Trending Commentary

Does a two-track security clearance process make sense?

I suggest two tracks to determine who should retain security clearances:

First: Review and revoke all clearances as warranted by the conduct of the holder.

Second: Perform a cost-benefit assessment for all security clearances held by those who are no longer on the government’s payroll. That’s just good financial sense.

The first step will protect national security. The second step will save taxpayer dollars.

Critical question: If a person without a clearance will not consult with the President, what difference does possession of a clearance make?

Allegation: Many persons are monetizing their clearances. Why should taxpayers subsidize them?

John Lucas

Share
Published by
John Lucas

Recent Posts

JD Vance Takes His Turn in the Media Cesspool

Some may think that title to be a bit crude, but I contend that there…

4 hours ago

Democrats Descend Into Circular Firing Squad Over Their Candidate Who Wants To Put ‘American Zionists’ In Prison

House Democrats declared war Wednesday on Democratic Texas congressional candidate Maureen Galindo, who stated she…

4 hours ago

James Murdoch Reportedly Acquires Vox Website, Podcasts, And New York Magazine For $300 Million

Billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s liberal son, James Murdoch, is acquiring three major divisions of…

4 hours ago

The Department Of War Announces Troop Cuts In Europe

The Department of War announced Tuesday that it will reduce the number of troops present…

4 hours ago

Fire Truck Careens Into Los Angeles Building In Out-Of-Control Overturn

Two Los Angeles firefighters suffered minor injuries Tuesday evening after a fire truck lost control…

4 hours ago

Human Composting Sites May Be Coming To A City Near You

One of the world’s largest human composting facilities just opened near the nation’s capital, according…

5 hours ago