Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
Mr. Williams I would encourage you to look into why the Sheriff does not have a security clearance so he can be briefed by members of the department that do.
Due to the sensitive information that is being discussed, it seems that it would be nearly impossible for a reporter to delve into these kinds of national security issues because the feds are tight lipped.

This is very confusing to ask (with clarity), but here it is anyway:

QUESTION #1: Since Knight was denied a federal security clearance, is it legal for those who DO have a federal clearance to brief Knight on sensitive security issues that they have been briefed on? How can a deputy tactfully say NO to his employing sheriff?

QUESTION #2: Don't those that have federal security clearances have to sign a contract, stipulating that they will not release certain information? But then doesn't that put them in an odd political position, if they tell Sheriff Knight that they cannot give him that information? (think job security)

QUESTION #3: Is Knight being briefed by those who DO have federal security clearances, thus getting access to that information?

Due to the sensitive nature of this material, it is highly unlikely that the public will ever be privy to the facts of this odd case.