to toss trump out of the WH. Why would he be so careless with our state secrets? And why weren’t people like John Kelly or Mattis sounding the alarm? I can understand that trump is an amoral and traitorous criminal, so he’d have no concern about exposing America’s secrets to benefit himself and his family. But why did other “grown ups” in the administration no sound the alarm??

I understand the murkiness of law etc, but arm twisting by a president to provide security clearances to people who would not qualify otherwise should be illegal. Someone who has security clearance cannot share information gleaned through special access with someone else who doesn't have clearance. In fact people can go to jail for it. So, how is pressuring to give clearance to undeserving family member any different?

This week's Rational Security podcast was about Jared's security clearance. They talked about it as "lawful but awful" - and did seem to believe that it is an actual security risk, plus shows Trump's gdawful judgment.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/topic/rational-security

Seems worth listening to if you're interested in how folks with national security expertise think about this.

I love Lawfare!

Someone needs to fix all these "lawful but awful" things.

[Anonymous]

Jared's comments about the Mueller report seem to contradict this:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2016/11/22/exclusive-interview-how-jared-kushner-won-trump-the-white-house/#66d5904e3af6

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is preventing Cline from testifying before the House despite a subpoena.

Gee, I wonder why.

It will be another court case the Administration should lose.

Can he do that?

At his peril.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-carl-kline-defy-subpoena

The White House this week directed former personnel security director Carl Kline to defy a subpoena issued by the House Oversight Committee as part of the panel’s investigation into the controversial security clearance process for administration officials.

Kline was slated to appear before the committee for an interview on Wednesday but was told by the White House to ignore the subpoena, unless a representative from the White House counsel is permitted to attend the interview.

“[M]y client has been instructed not to appear tomorrow. With two masters from two equal branches of government, we will follow the instructions of the one that employs him,” Kline’s attorney, Robert Driscoll, wrote to committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Md., late Monday.

Driscoll attached a letter from Deputy White House Counsel to the President Michael Purpura revealing the administration’s instructions for Kline to defy his subpoena.

https://kfgo.com/news/articles/2019/apr/23/white-house-ex-security-director-to-ignore-congress-subpoena-report/
He's about to be in contempt of Congress.

House panel to act against White House ex-official for ignoring subpoena
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A top U.S. House Democrat aimed on Tuesday to hold a former White House security director in contempt for failing to appear for questioning on allegations that the Trump administration inappropriately granted clearances to some of the president's advisers.

"I intend to consult with House Counsel and Committee Members about scheduling a vote on contempt," House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings said in a statement.

Carl Kline, who served as the White House personnel security chief for the first two years of Republican Donald Trump's presidency and now works for the Department of Defense, had been called to appear before the House of Representatives Oversight and Reform Committee at 9 a.m. (1300 GMT).

The White House told the committee it had directed Kline to ignore the subpoena, the panel said in a statement, but Trump did not assert "any Constitutional or other privilege that would have relieved Mr. Kline of his legal obligation to testify."

A lawyer for Kline also told the panel he would not appear.

The House, now controlled by Democrats following their election gains last year, could vote to hold Kline in contempt and seek redress in the courts, sparking a legal battle.

Lawmakers have three ways to enforce a subpoena against a uncooperative subject, the Congressional Research Service said in a 2017 report, including using its "long dormant" power to detain and imprison them until they comply, referring a contempt citation to the executive branch for criminal prosecution or seeking a civil judgment from a U.S. court.

[Anonymous]

Trump is in a losing battle here. And he looks terrible for pushing through Jared and Ivanka's clearances.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/cummings-threatens-ex-white-house-adviser-with-contempt-for-no-showing-security-clearance-deposition

Rep. Elijah Cummings threatened Tuesday to hold former White House adviser Carl Kline in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena ordering him to testify about his role allegedly covering up wrongdoing in the Trump administration’s White House security clearance process.

President Donald Trump’s White House counsel directed Kline in a letter earlier this week not to comply with the subpoena. Kline did not appear for his scheduled deposition.

“It appears that the President believes that the Constitution does not apply to his White House, that he may order officials at will to violate their legal obligations, and that he may obstruct attempts by Congress to conduct oversight,” Cummings, who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, said in a statement Tuesday.

[Anonymous]

Sounds about right to me.

IVANKA TRUMP and her husband Jared Kushner have been branded “negative” and “creepy” respectively, according to a new poll.

Data collected shows Ms Trump was considered beautiful by voters but had an “overall strong negative appeals". Husband Kushner was found to be “insincere”. The poll was created by E-Poll, a company that ranks celebrities’ marketability.

According to the New York Times, 21 percent of people said she had a negative impact as opposed to 12 percent disagreeing and saying she was positive.

Her highest scoring words with voters was beautiful and attractive while her least scoring ones included funny and can identify with.

Her father, US President Donald Trump, also polled poorly.

More than 48 percent said he was “aggressive” while 38 percent said he was “mean”.

[Anonymous]

Kline is accused of overriding career national security officials to approve security clearances for officials whose applications were initially denied. The allegations against him were revealed to the committee by Tricia Newbold, a whistleblower who told the Oversight Committee that Kline and others put national security at risk by granting security clearances to more than two dozen officials.

If it moves forward, the contempt vote against Kline would be the first since Trump took office. It reflects House Democrats’ frustrations with a White House that is ignoring their requests for documents and witness testimony and, in some cases, filing lawsuits to challenge congressional subpoenas.

“It’s true with all of the committees — the White House is fighting each and every one,” said Ed Passman, Newbold’s lawyer. “This is just another example. It’s really disappointing because my client has come forward at great personal risk.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump is in a losing battle here. And he looks terrible for pushing through Jared and Ivanka's clearances.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/cummings-threatens-ex-white-house-adviser-with-contempt-for-no-showing-security-clearance-deposition

Rep. Elijah Cummings threatened Tuesday to hold former White House adviser Carl Kline in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena ordering him to testify about his role allegedly covering up wrongdoing in the Trump administration’s White House security clearance process.

President Donald Trump’s White House counsel directed Kline in a letter earlier this week not to comply with the subpoena. Kline did not appear for his scheduled deposition.

“It appears that the President believes that the Constitution does not apply to his White House, that he may order officials at will to violate their legal obligations, and that he may obstruct attempts by Congress to conduct oversight,” Cummings, who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, said in a statement Tuesday.

Sam Ervin threatened to jail Nixon admin members.
The same is bubbling up in the Dems right now. We're going to see jail time and real questioning in the House.

[Anonymous]

Do you have any idea how many Clinton people got their security clearances rammed through despite objections from the security team?

This is a "shocked to find out there is gambling" story if there ever was one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you have any idea how many Clinton people got their security clearances rammed through despite objections from the security team?

This is a "shocked to find out there is gambling" story if there ever was one.

Can you link to a credible source on that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you have any idea how many Clinton people got their security clearances rammed through despite objections from the security team?

This is a "shocked to find out there is gambling" story if there ever was one.

Citation, please.

Also, if this is true, how many of those Clinton people were immediate family?

[Anonymous]

https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/1994/03/25/the-clinton-security-clearance-melt-down-no-gate-demonstrates-its-the-people-stupid-2/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/1994/03/25/the-clinton-security-clearance-melt-down-no-gate-demonstrates-its-the-people-stupid-2/

You should read links before you post them. This is about WH staff not having permanent clearances due to a backlog. If there had truly been a problem, I have no doubt in my mind the GOP in power back then would have made a huge stink about it and held hearings. This article sounds like politics more than facts. And the biggest point, we can fix what happen in 1994 but we can deal with the Trump administration’s bad clearances and use of back channels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you have any idea how many Clinton people got their security clearances rammed through despite objections from the security team?

This is a "shocked to find out there is gambling" story if there ever was one.

I don’t have any idea. Why don’t you name them all? What kind of objections - foreign business ties, huge debts? How many of them were related to the Clintons? And did Bill personally call up and demand they get them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have any idea how many Clinton people got their security clearances rammed through despite objections from the security team?

This is a "shocked to find out there is gambling" story if there ever was one.

I don’t have any idea. Why don’t you name them all? What kind of objections - foreign business ties, huge debts? How many of them were related to the Clintons? And did Bill personally call up and demand they get them?

This. I didn’t agree with executive overreach from Democratic administrations either. What Trump and his minions are doing is worse. Stop acting as if the sins of prior administrations somehow cleanses the corruption of the current one.