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

President Donald Trump’s Schedule for Wednesday, May 20, 2026

Schedule Summary: President Donald Trump will travel to Groton, Connecticut, where he will deliver the…

49 minutes ago

There’s A New Suicide Drone On The Block, And America’s Enemies Are Salivating Over It

Cuba may have acquired small, portable and easy-to-operate suicide drones, the new deadly buzz heard…

3 hours ago

China-Linked Group’s Socialist ‘Liberation Centers’ Coming To A Town Near You

A socialist group with ties to a China-based financier is setting up indoor hubs for…

3 hours ago

Appeals Court Puts Stake Through Heart Of New York’s Anti-2nd Amendment ‘Vampire Rule’

A federal appellate court ruled that New York’s law banning firearms carrying under a so-called…

3 hours ago

Kathy Hochul Tries Having It Both Ways On School Choice

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul seems to be walking a tightrope on education reform. Last…

3 hours ago

Trump Endorses Ken Paxton For Texas Senate

President Donald Trump endorsed Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Tuesday over incumbent Sen. John…

3 hours ago