You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Lurid Crime Tales-
Firm that checked NSA leaker's background under investigation
2013-08-10
[CBS News] The evil government contractor that performed a background investigation of the man who says he disclosed two National Security Agency surveillance programs is under investigation, a government watchdog said Thursday.
Gov't watchdogs? Tier-Sprechschule graduates no doubt, I can hear them barking from the towers.
Patrick McFarland, the inspector general at the Office of Personnel Management, said during a Senate hearing that the contractor USIS is being investigated and that the company performed a background investigation of Edward Snowdenski.
Where's the bus? Can we get those USIS goats under the bus? Hurry will you, someone must be blamed, and we need another media diversion at once.
McFarland also told lawmakers that there may have been problems with the way the background check of Snowdenski was done, but McFarland and one of his assistants declined to say after the hearing what triggered the decision to investigate USIS and whether it involved the company's check of Snowden.
Trigger? How about the need for media diversion and regime deflection ?
"To answer that question would require me to talk about an ongoing investigation. That's against our policy," Michelle Schmitz, assistant inspector general for investigations, told reporters after the hearing. "We are not going to make any comment at all on the investigation of USIS.
We are simply hoping you will focus on them and not us."
USIS, which is based in Falls Church, Va., did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Nor can they legally as I recall.
Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said she and her staff have been told that the inquiry is a criminal investigation related "to USIS' systemic failure to adequately conduct investigations under its contract" with the Office of Personnel Management.
Anyone conducting a criminal investigation of Benghazi "systemic failure" yet ?
McCaskill said that USIS conducted a background investigation in 2011 for Snowdenski, who worked for government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton.
And he was working for whom at that time ?
Snowdenski says he is behind the revelation about the NSA's collection of Americans' phone records and Internet data from U.S. Internet companies.
Yes, it appears he is in fact behind the revelations.
"We are limited in what we can say about this investigation because it is an ongoing criminal matter," McCaskill said.
Anything further and I would have to kill you. I hope you understand.
"But it is a reminder that background investigations can have real consequences for our national security."
The 'little people' being reminded once again regarding consequences.
McFarland told reporters that his office has the authority to conduct criminal investigations. How did low-level contractor gain access to NSA programs? Pentagon reviewing private contractors, Hagel says.....
Er huh, he was assigned those duties and granted access by a US Gov't employee and supervisor ?
A background investigation is required for federal employees and contractors seeking a security clearance that gives them access to classified information.
TS-SCI along with a full scope poly if you work for the Klingons or NSA as I recall. Any deception indicated on the poly ?
Of the 4.9 million people with clearance to access "confidential and secret" government information, 1.1 million, or 21 percent, work for outside contractors, according to a January report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Of the 1.4 million who have the higher "top secret" access, 483,000, or 34 percent, work for evil contractors.
Snowdenski is now a wobbly 26 years of age. Three of those 26 years he reportedly worked for the leading US Intelligence service of the nation. That leaves some 4-5 years after high school to amass a treasonous history of cunning deception, and evil doing. How could USIS have missed it? Yes, how could they ?
I'm coming a little late to this post. But as I see it, the real scandals are --

1) we hire consulting companies to do vital security screening

2) they do a lousy job

3) we don't care that they do a lousy job

In a just world USIS would already have lost its contract, and the other screening companies would have federal auditors on them like the IRS on a Tea Party tax exemption application.

Besoeker asks the right question about the skinny little creep: what'd he do before he got his job with the NSA? Why isn't the journalism community digging into this punk's life? We knew more in 48 hours about Joe the Plumber than we've learned about Snowden. The reporters are all over whether Champ will cancel a summit with Vlad, but they have a curious lack of curiosity in exhuming Snowden's past.

But that's still small ball.

We have a system in which systemic failure no longer is examined, let alone punished. We focus on the tawdry and let important things slip by quietly.

How many other Snowdens are out there? How many times has our security screening failed? How will we even know? And what will it take to get people in Washington to look, let alone act?
Posted by:Besoeker

#5  can we trust the people commanding the is agency or not? Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain

In the Army, an Aricle-32 Investigation determines whether wrong-doing, or something unlawful has occurred. An investigating officer is appointed, given specific instructions and a timeline for completion, and that is his or her job until completed. In the civilian world a Grand Jury is convened to accomplish much the same. From both of these, a decision is rendered regarding the need to present a recommendation of formal charges based on findings. Unfortunately, congressional hearings and media sessions are NOT the same.

The key missing piece in the majority of these scandals is the appointment of an investigating officer by an appointing authority. I think we know who the appointing authority is, and precisely why nothing is taking place.

As far as Snowden goes, he's still innocent until PROVEN guilty of formal charges in a court of law.

I don't trust any of them. Snowden could probably be rehabilitated at some point and go on to serve a useful and productive life. The rest of them, I doubt it.


Posted by: Besoeker   2013-08-10 16:55  

#4  Besoeker: they're giving the "civil libertarians" what they think they want: dismantling the agency itself to take our minds off the more basic question: can we trust the people commanding the agency or not?
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2013-08-10 14:59  

#3  Champ referred to him as a "hacker", but then the Champ thinks Charleston, SC is in the Gulf. Director NSA announced this week that the agency has undertaken a huge cutback in "system administrators" [SYSADMIN] types. Well, here's a flash; SYSAD people do a bit more than 'Sneakernet' data from one computer or computer system to another. But as usual, some type of corrective action needed to be made public...ie, as we all know, motion equals progress(M=P), so lets whack the contract SYSAD geeks and USIS background investigation pukes. What a wonderful way to deflect responsibility and at the same time create a cool diversion from a massive, illegal, programmatic activity.
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-08-10 11:45  

#2  LOL - It's MoDo but Furred Reich is a hell of a headline.
Posted by: Shipman   2013-08-10 08:55  

#1  Heh, barking dawgs, I get it, took me awhile tho.
Posted by: Shipman   2013-08-10 08:53  

00:00