| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government |
| Memo: State Dept. hired law enforcement agents with criminal records |
| 2013-06-17 |
| The State Department has hired an alarming number of law-enforcement agents with criminal or checkered backgrounds because of a flawed hiring process, a stunning memo obtained by The [NY] Post reveals. The background problems are severe enough that many of the roughly 2,000 agents in State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security can play only limited roles in agency efforts to police bad conduct and prosecute wrongdoers. The memo goes on to state that the troubling backgrounds can pose a problem if the agents are needed to testify at trials to assist prosecutors. Some Diplomatic Security field offices “have major problems just waiting to be discovered,” the memo adds. An IG spokesman said he couldn’t comment on internal documents, but State has said it prosecutes misconduct, and that the internal draft reports contain “unsubstantiated information.” |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #6 That's just to make sure the political classes can get hired. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2013-06-17 18:07 |
| #5 Well, according to the Feds, it is discrimination to refuse to hire someone just because they have a criminal record. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2013-06-17 16:44 |
| #4 I suppose it is possible. State Dept. applicants fill out standard form 86, Questionnaire for National Security Positions. It is a 127 page form. It is not until page 84 that psychological suitability questions and criminal record questions get asked. Criminal history spans only the last 7 years of as person's history. 127 pages is too long. I can see why Personnel/HR doesn't have enough time for proper background checks. It looks like background and security checks are an in-house State deal. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2013-06-17 11:53 |
| #3 Yo Billy: You ever spend any time at Fort Devens, Lima Peru, or Moscow perhaps? Marry a fitness hottie from DIA? Oh well, no answer required, but send along my regards. :-) |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-06-17 07:16 |
| #2 I call BS on "many" of the points in this article. They throw out some big accusations but are short on details. Many means...50 %? 80 %? Suffice to say there are some worried mofos in HQ now regarding this and the hooker thing from last week. I'm about as far away from the Death Star as one could be. As for Mr. B's comment - In high threat places, people tend to listen to us but in other places we are viewed as an annoyance. I've worked for two Ambassadors directly and both of them were buying what I was selling. So kinda of a mixed bag. |
| Posted by: Bangkok Billy 2013-06-17 06:55 |
| #1 and that the internal draft reports contain "unsubstantiated information." But it's OK to paint Bureau of Diplomatic Security Service [DSS] employees as miscreants and criminals. Remember, they carry badges and icky guns, and when you go overseas.... you've got plenty of time to make nice and suck up to them for protection. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-06-17 04:02 |