(URL destination is a paywalled site, Epoch Times)
That would be Perkins Coie, based in Seattle. It has been the long-standing legal representation for The Boeing Company. As a result, it would be involved in sorting out or negotiating any problems or questions of security requirements and practices between Boeing and the U.S. government. It is not unreasonable to suppose they possibly would have a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) in order to host classified discussions. If their clearances were revoked...along with any SCIF certifications...that could prove to be very problematic in that relationship. And if their security staff were likewise decertified, Ghost Town. They would be unable to discuss anything in that category with either Boeing or the government. Some elements of the government would be Unspeakable (meaning, they cannot be named). I can see this being a huge upset for all defense things Boeing, unless they had a second firm on retainer.
Perkins Coie also handles the organization of Boeing's stockholder meetings. And doubtless helps to prepare the Annual Report. What a whitewash operation. Glowing accounts of programs that I knew from inside information were very troubled. Not all of them, but enough to contaminate the reliability of the whole report (in my view). But that is a topic of corporate governance, not of security clearances.
(Joke time: What do you call it when the Epoch Times covers the end of the world? An Epoch-alypse.)
All I needed was confirmation of the name, which wasn't hard. The Fox News article is heading off into a fruitless direction, considering who Perkins Coie represents and what customers are involved. Boeing has lots of contact with the Department of Defense, NASA, and other agencies in the WDC area.
Trump may have to back-pedal this one. Classified access is not only about clearances, but about need-to-know. Easy to revoke a need-to-know without revoking a clearance. It would be interesting to see what government representative posed a need-to-know concerning domestic political affairs---which I don't think would be covered by DoD clearances anyway. If P-C had been dipping into matters without a need-to-know, they would be in very hot water. Anyway, this action, while gratifying, could screw up government programs being performed by Boeing, not a benefit to the government nor to the public.
The actors getting their clearances yanked are a proven threat to national security. They knowingly engaged in literal treason to attempt to remove the sitting commander in chief, and president of the USA.
There is no "walking back" of anything for what they willfully did. They crossed into firing squad territory for their conspiratorial crimes, and should have all been arrested years ago.
You are jumping to a conclusion. Did they violate the terms of the clearances? I could see that violation of the election laws could compromise their background qualifications (no derogation based on law violation). As I understand it, their involvement is alleged to have been with the Steele report, before Trump had even been elected. Election interference is a federal crime, but it is not "treason." Don't get your hopes up.
You are willing to cut off your nose to spite your face. The Boeing Company has a number of important DoD programs. If Perkins-Coie is unable to provide legal services to government contracts, there may be "problems." The KC-46 Tanker program, for instance, has been chronically behind schedule. Same thing with the new Air Force One in work. Production of F-15s are under order. A space capsule CST-100 (for NASA) is running behind on schedule and performance.
Also the violations would be traceable to individuals, and possibly their chain of command. That should not contaminate those who were uninvolved. In the Darleen Druyun affair, she lost her job along with Michael Sears, Boeing CFO, and Phil Condit, Boeing CEO, resigned. The rest of Boeing was unaffected. It was flat-out procurement corruption, noted at the time (2005) as "the biggest Pentagon scandal in 20 years." Look up the Wikipedia entry for details on the case.
For now, a blanket suspension is a suitable administrative move while the government finds out who was involved and how far up the management chain it went, and removal, indictment, trial, conviction, and sentence of individuals according to whatever charges are applicable. I expect cooler heads will prevail. Nothing easier to reinstate as clearances, if there is no impeachable behavior.
As I understand it, their involvement is alleged to have been with the Steele report, before Trump had even been elected....
No, you do not understand it at all. You need to go back to 2016 and do your homework. There is a multi-year cesspool of treasonous, and seditious activity that orbits all around Perkins Coie.
They engaged in literal treason, not "alleged." Treasonous activity (conspiring with foreigners to intentionally harm the US) started in 2016, and continued throughout Trump's term. Add sedition to that list.
Law is law, and those miscreants chose treason. Boeing's best move is to distance itself from those people, throw them all under the bus, and hire new patriotic, trustworthy lawyers. Anything less, and Boeing may find itself cut off from the govt. tit, and receiving the "Toshiba treatment" for conspiring with foreign spies.
The facts you are looking for will take you weeks/months to sort through for yourself. That's why I said you have homework to do. The multitude of scandals surrounding Perkins Coie is far more expansive than you are imagining.
I'm sorry that I do not have time to readily provide much of the details on that swamp outfit. Most of the saved content I had on this topic was lost during an online censorship campaign years ago. But, I am sure that it's all still available, just look it up if you really want to know all the details. I only gave you bottom line.
I really don't know what you mean by that. In industry, I had multiple clearances, but if I did not have a need to know, I was not allowed to view material. It was not a library card. And the clearances were from different agencies (DoD, DoE, NATO, and one I wasn't even informed of).
But nobody would have been fired from Perkins-Coie. They have plenty of unclassified business. Could you be more explicit? Nobody is going to be fired from any of their customers. Who do you expect to be receiving pink slips? (I hate to be obtuse, but when I don't know, I ask questions.)
This is a good step one. Now let's round these folks up and charge them with treason!
Why would a private law firm have any security’s clearance?
Wasn't this the law firm that had an FBI office inside it?
Yep - found it: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gaetz-jordan-fbi-workspace-democratic-law-firm
"Why would a private law firm have any security’s clearance?"
...indication of heavy governmental involvement...
To make them feel special and keep what they were doing a secret, ie 'classified'.
So they can access the fbi computers if I remember right.
They had a terminal right in their office.
For the same reason a private industrial firm would have security clearances: to discuss and work on classified material.
(URL destination is a paywalled site, Epoch Times)
That would be Perkins Coie, based in Seattle. It has been the long-standing legal representation for The Boeing Company. As a result, it would be involved in sorting out or negotiating any problems or questions of security requirements and practices between Boeing and the U.S. government. It is not unreasonable to suppose they possibly would have a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) in order to host classified discussions. If their clearances were revoked...along with any SCIF certifications...that could prove to be very problematic in that relationship. And if their security staff were likewise decertified, Ghost Town. They would be unable to discuss anything in that category with either Boeing or the government. Some elements of the government would be Unspeakable (meaning, they cannot be named). I can see this being a huge upset for all defense things Boeing, unless they had a second firm on retainer.
Perkins Coie also handles the organization of Boeing's stockholder meetings. And doubtless helps to prepare the Annual Report. What a whitewash operation. Glowing accounts of programs that I knew from inside information were very troubled. Not all of them, but enough to contaminate the reliability of the whole report (in my view). But that is a topic of corporate governance, not of security clearances.
(Joke time: What do you call it when the Epoch Times covers the end of the world? An Epoch-alypse.)
...there is a link to an archived page...
All I needed was confirmation of the name, which wasn't hard. The Fox News article is heading off into a fruitless direction, considering who Perkins Coie represents and what customers are involved. Boeing has lots of contact with the Department of Defense, NASA, and other agencies in the WDC area.
Trump may have to back-pedal this one. Classified access is not only about clearances, but about need-to-know. Easy to revoke a need-to-know without revoking a clearance. It would be interesting to see what government representative posed a need-to-know concerning domestic political affairs---which I don't think would be covered by DoD clearances anyway. If P-C had been dipping into matters without a need-to-know, they would be in very hot water. Anyway, this action, while gratifying, could screw up government programs being performed by Boeing, not a benefit to the government nor to the public.
The actors getting their clearances yanked are a proven threat to national security. They knowingly engaged in literal treason to attempt to remove the sitting commander in chief, and president of the USA.
There is no "walking back" of anything for what they willfully did. They crossed into firing squad territory for their conspiratorial crimes, and should have all been arrested years ago.
You are jumping to a conclusion. Did they violate the terms of the clearances? I could see that violation of the election laws could compromise their background qualifications (no derogation based on law violation). As I understand it, their involvement is alleged to have been with the Steele report, before Trump had even been elected. Election interference is a federal crime, but it is not "treason." Don't get your hopes up.
You are willing to cut off your nose to spite your face. The Boeing Company has a number of important DoD programs. If Perkins-Coie is unable to provide legal services to government contracts, there may be "problems." The KC-46 Tanker program, for instance, has been chronically behind schedule. Same thing with the new Air Force One in work. Production of F-15s are under order. A space capsule CST-100 (for NASA) is running behind on schedule and performance.
Also the violations would be traceable to individuals, and possibly their chain of command. That should not contaminate those who were uninvolved. In the Darleen Druyun affair, she lost her job along with Michael Sears, Boeing CFO, and Phil Condit, Boeing CEO, resigned. The rest of Boeing was unaffected. It was flat-out procurement corruption, noted at the time (2005) as "the biggest Pentagon scandal in 20 years." Look up the Wikipedia entry for details on the case.
For now, a blanket suspension is a suitable administrative move while the government finds out who was involved and how far up the management chain it went, and removal, indictment, trial, conviction, and sentence of individuals according to whatever charges are applicable. I expect cooler heads will prevail. Nothing easier to reinstate as clearances, if there is no impeachable behavior.
No, you do not understand it at all. You need to go back to 2016 and do your homework. There is a multi-year cesspool of treasonous, and seditious activity that orbits all around Perkins Coie.
They engaged in literal treason, not "alleged." Treasonous activity (conspiring with foreigners to intentionally harm the US) started in 2016, and continued throughout Trump's term. Add sedition to that list.
Law is law, and those miscreants chose treason. Boeing's best move is to distance itself from those people, throw them all under the bus, and hire new patriotic, trustworthy lawyers. Anything less, and Boeing may find itself cut off from the govt. tit, and receiving the "Toshiba treatment" for conspiring with foreign spies.
So, you're not going to even give me a hint. I can live with that, since you don't refute my statement with any facts.
The facts you are looking for will take you weeks/months to sort through for yourself. That's why I said you have homework to do. The multitude of scandals surrounding Perkins Coie is far more expansive than you are imagining.
I'm sorry that I do not have time to readily provide much of the details on that swamp outfit. Most of the saved content I had on this topic was lost during an online censorship campaign years ago. But, I am sure that it's all still available, just look it up if you really want to know all the details. I only gave you bottom line.
" but about need-to-know."
...only the individuals who hold a position at a particular agency "need to know"...
...doggy winks...
...carry on...
I really don't know what you mean by that. In industry, I had multiple clearances, but if I did not have a need to know, I was not allowed to view material. It was not a library card. And the clearances were from different agencies (DoD, DoE, NATO, and one I wasn't even informed of).
"I really don't know what you mean by that."
...if you no got job...
...you no need clearance...
...unemployment nullifies "need to know"...
...pink slips do not require "your eyes only"...
...carry on...
But nobody would have been fired from Perkins-Coie. They have plenty of unclassified business. Could you be more explicit? Nobody is going to be fired from any of their customers. Who do you expect to be receiving pink slips? (I hate to be obtuse, but when I don't know, I ask questions.)
" (I hate to be obtuse, but when I don't know, I ask questions.)"
...you seem to be well versed in the art...
...one last time...
...ABC Law hires Joe for his ability to get a security clearance and be assigned to sensitive accounts...
...Joe loses his security clearance, thus becoming a liability to ABC Law...
...Joe collects his things and is shown the door...
Now do Covington and Burley.....
FUCK YOU Signed Donald J Trump p.s. strong letter will follow
https://archive.ph/KYtd2
https://archive.ph/wip/KYtd2