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.
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.)
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.
" 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.)