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

Why the Nevada State Treasurer Race Matters

It's challenging enough to pay attention to political races in our home states, much less…

8 hours ago

The 80% Solution

Provided that your basic life needs for shelter, food and clothing are being met, more…

8 hours ago

President Donald Trump’s Schedule for Thursday, May 14, 2026

Schedule Summary: President Donald Trump will have executive time and participate in a series of…

8 hours ago

Trump Can Totally Reshape AI Race During China Visit. Here’s How

The race between U.S. and China to powerful AI is a real thing, but we’re…

8 hours ago

CIA Whistleblower Alleges Coverup Of Lab Leak Intelligence

Spy scientists repeatedly concluded that a lab accident caused the COVID-19 pandemic but more senior…

8 hours ago