Good thing 2016 focused on handling classified material Media covered it (and covered it), politicians debated it, and the American people spoke loud and clear: Carelessness unacceptable And lo! The government heard the message 'Twas never a problem againhttps://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/scores-top-white-house-officials-lack-permanent-security-clearances-n848191 …
-
Show this thread
-
That was snarky, so let me be serious: I cared about Hillary's carelessness with classified info. Not most important issue in the election, but concerning. Likely reason: dodging FOIA requests. Normal officials would've lost security clearance. But Trump admin so much worse.
2 replies 5 retweets 20 likesShow this thread -
Porter: violent abuser, vulnerable to blackmail. Kushner: debts to foreigners, not forthcoming about foreign contacts. Scavino, McGahn, Sanders, Ivanka, more: can't get (probably don't deserve) real security clearance but still have access to top secret info.
2 replies 15 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
Anyone who claimed to care about Hillary's handling of classified info who isn't furious about Trump admin sharing TS/SCI (Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information) with people who can't get real clearance shows they were disingenuous, and don't care about US info sec (END)
8 replies 27 retweets 56 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @NGrossman81
Different sins, in my mind. HRC valued political precautions over security, a judgment not hers to make. Technically here, these decisions are Trump's to make. That he lacks competent WH staff has outraged me since the Christie team got purged in the transition.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HillSpiaire
I'm not saying they're identical. But I'm definitely saying this is worse. Sharing highly classified information with so many people who are information security risks is more dangerous. One doesn't excuse the other. But caring about info sec means caring about both.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @NGrossman81
The trump administration is certainly more dangerous from an infosec perspective (But I don't think Sanders and Ivanka are strong examples).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The two strongest examples are Porter and Kushner. That's why I listed them individually. The others were recognizable names in the list of more than 100 getting top secret info without real clearances.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.