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?
Such intersection acts as an institutionalized network blending ideology, labor advocacy, and software scaling. While…
Even famous and successful women can't avoid the reality of trade-offs. Earlier this month, Rep.…
…and a major dose of education. The results of many primaries, and the electorate’s acceptance…
While a new Gallup survey suggests that Americans are now much less likely to participate…
A man who threatened to shoot Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie was sentenced Friday to…
The U.S. federal budget is heading toward a fiscal crisis beginning in 2030, driven by…