Former WH ethics lawyers say Trump wouldn’t qualify for a top security clearance
A number of staffers in the Trump White House have had problems with their security clearances, and, according to two former White House ethics lawyers, the president probably wouldn’t fare any better.
In an op-ed published by USA Today, Richard Painter and Norman Eisen, who served under Presidents Bush and Obama, respectively, explain why.
The authors write, “Every day brings a new reason why President Trump cannot meet the standards expected of every single person who works for him,” and go on to provide numerous examples.
They include the questions about Trump’s alleged affair with adult film star Stormy Daniels and the $130,000 payout she reportedly received. Also noted are Trump’s global financial dealings, the possible obstruction of justice connected to James Comey’s firing, and the numerous complaints of alleged sexual misconduct, and so on.
“If we were presented with such a job applicant when we were working in the White House, we would have been forced to consider that person’s susceptibility to blackmail,” Painter and Eisen write.
The piece notes that Presidents don’t need a clearance for “ethics or security purposes,” so it’s unclear if Trump would, in fact, be denied one.
Meanwhile, it has been reported that a number of staffers either resigned or were reassigned due to their inabilities to obtain the clearance level required for the positions they held.