Trump Revokes Security Clearance of John Brennan, Former C.I.A. Director
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR 27 mins ago
The White House had threatened last month to strip Mr. Brennan and two other Obama administration officials — Susan E. Rice, the former national security adviser; and James R. Clapper Jr., the former director of national intelligence — of their security clearances.
Mr. Trump has questioned the loyalties of national security and law enforcement officials and dismissed some of their findings — particularly the conclusion that Moscow intervened in the 2016 election — as attacks against him.
Mr. Brennan has become a frequent critic of Mr. Trump since the 2016 presidential election, often taking to Twitter to question the president’s ability to serve in the Oval Office.
In a tweet this week, Mr. Brennan criticized Mr. Trump for the language that the president used to attack Omarosa Manigault Newman, his former top aide, who he called a “dog.”
Mr. Brennan wrote, “It’s astounding how often you fail to live up to minimum standards of decency, civility, & probity. Seems like you will never understand what it means to be president, nor what it takes to be a good, decent, & honest person. So disheartening, so dangerous for our Nation.”
Mr. Trump’s decision to revoke Mr. Brennan’s security clearance was announced by Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary. Ms. Sanders said the president is reviewing the security clearances of other former Democratic officials who have been critics of the president.
Former high-ranking officials in defense, intelligence, diplomacy and law enforcement usually maintain their clearances to advise those still in government. A clearance also serves a more personally profitable function: helping departing officials get jobs at security contractors or similar firms.
Revoking their access to classified information could weaken their ability to work as consultants, lobbyists and advisers in Washington. Nearly 4.1 million people have security clearances, according to the most recent report by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, including 1.3 million with top secret clearances.
The announcement of the change in Mr. Brennan’s security clearance came as the White House has been mired in a public relations crisis created by the allegations from Ms. Manigault Newman, who has said the president suffers from mental incapacitation and has used racial slurs.
Ms. Sanders read a statement from Mr. Trump that indicated that the reason for the revocation of Mr. Brennan’s security clearance was because he is among a group of former officials who have “transitioned into highly partisan” people.
She also said Mr. Brennan had provided inaccurate testimony before Congress. She did not say whether the administration has evidence that Mr. Brennan had misused any classified information that he has had access to as a former intelligence official.
She denied that the officials, including Mr. Brennan, were chosen because they are all critics of the president.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
231 visitors
This is a grade school playground response by Donald Trump. He cannot tolerate being criticized for his many failures so he lashes out instead of addressing the core problem.
petty and pathetic
It is basically him creating an enemies list.
Some of the people on his list do not even have clearance.
Which is the grade school playground action?
Removing a highly partisan former CIA director from security clearance or calling the President of the United States a "traitor"???
So you don't support freedom of speech?
How is Brennan's speech being denied?
Yes, that is a childish, grade school reaction.
When there is something going on that requires the US to fire on all cylinders, sometimes those highly experienced people can give good advice. Being eligible for the information is I believe what he lost, these people never just went in and looked at whatever they wanted, but by keeping them eligible they are ready to help if necessary. Lets get one thing clear, his clearance was NOT revoked for 'security purposes'. It was vindictive, but it was also a distraction thrown out take some air out of Omarosa. This could impair our human resources in the event of a national security crisis or even to mitigate a terrorist attack.
96WS6 is monitoring this article on my behalf. I am signing off for a bit and will be back later.
Thank you 96!
Calling it a night and locking the article. I'm sure tomorrow will bring a new headline so that we can continue this conversation.
And so it starts.....
One can only hope that this type of partisan vindictiveness by the alleged leader of the free world motivates moderate people to the polls in November.
I keep waiting for the final straw but it never comes. I am absolutely terrified what will happen next. Our country is being attacked within and there doesn't seem to be any act from this man that will jolt the Republican leadership into action.
party before country. securing and retaining absolute power at any cost.
I wish I could disagree but it's pretty blaring that the good of the country isn't their focus.
And personal power above party.
You'd think the GOP would at least be able to recognize a domestic enemy when their party is led by one.
Trump wanted to create a diversion from the attack he is under by the dreaded Black Pantheress Omarosa. It's that simple.
Trump signed this order three weeks ago and was waiting to use it when a "crisis" popped up. I'm sure he has similar orders signed that revoke Clapper's security clearance and Biden's and others. He will pull those cards out on days he is being pummeled in the news. Soon enough that will be every day.
What is the specific reason ANY former member of government would need access to top-secret information?
And when I say ANY, I mean Republican, Democrat, or independent.
Once out of govt. work, the security clearances should be removed for ALL.
No, you don't. You've never said that until now so such a disclaimer is to be dismissed as cant on its face.
If you can find any posts where I have ever said anything different regarding ex-members of the govt. having security clearances please post it and prove what you claim.
I'll wait patiently for you to back that claim up.
SMMFH
BTW, very nice way to COMPLETELY avoid my question.
Nice deflection!
Democrats everywhere will be so proud!
I will try and answer your question Tex. Many international issues do not wrap up at the end of an Administration. Many of the top security officials go in and brief the current officials and provide their recommendations on their experience.
These ex security officials are mentoring many times and providing guidance to those coming in.
I think it's also important to understand the mindset of a civil servant. They place their country above politics. When they walk into those offices it's not about party. I can honestly tell you that I do not know what political affiliation my co-workers are (with the exception of one person and she and I have worked together for over 20 years). We don't talk about it. It just doesn't come up. We focus on the mission.
I can see your point, but believe that it should be strictly on a need-to-know basis and not just some blanket policy because "that's the way we have always done it".
And if someone is fired, for cause, they should be revoked, IMO.
Which is not the case for Brennan.
I have no qualms about revisiting who maintains a security clearance but this is not the way to do it.
There should be a standard practice in place. Mr. Trump did NOT speak with his security leaders when he made this decision because there is no security violation. It was done for political retaliation. We should not set this precedence. It will only put a wedge further between Americans.
I didn't claim it did.
No, because you've never opined about this either way at all, which was my point. This is a freshly brewed opinion specific to this person at this time for purely base partisan reasons. Care to try to prove you have made this assertion in the past?
So basically you are admitting that you merely guessed about what MY opinions are on the subject, without anything to lead you to that guess.
That is rather pitiful.
This is clearly politically motivated punitive move so typical of tinpot dictators.
What reason would ex-govt. employees have for having security clearances?
Here ya go:
Did you read the article? Clearly not.
They expressed their opinion, using their freedom of speech....and trump, like a petulant child, attacks back. He is a fucking thin skinned asshat.
When is the MASS MEDIA going to get off their 'powered pillows" and deploy its resources to rein in this 'one-man wrecking machine'? There are too many intellectuals in this country to not find the goods on a talking 'ass' if there really is something to be discovered! I look through my television screen at cable news and I SIMPLY DON'T SEE THE OUTRAGE! Getting mildly disturbed is simply not enough - it is time for MSM to vent its own exasperation through more 'gum-shoe' reporting! The "novelty" of a businessman-president who with his team of 'pyscho-liars' is pulling off the figurative arm and legs of our screaming institutions is OVER!!
President Trump is president, but he is acting as one man taking on the world! World strike back!!
So trump is revoking the clearance because Brennan used his first amendment right of freedom of speech?
But trumpy said that he supported free speech???!!!!!
Fuck trump, what a pathetic POS.
He is completely free to say whatever he wants--no one is stopping him
Did you think someone tried to silence him?
Let me guess, John Brennan is a pinko, commie, radical left wing nut who is unfairly smearing our fine president, Donald Trump?
This POS still has his clearance as well, despite his constant lies.
The incongruity of trump saying someone else is a security risk is hilarious.
No wonder this country can't keep a secret. I think for most people, you could share a secret with your best friend or your immediate family and it would still get out.
I feel like the country has been thrust into the twilight zone. We can no longer agree when something is right or wrong, good or bad. We now have some invoking "Trump" and declaring nothing to see here everything is a-okay.
How can we be so far apart on this issue. How can some think it's okay to retaliate against those who don't tow the line.
And the list could go on.......
Looking at some of these comments, you would think that some of these people here have never heard of or seen Donald Trump in action. The idea that this has anything to do with something Brennan said to the Senate , or anyone else, 4 years ago, or 3 years ago or 5 years ago or 10 years ago is laughable. Trump did this because he is a vindictive prick and Brennan has been telling the truth about Trump's presidency. Also, Omarosa has been sucking up all the news cycle oxygen bashing Trump and he wants to try and change the subject.
Those are the reasons. Brennan himself is almost immaterial to this.
The fact is Trump is floundering, and it is about to get worse. he is entering what will be the low point of his time in office - the long goodbye.