@ over 1 year ago
Chaska, MN 55318, USA
assuming all the above is true, it doesn't appear to reach to the level of illegal does it?
@ over 1 year ago
Cerritos, CA, USA
This wasn't the criminal investigation. However, the findings can shed some light on the criminal investigation.
@ over 1 year ago
Leaks (if they can be believed) suggest that the FBI is pursuing the espionage act in part of their investigation. (Public corruption related to the Clinton Foundation being another investigation track. See McAuliffe)
The relevant text for the espionage act: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
d,f, and g are at play.
(d): "Whoever, lawfully having possession of [lots of stuff]...or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same
and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it."
If her server was hacked in January 2011 like was suggested by Pagliano shutting it down emergently (and it sounds like she didn't have basic intrusion detection), and then she kept using it without basic protections,
that seems to meet the "cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted" clause.
That's not withstanding the fact that because she had all this info on her private server after she left State, she also was
willfully retaining it.
(f) "Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of [lots of stuff].. (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in
violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust
or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 yr."
She had lawful possession.
Continuing to use her private server after being hacked in Jan 2011 without security measures is grossly negligent.
She failed to report being hacked as noted in the IG report.
(g) "If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy..."
The IG report highlights the effort of her staff to keep the server secret, allowing violations of d and f.
I'm curious to hear your thoughts, Undr.
I haven't seen evidence that she was actually hacked, just that there were attempts (there are several automated attempts on my servers hourly). you posted the account of the hacker who allegedly hacked her account, but that's still alleged still?
Northeast Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
Also, just for clarity, I have no need to defend her (I'd rather Bernie win the primary), but like similar events in the past, this stuff can put people to sleep (too many notes!).
fuzzily illegal activity is not sufficient to get people too concerned I don't think.
I know you have an IT background so I was curious on that part of the story - wasn't expecting you to defend her (sorry if it came off that way).
I agree, fuzzy activity is tough to get people excited about.
People love smoking guns.
The clearest evidence her server actually was hacked were Bill's doodles obtained by Guccifer and released in 2013.
The previously unreleased doodles were on the Clinton Foundation server, which had the same
IP address as Clintonemail.com
it's also been known that the sysadmin left port 3389 and 5900 open on her server.
I don't have an IT background...I've mostly been in a social work type career path. I'm just very interested in technology, especially open source.
gotcha. you struck me as technologically inclined in previous discussions.
you and I have similar interests
yep. I'm interested in how this plays out. I've also looked into how to create my own email server as a result.
Artesia, CA, USA
how many other sec of state used a personal email server to transmit government, business, classified information, bhippy?
@ over 1 year ago
Spotsylvania Courthouse, VA 22553, USA
@undr - using your RPi for the server?
is the second of state capable of immediately recognizing and/or immediately classifying! NY document or information?
proofreading is your friend
I agree skal,
fat fingers aren't though
rPi runs web server, owncloud, and asterisk.
oh! and ncid to stop spam callers.
I'll answer that question h2o: none.
@ over 1 year ago
Lakeland, MN 55043, USA
...the first question that is. As to the second, not sure but I think you're point is that there was no oversight of potentially misclassified communication. I'd have to agree on the whole that's likely.
My personal suspicion is that Hillary wanted to avoid oversight...not necessarily due to illegal activities per se, but to avoid future FOIA requests for purposes of scrutinizing her activities.
Remember, she and Bill have been through the wringer, legally. It makes sense that Hillary would seek ways to be circumspect.
That is not an excuse. Her duties to the country trump her desire for privacy in conducting the people's business.
doc, I think that's the best argument to use with her. I will bet she's either struggling with the same (explains why she gets so defensive), or maybe she's evil (less convinced of this).
I don't think HRC's evil. That's a bit much.
I agree that she probably set it up to avoid FOIA. Some of her comments in the IG report seemed to suggest as much.
As sec of state, Hillary was 1 of 20 people who could instantly classify material/documents/information.
With that level of responsibility, don't you think, you should be able to recognize it?
Fort Belvoir, VA, USA
HRC and Bill have been through the ringer - which makes some of her actions even more mystifying.
There's a fine line between keeping things private and giving the appearance that you are actively hiding something
With that, only the President can instantly downgrade it.
So she would have known she was transmitting classified material , should have been marked by her, or she's totally incompetent
@H2O - I've never understood her "I never sent or received anything marked classified" argument.
It's one of those things that may be technically correct but completely misleading.
Since she was using "off the grid" e-mail, I wonder if she even had the capability to mark stuff as classified, etc.
Furthermore, since the email didn't traverse through official channels, a third party at State never had the opportunity to review if it contained sensitive or classified information.
Until after the fact, of course.
"So she would have known she was transmitting classified material"
There's one line from the IG report that suggests she did know she could be receiving sensitive material - that came after the hacking attempt.
"On January 10, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations emailed the Chief of Staff and the Deputy Chief of Staff for Planning and instructed them not to email the Secretary 'anything sensitive'"
Granted, sensitive =/= classified.
too many notes!
I don't understand that quote in this context.
maybe because he new she was off the grid, and was extremely vulnerable.
if they knew she wasn't on a government network, she didn't have the protection, big red flag.
She also got to determine what was personal email & what was government related email.
she deleted over 30,000 emails, at her direction. We have ONLY HER word they were personal. We now know her word is worthless.
She decided all on her own, which should have a legal consequence under the FOIA.
Wonder how many "donation" and "quid pro" got deleted, to hide the playoffs.
3 of the deleted emails were about the server getting hacked...
The great thing was the deleted emails were backed up on the cloud.
FBI has them.
nothing to see here, don't look behind the curtain, move along...
why does it matter, they're just 4 dead Americans
HILLARY FOR PRISON 2016
President Not Sure
@ over 1 year ago
Florissant, MO, USA
before evil can say anything. I will say I am not a trump fan but I will still take an idiot over a crook every time.
The dilemma for me is that she's a known entity, he's not. I'm not voting for either of them, but I'm going to be uncomfortable either way.
skal, my "too many notes" reference comes from the movie Amadeus. he created an amazing composition for the court with great detail, but the court couldn't understand the musical genius. the king almost fell asleep. his criticism: "too many notes".
yeah, I got the Amadeus quote just not the analogy.
With Hillary's situation, the devil is in the details - even if those details are so boring the make your eyes gloss over.
I'd argue that one of the reasons that Hillary has been able to get away with it so far is because few people have actually challenged her on the actual details of what she released and taking it at face value.
Now we are finally getting stories about how she's been lying about it for the last year. If they media wanted to actually be journalists, it would have fallen apart much sooner.
Simple example where digging could've made it fall apart:
She loved her crackberry and used it to send and receive email.
She's claimed that she never sent or received email marked classified, right?
Natural follow up question: Did HRC have the ability to mark an e-mail classified (or sensitive but unclassified) with the blackberry email client?
If not, of course she could never have sent anything marked classified. That option didn't exist in her email client's software. Her argument would have been dismissed.
If yes, State would have had to provide the crackberry software and this entire thing becomes a nonstory.
I look at it from wife's perspective, and everything you just said is "too many notes". she's a Hillary fan (too strange because she talks like a 60's Republican), but the issue has to be stated in terms she can understand.
I understand that, but what other way is there to point out how her statement "I never sent or received information marked classified" was misleading?
If I'm going to call her out, I should at least have an explanation
The really tough part is, that explanation requires more nuance than her effectively saying "I didn't do it". I fully understand that this is where the "too many notes" happens, but I don't know how that would be avoided
I guess I look at it from an investigative point of view. Dig through the details, follow up the things that make no sense, etc.
It's just how I think.
Bhaven is suspiciously absent from this thread...
Anyways, looks like the press is starting to turn on the years worth of lies, too.
not only is she not going to be charged with anything she's going to run for president and has a good chance at winning
@ over 1 year ago
Strongsville, OH, USA
it's still a feasible choice opposed to a racist war-mongering dirty air and water Republican
Hey, the IT guy's testimony has been leaked
Did you see the DePaul video?
@ over 1 year ago
race Wars coming
Trump protestors in San Jose. Liberals doing what liberals do.
and they whine and cry about obstruction. that idiot with the whistle what was he all about? What a stupid ass
North Royalton, OH 44133, USA
Ive read where he wasnt even a student at the school.
Maybe he owns a whistle shop nearby.
I blame his behavior on his father but I bet his mother is good with a whistle
Boston Heights, OH, USA
Skål, hi. There's absolutely no way Hillary will be indicted, Bam wouldn't let it happen.
@ over 1 year ago
Yorkville, New York, NY
Well that settles it.
bam, has no real love for the Clinton's
yep. let's say this story reaches critical mass on the next month. what happens next?
Depends on what you mean by critical mass.
Or just more media attention?
Clinton (finally) holding a press conference where she gets more than softballs on the topic?
maybe we can get someone else in here to answer?
I meant indictment. she can no longer run for potus. then what does the dnc do?
Old Town Torrance, Torrance, CA 90501
depends on when it happens relative to convention.
which shows how absolutely pitiful the American people are
Bam protects his own, not gonna let Hillary get harmed here. It's wishful thinking of Berniebros and a lot on the Right that she'll be indicted. They'll give her a wrist slap or something, and people won't care cuz uh oh Trump.
Midtown, New York, NY
Bernie did extremely well considering, but he really harmed himself by saying the emails didn't matter and nobody cared. It's like your editorial, goes towards her character.
let's say Comey recs indictment, and Bam steps in to prevent.
won't that tarnish his legacy a bit, too?
WaPo just picked up that Hillary was using CIA agents names in these emails through insecure channels (redacted in FOIA documents).
if he server was compromised, that's huge.
more than a slap on the wrist
re Bernie missed op on emails - tough to say on that. we know a lot more on the emails now then we did months ago. could've been too premature
But #Imwithher cuz the other option is a nonstarter. At least for me.
Other party shít the bed and is now rolling around in the feces pretending it doesn't smell so bad.
there's always Johnson or Stein
sigh. at least we live in interesting times.
Northwest Torrance, Torrance, CA
It's not tough to say Bernie messed up on the emails. It was premature to take it off the table like he did. Didn't have to make any arguments about them at the time if he didn't want to.
I think I'm gonna do a write-in vote, just not sure who. Not that it matters in terms of my state, - - Johnson is way too libertarian for me. And I'm not voting for Watermelon Jill Stein.
Good Morning, Madam President!
Skal a vote for Johnson, is a vote for the orange face coward.
Johnson a Republican, like Sanders an independent.
@ over 1 year ago
Killeen, TX 76543, USA
you'd rather people voted Republican or Democrat? not a fan of third parties?
and why can't a vote for Johnson be a vote for Clinton?
Or simpler, why can't a vote for Johnson be a vote for Johnson?
Bhaven. fyi...Boehner isn't running.
I hear your frustration Drew and I share it. I cannot bring myself to vote for either of the so-called mainstream choices, but Stein and Johnson are too far out there for me.
Also I still think Hillary is going to fall between now and the
convention. She'll be indicted, superdelegates shift to Bernie, and he's off to the races.
I'm sure that's just wishful thinking, but on this election cycle I gotta say, you can't call me crazy for thinking it's an actual possibility. I mean we have a racist representing half the voting population for crying out loud. How is the notion
that the other half supports a criminal so far out there?
potato tomato he's a republican that automatically makes him a racist and the races are different anyhow
White Men Can't Jump black men can't eat the pűssy Mexicans look out of place without a burro Asians have tiny peckers
Dr. Evil a criminal that has never been charged or convicted of any crime. I thought you have to be convicted of crime to be call a criminal.
what a statement in this world where a woman can have a dick
I wonder how Cali would have turned out if the race wasn't called early by AP. She built her lead with mail-in votes and sustained that as day-of votes were counted.
Time for the FBI primary.
Skal you must have some stock in Kleenex, because you have been doing a lot of crying on here. Hillary probably won by a smaller margin after the AP said she reached the magic number.
soon to be pulling the lever on Elizabeth Warren. seems you only need one thirty-second to be called a native and take all the advantages . first woman first Native American
Last African American for 1000 years . You had your chance. you wasted it on Barack Obama although he did reveal that the Cambridge Police acted stupidly
Barack Hussein Obama will go down as one of the best ever. Did an extremely good job despite all the gop obstruction by the GOP.
Why would it be a smaller margin? Her bread and butter has been the mail in vote - that wouldn't have been affected by the AP announcement.
In person voting, would.
Greenwald sums the entire situation up well:
The former Marine in that USAToday OpEd linked above said it well:
"Clinton is [...] someone with no honor, little courage and commitment only to her endless ambition."
I fully understand the historic nature of her nomination - the glass ceiling has been shattered.
It's unfortunate that such a momentous occasion belongs to someone of such poor character.
Her margin of victory was smaller because those that wanted to vote for her could have stay home. After the AP said she had won.
Harker Heights, TX, USA
(unless they already voted by mail, which is something her campaign pushes hard)
Greenwald and yourself can go buy your stocks, because this has been the democrat's nominating process since the 80's. Hillary won all the pledged delegate rich states, received 4 million more popular votes. Wasn't anything rigged, he just
got his azz handed to him.
Indictment futures are much more profitable and gratifying.
Yep, debate schedule was completely fair and DWS was a model for impartiality.
Berniebros are still crying into their Cheerios.
The reddit forum is particularly delusional.
Interesting: 3M votes still to count.
Those are definitely all Bernie votes
Most definitely not.
Don't know if anyone knows the demographics though.
It's over, man.
It's been over for a few weeks.
Help us Obi Wan Jim Comey, you're our only hope
There's a good deal on a bridge that I can get you if you think she'll be indicted now.
Are you thinking that Lynch won't follow through if Comey recommends indictment?
We're already hearing mumbling about needing a special prosecutor.
The fun has only just begun.
Mumblings of Bernouts not giving into reality along with some righties, maybe.
Her Hillness will be protected. There will be no walk of shame for her.
"no individual* to big to jail"
Mostly righties, especially after Earnest called it a criminal investigation today and Bam met with Lynch behind closed doors following the endorsement.
walk of atonement, please. the high sparrow is in chambers with Obama as we speak.
That's a disturbing mental image.
Like I said, the fun is just beginning:
I don't think anybody's going to acknowledge that when the debate start except Donald Trump! But who's listening to him
Perception is reality. "Bernouts" "Berniebros" "Berniebots" understand that they're still counting ballots, Hillary is still under investigation, and the convention will be contested. It's not over by a damn sight.
srorriM & ekomS
@ over 1 year ago
People are starting to realize how rigged our political process is and how the media has become the 4th branch of the establishment.
I'm just tired of the parade of empty-suit neocons pushing their sociopathic agendas. And Donald Trump??? Has it really come to this? The fact it's even a possibility is mind boggling...
Though I guess it's a measure of how far we've fallen, the product of apathy, and ignorance. How we've let them deceive, manipulate, exploit, and divide us is an embarrassment. We're all ####ed anyway
If Bernie is not the nominee or doesn't run third party, i will not be voting for POTUS
Thanks for your lack participation, because Bernie isn't the Democrat nominee. This system is only rigged once you have your azz handed to you. Why wasn't the system rigged when Bernie won 8 states in a row.
California ain't done counting yet.
2.5 million votes haven't been counted as of today.
~700,000 of those are provisional.
CA has a pretty low rejection rate for these (Table I, https://www.supportthevoter.gov/files/2013/08/Daron-Shaw-Provisional-Ballots-Shaw-and-Hutchings.pdf)
Provisional ballots were given to many first time voters because their registration couldn't be verified at the polls.
First time voters have trended Bernie
Long story short, CA's vote gap will likely shrink
I doubt it will reverse, but who knows. This election has already been crazy - anything is possible.
And if it reverses? What then, Bernie wins by a smidgen?
Also lmao at the dude wanting Bernie to run independent, guess he really likes the Donald.
Better off hoping on that 'indictment primary'
Like I said, I doubt it will reverse. Other than the provisionals, we don't really know who the VBMs are. Gap could widen too. Time will tell.
Although as Silver said, North Montana, New Arizona, East Virginia, these states haven't voted yet. Maybe Bernie can close the gap!
Fully looking forward to the indictment primary.
I wonder if the AP will secretly poll the grand jury and announce it a day early
Berniebros say the system is rigged which I agree with (well up to a point), but if it's *as rigged* as they've implied, why would there be any indictment?
That'd bring the total to 53 states.
What about the other four?
down from 57, Bush's fault
"but if it's *as rigged* as they've implied, why would there be any indictment?"
The 'rigging' has to do with the perceived thumb on the scale from the DNC.
Dem party is completely independent of current DOJ and FBI.
(ok...maybe in theory on the former).
Yeah I think you're gonna sadly disappointed at the 'independence' there.
I don't think he expects any different.
Janet Reno, Hillary Clinton's FLOTUS
I don't, sadly.
can hope, though
Highland, St Paul, MN
I'd be interested in seeing the D party get rid of the superdelegates. It's a party thing, they've always had it, I get that. But it seems to me to be a badly outdated relic of the old school methodology, where party bosses pick the nominee.
It's amazing to me that this doesn't change. I think a pledged-only delegate system is the only way to go. Party bosses can still influence what happens to delegates of failed candidates.
However, not being a member of the Democratic Party, I don't affect the change from within. If I were younger, and not thinking of leaving the country soon anyway, I'd get involved to try and spark that change. But just like global warming, we'll
continue to live in denial until it's too late (i think that's around now), then suffer through the consequences and blame others for causing it.
Not sure if that's the human way, I suspect it's more likely the American way. We sure aren't responsible for anything bad that happens...gotta be someone else's fault. Just have to figure out who, other than me. Right?
As to the Democrats, Bernie has done a good job raising awareness of the issue. If the indictment convention causes a nominee by "fiat" involving superdelegates, there will be an uproar over their role overall. Denial over...time for blame.
Blame someone and demand they fix it!!! Maybe something will happen then, not an overhaul but a token change sufficient to silence the loudest voices until the next cycle.
many states have decided to get rid of the superdelegates, so that's happening at least
Gateway District, Minneapolis, MN
Prediction, 'modified limited hangout'?
Hasn't team Hillary already been doing that?
They would've gotten away with it too, if it weren't for the meddling kids at the OIG.
Except unlike a Scooby episode, they will get away with it and then some. It'll be like the ending of one of those but in this one they unmask the "monster," Velma describes the evil plan, and the police say "sorry kids, can't do anything here."
Shaggy and Scooby (obviously Berniebros) will still get high and get the munchies though.
Still don't know what Comey has found.
Interesting with the news about the foundation donor getting put on a board at State with top secret clearance and no credentials.
That story understandably got buried after Orlando.
Supposedly Assange is releasing damaging stuff soon, just released a torrent with a dead man's switch this morning.
And the Twoccifeer stuff has been semi interesting.
If those files are valid, she was clearly planning her run while giving those Goldman speeches (campaign finance violation)
She's a Clinton, she's above any laws. Laws... Those are for the little people
Skal still grasping for unicorns in the sky. Just practices saying Madam President.
HRC giving a high-level post with top secret security clearance to an unqualified major donor is not make believe.
That would absolutely tank *any* other candidate.
It's just one of the many issues based in fact.
CNN is just now starting to get some outrage that State is stonewalling the release of her TPP related emails until after the election (despite promising them in April 2016)
She's an ethical time-bomb waiting to explode
First of all HRC can't give anyone a top secret clearance, that your first lie. A lot of people felt Karl Rove was unqualified for his position in W admin. No she your future President, She beat the brakes off your candidate. Maybe because your
doctor the BS the GOP and Trump will put this country through will not have any affect on you. You're the 10% the democrats been talking about.
Umm...yeah she can. And did.
She recommended that Raj Fernando was appointed to the International Security Advisory Board, which required top secret security clearance.
That's not a lie, that happened. Get your head out of your ass.
She gave a position with top secret clearance on a board dealing with nuclear issues to a donor with ZERO relevant experience. The donor was forced to resign after abcnews questioned his appointment and credentials.
How the hell does that not bother you?
And we're supposed to believe money doesn't influence her?
Because she can appointed anybody she wants to her staff. Name one political figure that hasn't appointed someone people felt wasn't qualify. People felt RFK wasn't qualify for his appointment.
So who approved the clearance? it wasn't Hillary she doesn't have the power. So f-ing what, there's probably people in Hospital where you work, has position you feel are not qualified. Stop your damn whining, Bernie got his azz kicked, you can't
hide in Vermont and expect the minority vote, when you're still trying live off #### you done 50 years ago.
The ISAB was not her "staff". Her staff rushed the clearance approval. He was a high frequency stock trader, not a nuclear expert.
If he was qualified, he wouldn't have stepped down after press started asking question
Her corruption has nothing to do with me, Bernie, or the GOP. It's an independent issue.
This specific example is pretty clear that a donor bought access
We wouldn't give any other candidate a pass on this, except
we appreciate your valiant effort Skal but this is obviously a vengeance for slavery thing so let's see what Hillary does for the black community, not much I'm sure
appointing someone you do not like isn't corruption. Sorry you can't rush a security background check. All your bitchin and whining is all about Bernie getting his old azz kicked from from Brooklyn to Compton. Have you ever had a top
secret clearance, if so you know they can't be rushed, if not it show because you don't have f-ing clue what you are talking about.
Sorry pinky it the do nothing gop let's program through Congress proposed by the President, they will help all people. So what are the poor caucasian people called that keep voting republican, inbred imbecile. Nothing the GOP propose will benefit
their life below the poverty line azzes.
the issue isn't appointing someone I don't like.
the issue is appointing someone who's only qualification for the job with top secret clearance is the fact they've raised a lot of money for your campaign.
another inaccurate statement there, bhaven
clearance can be rushed if you know/disagree to the right people
Tick tock lmao.
@ about 1 year ago
NoMad, New York, NY
Did I call the Hillary Scooby Episode or what?
@ about 1 year ago
Washington examiner article is BS, you can't fast track a top secret clearance. It took about six month to get mine recertified, and held a NATO TS clearance.
@ about 1 year ago
Bros are losing it. http://nypost.com/2016/07/06/half-naked-rambling-bernie-bro-hops-into-the-hudson/
@Bhaven - well you clearly must not have donated enough to the right people.
ha ha that's funny
@ about 1 year ago
You can't donate to the FBI when it comes to security clearance.
who said anything about donating to the FBI?
To get a top secret security clearance you must go through a FBI background check.
well apparently the Clinton's have something going with the fbi
@ about 1 year ago
you're missing the point bhaven.
if you donated enough to someone well connected outside of the FBI, maybe you could've been fast tracked.
Fast tracked, surely that must be against the rules.
Midtown East, New York, NY
Now we can have a never ending parade of committees investigating the emails and probably the FBI. The republicans are flirting with overeach. The last thing they want is for Hillary to look like a victim of continuing witch hunts.
@ about 1 year ago
Yellow Springs, OH 45387, USA
You can't get a clearance without going through the FBI. It doesn't matter if you're the brother of President.
and in the current case especially if you're the brother of the president
@Bhaven - and I'm sure that review process couldn't be fast tracked with a few phone calls from properly connected people.
Killeen, TX, USA
It can't be, it's probably against the rules hence it's impossible that it happens.
I've seen clearances fast tracked. TS within a matter of weeks vs months.
@ about 1 year ago
Another BS statement from plc. Getting a secret upgraded to TS restart the whole process over again. NSA, FBI, questioning witnesses. it probably take a couple weeks to get a confidential clearance with limited access.
In 2015 it took an average of 95 days just to upgraded from secret to TS, and that was considered fast track.
I wonder if those who became Berniebros would be calling this "just another fake Clinton scandal" if Bernie never ran for pres.
Sayville, NY, USA
news flash, people often ignore things that hurt their candidate and often amplify things that help. ITS NOT A STAR OF DAVID ON THAT MONEY ITS A SHERIFFS BADGE!
@ about 1 year ago
Lol sheriff's badge
anyone ever wonder how a telephone operator is the absolute expert on security clearances?
fast tracked ,, means moved from the bottom of the list to the top,
I got this bridge ........
I wonder, can limited access clearances be granted on an FBI background check, credit check, local and state LE check?
btw, limited access level might even reside with the agency concerned
no influence never expedites a clearance
give me a break with the bullshìt, our government moves on influence, money
I wouldn't know, but my wife was assign to White House Communication. All I know is I had a NATO TS to work in the Kindsbach Bunker in the 80's and Government Contractor. What would a fly boy know who didn't fly aircraft