For the last few days the regime and their media lapdogs have been out hounding Edward Snowden, deriding his motives, doubting his ethics, and deconstructing his character. This man is a spy because he collected data on our completely benign and legitimate government’s spying activities. He has aided our enemies by revealing information that is completely unimportant because we already knew about it or that it is even untrue (really, people are saying this). We are assured Snowden is misleading the American people because they are being kept safe, internal controls are in place to stop abuse, and their data is protected.
But if our data is so protected how was Snowden able to give it to the newspapers? How did he ever get access to it if he was such an unstable character?
It turns out that the national security system, while it is harvesting and mining data on everyone, is not competent enough to do a background check on anyone. USIS got the contract to do background checks. It has now come to light the first hints of how bad a job they were doing (or, perhaps not doing) that the leaker (!) speaking to the Washington Post says he will recommend that the government cut all ties with USIS unless they can prove their innocence. But it sounds doubtful that the government is even capable of letting USIS go:
“Cutting off USIS could present a major logistical quagmire for the nation’s already-jammed security clearance process. The federal government relies heavily on contractors to approve workers for some of its most sensitive jobs in defense and intelligence. Falls Church-based USIS is the largest single private provider for government background checks.”
So we are stuck with a company that not only proved incompetent, but covered up that incompetency with fraud so that it could earn undeserved incentives.
“After conducting an initial background check of a candidate for employment, USIS was required to perform a second review to make sure no important details had been missed. From 2008 through 2011, USIS allegedly skipped this second review in up to 50 percent of the cases. But it conveyed to federal officials that these reviews had, in fact, been performed. The shortcut made it appear that USIS was more efficient than it actually was and may have triggered incentive awards for the company, the people briefed on the matter said. Investigators, who have briefed lawmakers on the allegations, think the strategy may have originated with senior executives, the people said.”
So there is your all powerful national security system working tirelessly to milk taxpayers for work that they never even do. Yet on their website, they brazenly advertise “Fraud, Waste, and Abuse solutions.”
Yet we are supposed to trust these people with our national security and allow them to keep all their actions and people secret?