3 Whisky Happy HourThe Ricochet PodcastGLoP CultureBeyond the Polls with Henry OlsenChicks on The RightParsing Immigration PolicyFederalist Radio HourWhat the Hell Is Going OnFreedom to LearnDaily SignalThe Erick Erickson Show3 Martini LunchThe Learning CurveThe Conservative Woman’s GuideHeritage ExplainsNot Dead YetGiving VenturesWho Funds that?The Radio Free Hillsdale HourThe Glenn ShowFirst Things PodcastCall Me Back - with Dan SenorHillsdale DialoguesLaw Talk with Epstein, Yoo & CookeThe LibertarianThe Report Card with Nat MalkusThe Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’ConnorThe American IdeaMadison’s NotesConservative Crossroads with Henry OlsenMom WarsThe Back of the BookGray MattersMartini ShotThe Dave Carter ShowThe Powerline ShowIn DissentHeard at HeritageSmart Girl PoliticsJames Lileks’ The DinerCase in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and CultureJobMakersOne on One with Robert DoarHomeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeHubwonk

Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

  1. Main Feed/
  2. Skipping the FBI Background Check
November 17, 2024 at 10:02 AM

Skipping the FBI Background Check

Steve Fast
@SteveFast

To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

Join to bookmark34likesJoin to like22comments

It is being reported in the media that the Trump transition team is skipping the FBI background check for nominees. Instead, they are using private investigative organizations. Naturally, there is a lot of tut-tutting among our political betters.

The concern is that the officials (e.g. FBI Director Christopher Wray) overseeing the background checks are the very ones that Trump has promised to fire. It would be tempting for them to interfere or to use the information developed against the nominees. In addition, FBI background checks are notoriously slow, so it delays the point when confirmation hearings can start and lengthens the time that the Deep States can do its Trump-proofing. It shows how broken the confirmation process is when you have to outsource the background checks.

As an aside, I once participated in a background check for one of my Chinese ESL students who had joined the Army and needed a Top Secret clearance. The student listed me a reference, and an investigator came to my house. The final question was whether I would give my former student a Top Secret clearance if it were my decision and why. I said, "No, because he has family in China who could be pressured." The investigator told me that was not a valid reason and that I had to give an answer based only on my personal knowledge of the student. So I finally said "Yes," but I thought that was the craziest way to make a security clearance decision.

This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.

Discussion (22)

Sign in to commentSign in
  • CHARTER MEMBER

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Sisyphus@Sisyphus·1y
    Steve Fast (View Post):
    The final question was whether I would give my former student a Top Secret clearance if it were my decision and why. I said, “No, because he has family in China who could be pressured.” The investigator told me that was not a valid reason and that I had to give an answer based only on my personal knowledge of the student.

    The fact that he has relatives in China is baked into the cake, already. He had to divulge close family in the application. If you had said he once expressed concern about his family being in China, that might have been a different discussion. Since Clinton, China has not usually been dealt with as a hostile power, and I have worked with Chinese natives in the federal environment on multiple occasions. I am not personally endorsing the policy.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Barfly@Barfly·1y

    That's an interesting perspective on the clearance process. It can be jiggered to produce a desired outcome by controlling the informal context of the formal question.

  • CHARTER MEMBER

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Percival@Percival·1y
    ReplyingtoSisyphus

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Post):

    Steve Fast (View Post):
    The final question was whether I would give my former student a Top Secret clearance if it were my decision and why. I said, “No, because he has family in China who could be pressured.” The investigator told me that was not a valid reason and that I had to give an answer based only on my personal knowledge of the student.

    The fact that he has relatives in China is baked into the cake, already. He had to divulge close family in the application. If you had said he once expressed concern about his family being in China, that might have been a different discussion. Since Clinton, China has not usually been dealt with as a hostile power, and I have worked with Chinese natives in the federal environment on multiple occasions. I am not personally endorsing the policy.

    Things have changed then, because one of my office mates waited for months for his clearance, and it was denied because he still had family (grandparents) in the PRC. He needed the clearance to do the work he had been hired for, so he wasn't there much longer.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Steve Fast@SteveFast·1y
    ReplyingtoSisyphus

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Post):

    Steve Fast (View Post):
    The final question was whether I would give my former student a Top Secret clearance if it were my decision and why. I said, “No, because he has family in China who could be pressured.” The investigator told me that was not a valid reason and that I had to give an answer based only on my personal knowledge of the student.

    The fact that he has relatives in China is baked into the cake, already. He had to divulge close family in the application. If you had said he once expressed concern about his family being in China, that might have been a different discussion. Since Clinton, China has not usually been dealt with as a hostile power, and I have worked with Chinese natives in the federal environment on multiple occasions. I am not personally endorsing the policy.

    That distinction makes sense, and I hadn't thought of it that way. My concern was based on a general knowledge of how a Confucian society works instead of anything specific that he had said.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Kevin Schulte@KevinSchulte·1y

    I have to say , I am just loving Trump 2.0 . He is approaching taking power in DC just like you would approach a wild dangerous animal . With cunning ;) .

Scroll for later comments
+17 more comments
Join the conversation

You're seeing five of 22 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.

Trending

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Join Ricochet

Get the Ricochet app

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play
  • •
  • •