Trump is in debt. We can’t ignore the national
security risks that come with that.
Opinion by
Michael Morell and
David Kris
Oct. 11, 2020 at 7:00 a.m. CDT
Michael
Morell is a Post contributing columnist and has twice served as acting director
of the Central Intelligence Agency. David Kris is a former assistant attorney
general for national security.
There is
a powerful reason nearly all federal employees with access to classified
information turn over deeply personal details about their lives and finances to
security experts: Debts and other vulnerabilities can create weaknesses that
our nation’s adversaries could exploit.
Multiple studies have shown that,
while betrayal of one’s country is a crime that has complex psychological
underpinnings, money is a leading motivator. And paying off large,
unsustainable debts is often a driver of an interest in money.
For
example, Aldrich Ames, the most
damaging spy in the history of the CIA, and responsible for the deaths of
multiple CIA assets in the former Soviet Union, told prosecutors after his
arrest that he began spying for the Russians because he was in debt and needed
funds to dig himself out of the hole.
As
former national security officials of the government, we have no special
insight into President Trump’s financial condition, but if the recent news accounts are
correct, his financial situation presents
a significant counterintelligence risk — because the millions of dollars he
owes over the next few years put his very financial solvency at risk.
If he
can’t pay these debts, he may face severe business, political and social
consequences.
This
would undoubtedly be the conclusion of the professional “adjudicators” whose
job it is to decide whether to grant someone a security clearance. But, because
he is the president, Trump did not need to go through the normal process of
filling out necessary forms and having his case reviewed. The American people
gave him the highest clearance when they elected him in 2016. Members of
Congress are also exempted from this exhaustive review.
Having
said that, we have no doubt that if the president were a normal applicant for a
job requiring access to classified information, any adjudicator we know would
have rejected him over concerns that his high levels of debt would create an
unacceptable counterintelligence risk. Trump would have been denied a clearance.
The
screening process begins with Standard Form 86, the “Questionnaire for National Security Positions.”
Also known as the SF-86, the form is deeply intrusive. (We’ve filled out multiple
SF-86s, and the supplements that accompany it, over the course of our careers.)
The process leaves no financial, or personal, stone unturned.
Apart
from questions about family and marital history, mental health, and drug and
alcohol use, the form demands a massive amount of financial data, including
whether you have filed for bankruptcy, failed to pay taxes, experienced
financial problems as a result of gambling, defaulted on a loan, had any
account or credit card suspended, or been more than 120 days delinquent on any
debt. Applicants sign broad waivers allowing investigators to review their
private financial (and medical) records.
Beyond
the debts themselves, if an applicant has ties to a foreign adversary, or if
some of the debt is owed to foreign entities, the risk is higher. Which is why
the SF-86 places special emphasis on surfacing information about an applicant’s
foreign activities — including foreign financial interests such as “stocks,
property, investments, bank accounts, ownership of corporate entities,” foreign
business, professional and governmental contacts, and foreign trade.
Transparency
is vital. If an applicant tries to hide anything, a clearance would be denied.
If an employee, came forward during a routine security reinvestigation and
admitted to a debt problem, continued employment would be contingent upon
regularly seeing a financial counselor and developing a debt payback plan,
along with often moving to a less sensitive job. If a U.S. official tries to
hide a debt, he or she would lose their job.
For a
senior official, and certainly for a president, the counterintelligence risk is
direct — a foreign intelligence officer shows up and offers to pay your debt in
exchange for sensitive information or policy decisions.
But
there is an additional, just as insidious risk, that is more subtle: a
president, eager or even desperate to clear his accounts might, without any
foreign intervention, pursue policies not with the goal of furthering U.S.
national interests, but rather with the goal of advancing his or her business
either before leaving office or after. Both types are a betrayal of one’s
country.
We do
not know to whom Trump owes his debts. But for all these reasons, we should.
There is no evidence that the counterintelligence risk has come to fruition
with the president, but there are signs — Trump’s refusal to call out Russian
President Vladimir Putin for a variety of damaging actions, for
example — that could suggest that the second, more subtle risk, may be playing
out before us.
Money
has powerful impact on the psyches of many people — and not always for the
good. That’s why the SF-86, and the transparency it provides, is so important —
at least for those who have to fill it out.
