Trump talking pardons and Hillary

[HokieFanDC]

[

Agreed. But we know at least not me was with Kislyak, and one was with a Russian banker for on a bank under US sanctions. Those aren't minor.

He didn't have a meeting with Kislyak, he attended an event where he was present and shook his hand. Russian banker? That doesn't mean shirt per the SF-86.

Both are pretty minor in perspective. It's the nutjobs who think you need to name ever taco stand vendor you've encountered in the last 7yrs.

Like I said, you're in over your head, and don't know what you're talking about. Kushner had a meeting with Kislyak (those are Kushner's words) and Flynn in Trump tower, discussing a secure communication line between the transition team and Russia, inside the Russian embassy.
And meeting the head of a Russian owned bank, who was appointed by Putin, and a bank under US sanctions, is a big deal.
It's illegal for someone to even discuss certain types of business with those banks.

You should try googling some stuff and get yourself up to speed. Or, just keep calling people imbeciles. Your choice.

There is no place on the SF-86 to document the occurrence of that meeting.

you're supposed to list contacts and that's where it gets tricky as the democrats are trying to claim him shaking hands with anyone is a contact as well as multi-person meetings from last year. Meanwhile they were A OK with people associated with known terrorists and desires to undermine the government having clearances. It's a glaring display of hypocrisy.

No you don't. That is part of a poly.

This seems pretty straightforward....

[133743Hokie]

He didn't have a meeting with Kislyak, he attended an event where he was present and shook his hand. Russian banker? That doesn't mean shirt per the SF-86.

Both are pretty minor in perspective. It's the nutjobs who think you need to name ever taco stand vendor you've encountered in the last 7yrs.

Like I said, you're in over your head, and don't know what you're talking about. Kushner had a meeting with Kislyak (those are Kushner's words) and Flynn in Trump tower, discussing a secure communication line between the transition team and Russia, inside the Russian embassy.
And meeting the head of a Russian owned bank, who was appointed by Putin, and a bank under US sanctions, is a big deal.
It's illegal for someone to even discuss certain types of business with those banks.

You should try googling some stuff and get yourself up to speed. Or, just keep calling people imbeciles. Your choice.

There is no place on the SF-86 to document the occurrence of that meeting.

you're supposed to list contacts and that's where it gets tricky as the democrats are trying to claim him shaking hands with anyone is a contact as well as multi-person meetings from last year. Meanwhile they were A OK with people associated with known terrorists and desires to undermine the government having clearances. It's a glaring display of hypocrisy.

No you don't. That is part of a poly.

I had to and without the poly. Listed trips overseas and all of that too.

Have to list overseas trips, yes

[Major Kong]

After reading thru SF-86 12/10, somewhere around Page 75 I'd just say "FI".

I've worked for several multinational and international companies. I've worked internationally, there is no way I could list everything the gubment wants.

No gubment security work for me.

It does make me wonder if there is a SF-86 r' Us company out there that fills these forms out for the regular masses

[133743Hokie]

He didn't have a meeting with Kislyak, he attended an event where he was present and shook his hand. Russian banker? That doesn't mean shirt per the SF-86.

Both are pretty minor in perspective. It's the nutjobs who think you need to name ever taco stand vendor you've encountered in the last 7yrs.

Like I said, you're in over your head, and don't know what you're talking about. Kushner had a meeting with Kislyak (those are Kushner's words) and Flynn in Trump tower, discussing a secure communication line between the transition team and Russia, inside the Russian embassy.
And meeting the head of a Russian owned bank, who was appointed by Putin, and a bank under US sanctions, is a big deal.
It's illegal for someone to even discuss certain types of business with those banks.

You should try googling some stuff and get yourself up to speed. Or, just keep calling people imbeciles. Your choice.

There is no place on the SF-86 to document the occurrence of that meeting.

you're supposed to list contacts and that's where it gets tricky as the democrats are trying to claim him shaking hands with anyone is a contact as well as multi-person meetings from last year. Meanwhile they were A OK with people associated with known terrorists and desires to undermine the government having clearances. It's a glaring display of hypocrisy.

No you don't. That is part of a poly.

This seems pretty straightforward....

That is specifically related to "close and/or continuing contact", i.e. foreigners that you know well and interact with regularly. It does not apply to one-off meetings or casual acquaintances, and that was clarified to me by the investigators years ago. My acquaintances were clarified and discussed during the poly.

[awesome guy]

Like I said, you're in over your head, and don't know what you're talking about. Kushner had a meeting with Kislyak (those are Kushner's words) and Flynn in Trump tower, discussing a secure communication line between the transition team and Russia, inside the Russian embassy.
And meeting the head of a Russian owned bank, who was appointed by Putin, and a bank under US sanctions, is a big deal.
It's illegal for someone to even discuss certain types of business with those banks.

You should try googling some stuff and get yourself up to speed. Or, just keep calling people imbeciles. Your choice.

There is no place on the SF-86 to document the occurrence of that meeting.

you're supposed to list contacts and that's where it gets tricky as the democrats are trying to claim him shaking hands with anyone is a contact as well as multi-person meetings from last year. Meanwhile they were A OK with people associated with known terrorists and desires to undermine the government having clearances. It's a glaring display of hypocrisy.

No you don't. That is part of a poly.

This seems pretty straightforward....

That is specifically related to "close and/or continuing contact", i.e. foreigners that you know well and interact with regularly. It does not apply to one-off meetings or casual acquaintances, and that was clarified to me by the investigators years ago. My acquaintances were clarified and discussed during the poly.

Yep

[133743Hokie]

After reading thru SF-86 12/10, somewhere around Page 75 I'd just say "FI".

I've worked for several multinational and international companies. I've worked internationally, there is no way I could list everything the gubment wants.

No gubment security work for me.

It does make me wonder if there is a SF-86 r' Us company out there that fills these forms out for the regular masses

Once you complete the initial application you constantly keep it updated so you are ready for your PR. It does take some time to do the initial.

[awesome guy]

After reading thru SF-86 12/10, somewhere around Page 75 I'd just say "FI".

I've worked for several multinational and international companies. I've worked internationally, there is no way I could list everything the gubment wants.

No gubment security work for me.

It does make me wonder if there is a SF-86 r' Us company out there that fills these forms out for the regular masses

Once you complete the initial application you constantly keep it updated so you are ready for your PR. It does take some time to do the initial.

Total pain in the butt, getting SSN and addresses for family stunk.

[HokieFanDC]

There is no place on the SF-86 to document the occurrence of that meeting.

you're supposed to list contacts and that's where it gets tricky as the democrats are trying to claim him shaking hands with anyone is a contact as well as multi-person meetings from last year. Meanwhile they were A OK with people associated with known terrorists and desires to undermine the government having clearances. It's a glaring display of hypocrisy.

No you don't. That is part of a poly.

This seems pretty straightforward....

That is specifically related to "close and/or continuing contact", i.e. foreigners that you know well and interact with regularly. It does not apply to one-off meetings or casual acquaintances, and that was clarified to me by the investigators years ago. My acquaintances were clarified and discussed during the poly.

That's a unique perspective on a meeting with the Russian ambassador, about setting up a line of communication outside the normal lines of communication...

Not even Kushner, or his people, are attempting to make that argument.

[USN_Hokie]

And? He has a high level clearance that someone like yourself, being a lover of Trotsky and associating with "Johns", would very likely not be eligible for.

The government thinks he's more trustworthy than you. Maybe something to think about...

I have always assumed (not sure if it is a good assumption or a bad assumption) that a lot of regime officials on both sides could not get a security clearance if they were, say, applying to work as a software developer for a government contractor, but can only get one because the regime wants them to.

Clearly, with Kushner, his position has allowed him to retain his clearance. How many "oops" do you get with regard to your disclosures, before it's clear you can't be trusted?

Clearly? Please explain your rationale and bonafides.

LOL. Lying on the clearance form should be reason enough not to get clearance. He submitted a BS form to start with. Then after months of revising it, he still "left out" meetings. How many chances do you think he should get?
Maybe he should take a polygraph as a test of his trustworthiness. That would be a good start, because the initial results of his clearance process are pretty lousy.

"Meetings" don't show up on your clearance form.

DC has already made a final adjudication on Kushner's clearance based on Google searches and Keith Olbermann tweets.

[USN_Hokie]

After reading thru SF-86 12/10, somewhere around Page 75 I'd just say "FI".

I've worked for several multinational and international companies. I've worked internationally, there is no way I could list everything the gubment wants.

No gubment security work for me.

It does make me wonder if there is a SF-86 r' Us company out there that fills these forms out for the regular masses

Once you complete the initial application you constantly keep it updated so you are ready for your PR. It does take some time to do the initial.

Total pain in the butt, getting SSN and addresses for family stunk.

I had to find my MIL's immigration paperwork from 1947 as well as the court which granted her citizenship.

[USN_Hokie]

There is no place on the SF-86 to document the occurrence of that meeting.

you're supposed to list contacts and that's where it gets tricky as the democrats are trying to claim him shaking hands with anyone is a contact as well as multi-person meetings from last year. Meanwhile they were A OK with people associated with known terrorists and desires to undermine the government having clearances. It's a glaring display of hypocrisy.

No you don't. That is part of a poly.

This seems pretty straightforward....

That is specifically related to "close and/or continuing contact", i.e. foreigners that you know well and interact with regularly. It does not apply to one-off meetings or casual acquaintances, and that was clarified to me by the investigators years ago. My acquaintances were clarified and discussed during the poly.

That's a unique perspective on a meeting with the Russian ambassador, about setting up a line of communication outside the normal lines of communication...

Not even Kushner, or his people, are attempting to make that argument.

You really have no idea what you are talking about. Please close the Google tab in your browser.

#'sHokie is right.

[HokieFanDC]

No you don't. That is part of a poly.

This seems pretty straightforward....

That is specifically related to "close and/or continuing contact", i.e. foreigners that you know well and interact with regularly. It does not apply to one-off meetings or casual acquaintances, and that was clarified to me by the investigators years ago. My acquaintances were clarified and discussed during the poly.

That's a unique perspective on a meeting with the Russian ambassador, about setting up a line of communication outside the normal lines of communication...

Not even Kushner, or his people, are attempting to make that argument.

You really have no idea what you are talking about. Please close the Google tab in your browser.

#'sHokie is right.

I'll take Kushner's word that he made a mistake by not disclosing it, and that of all the people who agree he should have disclosed a meeting with the Russian ambassador, over #sHokie, and certainly over a guy who didn't know Kushner met with Kislyak until a few hours ago. I'll listen to what #sHokie has to say about the necessity of disclosing a meeting with a Russian official who will have lots of contact with the Trump admin, which is more than just a foreign national.
You, on the other hand, have zero credibility on this subject.

[Major Kong]

Once you complete the initial application you constantly keep it updated so you are ready for your PR. It does take some time to do the initial.

I think the closest I ever came was in Alaska when I was named the "manager" of an onshore fuel storage tank facility (16 million gallons) that was identified as a potential terrorist target by Homeland Security in 2002.

Talk about FUBAR crazy...it was located ¼ mile on shore and the only way to supply the tank field was via barge. So the Coast Guard (CG) was responsible until the 1st valve inside containment, the land it was surrounded by was National Park land but the land itself was owned by the State of Alaska.

In turn the the State of Alaska leased the property out to an Alaska Native Corporation who in turn had a working agreement with a Canadian company.

To make it all the more interesting is the CG didn't monitor the facility but once every 3 years so I was also the CG facility coordinator.

I spent a whole week at the Federal Building in Anchorage filling out paperwork and being interviewed by folks but I don't remember that form though.

[USN_Hokie]

This seems pretty straightforward....

That is specifically related to "close and/or continuing contact", i.e. foreigners that you know well and interact with regularly. It does not apply to one-off meetings or casual acquaintances, and that was clarified to me by the investigators years ago. My acquaintances were clarified and discussed during the poly.

That's a unique perspective on a meeting with the Russian ambassador, about setting up a line of communication outside the normal lines of communication...

Not even Kushner, or his people, are attempting to make that argument.

You really have no idea what you are talking about. Please close the Google tab in your browser.

#'sHokie is right.

I'll take Kushner's word that he made a mistake by not disclosing it, and that of all the people who agree he should have disclosed a meeting with the Russian ambassador, over #sHokie, and certainly over a guy who didn't know Kushner met with Kislyak until a few hours ago. I'll listen to what #sHokie has to say about the necessity of disclosing a meeting with a Russian official who will have lots of contact with the Trump admin, which is more than just a foreign national.
You, on the other hand, have zero credibility on this subject.

#'s is right. "Close and continuing" are the key terms.

You should close the Google tab on your browser and get back to your Obamaphone kiosk.

[USN_Hokie]

Once you complete the initial application you constantly keep it updated so you are ready for your PR. It does take some time to do the initial.

I think the closest I ever came was in Alaska when I was named the "manager" of an onshore fuel storage tank facility (16 million gallons) that was identified as a potential terrorist target by Homeland Security in 2002.

Talk about FUBAR crazy...it was located ¼ mile on shore and the only way to supply the tank field was via barge. So the Coast Guard (CG) was responsible until the 1st valve inside containment, the land it was surrounded by was National Park land but the land itself was owned by the State of Alaska.

In turn the the State of Alaska leased the property out to an Alaska Native Corporation who in turn had a working agreement with a Canadian company.

To make it all the more interesting is the CG didn't monitor the facility but once every 3 years so I was also the CG facility coordinator.

I spent a whole week at the Federal Building in Anchorage filling out paperwork and being interviewed by folks but I don't remember that form though.

DOE? They have their own equally complicated system.

[HokieFanDC]

You really have no idea what you are talking about. Please close the Google tab in your browser.

#'sHokie is right.

I'll take Kushner's word that he made a mistake by not disclosing it, and that of all the people who agree he should have disclosed a meeting with the Russian ambassador, over #sHokie, and certainly over a guy who didn't know Kushner met with Kislyak until a few hours ago. I'll listen to what #sHokie has to say about the necessity of disclosing a meeting with a Russian official who will have lots of contact with the Trump admin, which is more than just a foreign national.
You, on the other hand, have zero credibility on this subject.

#'s is right. "Close and continuing" are the key terms.

You should close the Google tab on your browser and get back to your Obamaphone kiosk.

Seems like you guys aren't even trying.
I mean, we have self-proclaimed experts making proclamations, insulting people, and acting soooo incredibly knowledgeable.
Unfortunately for you, there is a Google, and it's useful for when you sense bullshirt.
Now, I'm not an expert, and admit that. But, there seems to be no reason for the resident genius experts not to fully understand this part of the form.
It's almost like you're talking out of your asses, and are too lazy to actually read the from you're soooo familiar with. Or not.
The key term here is "FOS", and it applies to you. I eagerly await your explanation as to why Kushner had no need to disclose the meeting in this section.....

[Major Kong]

DOE? They have their own equally complicated system.

It didn't fall under the DOE but USDOT at that time and then transferred over to Homeland Security.

[133743Hokie]

You really have no idea what you are talking about. Please close the Google tab in your browser.

#'sHokie is right.

I'll take Kushner's word that he made a mistake by not disclosing it, and that of all the people who agree he should have disclosed a meeting with the Russian ambassador, over #sHokie, and certainly over a guy who didn't know Kushner met with Kislyak until a few hours ago. I'll listen to what #sHokie has to say about the necessity of disclosing a meeting with a Russian official who will have lots of contact with the Trump admin, which is more than just a foreign national.
You, on the other hand, have zero credibility on this subject.

#'s is right. "Close and continuing" are the key terms.

You should close the Google tab on your browser and get back to your Obamaphone kiosk.

Seems like you guys aren't even trying.
I mean, we have self-proclaimed experts making proclamations, insulting people, and acting soooo incredibly knowledgeable.
Unfortunately for you, there is a Google, and it's useful for when you sense bullshirt.
Now, I'm not an expert, and admit that. But, there seems to be no reason for the resident genius experts not to fully understand this part of the form.
It's almost like you're talking out of your asses, and are too lazy to actually read the from you're soooo familiar with. Or not.
The key term here is "FOS", and it applies to you. I eagerly await your explanation as to why Kushner had no need to disclose the meeting in this section.....

I fully understand that form, having first completed one in the mid 80s and having updated my information over the years as the forms have evolved. Until retiring 9 years ago I held TS/SCI level (or agency equivalent) poly-based clearances with just about every government entity except DOE (didn't have a need to get Q). I was badged with staff-like access into the WH, DOS, the major intelligence agency HQs (as well as numerous affiliated domestic "sites") and cleared to work in all aspects of US embassies, including the core and "tenant spaces". This was my career for almost 30 years. I lived with clearances for 30 years. I created, transported, transmitted, received and destroyed classified documents.

I filled the forms out. I spoke with investigators, I discussed the documents with poly administrators. My casual foreign acquaintances were not to be included in that section of the form.Trust me when I tell you I know what I'm talking about.

[USN_Hokie]

Seems like you guys aren't even trying.

Says the guy who cited the wrong section. You wasted everyone's time citing 19B and now want to call people stupid as you wade through Google.

[awesome guy]

I'll take Kushner's word that he made a mistake by not disclosing it, and that of all the people who agree he should have disclosed a meeting with the Russian ambassador, over #sHokie, and certainly over a guy who didn't know Kushner met with Kislyak until a few hours ago. I'll listen to what #sHokie has to say about the necessity of disclosing a meeting with a Russian official who will have lots of contact with the Trump admin, which is more than just a foreign national.
You, on the other hand, have zero credibility on this subject.

#'s is right. "Close and continuing" are the key terms.

You should close the Google tab on your browser and get back to your Obamaphone kiosk.

Seems like you guys aren't even trying.
I mean, we have self-proclaimed experts making proclamations, insulting people, and acting soooo incredibly knowledgeable.
Unfortunately for you, there is a Google, and it's useful for when you sense bullshirt.
Now, I'm not an expert, and admit that. But, there seems to be no reason for the resident genius experts not to fully understand this part of the form.
It's almost like you're talking out of your asses, and are too lazy to actually read the from you're soooo familiar with. Or not.
The key term here is "FOS", and it applies to you. I eagerly await your explanation as to why Kushner had no need to disclose the meeting in this section.....

I fully understand that form, having first completed one in the mid 80s and having updated my information over the years as the forms have evolved. Until retiring 9 years ago I held TS/SCI level (or agency equivalent) poly-based clearances with just about every government entity except DOE (didn't have a need to get Q). I was badged with staff-like access into the WH, DOS, the major intelligence agency HQs (as well as numerous affiliated domestic "sites") and cleared to work in all aspects of US embassies, including the core and "tenant spaces". This was my career for almost 30 years. I lived with clearances for 30 years. I created, transported, transmitted, received and destroyed classified documents.

I filled the forms out. I spoke with investigators, I discussed the documents with poly administrators. My casual foreign acquaintances were not to be included in that section of the form.Trust me when I tell you I know what I'm talking about.

Do you have Google though?

[USN_Hokie]

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define. ... %20warrior

[HokieFanDC]

#'s is right. "Close and continuing" are the key terms.

You should close the Google tab on your browser and get back to your Obamaphone kiosk.

Seems like you guys aren't even trying.
I mean, we have self-proclaimed experts making proclamations, insulting people, and acting soooo incredibly knowledgeable.
Unfortunately for you, there is a Google, and it's useful for when you sense bullshirt.
Now, I'm not an expert, and admit that. But, there seems to be no reason for the resident genius experts not to fully understand this part of the form.
It's almost like you're talking out of your asses, and are too lazy to actually read the from you're soooo familiar with. Or not.
The key term here is "FOS", and it applies to you. I eagerly await your explanation as to why Kushner had no need to disclose the meeting in this section.....

I fully understand that form, having first completed one in the mid 80s and having updated my information over the years as the forms have evolved. Until retiring 9 years ago I held TS/SCI level (or agency equivalent) poly-based clearances with just about every government entity except DOE (didn't have a need to get Q). I was badged with staff-like access into the WH, DOS, the major intelligence agency HQs (as well as numerous affiliated domestic "sites") and cleared to work in all aspects of US embassies, including the core and "tenant spaces". This was my career for almost 30 years. I lived with clearances for 30 years. I created, transported, transmitted, received and destroyed classified documents.

I filled the forms out. I spoke with investigators, I discussed the documents with poly administrators. My casual foreign acquaintances were not to be included in that section of the form.Trust me when I tell you I know what I'm talking about.

Did you have meetings with foreign government officials, that you asked about? Yes, or no.

[HokieFanDC]

Seems like you guys aren't even trying.

Says the guy who cited the wrong section. You wasted everyone's time citing 19B and now want to call people stupid as you wade through Google.

You guys wasted my time. You, as the so-called experts should have known that a meeting with a foreign govt. official would be covered under 20b, not 19b. Instead, you made arguments that the pertinent part was "close and continuing", when the pertinent part was that 19b was the wrong section. So, yes, I'm calling you stupid, because you act like you're knowledgeable, but you don't know any more than I do, and are too lazy and dopey to try and learn something.
You tried to make aoun argument based solely on your proclaimed expertise (trust me!), and when your bluff is called, you can't even admit you're wrong....now for the third time in this thread.

[133743Hokie]

#'s is right. "Close and continuing" are the key terms.

You should close the Google tab on your browser and get back to your Obamaphone kiosk.

Seems like you guys aren't even trying.
I mean, we have self-proclaimed experts making proclamations, insulting people, and acting soooo incredibly knowledgeable.
Unfortunately for you, there is a Google, and it's useful for when you sense bullshirt.
Now, I'm not an expert, and admit that. But, there seems to be no reason for the resident genius experts not to fully understand this part of the form.
It's almost like you're talking out of your asses, and are too lazy to actually read the from you're soooo familiar with. Or not.
The key term here is "FOS", and it applies to you. I eagerly await your explanation as to why Kushner had no need to disclose the meeting in this section.....

I fully understand that form, having first completed one in the mid 80s and having updated my information over the years as the forms have evolved. Until retiring 9 years ago I held TS/SCI level (or agency equivalent) poly-based clearances with just about every government entity except DOE (didn't have a need to get Q). I was badged with staff-like access into the WH, DOS, the major intelligence agency HQs (as well as numerous affiliated domestic "sites") and cleared to work in all aspects of US embassies, including the core and "tenant spaces". This was my career for almost 30 years. I lived with clearances for 30 years. I created, transported, transmitted, received and destroyed classified documents.

I filled the forms out. I spoke with investigators, I discussed the documents with poly administrators. My casual foreign acquaintances were not to be included in that section of the form.Trust me when I tell you I know what I'm talking about.

Did you have meetings with foreign government officials, that you asked about? Yes, or no.

Limited number of meetings with foreign officials, but I did have a few. None were put on the form and in the pre-poly discussion with the administrator, when the question of foreign contacts came up we discussed these contacts and it was made clear the question did not apply to them. (FYI, in case you didn't know, they go over every question they are going to ask you before the poly to make sure you understand the question, its context, and to provide any clarification to questions you may have).

[RiverguyVT]

Let's be cool, yall