Supposedly, the recommendation to remove him was made about a month ago.
The official reason given was concerns about ongoing lax security, and ineffective operations against ISIS.
I don’ t believe either reason, nor do I think it had anything to do with his recent visit with Trump, for which he took personal leave.
You know how this works. In Obama’s case he hired a couple of Bush holdovers and every time something went wrong they would blame the holdovers claiming that they were Bush appointees. They don’t want Trump to do the same to them so if it looks like Trump is going to hire one of the Obama appointees then they want to fire him first.
>>> ineffective operations against ISIS <<< ???
Well, NSA is SIGINT. Electronic signals/data collection. And they’re not exactly a secret these days.
If ISIS is going old school, low tech with their coms to slow NSA down, what can NSA do?
Lots of variables in play.
I don’ t believe either reason,
Supposedly there were so many red flags in Harold Martin's personal life that this could easily have been noticed by a software scan of databases normally used in background checks. And once again a contractor was accessing an unnecessarily wide variety of material without anyone paying attention. So shouldn't some heads roll because of this unacceptable security situation, especially since apparently nothing was learned from prior incidents? And why should the top guy be immune?