White House says Trump wants to revoke security clearances for former officials critical of him

[Jhhnn]

But he hasn't done anything yet. And he is only considering it which makes the title of the thread yet another reflection of the hyperbole the left accepts as truth every day and even multiple times a day.

All this anxiety and drama over something that has not happened, may not even happen and if it does happen will amount to zilch. What a way to live your life.

And the point of SHS announcing it during a press conference is... just trolling, or what?

 

[dank69]

When you get caught lying it's common to lose a top security clearance. Happens all the time. Someone got fired last Monday here, for nothing more than a lie. A simple, stupid lie. If you lie, it shows you cannot be trusted. And therefore cannot carry a clearance. It's the single most common thing you can do to lose it. It's always funny seeing people make judgments and spin things into hyperbole, when they don't have a clue.

That being said, a routine, and often time yearly, evaluation would take care of the problem. Issues would be brought up, and actions should be taken. Most of these people are retired, fired, or otherwise don't work in the job that would require one. Since it's a need to know basis to view top secret documents, the likelihood of them using it is minimal. Trump seems petty to do this. It's clear they don't like each other and he's attempting to take it out on them in a way he can. Another useless, and needless thing he does to make himself look bad. Should have just left it alone. That doesn't take away the fact that there are legitimate grounds for it. Just not from him.

Golly I hope Trump never gets caught lying then.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Trumps got a hit list:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/23/poli...st-trump-security-clearances-cnntv/index.html

I stand by what I said last year, won’t be collusion or obstruction that will get Trump into office it will be a grudge list. He’ll send the IRS after someone who is mean to him or some Shreiff Joe guy after them.

 

[feralkid]

Sorry, but Hillary

Sums it up.

 

[hal2kilo]

I guess he doesn't like it when it's pointed out he has no clothes on.

Or any clue.

It's because they "politicized and monetized" their positions. Another classic Trump projection

Trump administration is the epitome of "politicized and monetized". Yes total projection.

 

[cytg111]

But he hasn't done anything yet. And he is only considering it which makes the title of the thread yet another reflection of the hyperbole the left accepts as truth every day and even multiple times a day.

All this anxiety and drama over something that has not happened, may not even happen and if it does happen will amount to zilch. What a way to live your life.

Idiot, it is witness tampering.. "If you dare say negative things about me I will use this office...."... like with dangling pardons infront of manafort and gang.. I know you are too dense to understand why thats a problem but there it is...
Boomers life philosophy : Wait till the nuke goes off. Any debate on using nuclear before that is 100% hysterical libtard tears.

 

[boomerang]

And the point of SHS announcing it during a press conference is... just trolling, or what?

Rand Paul stated over the weekend that he had a meeting scheduled with Trump to discuss removing Brennan's security clearance. The cat, it was already out of the bag. She had a choice to preemptively make it public or to answer questions after the fact. Not everything is a conspiracy despite what the media tells you. But either way the usual suspects would be full of rage or outrage because, Trump...

In all seriousness, you're smart enough to think for yourself. Picking one's battles is an individual choice just as is running around with one's hair on fire 24/7/365.

This is a nothingburger. The rage du jour. Brought to you by the usual suspects.

LOL

 

[boomerang]

Idiot, it is witness tampering.. "If you dare say negative things about me I will use this office...."... like with dangling pardons infront of manafort and gang.. I know you are too dense to understand why thats a problem but there it is...
Boomers life philosophy : Wait till the nuke goes off. Any debate on using nuclear before that is 100% hysterical libtard tears.

Citizen of Europe your lectures mean absolutely nothing to me. They are like water off a ducks back. You're a whackjob that on any given day lives there, lives here. Whatever direction the meds are taking you on any given day I guess. Someday's... on Mars?

 

[soulcougher73]

When you get caught lying it's common to lose a top security clearance. Happens all the time. Someone got fired last Monday here, for nothing more than a lie. A simple, stupid lie. If you lie, it shows you cannot be trusted. And therefore cannot carry a clearance. It's the single most common thing you can do to lose it. It's always funny seeing people make judgments and spin things into hyperbole, when they don't have a clue.

That being said, a routine, and often time yearly, evaluation would take care of the problem. Issues would be brought up, and actions should be taken. Most of these people are retired, fired, or otherwise don't work in the job that would require one. Since it's a need to know basis to view top secret documents, the likelihood of them using it is minimal. Trump seems petty to do this. It's clear they don't like each other and he's attempting to take it out on them in a way he can. Another useless, and needless thing he does to make himself look bad. Should have just left it alone. That doesn't take away the fact that there are legitimate grounds for it. Just not from him.

So Trump should be out any second now with this logic, amrite?

 

[dphantom]

If a crisis occurs, can you really not see the value in consulting these experts who have knowledge and experience few others do?

Not that trump has any interest in knowledge or experience.

There are many of such available. Eliminating a handful would make no difference to the knowledgebase.

 

[dphantom]

Nope. Trump wants to remove clearances for people because they were critical of Trump and no other reason. It is a straight up dictator move to use political power to silence critics and flies in the face of the first amendment.



I have no problem with an agency making a call to revoke based on someone's risk outside of political motivations. This is a far cry from a President directing removal for motive of silencing critics.

Explain how removing a security clearance would silence a critic?

 

[fskimospy]

There are many of such available. Eliminating a handful would make no difference to the knowledgebase.

This is ridiculously false and you know it. For example John Brennan. He was director of the CIA for 4 years preceding the Trump administration. The number of people with a similar extent of knowledge of CIA activities during that time is somewhere close to zero. The deputy directors aren't going to have all the same access and those above Brennan are going to have larger portfolios that mean they don't have time for the details.

If you want to know what the CIA was doing between 2013 and 2017 John Brennan is most likely an unparalleled source. The idea that eliminating him as a source would have no effect on the knowledge base is silliness.

 

[fskimospy]

Explain how removing a security clearance would silence a critic?

Plenty of private sector positions can require a security clearance and removing that potentially damages their earning potential. Furthermore, stripping them of their security clearance gives the false impression that they have acted improperly. Basically he's trying to damage the reputations and future earning potential of people because they are criticizing him. You know as well as I do if Obama did that conservatives would be incandescent with rage so I would hope that all conservatives could join with us in condemning this.

EDIT: Although really look at me falling for Trump's bullshit. This is almost certainly his attempt to distract the country's attention from the fact that his #1 campaign official's trial on about 8 million felony charges is starting this week.

 

[zinfamous]

Courtesy is a two way street.
They have the right to say anything they want.
He has the right to revoke their security clearances.

lol. and you pretend you aren't a fascist, fascist.

 

[zinfamous]

You're all pissy because you feel that anti-Trumpers should be able to be complete douchebags and shit holes and nasty little terds and never have to deal with the consequences of their being assholes.
Get over it, welcome to the other side of the resistance.

lol. the unapologetic, proud twatwaffle runs to his snowflake corner every time he is called on his twatwaffle antics, points the finger at everyone else explaining to him that he is being a cvnt, and accusing them of starting it.

shut up, bitch.

 

[Bitek]

I'll grant you that it's a dick move, but not dictator. Continuing their status is a courtesy and one they no longer deserve by their own behavior.

And what behavior is that? Are you saying that former officials don't have the right as US Citizens to criticizes the POTUS just because they were government officials?

The behavior of not telling Trump what he wants to hear and pampering his fragile ego.

He can do what he wants, but only getting national security advice only from those want to sing of rainbows and unicorns is foolish and dangerous.

 

[VRAMdemon]

When you get caught lying it's common to lose a top security clearance. Happens all the time. Someone got fired last Monday here, for nothing more than a lie. A simple, stupid lie. If you lie, it shows you cannot be trusted. And therefore cannot carry a clearance. It's the single most common thing you can do to lose it.

Well..if that's the case, Trump should have lost his security clearance about a month into his presidency.

 

[cytg111]

Citizen of Europe your lectures mean absolutely nothing to me. They are like water off a ducks back. You're a whackjob that on any given day lives there, lives here. Whatever direction the meds are taking you on any given day I guess. Someday's... on Mars?

Would that perhaps be a lame duck?
Given the intellectual and physical condition I would have to be in to be a pioneer on Mars, I thank you for this compliment. I can think of nothing more patriotic for the species than to be part of the colonization of Mars.

You surely have that in common with Trump, every-time you open your mouth you manage to screw yourself even more. Now you just need a lawyer that manages to negotiate your jaywalking charges down to first degree murder and you would be a little trump mini me.

 

[repoman0]

Well..if that's the case, Trump should have lost his security clearance about a month into his presidency.

lmao. Trump should have never gotten a security clearance. If he was literally anyone but the president he would have been outright denied, but retards saw fit to vote in an obviously compromised stooge and hand one to him.

 

[Amused]

Explain how removing a security clearance would silence a critic?

First, it punishes current critics. (un-fucking-constitutional to the extreme)

Second, it serves as a warning to any potential critics who have a federal security clearance.

That this has to be explained to you is actually rather pathetic. I gather you would grasp the implications had Obama done this.

 

[interchange]

Explain how removing a security clearance would silence a critic?

In this case, it may even be the threat of doing so that has impact. That's a slippery slope that we shouldn't let pass without (at least) rebuke. It's not OK if Trump merely publicly threatens an action and never does it if the action itself is inappropriate.

Certainly removal of security clearance does not absolutely strip away the right for someone to speak. It is not the same level of impact as jailing someone for a made up crime. And yet removal of security clearance does impact an individual. It impacts their access to pertinent information. It impacts their capacity to work in the intelligence industry as a civilian -- e.g. consultation for a defense contractor. It impacts their capacity to advise current government officials on how to handle current events when their past experience holds significant value. If done for political purposes, it confers an imbalance in power among parties.

Whether this action or threat of this action has any impact on the willingness of the mentioned parties (or others holding security clearance who have not yet spoken up) is not measurable. If the individuals are not demonstrating any actual risk to violate national security then it would be absolutely inappropriate to remove their clearance.

 

[Victorian Gray]

But he hasn't done anything yet. And he is only considering it which makes the title of the thread yet another reflection of the hyperbole the left accepts as truth every day and even multiple times a day.

All this anxiety and drama over something that has not happened, may not even happen and if it does happen will amount to zilch. What a way to live your life.

Nice shoe shine. Here's your tip.

 

[hal2kilo]

lmao. Trump should have never gotten a security clearance. If he was literally anyone but the president he would have been outright denied, but retards saw fit to vote in an obviously compromised stooge and hand one to him.

It's quite simple other than Russia, Trump is our biggest national security threat. I said it several months ago, and I still believe it now more than ever.

 

[urvile]

When you get caught lying it's common to lose a top security clearance. Happens all the time. Someone got fired last Monday here, for nothing more than a lie. A simple, stupid lie. If you lie, it shows you cannot be trusted. And therefore cannot carry a clearance. It's the single most common thing you can do to lose it. It's always funny seeing people make judgments and spin things into hyperbole, when they don't have a clue.

That being said, a routine, and often time yearly, evaluation would take care of the problem. Issues would be brought up, and actions should be taken. Most of these people are retired, fired, or otherwise don't work in the job that would require one. Since it's a need to know basis to view top secret documents, the likelihood of them using it is minimal. Trump seems petty to do this. It's clear they don't like each other and he's attempting to take it out on them in a way he can. Another useless, and needless thing he does to make himself look bad. Should have just left it alone. That doesn't take away the fact that there are legitimate grounds for it. Just not from him.

A vetting process is mainly about looking for leverage. Be it financial or otherwise e.g. are you closet homosexual? etc. First they get your answers then they interview people who know you well. Once the vetting goes above secret. The candidate will be interviewed by a government psychologist who will ask some weird questions like "do you watch porn on the internet?" or "Do you download torrents?". They want to see how the candidate reacts.

People are compromised with leverage. Pee pee tapes for example. That's the primary thing they are looking for.

 

[pcgeek11]

Why? I mean, other than to justify Trump's vindictiveness?

It is called " need to know ". They are no longer holding a Government job and no longer have the need to know.

Just having a Top Secret Clearance does not give you a right to read Any information that is classified as Top Secret. You are only granted access with respect to what you need to know for your job. It also cost money to maintain the clearance as in background investigation renewals etc.