***Official Political Discussion Thread***



This was wild to me. She has a security clearance so she clearly doesn’t have an alarmingly high debt load that would compromise her and she would have had to declare debts and her husbands salary anyway (he works for the government at the Commerce Department btw).

I am thinking it has more to do with her being a woman than being black because the current preferred choice is a black male (Harry Coker). Either way, it is a shame and I am curious to see if they keep this same energy going forward.
 
That timeline algorithm gotta be wild if you're posting Ian Cheong post
deadmanny.png

If he left his Twitter handle in the “about” section of his NT profile, maybe you can find out. I wouldn’t expect to see him around here again anytime soon.

He reacted to his warning exactly as you’d expect - throwing a tantrum, angrily declaring he’s not racist, insulting how my “brain is developed”, and calling me “boy.”




It seems to me that the people who want the “freedom” to say offensive things without pushback are, ironically, demanding a “safe space” for their intolerance.

One of the interesting things about participating in a forum like this for so long is that you get to see the entire character arc of people who signed up as part of an adolescent hip hop phase, entered a “real world” that wasn’t impressed, and switched from Dr. Dre to Dr. Drew at the speed of gout.

Time always tells the truth.
 
So the guy who was just lecturing people with anxiety about controlling their emotions had an outburst that got him clipped?

Imagine that

I think he might have been off that Goose or Natty Light or whatever last night because he was wildin out all over NT, not just in here :smh:
 


And Chris Wallace didn't push back AT ALL with her deflection. Last I checked, Hillary wasn't charged and forgive me because I'm not the brightest bulb in the factory, but when did Hunter Biden decide to run for office. She's just another grifter who has sold their sole to a sinking ship. Can't wait for August and the Georgia GJ indictment, because it's coming!!
 

Its a real thing and they don't take it lightly. More serious the higher one goes. The logic being indebted people are more likely to trade cash for influence or even sell government secrets. At boot camp I knew a marine who didn't get a TS clearance for debts he already paid off. Anyone working for the feds or the military long enough should know this. It's unfortunate but the reason makes sense.
 
This was wild to me. She has a security clearance so she clearly doesn’t have an alarmingly high debt load that would compromise her and she would have had to declare debts and her husbands salary anyway (he works for the government at the Commerce Department btw).

I am thinking it has more to do with her being a woman than being black because the current preferred choice is a black male (Harry Coker). Either way, it is a shame and I am curious to see if they keep this same energy going forward.
The standards jump remarkably going from secret to top secret. There's a running joke, very much based on reality, that the only people qualified for these jobs are devout mormons. And in point of fact, many high level gov and military positions are held by mormons due to the training they get from the church + their inoffensive lifestyles.

Edit:

To be clear, I have no doubt race or gender play a factor in the decision making. However, on this particular topic, I am confident that her debts were the majority factor.
 
Last edited:
Its a real thing and they don't take it lightly. More serious the higher one goes. The logic being indebted people are more likely to trade cash for influence or even sell government secrets. At boot camp I knew a marine who didn't get a TS clearance for debts he already paid off. Anyone working for the feds or the military long enough should know this. It's unfortunate but the reason makes sense.
But we're not talking about CC debt. It's a mortgage, something +90% of homeowners have or have had.

The only way I think this would matter is if her mortgage-to-income ratio is higher than what the DOD would consider acceptable.
 
The standards jump remarkably going from secret to top secret. There's a running joke, very much based on reality, that the only people qualified for these jobs are devout mormons. And in point of fact, many high level gov and military positions are held by mormons due to the training they get from the church + their inoffensive lifestyles.

Edit:

To be clear, I have no doubt race or gender play a factor in the decision making. However, on this particular topic, I am confident that her debts were the majority factor.
She is doing the job right now.

She was appointed to an acting Interim role. But to make her permanent, she needs a Senate confirmation.

Senate Republicans like hassling and trying to sabotage Democratic nominees, and especially black women.

They got two Dem senators to not support the nomination.

She is qualified, she is highly recommended, and she is doing the job right now without issue.
 
But we're not talking about CC debt. It's a mortgage, something +90% of homeowners have or have had.

The only way I think this would matter is if her mortgage-to-income ratio is higher than what the DOD would consider acceptable.

From the article:

“They don’t have generational wealth. They’ve taken on debt to put their kids to private school. And most importantly, they pay their bills”

“After being hired as Inglis’s deputy, Walden filed a Form 278 with the Office of Government Ethics disclosing income, credit card debt, gifts, loans and her spouse’s income.”

From the sounds of it it’s not just a mortgage.

While you’re right that it isn’t a an automatic DQ for having debt, I really think they’re playing it safe. Something else to consider is how deeply personal these confirmation hearings have become. They rip your life to shreds on national TV. I don’t think they want that for her or that she wants that for herself. It sounds like she’s done with the BS anyway.

From the article:

“ “Though she has withdrawn her name from consideration, he would support her if she changes her mind or if she is nominated for a future position,” Green said.”

She is doing the job right now.

She was appointed to an acting Interim role. But to make her permanent, she needs a Senate confirmation.

Senate Republicans like hassling and trying to sabotage Democratic nominees, and especially black women.

They got two Dem senators to not support the nomination.

She is qualified, she is highly recommended, and she is doing the job right now without issue.

Back room politics is a thing, but so is bureaucratic BS.

You would be surprised how often things like this happen. Happened to me, happened to a boss of mine, happened to an officer I knew. They will make you interim this or acting that and take the hard work you put in happily. But the second it’s time to make things formalized, they suddenly care highly about clearances and rank and checking every box and dotting every i.

While I’m sure congressional politics is afoot as you’ve suggested, my experience in this kind of thing tells me this is mostly bureaucratic BS. It could be fought but many people don’t have the time or energy or desire for that kind of fight. The amount of people I knew who got out over this kind of thing is absurd. The US Gov and the military lose excellent talent everyday because of their own idiotic rules and procedures.

After what happened with Ketanji Brown Jackson, I could see why she nope’d out of continuing the process.

Like the article says:

“ “If the requirement to take a job like this is that you have to be independently wealthy, then it will be a poorer place because you’ll be cutting out a lot of great talent.” ”
 
But we're not talking about CC debt. It's a mortgage, something +90% of homeowners have or have had.

The only way I think this would matter is if her mortgage-to-income ratio is higher than what the DOD would consider acceptable.

Yeah, having things suddenly paid off is much more suspicious - a la Kavanaugh. It's ridiculous that this is even a thing.
 
Back room politics is a thing, but so is bureaucratic BS.

You would be surprised how often things like this happen. Happened to me, happened to a boss of mine, happened to an officer I knew. They will make you interim this or acting that and take the hard work you put in happily. But the second it’s time to make things formalized, they suddenly care highly about clearances and rank and checking every box and dotting every i.

While I’m sure congressional politics is afoot as you’ve suggested, my experience in this kind of thing tells me this is mostly bureaucratic BS. It could be fought but many people don’t have the time or energy or desire for that kind of fight. The amount of people I knew who got out over this kind of thing is absurd. The US Gov and the military lose excellent talent everyday because of their own idiotic rules and procedures.

After what happened with Ketanji Brown Jackson, I could see why she nope’d out of continuing the process.

Like the article says:

“ “If the requirement to take a job like this is that you have to be independently wealthy, then it will be a poorer place because you’ll be cutting out a lot of great talent.” ”
From the article...
The acting White House national cyber director was told in recent weeks that she would not be considered to serve in a permanent role, despite endorsements from key lawmakers from both parties and her predecessor, because of personal debt issues that would make her difficult to confirm, according to four people familiar with the matter.

Kemba Walden, who has been acting director since mid-February, was told five weeks ago that her high debt load would create an opportunity for senators to “give her a rough time,” said one person, who, like others interviewed, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.

The White House are choosing not to send her up for confirmation, that is why she withdrew her name.

They pointed to the debt issue giving the Senate Republicans and opening to attack her. And if they don't have the votes, it would be a pointless effort.

This is pointing to this being more a political issue, not beaururatic.

Secondly, from the article...

Experts in the arcane rules and practices of presidential nominee vetting said passing over a qualified candidate due to personal debt is unusual. “I’ve never heard of that one before,” said a lawyer who practices in the area who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.

“If she’s actually paying the debt or hasn’t defaulted on the debt, I think it would be very unusual to be held up because of that,” the lawyer said.

The expert on the matter WaPo themselves asked for clarification said this situation seems highly unusual.

We don't know what is in the report, so people have to do some level of guessing.

But it seems like you are taking a step further and doing the acknowledge and hand wave rhetorical move to whenever it comes to anything that doesn't match your anecdotal experience.

Not saying you haven't seen bureaucratic *******, but this situation is fundamentally about a Senate confirmation hearing, and vote. Which is a political roadblock.

If more info comes out, I am willing to change my position, but given the information, known your argument doesn't seem that a strong explanation. And in some level just seems like it is potentially giving cover to political bad actors.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom