Security Clearance Form Fillable Template

The notes in the instructions of the SF86 explain “The U.S. CriminaCode titlele 18 section 1001 provides that knowingly falsifying or concealing material fact is a felony which may result in fines ardor up to five 5years imprisonment.”They would have to determine that you knowingly and purposefully attempted to conceal your foreign contacts. If you fill out the SF86 but then during your interview you reveal this information without prompting to the investigator he will make note that you are revising the information in yourSF86 due to erroneous or mistaken omission. The adjudication facility may still judge the omission to be suspect and deny your clearance but will bless likely to recommend charges. However if it is discovered at a later date especially if you’ve already been granted the clearance you are less likely to have a plausible defense that your omission was out of carelessness and not out of a knowing and purposeful concealment.

Its impossible to say but an incomplete SF86 can cause delay of the investigation rejection of a clearance andor prosecution for swearing to false document which is what you do by signing submitting an SF86. Seeinstructions here HTTPS.ors.od.nih.govserd...P.S. Jared Kushner just resubmitted his SF86 for the THIRD time adding over100 additional foreign contact names. July 13 2017

TLDR This is important. Read it.Oftentimes we ask questions that implicitly make assumptions about thesubject of the question in order for the question to make sense.If we have a sample of English text we can ask what its translation to Germanor Russian is but if it is not a grammatically correct sentence in the firstplace it may not be clear that it has any meaning to translate.In the question at hand the word “should” presupposes a shared system ofnormative ethics. We don’t ask if a bowling ball should fall into the gutteror if it should roll all the way down to alley to strike the pins. The balldoes not guide its actions by reference to or consideration of any system ofethics that it shares with those of us that are discussing its behavior.Similarly we don’t ask whether or not a raid dingo should bite a tourist onthe leg. It will do what a rabid dingo does irrespective of the ethicalconsiderations that win approval from those of us that are observing anddiscussing its behavior.Similarly before we ask ourselves any questions about what the AG should doI think it is to the point to determine the extent to which he shares with therest of us a system of normative ethics especially with respect to questionsthat impinge on law enforcement.For most of my lifetime the most compelling trend in our national law andculture has been the increasing protection and validation of formerlydisadvantaged groups. Discrimination on the basis of race religion genderand gender orientation have all become unpopular illegal and then somewhatless frequent over my halfcentury. During that time Jeff Sessions hasdeveloped an extensive resume as US Attorney Alabama Attorney General andUS Senator. I think it is reasonable to ask several questions about thatresume. Has Mr. Sessions been a consistent leader of that progress or has he been consistently opposing the trend toward civil rights Does he accurately describe objectively verifiable facts about his own history If his position on civil rights has developed and matured as has the rest of the country does he acknowledge that change and does he express regret for not having been ahead of his time do his recent filings and sworn testimony comport with verifiable realityLet us consider some vignettes from each of the jobs in his resume.As US Attorney Sessions claims he led the investigation that led to filing ofcharges against Klan members for a racially motivated murder in Mobile in1981. The attorneys who actually filed those papers now claim the Sessions’involvement consisted merely in no preventing them from acting.In 1985 Sessions actively prosecuted a case against 3 AfricanAmericancommunity organizers with accusations of absentee ballot tampering. The juryfound them innocent of all charges. Facts surrounding the case lead to aninterpretation that the case was primarily intended to discourage others fromtrying to help AfricanAmericans from trying to register to vote.As Alabama Attorney Sessions defended a model for school funding whichpreserved disparities in quality between rich white and poor blackschools. Federal courts found the model unconstitutional.When the Alabama legislature denied funding to student groups that advocatedfor rights for LGBT students Sessions argued that funding should not besupplied to groups that advocated breaking laws such as those against sodomy.This matter was resolved when one of the student groups won its case againstSessions in US District Court with the court finding the sodomy lawsunconstitutional.As a Senator Sessions has consistently voted against the expansion of civilrights laws and has expressed doubt that an openly gay Supreme Court Justicecould be accepted by the American public. He voted against a law that wouldhave expanded hate crimes to include crimes based on sexual orientation. Hevoted in favor of a Constitutional Amendment permanently restricting marriagesto one man one woman.He has soften his stance calling for a mandatory death penalty for a secondconviction for marijuana trafficking.In his application for security clearance when asked to name all contact inthe previous 7 years he neglected to mention at least two meetings withAmbassador Kislyak. A Justice Department spokesman ie Sessions• subordinatehas recently claimed that Sessions was advised by both the FBI and by otheradvisers in the Justice Department that those contacts did not need to bementioned. Other experts in security clearance law have said that the reasonshe might not need to list some contacts do not seem to apply here. If heneeded to list them then his application filed “under penalty of perjury”constitutes perjury. A nominee for AG should not be able to cite uncertaintyabout the law to cover his omissions.In his confirmation hearings he repeatedly stated that he had not had contactwith the Russian Government or its representatives. Even if the custom in thesecurity clearance application allowed him to omit some contacts thiscategorical denial was perjury.In short the evidence is that Jeff Sessions does not share a system ofnormative ethics with most Quora readers. Therefore we might as well ask if abowling ball or a rabid dingo should resign if it should find itself in theposition of being Attorney General.Since the issue of persuading the AG that he should resign seems unprofitablethe next logical question is “What should the rest of us do about the factthat we apparently have a rabid dingo as an AG”First of all don’t look for help from those who put him there. The Presidentcertainly knew what he was getting. The Republicans in the Senate also knewwhat they were getting or chose to ignore abundant warnings about it.The only actions that concerned citizens can take are essentially electoral innature. If you know a constituent of a Republican Senator remind them everytime some bit of embarrassing news comes out “You voted for the morons whoconfirmed this rabid dingo.” Remind them again next election. Offer to drivethem to the polls.Use the sloganLook what happens when we let Republicans get elected

Possible but unlikely without other cause.To put this in perspective almost the entire Clinton White House staff weregiven clearances by executive fiat because very few of those that bothered tofill out the paperwork were eligible to receive clearances due to drug use andantigovernment activities. None of them were prosecuted. Not even after theycompletely trashed the offices the day before George W. Bush took office.

I think number one was that Jared Kushner does not want to fill out thequestionaire completely. He knew he had a ahem troubled past and that pastwould flag his application. Two you have to fill it out ultimatelyyourself. You must certify under penalty of perjury it is true and correct.The lawyer could not know for sure what is “true and correct” except by takingJared Kushner’s word for it. Third I am not sure it requires a lawyer. Theform is straight forward you tell them what they want to know. There is nonegotiation and there is no strategy unlike tax forms for instance wherewhat you do can reduce your taxes. For a clearance you tell them what theywant to know. Obfuscation is not a legal option. I filled out one and it was along time ago but it wasn’t that hard. Unless you have a problem

The vetting process for high level officials is NOT treated the same as itwould be for you or me cough Hillary coughThat said officials who are not around classified information or didnt growup around it tend to play the ignorant card a lot. Who knows what hissuitability investigating went through. Im sure there waa pressure to getSessions cleared at all costs. Personally Id suspend his clearance bar himfrom accessing classified i formation and open up an investigation until adetermination is made. The investigating officer of course will be a highlevel government employee who will not find any wrong doing.Naturally Im a pessimist. There are oversight committees responsible forthis guy and security personnel in place to prevent spillage. Obviously atthat level theyre not very successful but the important info is protectedwhile politically charged information is “leaked.” Quite frankly Imirritated by this pattern.To answer your question though no this probably isnt enough to remove him.Hell simply disclose it then have an infraction in his security record ifthat.

There has to be knowing and willful nondisclosure and we cant get to thatwithout investigation unless they admit it. Conveniently they will have workers who actually completed the forms, and so they can always claim that asthe reason for the omission. I seriously doubt anything untoward will happen to them for one they will have the protection of the President. I am pretty nonpartisan I believe if Trump colluded with the Russians it is disloyal but no crime has been committed. However the lying on security clearance forms to get or maintain a clearance with no punishment I find to be as disloyal and a slap in the face to every service man or woman or every American citizen who were denied a clearance even when they were forthcoming with their information. With regards to Mr. Kushner where his attorneys acknowledge things were left off intentionally or not the clearance should be revoked until the investigation has been completed and an adjudicator decides whether he should get it. Why Because the interim clearance he received was based partially on his forms which they admit contain omissions he should have also listed contact with foreign government representatives for ALL immediate family members as well and anyone else would have a clearance revocation based on serious omissions to the form. In other Kushner’sinterim clearance was based at least partially on the granter’s belief that hehad no contacts with foreign government representatives. Period. Omitting Roget an interim or get pass the first hurdle is common and should be frowned upon. His lawyers state he will prall info at the interview. That excuses used a lot. The concern is were they really going to acknowledge what they admitted or just hope it wont be found out Mr. Kushner used something frankly common to those with unclean pasts who have concerns over whether they are clearable. Still Kushner and Sessions will maintain their clearances although the law is no one has a right to a clearance and trust you and Would have our revoked in a heartbeat. Its an unfair situation but because this society worships the rich and famous they get treated better than Rostand we allow it.

If the job requires security clearance then they will most likely take this step. If there are clear issues in the paperwork which would prevent you from getting cleared for the work then it is a waste of your and their times and effort as you will not get clearance and cannot do the job.