In Porter’s case, the interim security clearances had been temporary: 180 days with the option for extension (another 180 days). Porter appears to have started on January 20, 2017 – Inauguration Day. Assuming he was given that “interim” clearance on Day 1, it would have expired on January 15, 2018.

The fact that Chief of Staff Kelly -- a former military officer and former secretary of homeland security -- would not have seen this as a problem is staggering. He would know better than anyone that managing highly restricted information is essential to American national security.

Every person who has access to the most sensitive pieces of intelligence must be supremely trustworthy -- capable of being kept in the highest cones of silence. If they leak information, they potentially jeopardize lives of intelligence agents or sources in the field.

So, in essence, Kelly either (a) allowed a key aide in the chain of information access to TS/SCI information without a clearance, (b) waived the process entirely or (c) created a system that worked around him.

If Kelly knowingly allowed Porter access to TS/SCI information without formally approving it, that’s an extraordinary security breach.

If Kelly waived off the TS/SCI restrictions, he likely would have done that formally -- including either with the White House counsel, the FBI, or the president himself. That would require understanding fully the reason Porter was still “interim” – a restraining order preventing him from contacting a former wife who alleged that he physically abused her.

Anonymous wrote:It is a serious error in professional judgment for any communications director -- much less for that of the world's arguably most important organization -- to continue to participate in a public relations crisis in which they have such a clear conflict of interest. The White House's initial response in drafting, issuing, and approving certain statements, including that of John Kelly, illustrates how that personal conflict of interest may have affected the WH judgment. In any Fortune 500 company that lapse could get one fired, but this is luckily a family-run outfit.

Anonymous wrote:It is a serious error in professional judgment for any communications director -- much less for that of the world's arguably most important organization -- to continue to participate in a public relations crisis in which they have such a clear conflict of interest. The White House's initial response in drafting, issuing, and approving certain statements, including that of John Kelly, illustrates how that personal conflict of interest may have affected the WH judgment. In any Fortune 500 company that lapse could get one fired, but this is luckily a family-run outfit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how Trump & Friends will defend this guy: Trump campaign chair, KY who has pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of minors.

http://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=AttorneyGeneral&prId=497

Only the best.

He’s still better than Jeremiah Wright or Farrakhan or Ayers.

Anonymous wrote:We talk about faux relationships all the time. Sometimes they are constructed to mask the true sexual preference of one or both parties. Sometimes they are purely for promotional purposes, to increase TV ratings or movie ticket sales or album sales.

This faux relationship was assembled for a very different reason. It was to discredit anybody who claimed that this under-30 female was having an affair with one of the most famous men in the world. They had to find her an alternative public boyfriend to put some credible distance between her and the much older married man.

The only problem? They paired her with the wrong faux boyfriend! Cute and more age-appropriate… but a bad person with a sordid history that caused him to get fired. Yes, fired!

What a disaster. Now that he’s been fired, they have to find a replacement for him really fast. She will “break up” with him and will be seen dating someone new within the next few weeks.

With all the resources at their disposal, they should have done their due diligence on him in the first place. They won’t make that mistake again.

The next one will be more thoroughly vetted.

Anonymous wrote:According to both the New York Times and the Washington Post, White House Communications Director Hope Hicks, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, and White House Counsel Don McGahn were all three aware of the serious domestic violence reported about White House Staff Secretary Rob Porter for MONTHS.

(1) Why was Rob Porter allowed to continue as WH Staff Secretary, with direct access to the President, senior administration officials, confidential documents, and high-level, private conversations?

(2) Why did WH Communications Director Hope Hicks not immediately recuse herself from any participation in the White House's public reponse to the questions and revelations about Mr. Porter, given their intimate personal relationship?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how Trump & Friends will defend this guy: Trump campaign chair, KY who has pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of minors.

http://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=AttorneyGeneral&prId=497

Only the best.

He’s still better than Jeremiah Wright or Farrakhan or Ayers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how Trump & Friends will defend this guy: Trump campaign chair, KY who has pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of minors.

http://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=AttorneyGeneral&prId=497

Only the best.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how Trump & Friends will defend this guy: Trump campaign chair, KY who has pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of minors.

http://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=AttorneyGeneral&prId=497

Only the best.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is stuck with Kelly. It's not like there's a line of quality applicants for the job.

Rumor is Rick Mulvaney is leading candidate to take over for Kelly.

Personally, I'd prefer him to be out of OMB and CFPB where he's creating havoc.

Mick Mulvaney, love him or hate him, has been very effective and successful at implementing the Trump administration's policies and goals at both OMB and CFPB. Mulvaney would undoubtedly be a very effective WH Chief of Staff, but wouldn't the Trump administration be hesitant to remove him from the OMB and CFPB?

Mulvaney is even more of a tone deaf jerk than Kelly. Trump does probably see him as a “killer” but it would be a bad move on the PR front. This administration is bleeding problematic people faster than it can hire probelmatic people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how Trump & Friends will defend this guy: Trump campaign chair, KY who has pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of minors.

http://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=AttorneyGeneral&prId=497

Only the best.

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how Trump & Friends will defend this guy: Trump campaign chair, KY who has pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of minors.

http://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=AttorneyGeneral&prId=497