Federal Personnel Office Director Katherine Archuleta Resigns Following Massive Government Data Breach

The OPM chief was formerly the National Political Director on Obama's 2012 campaign.

|

OPM.gov

That didn't take long. 

Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Director Katherine Archuleta, who previously served as the National Political Director on President Obama's 2012 campaign, tendered her resignation today.

The move follows yesterday's revelation by OPM that a massive cybersecurity breach had exposed sensitive personal information, including Social Security numbers, for more than 21.5 million people to Chinese hackers. (There's been no formal accusation, but virtually everyone believes that China is the culprit.) Pretty much anyone who went through the federal government's background check since 2000, as well as about 1.8 million family members, was swept up in the beach. 

It was the second major breach in recent weeks; last month, OPM admitted that, in a related incident, hackers had stolen confidential records for more than 4 million federal employees, including details of their sex lives, gambling habits, and personal debts. 

Following news of the earlier breach, President Obama had publcily expressed confidence in her abilities

The New York Times reports that Archuleta went to the White House to submit her resignation this morning:

Ms. Archuleta went to the White House on Friday morning to personally inform Mr. Obama of her decision, saying that she felt new leadership was needed at the federal personnel agency to enable it to "move beyond the current challenges," the official said. The president accepted her resignation.

Beth Cobert, the deputy director of management at the Office of Management and Budget, will step in to temporarily replace Ms. Archuleta while a permanent replacement is found.

Before Archuleta leaves, however, she wants everyone to know how proud she is of OPM's IT Strategic Plan

OPM announced yesterday that it would offer three years of identity monitoring to anyone affected by the larger hack, but as National Journal reported, it has so far not found a contractor to do so

Much of the hacked information is pretty much the exact personnel data that would be worst to allow into the hands of foreign governments. As Kim Zetter notes in Wired, the background investigations database that was compromised contained…

…a wealth of sensitive data not only about workers seeking security clearance, but also about their friends, spouses and other family members.

The 127-page SF-86 forms include financial information, detailed employment histories—with reasons for past terminations included—as well as psychological records. They can also include potentially sensitive information about the applicant's interactions with foreign nationals—information that could be used against those nationals in their own country.

Federal background checks are meant to suss out information that might be used by foreign enemies to blackmail a government staffer into turning over classified information. Diplomats and other workers with access to classified information are required—depending on their job—to provide a list of foreign contacts.

IT security is, of course, complicated, and Archuleta had no real background in cybersecurity. But there are some steps that should be obvious. For example, maybe in the future, OPM should try to avoid giving root access to databases like this to outside contractors that employ systems administrators who are physically located in China

NEXT: Happy Birthday .Org!

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Where’s my free Lifelock subscription, goddammit.

    1. Which does absolutely nothing.

      1. Teh feelz!!!!

      2. Are you calling El Rushbo a liar?

        1. I am always thinking it’s El Rushmo.

  2. Who is in charge of national security?

      1. ProgBlaster!

    1. Steve Zhan and Martin Lawrence.

  3. Top. Men.

      1. Power. Bottoms?

        1. It is a known fact that Obama has failed to name a single trans-person to head any government agency. The cishet oppression must end.

  4. At least he always has his American Idol career to fall back on.

  5. Cue David Brooks to go on the Sunday talk shows and remark how amazingly competent and scandal free the Obama administration has been.

    It is nice that this woman resigned and all but it is a little late. I guess it is too much to expect any accountability from the boob who hired her. That would be RACIST and all.

    1. She may have not been a very wise Latina… but today she is a very sad Latina. That counts for something in today’s America, right?

  6. Resign? That’s a euphemism for “commit seppuku,” right? How could any other action be even considered? How could any other action be morally justified?

    1. Oh, I can think of a few other morally justified options…

    2. This isn’t her fault. It’s the person who put her in charge.

      1. Following news of the earlier breach, President Obama had publicly expressed confidence in her abilities

        Of course he did, bless his tiny little brain.

        1. “Following news of the earlier breach, President Obama had publicly expressed confidence in her abilities”

          And the problem is
          HE WAS SERIOUS!

        2. They’re going to plant a tiny little confederate flag in her desk and “discover” it later.

          1. The new kiddie porn.

        3. Obama was refering to her loyalty to him and his cause, not her level of competence or skills. That’s why she is now “resigning”….

        4. “Brownie’s doin a heck of a job.”

      2. This isn’t her fault. It’s the person who put her in charge.

        Didn’t matter to the daimyo of the Sengoku era and it doesn’t matter to me now.

        1. Wouldn’t that be Jigaki for her then?

          1. I don’t know how these terms translate in a post Shudo America.

            1. Are you telling me that if I get appointed Chief of Surgery at UCLA Medical Center and end up killing a few people on the table, it will be my fault????

        2. KATSUMOTO!

    3. Resign? That’s a euphemism for “commit seppuku,” right?

      If only. There might be less of this shit if people were actually afraid of having to commit suicide to preserve their honor.

      Or put up against a wall, or fed into a woodchipper…

      Hell, any kind of consequences whatsoever would be nice. Instead I’m sure Ms. Archuleta will be hired by some lobbying firm and be just fine.

  7. Didn’t Obama just give her a full show of support a few days ago?

    And honestly – just looking at her and her age, nothing about her screams qualified to protect data or to understand any of the technical aspects involved. And what was she before? A political hack on Obama’s campaign.

    Why do we consider it acceptable to hand out posts to cronies? It’s not even hidden.

    1. Well, a few days ago she was doing a heckuva job.

    2. Hell, I’m sitting at my computer as a non-programmer trying to figure out how you would hire someone competent for the job, and I honestly can’t think of one. Ninety percent of the time at that level the person who would be able to convince me they knew what they were doing would have their major skill set being bullshitting.

      Maybe go over to Google and ask to borrow ten programmers to write the job requirements for someone in this position? If you grab ten from the same group you could probably avoid just getting the guy who’s best at sucking up to the boss, and between them they probably have the knowledge to write out some actual technical requirements. I’m sure there are some common security measure protocols that everyone should have and they probably have a name (again, not knowledgeable in the field myself), so maybe a list of those type things. Knowledge anyone competent in the field should at least be aware exists and able to give some basic explanation of what it does.

      But yeah, hiring some guy who donated to my campaign would be so much easier.

      1. Maybe go over to Google and ask to borrow ten programmers to write the job requirements for someone in this position?

        Funny thing is, Obama did just that, and we still have this clusterfuck.

        1. Yeah, my first thought was “How is going over and getting Google’s top bullshitters going to solve the problem?”

          1. I specified programmers for a reason. Not the guys who manage the programmers, but someone who has written code in the last month and nine of his direct coworkers who have done the same. Grab ’em all from the same group so you don’t only get the diversity and top ass kisser hires.

            1. In general, most Google managers are pretty top notch programmers on their engineering side. They are extremely intelligent and also not a good fit for this position. Even at Google, security is a huge problem. Most engineers, even really smart ones, do not have security as a primary skillset. Indeed, many are so specialized that they can’t understand how vulnerabilities in other parts of the tech stack impact their own application’s security.

              I have no problem with the leader of OPM being technically illiterate. I don’t expect the CEO of Walmart to be a technical guru. So whether or not Archeletta knows the difference between XSS, XFR or SQL Injection isn’t important. What is important is getting a competent leader who is willing to do the very hard work of hiring security analysts and giving them the power and resources to harden the infrastructure.

            2. I specified programmers for a reason.

              And my first thought was “Yeah, we didn’t get The Right TOP MEN, *that’s* the problem.”

            3. Except this was a security breach, not a programming problem.

              maybe in the future, OPM should try to avoid giving root access to databases like this to outside contractors that employ systems administrators who are physically located in China.

              1. Also, i don’t know why they felt the need to digitize this data.

                A simple “pass/no pass” for security in the database would have sufficed, as I doubt there are regular requests to access the data beyond that result.

                So, if the FBI was worried about someone, they could request the paper file, which would have all the details, but China could only hack data for
                “pass/no pass”

      2. Edward Snowden is the only guy qualified for the job, and, unfortunately, he’s current out of the country.

        1. Not only qualified, but honest enough to admit there’s a problem.

      3. The answer is you don’t base your requirements on technical specifications at all, but on performance requirements (e.g. the government hires someone to do penetration testing, and the contractor must reach a certain level of performance at resisting that penetration testing). Then leave it up to the contractor to figure out the technical means for meeting the performace criteria.

        The problem with specifying the technical specs is that you can end up with a system that meets all the technical criteria but that doesn’t actually do what it’s supposed to do.

        1. the government hires someone to do penetration testing, and the contractor must reach a certain level of performance at resisting that penetration testing

          That sounds a little too rapey. Check your patriarchal prvelege, dude.

        2. The other problem is that government managers set technical specifications with no regard to what is actually feasible. They want systems that are easy to use and accessible but also secure. Those two things are of course often mutually exclusive.

          At some point, every large organization government and private, needs to understand no network or stored electronic information is ever completely secure and some information may be important enough to not store electronically at all. If OPM had had paper files of all of these SF 86s, it would have been inconvenient but there is no way anyone could have stolen them all. A cave full of 22 million paper files may be a pain in the ass to use, but no one is ever going to walk off with a copy of all of them.

          1. If OPM had had paper files of all of these SF 86s, it would have been inconvenient but there is no way anyone could have stolen them all.

            There are problems with inventory control there too, but it is a good point.

            At the end of the day, we are talking about governments spending billions of dollars on this stuff. I don’t think there is any real way to protect this stuff. If they can spend time targeting one stupid or disgruntled person to load malware on their computer, they can do serious damage.

            Also consider that the majority of compute resources in this country are manufactured in China, and you could have any number of back doors built into these systems.

            1. Sure they would have lost some of them, but they never could have lost them all like this.

              The SF 86s are actually exactly the kind of thing that didn’t need to be stored electronically and were only stored that way out of laziness and a fetish for automation. For decades people filled out paper SF 86s and things worked fine. Understand, once the investigation is completed, the file is only kept for future record. They are of no further use unless the person is later accused of fraud.

              Even if they wanted to keep the electronic filing system, they could have just printed out the documents and stored them out in a cave in Missouri and erased the data off the hard drives.

              It was an act of epic stupidity bordering on insanity to store all of them electronically in one database in the first place. We didn’t need timely access to them. So why risk their theft by putting them on a database?

              1. Budget. And curiosity about their ex-gf.

          2. A little background: the form is filled in and submitted electronically. It’s a bitch of a task. I printed a copy for my own records [to save me the hassle of looking up references’ addresses the next time] but it gets submitted online. For all I know OPM never makes a paper copy.

            My question is, after the security minion finishes their review, why do all these completed SF86’s have to be online for retrieval 24/7? They are so backlogged to do current investigations it’s highly unlikely that they’re going to retrieve old completed work. If a situation came up where an individual came under suspicion, they ought to retrieve the form from an offline server.

        3. I think you really do need someone embedded in the organization who is not only doing the penetration testing, but constantly working with developers to review their changes and guide them in the right direction.

          Unfortunately, IT Security is extremely hard. No one does it great, but some companies do it well.

      4. I mean, looking for someone with private sector IT security experience would be a start.

      5. ” hiring some guy who donated to my campaign would be so much easier.”

        And who do you think that person then hires to fill the rolls of middle-management subordinates?

        The most *qualified*?

    3. We should to a patronage system so all government jobs are political appointments.

      1. We’ve been in a patronage system for years.

    4. Didn’t Obama just give her a full show of support a few days ago?

      Isn’t that always how this shit always goes? Some crisis happens involving some department of government. The president goes out and voices his “full support” for the retard in charge of said department. Retard in charge ends up “resigning” a few days later.

      We saw it with Michael Brown(ie) during W’s tenure, with Kathleen Sebellius, Lois Lerner, now this woman. I’m sure I’m missing some other recent examples too. If was a bureaucrat I’d start getting my resume ready the second I hear the president mention my name publicly.

    5. She’s a professional political hack and a typical high-level bureaucrat. I wouldn’t expect her to know the ins-and-outs of IT security any more than I would expect the President to be well-versed in military strategy or international relations, but I absolutely would expect her to understand how much she doesn’t know and be able to pick subordinates with the specialized knowledge she lacks. A friend of mine always used to say that the best Presidents and directors and so forth were Democrats because they were so good at administration and staffing. Clearly, this is complete and utter bullshit.

      1. You know that on day one, the IT guys came to her with their concerns, and she quickly put them off, until more important work was finished.

        Remodel of her office, design new logo (what font to use?) and finally, how to increase diversity.

        1. Cornflower blue, I showed this to m’man here – you liked it, didntcha?

    6. And honestly – just looking at her and her age, nothing about her screams qualified to protect data or to understand any of the technical aspects involved

      Not to defend her, but isn’t that a little much to expect from the director of an office whose primary responsibility is personnel management? IT is what is supposed to support that responsibility; does anyone really think a Sheldon Cooper-type running OPM would be able to perform ANYTHING competently remotely related to personnel management?

      What stuns me is that the IT manager at OPM wasn’t brought in and raked over the coals. If I’m Archuleta, I would have made a big show about shit-canning the people in charge of the comm department there. And since the OPM’s servers are apparently running on ancient code that hasn’t been updated in decades, start figuring out some areas to cut in order to bring the IT up to standard–and if the cuts aren’t enough to do so, go to Congress and beg for money.

      1. Oh, I’m sure multiple heads rolled but for political reasons they had to make an example of the top dog in this case.

    1. Hackuva job, Archie!

  8. I have to say that his whole fiasco has my laughing; it is high-grade government stupidity – refined to be 99.99999% pure of any impurities such as flakes of prudence or competence.

    1. I would laugh, but I am fairly certain my security clearance info is in the hands of the PLA now.

      Maybe the dead dry laugh of an old behind-the-Iron-Curtain sort?

      1. You’re probably right! And I do feel sad that you are in this uncomfortable situation.

        But still; there is a huge irony in amassing all this data on how people can be suborned as a means of controlling security risks, and then allow a rival power to simply harvest it. It’s as if the DOD was doing the legwork for the Chinese intelligence agencies.

        The only failure as massive as this that I can recall is when Germany appointed a British spy to head the Abwehr during World War II.

        1. I dunno.
          The Brits countered by putting Kim Philby in a pretty high position and then giving Klaus Fuchs a clearance.

          1. Haven’t you read Declare? Philby was totally working for the Brits (albeit not completely wittingly) to keep the Soviets from forming an alliance with a powerful djinn.

        2. Tarran – you need to look at the life of Harry Dexter White. We’ve had much, much worse. He helped set up the IMF and the World Bank while he was working for the Russians as OUR representative at Bretton Woods. It was at his assistance that we gave the Russians their own plates to print post-WW2 currency in East Germany. Oops.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Dexter_White

          1. “It was at his ‘insistence'” not ‘assistance’

            You should know, tarran, that it’s always worse than the worst you can think of. Always.

      2. my wife has already been notified by corporate security that her security clearance information was in the batch of stolen data.

      3. Same here. I would say I’ll never take another job requiring a security clearance, but the government collects so much information on everyone else anyway that it doesn’t matter. None of it’s secure, so we’re all fucked either way. Hell, I’m surprised the Chinese goevernemnt doesn’t have SS #s for every American citizen.

        Actually they could already have it and the feds will never tell us. Don’t want to cause a “panic” afterall.

        1. It’s in the government’s best interest to have a foreign scapegoat. That way, when it comes time to seize your savings and retirements accounts, they can blame the Chinese for stealing your money and then you’ll be ever so grateful when the government just decides to make good on 20% of your assets when they claim they have no legal obligation to do so.

        2. If these hackers cleaned out OPM’s data base then certainly could have cleaned out SSA’s – if they wanted to.

          I think one has to assume that DoJ’s and the FBI’s data bases have also been breached. It may be that the US has simply been collecting data on behalf of these hackers for past few years.

    2. It’s only government employees and their statist enablers. If anyone deserves to have their lives turned upside down or worse, it’s these federal fascists and their families and dogs and shit. No sympathy, no mercy, no exceptions!

  9. a wealth of sensitive data not only about workers seeking security clearance, but also about their friends, spouses and other family members

    Friends don’t let friends apply for security clearances.

    And if your friends do apply, I hope you will tell them to get the fuck out of your life and stop endangering you.

    1. What do you have against 6 figure do-nothing jobs?

      1. Or being a commissioned officer in the National Guard 🙁

        1. We may love you, but none of us told you to go become an agent of the state.

          1. I don’t think that warrants having my personal information in the hands of the PLA, does it?!

            1. Next time join the Foreign Legion.

              1. Ran into them around Kabul in 2005…feisty bunch. My French is non-existent, however.

            2. Or try and get commissioned in Swiss Army instead.

      2. A lot of them don’t pay that much.

        1. Yep. I have a clearance and only make half that…

    2. Who gives a shit? The “blackmail” thing is so overblown. I can honestly tell you there is nothing on my SF 86 anyone would give a shit about and if there were, I likely would have never gotten a clearance. The whole thing makes me wonder about the people who are so convinced everyone is a security clearence is about to be blackmailed. What exactly are those people up to?

      Am I the only man in America who doesn’t have a secret tranny hooker he still hasn’t paid for that crack deal last year?

      1. John, why do you think the government does these checks to begin with? To find out if you can be blackmailed. You know that not everyone passes the check, so obviously those people have something bad in their past.

        And yeah, if you really have no secrets in your past, you are unusual.

        1. If you actually have secrets in your past, you don’t put them on your SF 86. To the extent that I have secrets, you would never find them out by looking at my SF 86. Anything is on there is on there because it can be checked. And if it can be checked out, it is a public record and not much of a secret. And the people who had their clearances denied, lost their jobs or didn’t get the one they were hired to do.

          1. And the people who had their clearances denied, lost their jobs or didn’t get the one they were hired to do.

            And…if the state collected information about their friends and family, those people just got fucked.

            If you think I care about foreign governments harming the state via blackmail, I don’t. I care about normal people who never tried to get entangled in this bullshit having their identities compromised because they’re related to some government employee. They didn’t fucking consent to that.

            1. And…if the state collected information about their friends and family, those people just got fucked.

              How? Seriously, how? Maybe identity theft but I doubt the Chinese are interested in doing that and it is not like you are not totally vulnerable to that anyway.

              I can’t think of a single circumstance, other than identity theft, where someone’s family member gets fucked over this. I really can’t.

              1. Why is identity theft not good enough for you? People who don’t want to be involved in the state have some “friend” hand over their information to be put into an insecure government database. And now we know that data has been hacked. Do you really need more evidence than that that those people were screwed? It’s phenomenally shitty.

                1. Identity theft sucks. But you are more likely to have your identity stolen by some illegal alien than the Chinese. I really don’t see how or why the Chinese would use this for identity theft.

                  Sure it is shitty. But just because it is shitty doesn’t mean there are going to be all of these grave consequences for everyone. Chances are there will be no consequences for virtually everyone. That doesn’t make it right of course.

                  1. If anything, this data makes the Chinese more likely to be able to pick you out of the noise. They are doing just as much, if not more, data hoovering from the internet. Having detailed information about you, where you are, phone numbers, addresses, etc allows a correlation engine more easily pick your identity out of all the traffic, posts, etc on the intertubes.

                    Additionally, it is not clear whether or not the stolen information was only the forms or if it also included additional information, such as stuff dug up by the reviewers or final disposition of the person.

                    Consider this- if there is really no harm that the Chinese could do from this data, why would they steal it in the first place?

                    1. Consider this- if there is really no harm that the Chinese could do from this data, why would they steal it in the first place?

                      Because it humiliates Obama for one. This information does have uses but I don’t think it is blackmail. The use is that it is a treasure trove of information for creating cover identities for Chinese agents. All an SF 86 is is the person’s personal history. Any government intel service can create a false passport and identity papers for their agents. What they can’t do or is hard to do is create an entire life. Those SF 86s are millions of ready made lives that will pass any check short of showing the agent to the person’s mother and asking if it is him.

                    2. Because it humiliates Obama for one.

                      The fact that this has happened on at least 3 occaisions tells me that there has been a long program of infiltration here, which is more than just a humiliation game. I can almost guarantee you that these aren’t three unrelated incidents. In fact, my bet is that they have had access to this data for a long while. At first they were getting one offs of information as they needed it- after all, it’s best if you can get the most recently updated information. At some point they were detected, and this latest incident is due to them realizing they were about to be shut out, so they just slurped the entire database under the knowledge they were about to lose access.

                      Certainly, Impersonation is a huge problem. They have probably used this information to access additional government systems. But it is also a route to coerce you. It is a route to financially fuck with you (I should be working on this trade negotiation but I’m too busy finding out why my bank account is empty now).

                      But when you look at what the US/MI6 did to infiltrate European network backbone providers, you see just how nefarious this information is. They found out who key engineers were, and then stalked them online, often infiltrating the company by infiltrating peoples computers on sites they were browsing, or physically by accessing them at shops and banks they frequented. I agree blackmail wasn’t their only intent and it isn’t the worst.

                    3. But when you look at what the US/MI6 did to infiltrate European network backbone providers, you see just how nefarious this information is. They found out who key engineers were, and then stalked them online, often infiltrating the company by infiltrating peoples computers on sites they were browsing, or physically by accessing them at shops and banks they frequented. I agree blackmail wasn’t their only intent and it isn’t the worst.

                      You answered your own question a lot better than I did. That is all very true and shows why this information is dangerous. But that danger is to the government not really to the people involved. If the Chinese stalk me online and figure out a way to use me to inadvertently put a worm inside government computers, that will suck for the government but I won’t even know it happened.

                      I am not saying this isn’t a big deal. It is just not a big deal for the reasons people are saying.

                    4. Cool then. I agree blackmail is not the biggest deal. It is a concern, but as you said impersonation is the biggest problem.

                      Let me tell you a fairy tale.

                      Once upon a time, there was an IT Helpdesk Guy sitting at his computer. In comes a call from an employee asking to reset his password. So he goes through all the standard security questions to verify identity- manager name, employment start date, etc. Password gets reset.

                      Two weeks later, due to that one compromise, the Kingdom was switching its VPN systems out, reimaging thousands of servers and rolling back commits to several sourcecode repositories. All because one hacker had enough personal information to convince a phone representative that he was someone else.

                    5. Absolutely. I will say that you do not reset your password on a classified system quite that easily. And also, you can’t remotely log into the classified systems.

                      And the unclass systems have thankfully gone to identity cards and hopefully soon biometrics.

                    6. Absolutely. I will say that you do not reset your password on a classified system quite that easily. And also, you can’t remotely log into the classified systems.

                      Given how many classified documents have been sent over email just at the state department, I am not reassured.

                      The point of my, erm, fairytail is that each compromise gets you to the next level. The hacker was able to get his password reset because he had accessed a low security intranet webpage. Then once he had a password, he could visit restricted knowledge articles with additional information about config systems. Once he knew about the makeup of the config systems, he could exploit a known vulnerability on their web-stack to drop to shell. This was all done from some eastern european internet cafe.

                      This is one of the problems with considering some data more sensitive than others. If you don’t think about how it can be combined, pretty soon a determined person has wormed their way all the way inside the castle walls. The safeguards you note are important, but they can be compromised in the same fashion- especially when you have the resources of a government behind you.

                    7. Because they could.

                      And they get to do a little dance and get moar budget.

                      In reality, stealing the data was dumb.

                      They could have been inserting agents that were fully cleared using the system, and we’d never know. “The computer says he’s clear.”

            2. The info on friends & family is limited to names, addresses and phone. So it’s pretty much like hacking the phone book for them.

        2. Considering the ‘winners’ are 20 Million gov’t employees, I always thought you failed by having slept with the head of the KGB or similar.

          Not no secrets, just secrets not worth extorting and/or selling out your country for.

          Everybody has secrets, most of mine are worth about 20% of my annual salary sum total. And about half of them are kept from people would notice if 20% of my salary went missing.

          1. That too mad casual. I don’t care how embarrassing the material you have on me is, I am not risking going to super max for the rest of my life to avoid having it made public. I am pretty sure every other person on earth would agree with me.

            There has never been a single case where someone sold out the country because they were being blackmailed. Every person who ever has did so voluntarily out of greed, spite, or ideology.

            1. What about Chief Justice Roberts?

              1. I am pretty sure he volunteered. If they blackmailed him, they wasted their time since a simple letter from Linda Greenhouse explaining how disappointed she in him she would be if he didn’t uphold Obmaacare would have worked just as well.

            2. Americans tend to be spoiled by the relative degree of privacy and anonymity they possess in comparison to the rest of the world’s societies. Thirteen separate, mandatory disclosures of exhaustive personal details are routine procedure in Britain, for instance.

            3. There has never been a single case where someone sold out the country because they were being blackmailed. Every person who ever has did so voluntarily out of greed, spite, or ideology.

              You’re correct it’s not so much blackmail that’s the problem as it is financial concerns. A lot of the people who sell out their country do so because they were in massive debt and were vulnerable to bribery that way. It’s not so much blackmail that’s the issue as bribery. And someone with financial problems is far more likely to take a bribe.

              Luckily, the Chinese probably now have too much data to sift through to find the one person on a given program they want to know about who’s in financial distress. They have just hoisted themselves by their own retard, just like the NSA has.

              1. You’re correct it’s not so much blackmail that’s the problem as it is financial concerns. A lot of the people who sell out their country do so because they were in massive debt and were vulnerable to bribery that way. It’s not so much blackmail that’s the issue as bribery. And someone with financial problems is far more likely to take a bribe.

                That is not even true. A few of them, Hanson I think being one, ran up big debts after they were selling out the country. None of them to my knowledge started in order to pay their debts. They just ran up debts because getting free money tends to cause you to spend even more and go into debt. The ones who were not just fucking communists fit the same general pattern; egotistical assholes disgruntled that the world and their employer in particular didn’t recognize their genius and provide them with the money and power they felt they deserved.

            4. There has never been a single case where someone sold out the country because they were being blackmailed. Every person who ever has did so voluntarily out of greed, spite, or ideology.

              That is definitely not true. Lookup “Motivations for Spying::Coercion” on wikipedia for just a few examples.

              Rarely are the MAJOR spies you read about- with decades of espionage before they were found- blackmailed (but there are examples). However, blackmail has been used in wartime and other periods for one off compromises. Ignore this dispatch. Open this door. Pass this message. It happened a lot. KGB even had agents tasked at seducing men, specifically for blackmail.

            5. There has never been a single case where someone sold out the country because they were being blackmailed. Every person who ever has did so voluntarily out of greed, spite, or ideology.

              That is definitely not true. Lookup “Motivations for Spying::Coercion” on wikipedia for just a few examples.

              Rarely are the MAJOR spies you read about- with decades of espionage before they were found- blackmailed (but there are examples). However, blackmail has been used in wartime and other periods for one off compromises. Ignore this dispatch. Open this door. Pass this message. It happened a lot. KGB even had agents tasked at seducing men, specifically for blackmail.

              1. Fair enough overt, but that is pretty small change. And also, those were the days when we still had privacy. It would take awfully big balls to do that sort of thing now.

                1. Well it would take awful big balls to do ANY spying in this day and age.

                  Of course, with information like this being stolen daily, they may not need to spy anymore. Who needs you to copy some data from a server when that server’s network stack is already sending the contents of its file system to an offshore host?

                  I agree with you that blackmail is not the main reason to get this information. It’s about social engineering. They have a list of people, likely with their positions in the government. How many of them are getting an email from an old highschool friend who is wondering what’s up? How many are now under surveillance at their home and church? How many have new firmware being installed on their cable modems?

        3. His secret is that he is actually Kristen’s dad.

          1. No. The secret is I am her dad and we didn’t know it until after we had that affair.

            1. Now I didn’t just throw up in my mouth a little – I full-on ruined my keyboard!

              1. You are the one who started that meme.

          2. Hey – did I mention my Pa is getting hitched? Being an emotionless automaton, this whole prospect of weddings and vows and toasts makes me throw up in my mouth a little bit. I’m trying to strongarm the squeeze into going, but he’s trying to kiss some union ass so he can get steadier work and make more money (which means he’s more at their beck-and-call than mine). I’m fucked.

                1. I was wondering whether your significant other was employed by the Transportation Security Administration. I hear checking out chicks in those scanners is their favorite pastime. Make sure that’s not why he’s reluctant to tear himself away. 😛

            1. I’m fucked.

              Seems like you brought it upon yourself. Stop whining. It’s undignified.

        4. Oh we all have secrets. It’s just better to have secrets that don’t leave a paper trail.

        5. John is Dexter.

      2. Yes?

      3. I have two friends with a security clearance, and I was interviewed for both of them. Seemed like a huge waste of time.

        Interview question: does he drink? What does he do when he drinks?

        Internal monologue: Yeah motherfucker, we’re 21. We get wasted several times a week.Ive also seen him run around his house wearing nothing but a guitar, shit in someone’s mailbox, and do donuts in a golf cart while drunk.

        Verbal response: He drinks socially, maybe a beer or two while he’s watching a game.

        I can’t imagine what the point of the interview process is unless its just to weed out the absolute dumbest people on Earth.

        1. More or less. They do things like talk to your neighbors and see if you cause any trouble in the neighborhood, because if I were spying for the Chinese the first thing I would do is draw attention to myself by having loud drunken parties that bothered my neighbors.

          1. In my case they thought I was hiding a secret family.

            My best friend in college was dating a Nasa engineer, and they got married immediately after my graduation. For some reason I no longer recall, my friend was 3 credits short of graduation, and finished up her degree the next fall. And professors in the physics department saw her pregnancy and assumed I must be the dad. Several of them were interviewed by the Navy investigators and told them about ‘my’ child.

            Needless to say, she was listed on my disclosure form as a friend and I hadn’t mentioned any kid at all. Some of my friends were very surprised to find themselves being asked about my secret love child. I got a few phone calls from very discomfited classmates. Luckily they were set straight before things got too out of hand.

            1. That is pretty hilarious.

            2. Sounds like it would make a good one hour episode of a TV show!

            3. Sounds like the hacked data contained a lot of BS.

              That’s actually the part that can be harmful. Not by foreign blackmailers but by domestic prosecutors with a budget to waste.

        2. I had a Raymond Burr doppleganger knock on my door doing a security clearance check of some neighbor I don’t know and don’t remember. I told him “Dude, I couldn’t even tell you what race the guy is”, yet he still kept asking me questions like “did he ever cause a disturbance?” “were the police ever called to his condo?”.

          I DON’T FUCKING KNOW!

          1. I told him “Dude, I couldn’t even tell you what race the guy is”, yet he still kept asking me questions like “did he ever cause a disturbance?” “were the police ever called to his condo?”.
            Because you can’t tell him how loud and criminal he is without knowing his skin color?
            So racist! 😛

        3. I can’t imagine what the point of the interview process is unless its just to weed out the absolute dumbest people on Earth.

          It also weeds out kids from the ghetto whose friends and neighbors don’t talk to the fucking feds.

          Those kids’ friends are smarter than you.

          1. Exactly what information do you think they got from me in the interview process? My name, an old address, a disconnected phone number, and the place I worked while in college. The government has way more information on me ( and you smart girl) from several other sources in many more databases.

          2. It also weeds out kids from the ghetto whose friends and neighbors don’t talk to the fucking feds.

            Nah, they snitch all the time. Why do you think we racial disparities in arrests?

            1. Racism pure and simple. It makes sense if you don’t think about it.

        4. Right. I needed clearance for unescorted access to a few power plants. I gave the references for a few friends who volunteered for it and they were called. I’m sure they had the same inner monologue. Also admitting to have smoked pot but able to pass a piss test OK. Admitting to have tried LSD however is verboten. Background checks really are a stupidity test more than anything.

          1. When I applied for mine, my boss called me into his office and told me, “I have no idea if you’ve ever done drugs or not. I don’t want to know. But when they ask you about your drug history, say, ‘I tried pot a couple times in college and it really didn’t do anything for me.’ Say that even if you never took drugs. If you deny ever having tried them, they’ll get suspicious, start digging, and you’ll delay the process by a year.” So that’s the answer I gave, they moved on from that, and the clearance came through in record time.

      4. Am I the only man in America who doesn’t have a secret tranny hooker he still hasn’t paid for that crack deal last year?

        Probably

        1. My father always told me “son if you don’t learn anything else from me, always remember, don’t run up a crack debt to a tranny hooker”.

          Did no one else in this country have a father?

          1. It’s basically free crack, all you have to do is pay the minimum every month.

            1. That is how they get you. Pay in full at the time of delivery.

          2. “son if you don’t learn anything else from me, always remember, don’t run up a crack debt to a tranny hooker”

            Of shit! I forgot to impart that one!

      5. Am I the only man in America who doesn’t have a secret tranny hooker he still hasn’t paid for that crack deal last year?

        Hey! She’s not a tranny, she’s just got very large hands!

        1. Ugh. “Sex-Worker”, people.

          Double-Ugh = “Tranny” is also an unspeakable slur. We’re still waiting on what the preferred nomenclature is.

        2. Don’t worry Loki. Everyone knows you are of course entirely straight. NTTAWWT

          1. I enjoy the occasional Thai ladyboy hooker after a cobra whiskey bender as much as the next guy, but the hooker I stiffed for that crack rock wasn’t one.

      6. Who gives a shit? The “blackmail” thing is so overblown. I can honestly tell you there is nothing on my SF 86 anyone would give a shit about and if there were, I likely would have never gotten a clearance.

        But now that they have your personal information, they can engage in all sorts of financial and legal transactions on your behalf easily.

        1. ^This

          How did hackers get access to Sara Palin’s Yahoo email account? They went through her online biography and did some basic guessing based on her profile so that they could pass the “Forgotten Password Security Questions.”

          Most people don’t need to have that fear. Questions about your highschool, first job, first girlfriend, etc are not necessarily publicly available, and if they are publicly available that information is unstructured and scattered on various sites. This means they need to be targeting you directly and spend a good amount of time searching for information.

          These forms have basically centralized that information for 20 million people. It is possible now to write a program to go through these 20 million people, bring back all the folks with accounts at Vanguard and start plugging in those details in a mass attack.

          Luckily, the world is moving away from these types of security questions (in fact, for years I have actually not put the real answers in these security questions in case someone I know ever wants to fuck me over). However many banking institutions and other websites absolutely rely on these security questions today and many will be defeated because that information is now stored in structured data records in Beijing.

      7. The Chinese can still basically guess all your security questions (if you use honest answers anyway) and lock down all your money. That might work pretty well for extortion too.

        1. Well, maybe I should just finish reading.

    3. Friends don’t let friends apply for security clearances.

      Unless they’re undermining shitty spying policies and practices in combination with leaky-sieve-style security.

    4. I applied for one. Amazingly, I got it. That shows you how rigorous the process is.

  10. Beth Cobert, Deputy Director for Management
    She has been a champion for professional development and initiatives to support women’s advancement to leadership positions.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/organization_office

    Meet the new boss.

    Isn’t it interesting that when you based on secondary qualifications the primary qualifications tend to suffer? It’s like you could predict this somehow.

    1. My editor sucks. I’d fire him but I’d have to employ him first.

      Isn’t it interesting that when you base hiring decisions on secondary qualifications the primary qualifications tend to suffer? It’s like you could predict this somehow.

    2. master’s degree in business administration from Stanford University

      It’s an improvement over Archuleta, who was a complete political hack.

      1. A certification doesn’t demonstrate competence any more than security theater demonstrates security.

        Compare Beth’s bio to Archie’s (excerpt below) to find the common thread.

        As the Director of OPM, Archuleta is committed to building an innovative and inclusive workforce that reflects the diversity of America. As a long-time public servant, she is a champion of Federal employees.

        Champions both. Hurrah.

  11. Well this will fix everything. When we see systematic failure in government institutions, nothing works better to fix the problem than axing the politically appointed figurehead who nominally oversees them.

    1. I also love this: she felt new leadership was needed at the federal personnel agency to enable it to “move beyond the current challenges,”

      I mean, God forbid she would say: “I screwed up. I quit to save the president the embarrassment of firing me.”

      Having said that, she’s still better than most of the TOP.MEN who run around saying, “I accept full responsibility” and then do nothing at all.

      1. God forbid she would say: “I screwed up. I quit to save the president the embarrassment of firing me.”

        I think the problem with saying that is that it doesn’t spare the president the embarrassment of firing her. You have to pretend you are just resigning, or it doesn’t work.

  12. For example, maybe in the future, OPM should try to avoid giving root access to databases like this to outside contractors that employ systems administrators who are physically located in China.

    They warned us about privatization. Why didn’t we listen?

  13. “But single-payer healthcare will be better and more efficient!!”

    1. Because, obviously, Obama values the average American taxpayer a lot more than the average federal employee!

  14. Also, in case you missed it, Archuleta took to Twitter back in 2012 to remonstrate Romney for being out-of-touch because he suggested Chinese and Russian hackers might target federal agency databases.

      1. Wow. Thanks for that history lesson.

  15. “The OPM Chief…”

    I think the title of Other People’s Money Chief would be a common one among gov’t employees.

    1. Other People’s Metadata.

      1. O is for Other. P is for people scratchin’ temple. The last letter, well, that’s not that simple.

  16. China and America should agree on America hosting a designated IP where it posts all sensitive stuff and China just runs a chron job every night.

    So much simpler, so many clock-cycles (read: carbon!) saved.

  17. It is funny how people who likely have dirt on Obama, like the head of the IRS or Holder keep their jobs until they decide to leave no matter how much of an embarrassment they are. The people like this woman who don’t, are told to hit the road pretty quickly once a single Democrat in Congress decides they don’t like them anymore.

    1. Could be. Though Rumsfeld probably should have resigned a year earlier and didn’t leave until the bloodletting in congressional polls. It may be a result of having dirt on someone, or just personal attachment to that person.

  18. I call on the government to release everything, with no reactions, to remove the threat of blackmail from our loyal public servants, for National Security and teh childrenz.

    1. Go for it. I would love for the world to see exactly how lame and boring most people’s lives, mine included actually are.

      1. According to the news perverted drug addicted mentally ill criminals with gambling problems who cheat on their spouse and were fired from previous employment for shocking and/or embarrassing reasons make up a substantial number of security clearance holders.

        1. Yeah, amazingly everything you read in the media isn’t the truth. I know, who knew.

          The funny thing about that is that if there are such people, that information is already public record anyway. I guess maybe you could have been a coke head in college and gone to rehab and that wouldn’t be public knowledge unless you were arrested for it. But so what? In this day and age is that really blackmail material?

          A secret is that you like you and your wife are furries in bed. And last time I looked, “are you a furry or have any other deviant sexual kinks” is not a question on the SF 86.

          1. Does this include shit revealed in polygraph examinations?

            1. Yes. The lifestyle polies are a bit more intrusive, but they only go back ten years. So your days of being a secret furry in college wouldn’t get asked about, assuming you are ten years past college.

              Even those are all about drugs and sex. Unless the guy is a Mormon or has a really crazy teetotaler family, “you tried cocaine in 2003” really isn’t very good blackmail material. The only thing that I could imagine would be is if the guy cheated on his wife and admitted it to them but had otherwise got away with it or maybe if you and your current spouse were mad swingers or into cuckolding or something. That would be blackmail material. Even then, the guy would have to be so embarrassed he is willing to risk life in prison. And I am not sure how it would work. Okay, the Chinese have my poly that said I had an affair on my wife a few years ago. How exactly do they spill the beans to her? Send her a copy of the file? Maybe but I could always say it was a fake. She might believe me. Taking that chance sounds better than risking prison.

              1. The lifestyle polies are a bit more intrusive

                When I was getting ready to take my CI poly a few years ago when I had a really high clearance, I heard a kind of funny story about those about a kid fresh out of college who was goin in for a CI poly and he was really nervous. So the polygraph analyst asked him if he OK and the kid told him that his co-workers had told him all kinds of horror stories about how they’ll ask if you’ve ever had sex with barnyard animals and stuff.

                The polygraph analyst, after laughing his ass of, explained to him that “no, this is just a counter intelligence poly, what you’re thinking of is the lifestyle poly. Although I’d hope the answer to that particular question would be a fairly straightforward ‘no’.”

            2. Nothing gets revealed in a polygraph examination except for what you choose to reveal.

              1. Are…Are you the Shadow?

        2. perverted drug addicted mentally ill criminals with gambling problems who cheat on their spouse and were fired from previous employment for shocking and/or embarrassing reasons

          I thought Bill Bennett was entirely in the public sector at this point.

          1. +100 Virtues.

  19. OK, I had to look up what the hell this office is for. According to Wikipedia:

    According to their website, the mission of the OPM is “recruiting, retaining and honoring a world-class force to serve the American people.”[4] The OPM is partially responsible for maintaining the appearance of independence and neutrality in the Administrative Law System.

    So, I’m left wondering, “What the hell is this office for?”

    1. Its the government’s HR department. That is all it is.

      1. ^^This. Anything your HR corporate department does, OPM does worse and more expensively.

        1. Yes. These are the people who fuck up your dental forms and W-4s when you hire on. And knowing multiple people who left government employment to go to the private sector, trust me when I say all big HR departments are equally awful.

          1. Yes, I know. I’ve worked in the private sector most of my career.

            1. The problem is who with any brains or prospects wants to work in HR? Their pool of talent is pretty limited.

              1. Personnel? That’s for assholes.

                /Harry Callahan

              2. I know someone in HR who is pretty smart, but he makes up for it by having no ambition other than planning his next vacation

                1. In 20 years of working with HR liaisons for my teams, I had ONE who showed me the true value of a good HR rep. Everything from helping get my employees the training they needed to helping me navigate a byzantine annual review process. This girl was awesome. She also coached me through a pretty nasty personnel issue (underperforming employee with medical issues) that could have turned ugly for the company.

                  She showed me the real value of an HR department. A vision lost in time that I shall never ever have again.

    2. If I were going to create a department tasked with “FYTW” and let everyone know without actually calling it that, I’m pretty sure “partial responsibility for appearances” would be the mission statement.

      That mission statement isn’t confusing, it’s blatantly insulting!

    3. “Maintaining the appearance”. That’s so seriously fucked up a whole squadron of woodchippers couldn’t fix it.

    4. Notice how they said it’s only for maintaining the appearance; it doesn’t actually accomplish those things, and they admit as much.

    5. Employment program.

    6. It tells you: it is there for maintaining the appearance of independence. I.e., it’s a propaganda agencies. They even helpfully tell you.

  20. “That didn’t take long.”

    Perhaps but nonetheless late.

  21. Ms. Archuleta went to the White House on Friday morning to personally inform Mr. Obama of her decision
    .
    She would have sent an e-mail, but she didn’t trust the security of the system. Plus, a junior intern would have had to show her how to log in to the OPM My AOL account.

  22. Just wait until Grandma becomes President.

    “I know you know how to prevent attacks by internet machines. But what do you know about preventing attacks by the newer Twitter machines?”

  23. OT: Climate scientists have psychological problems

    One psychologist who works with climate scientists told Richardson they suffer from “pre-traumatic stress,” the overwhelming sense of anger, panic, and “obsessive-intrusive thoughts” that results when your work every day is to chart a planetary future that looks increasingly apocalyptic. Some climatologists merely report depression and feelings of hopelessness. Others, resigned to our shared fate, have written what amount to survival guides for a sort of Mad Max dystopian future where civilization has broken down under the pressures of resource scarcity and habitat erosion.

    You doubters are driving them mental. You bastards!

    Boo-hoo

    While there’s a lot to lament about their current situation, researchers have discovered one solution to the climate-change blues: Parmesan and quite a few others have moved from the U.S. to Europe.

    Good. Hopefully their getting paid by the Europeans and aren’t on the US dime any longer.

    1. If their psychological fortitude is so meager as to allow graphs and half-baked thesis papers to cause them substantial mental issues, perhaps they should become supervisors at sewage plants in small, backwards, socialist European shitholes, where they’ll be isolated from the rest of us to clear their heads of all that reality their opponents insistently counter their bullshit with.

    2. One psychologist who works with climate scientists told Richardson they suffer from “pre-traumatic stress,” the overwhelming sense of anger, panic, and “obsessive-intrusive thoughts” that results when your work every day is to chart a planetary future that looks increasingly apocalyptic. Some climatologists merely report depression and feelings of hopelessness.

      Those are all pretty common things people who build their entire lives around a lie suffer from. Living your entire life as a lie does bad thins to your head.

      1. bad thins

        You’re preferences are showing.

        1. and my grammar. Ack.

          1. MUPHRY’S LAW STIKES AGAIN!

          2. That’s not grammar. That’s just the wrong word.

      2. I don’t know. A lot of religious people seem happy. Sorry, don’t mean to be rude about religion, but from the perspective of a non-believer, what else is it?

        I think the real problems happen when people see themselves as bearing the burden. And that will happen whether the big burden they feel they bear is truth or lie.

        Or perhaps you are suggesting that they know that they have built their lives around a lie. That would make more sense.

        1. I don’t know. A lot of religious people seem happy. Sorry, don’t mean to be rude about religion, but from the perspective of a non-believer, what else is it?

          The problems arise when you know it is a lie. If you don’t know it is untrue, you are not lying but mistaken.

          And not to be rude but the religious people I know seem in some ways to be less concerned with God than many atheists. And atheists inevitably import faith based assumptions like vague notions of “justice”, “truth” or “reason” that look an awful lot like God, just stripped of the characteristics the atheist doesn’t like.

    3. “researchers have discovered one solution to the climate-change blues: Parmesan

      I agree- cheese on a salad can solve any variety of emotional disorders

      1. Oh damn, i could fuck up some strong cheese right now. Might have to stop by the grocery on the way home and see if they’ve got any samples of Gruyere today.

    4. I was hoping the cure for climate depression was Parmigiano-Reggiano, or Parmesan cheese, which is a hard, granular cheese. It is named after the producing areas, which comprise the Provinces of Parma, Reggio Emilia, Bologna, Modena, and Mantova, Italy

      1. Recitation of unnecessary facts is oppressive heterologocentrism

  24. I’m going to just assume the Chinese have the Ark of the Covenant.
    #Topmen

    1. Also, the alien skeletons from Area 51.

      1. Pfft, there are no skeletons. They all survived, grew into lizard people, and now run the world as shape-shifters.

        1. One even posts here on HnR.

  25. Don’t worry everyone, someone has been blamed for this massive failure and thrown under the bus. Don’t worry your pointy little heads about the security of the massive amounts of data the government collects on other Americans via the IRS, the Obamacare exchanges, the NSA, etc. etc. All that data is perfectly safe in the Fed’s hands. Nothing further to see here… /Obama admin

    1. I have staunch, absolute objections to any governmental entity retaining data that relates to me, my personal and financial affairs, or anybody else, for that matter. The amount of shit we disclose to these bureaucratic retards by law is unbelievable, and anybody who honestly expects their private particulars to remain safe in the hands of the state are either fantastically ignorant, or suffer from abject delusion.

    2. Don’t worry, third rate administration officials will be thrown under the bus as needed to restore the appearance of security.

  26. Realistically this woman should not have been expected to know shit about computer/network security. She has a peer level CIO in the government who should be auditing, probing and fixing security issues. If she didn’t consult that office or blocked it’s efforts to do it’s job she should certainly be hung out to dry. If she did and the CIO’s office was telling her everything was fine it’s the CIO who should be polishing the resume.

    1. That is a fair assessment. The problem is that her reaction after the hack became known was appallingly bad. She seems to have taken no steps to hold anyone accountable or fix the problem or do anything beyond try and cover her’s and the Chocolate Jesus’ asses.

      1. She seems to have taken no steps to hold anyone accountable or fix the problem or do anything beyond try and cover her’s and the Chocolate Jesus’ asses.

        She probably considered that to be her true job description anyway. Actually I would think any high level bureaucrat’s job is basically to cover the president’s ass and be bus fodder when shit does go down. Why anyone would want such a shit job is beyond me.

        1. Watch the cushy job she ends up in, to answer your question.

  27. Chinese hackers. (There’s been no formal accusation, but virtually everyone believes that China is the culprit.)

    So is it private citizens in China doing the hacking on their own volition, or is it the Chinese government doing it (or contracting it out)? I would like to know whom we’re informally accusing.

    1. All the investigators will say at this point is that they’ve determined their coke has been pissed in.

    2. Dammit, I wrote my comment below and then got a lengthy phone call before hitting “submit.”

  28. “(There’s been no formal accusation, but virtually everyone believes that China is the culprit.)”

    Okay…..BUT…….someone here at Reason (or maybe somewhere else) brought up the point that the US govt has only said that the hackers are in China without specifying whether or not they’re the Chinese govt or just Chinese citizens. Did I miss something?

    1. Like the Chinese “volunteers” who invaded Korea in 1950?

  29. It’s the Republicans’ fault for confirming her, damn those Republicans.

  30. BUT SHE HAD THE RIGHT SKIN COLOR AND LAST NAME! HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN???

    1. All competence resides in your pigment cells. This is not racist.

      1. Instituting a race-preferential hiring policy in response to race-preferential hiring policies, while we pass laws disallowing race-preferential hiring policies…still not racist, since 1965!

        Being so unapologetically racist that the common man uses a common phrase, “reverse racism,” also not plain old racism or racist…since 1965!

  31. Shit, I had a chipped C.A.C. card and a Navy contractor background check.

  32. This wouldn’t even be a problem if we just got rid of the FedGov and let The People do as they pleased. Got a problem with gummint? Abolish it. I don’t know why more people don’t think of this.

  33. They may be saying everyone since 2000, but they sent me a letter saying I was involved. I left my government job in 1987

  34. Well…….The Empty Suit in the White House did promise….”The Most Transparent” Administration Ever!

    Just didn’t think it was going to be the CHINESE that were going to do it for us.

    Way to go Barry…..that’s what happens when the ONLY thing you know how to run…..IS YOUR MOUTH!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.