Trump considered revoking Obama's security clearance

[OldLady]

If you are not in a position, why do you need it?
This should be common practice!
Do it to everyone.

No one should throw away the accumulated experience of years and years of intelligence gathering, TN. Without access to certain current information, these guys couldn't be consulted. It is the currently employed intelligence people who want them to be available for questions when needed. That should be their call, not mine or yours. Or Trump's.

Nope. It should most definitely NOT be "their call", particularly regarding the Obama administration.

You super partisans are going to wreck this country if you have your way. Your views are dangerous, as well as inaccurate.

 

[OldLady]

If you are not in a position, why do you need it?
This should be common practice!
Do it to everyone.

No one should throw away the accumulated experience of years and years of intelligence gathering, TN. Without access to certain current information, these guys couldn't be consulted. It is the currently employed intelligence people who want them to be available for questions when needed. That should be their call, not mine or yours. Or Trump's.

The President shouldnt control the flow of classified information? Lol
They shouldnt be there for years and years! That was my point.

Sorry if I misunderstood you.

 

[OldLady]

No one should throw away the accumulated experience of years and years of intelligence gathering, TN. Without access to certain current information, these guys couldn't be consulted. It is the currently employed intelligence people who want them to be available for questions when needed. That should be their call, not mine or yours. Or Trump's.

The President shouldnt control the flow of classified information? Lol
They shouldnt be there for years and years! That was my point.

Intelligence agencies aren't political, or they shouldn't be and I think they mostly aren't, it is just the crazed Trump supporters who are PERCEIVING them as political in order to discredit them.
And the President has nothing to do with intelligence gathering, so why would he have anything to do with who has clearance?

Thats because republicans and democrats have the same end goals.
They have the same foreign policy. Blah blah blah.
Thats that same bullshit excuse people throw up about auditing the FED even though the FEDs board is appointed by a goddamn ideologue.
Americans really need to get a damn clue!
Its the PRESIDENT. The Commander and chief of our armed forced.
You dont want an elected person controlling information but want a fucking BUREAUCRAT to do it?

YES I DO. A "bureaucrat" who knows what he/she is doing, that has years of experience and knows the whys and wherefores of the job.
You work for a company that makes signs, right? You would rather have someone voted in by the tax payers, like your governor, perhaps, make the ultimate decisions about your company, regardless of if they know anything about making signs or how your company runs its operations on a daily basis?
That is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.

You could never understand the issue with it if you are comparing a private sector company to an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy.

TN, what you are not understanding is that the intelligence agencies do actually do a job, just like any other company. The fact that it is a bureaucracy or if you think it is CONSTITUTIONAL is totally beside the point.

 

[EverCurious]

The President shouldnt control the flow of classified information? Lol
They shouldnt be there for years and years! That was my point.

Intelligence agencies aren't political, or they shouldn't be and I think they mostly aren't, it is just the crazed Trump supporters who are PERCEIVING them as political in order to discredit them.
And the President has nothing to do with intelligence gathering, so why would he have anything to do with who has clearance?

Thats because republicans and democrats have the same end goals.
They have the same foreign policy. Blah blah blah.
Thats that same bullshit excuse people throw up about auditing the FED even though the FEDs board is appointed by a goddamn ideologue.
Americans really need to get a damn clue!
Its the PRESIDENT. The Commander and chief of our armed forced.
You dont want an elected person controlling information but want a fucking BUREAUCRAT to do it?

YES I DO. A "bureaucrat" who knows what he/she is doing, that has years of experience and knows the whys and wherefores of the job.
You work for a company that makes signs, right? You would rather have someone voted in by the tax payers, like your governor, perhaps, make the ultimate decisions about your company, regardless of if they know anything about making signs or how your company runs its operations on a daily basis?
That is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.

You could never understand the issue with it if you are comparing a private sector company to an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy.

TN, what you are not understanding is that the intelligence agencies do actually do a job, just like any other company. The fact that it is a bureaucracy or if you think it is CONSTITUTIONAL is totally beside the point.

Do you mean intelligence agencies doing their job(s) like "saw my first Bernie Sander bumper sticker. Made me want to key his car" or "So look, you say we can text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can't be traced" or like "no, we'll stop him" or hoping that Paul Ryan "fails and crashes in a blaze of glory" or like "insurance policies" or like "need to lock in" some one in "formal chargeable way" or like the "sense of loss" that "their" Director Comey was fired, that he could have made the FBI great again... Or maybe its like how somehow /all/ of these fucking damning biased texts between Strzok and Page magically went missing from the fucking FBI for months?

Yeah, you go ahead and trust /those/ people "doing their job" properly. I'd rather see if we can shove this dumpster truck into our "intelligent agencies" collective asses...

 

[TNHarley]

The President shouldnt control the flow of classified information? Lol
They shouldnt be there for years and years! That was my point.

Intelligence agencies aren't political, or they shouldn't be and I think they mostly aren't, it is just the crazed Trump supporters who are PERCEIVING them as political in order to discredit them.
And the President has nothing to do with intelligence gathering, so why would he have anything to do with who has clearance?

Thats because republicans and democrats have the same end goals.
They have the same foreign policy. Blah blah blah.
Thats that same bullshit excuse people throw up about auditing the FED even though the FEDs board is appointed by a goddamn ideologue.
Americans really need to get a damn clue!
Its the PRESIDENT. The Commander and chief of our armed forced.
You dont want an elected person controlling information but want a fucking BUREAUCRAT to do it?

YES I DO. A "bureaucrat" who knows what he/she is doing, that has years of experience and knows the whys and wherefores of the job.
You work for a company that makes signs, right? You would rather have someone voted in by the tax payers, like your governor, perhaps, make the ultimate decisions about your company, regardless of if they know anything about making signs or how your company runs its operations on a daily basis?
That is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.

You could never understand the issue with it if you are comparing a private sector company to an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy.

TN, what you are not understanding is that the intelligence agencies do actually do a job, just like any other company. The fact that it is a bureaucracy or if you think it is CONSTITUTIONAL is totally beside the point.

LOL right? Like their job is to hack into automatic driving cars to carry out assassinations so the murder can be blamed on us peons? Or how they want to lie to us about traced malware from hackers?
Yea, totally the same as a private sector company.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

McMaster talked him out of it. Of COURSE he denies it now.

At the time, some of Trump’s most fervent supporters in the White House saw former Obama Administration officials as powerful enemies who threatened the new President’s rule, and they agitated for punishing them by revoking their security clearances. The idea was rebuffed by the national-security adviser at the time, H. R. McMaster, who signed a memo extending the clearances of his predecessors at the N.S.C., Republicans and Democrats alike.

As Trump stepped up his public and private attacks on Obama, some of the new President’s advisers thought that he should take the extraordinary step of denying Obama himself access to intelligence briefings that were made available to all of his living predecessors. Trump was told about the importance of keeping former Presidents, who frequently met with foreign leaders, informed. In the end, Trump decided not to exclude Obama, at the urging of McMaster.​

LoL - I say let him keep going with this and see how it works out for him. Everyone who has EVER said ANYTHING critical of the Mango Menace gets the axe. Let's do 500 of them a day. That will keep him busy for the next 2.4 years (assuming he lasts that long ;-)

John Brennan’s Choice to Confront Trump

You have to understand Trump. On average, every day he comes up with some outrageous idea that he has no intention of pursuing, but he makes sure the moronic idea finds its way into the press.

He does this for two reasons. One, his desire to always be the center of attention. Two, if the media is talking about some crazy idea of his, they are not talking about his collaboration with a hostile foreign power during the election campaign.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

If you are not in a position, why do you need it?
This should be common practice!
Do it to everyone.

No one should throw away the accumulated experience of years and years of intelligence gathering, TN. Without access to certain current information, these guys couldn't be consulted. It is the currently employed intelligence people who want them to be available for questions when needed. That should be their call, not mine or yours. Or Trump's.

Nope. It should most definitely NOT be "their call", particularly regarding the Obama administration.

You super partisans are going to wreck this country if you have your way. Your views are dangerous, as well as inaccurate.

I am not partisan, but American. The Democratic Party is not, and they offer nothing but destruction and chaotic social nonsense.

I want them politically castrated.

Feel free to define my inaccuracy and "dangerous views".

 

[OldLady]

Intelligence agencies aren't political, or they shouldn't be and I think they mostly aren't, it is just the crazed Trump supporters who are PERCEIVING them as political in order to discredit them.
And the President has nothing to do with intelligence gathering, so why would he have anything to do with who has clearance?

Thats because republicans and democrats have the same end goals.
They have the same foreign policy. Blah blah blah.
Thats that same bullshit excuse people throw up about auditing the FED even though the FEDs board is appointed by a goddamn ideologue.
Americans really need to get a damn clue!
Its the PRESIDENT. The Commander and chief of our armed forced.
You dont want an elected person controlling information but want a fucking BUREAUCRAT to do it?

YES I DO. A "bureaucrat" who knows what he/she is doing, that has years of experience and knows the whys and wherefores of the job.
You work for a company that makes signs, right? You would rather have someone voted in by the tax payers, like your governor, perhaps, make the ultimate decisions about your company, regardless of if they know anything about making signs or how your company runs its operations on a daily basis?
That is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.

You could never understand the issue with it if you are comparing a private sector company to an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy.

TN, what you are not understanding is that the intelligence agencies do actually do a job, just like any other company. The fact that it is a bureaucracy or if you think it is CONSTITUTIONAL is totally beside the point.

Do you mean intelligence agencies doing their job(s) like "saw my first Bernie Sander bumper sticker. Made me want to key his car" or "So look, you say we can text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can't be traced" or like "no, we'll stop him" or hoping that Paul Ryan "fails and crashes in a blaze of glory" or like "insurance policies" or like "need to lock in" some one in "formal chargeable way" or like the "sense of loss" that "their" Director Comey was fired, that he could have made the FBI great again... Or maybe its like how somehow /all/ of these fucking damning biased texts between Strzok and Page magically went missing from the fucking FBI for months?

Yeah, you go ahead and trust /those/ people "doing their job" properly. I'd rather see if we can shove this dumpster truck into our "intelligent agencies" collective asses...

35,000 people work for the FBI, and you are going to judge the entire operation on the personal comments of one man? And it seems you are willing to not only do that but judge all the other intelligence agencies on that one man's personal comments, too.
You've been had.

 

[OldLady]

If you are not in a position, why do you need it?
This should be common practice!
Do it to everyone.

No one should throw away the accumulated experience of years and years of intelligence gathering, TN. Without access to certain current information, these guys couldn't be consulted. It is the currently employed intelligence people who want them to be available for questions when needed. That should be their call, not mine or yours. Or Trump's.

Nope. It should most definitely NOT be "their call", particularly regarding the Obama administration.

You super partisans are going to wreck this country if you have your way. Your views are dangerous, as well as inaccurate.

I am not partisan, but American. The Democratic Party is not, and they offer nothing but destruction and chaotic social nonsense.

I want them politically castrated.

Feel free to define my inaccuracy and "dangerous views".

Sorry, you are nothing but partisan. Dangerous division: "They offer nothing but destruction and chaotic social nonsense. I want them politically castrated" There is nothing constructive or even sensible in that statement. You are turning a group of people with different ideas into a mindless, faceless monster that exists only in your imagination.

 

[OldLady]

Intelligence agencies aren't political, or they shouldn't be and I think they mostly aren't, it is just the crazed Trump supporters who are PERCEIVING them as political in order to discredit them.
And the President has nothing to do with intelligence gathering, so why would he have anything to do with who has clearance?

Thats because republicans and democrats have the same end goals.
They have the same foreign policy. Blah blah blah.
Thats that same bullshit excuse people throw up about auditing the FED even though the FEDs board is appointed by a goddamn ideologue.
Americans really need to get a damn clue!
Its the PRESIDENT. The Commander and chief of our armed forced.
You dont want an elected person controlling information but want a fucking BUREAUCRAT to do it?

YES I DO. A "bureaucrat" who knows what he/she is doing, that has years of experience and knows the whys and wherefores of the job.
You work for a company that makes signs, right? You would rather have someone voted in by the tax payers, like your governor, perhaps, make the ultimate decisions about your company, regardless of if they know anything about making signs or how your company runs its operations on a daily basis?
That is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.

You could never understand the issue with it if you are comparing a private sector company to an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy.

TN, what you are not understanding is that the intelligence agencies do actually do a job, just like any other company. The fact that it is a bureaucracy or if you think it is CONSTITUTIONAL is totally beside the point.

LOL right? Like their job is to hack into automatic driving cars to carry out assassinations so the murder can be blamed on us peons? Or how they want to lie to us about traced malware from hackers?
Yea, totally the same as a private sector company.

You're ignoring my point.

 

[TNHarley]

Thats because republicans and democrats have the same end goals.
They have the same foreign policy. Blah blah blah.
Thats that same bullshit excuse people throw up about auditing the FED even though the FEDs board is appointed by a goddamn ideologue.
Americans really need to get a damn clue!
Its the PRESIDENT. The Commander and chief of our armed forced.
You dont want an elected person controlling information but want a fucking BUREAUCRAT to do it?

YES I DO. A "bureaucrat" who knows what he/she is doing, that has years of experience and knows the whys and wherefores of the job.
You work for a company that makes signs, right? You would rather have someone voted in by the tax payers, like your governor, perhaps, make the ultimate decisions about your company, regardless of if they know anything about making signs or how your company runs its operations on a daily basis?
That is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.

You could never understand the issue with it if you are comparing a private sector company to an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy.

TN, what you are not understanding is that the intelligence agencies do actually do a job, just like any other company. The fact that it is a bureaucracy or if you think it is CONSTITUTIONAL is totally beside the point.

LOL right? Like their job is to hack into automatic driving cars to carry out assassinations so the murder can be blamed on us peons? Or how they want to lie to us about traced malware from hackers?
Yea, totally the same as a private sector company.

You're ignoring my point.

Maybe you just arent expressing it clearly

 

[EverCurious]

Thats because republicans and democrats have the same end goals.
They have the same foreign policy. Blah blah blah.
Thats that same bullshit excuse people throw up about auditing the FED even though the FEDs board is appointed by a goddamn ideologue.
Americans really need to get a damn clue!
Its the PRESIDENT. The Commander and chief of our armed forced.
You dont want an elected person controlling information but want a fucking BUREAUCRAT to do it?

YES I DO. A "bureaucrat" who knows what he/she is doing, that has years of experience and knows the whys and wherefores of the job.
You work for a company that makes signs, right? You would rather have someone voted in by the tax payers, like your governor, perhaps, make the ultimate decisions about your company, regardless of if they know anything about making signs or how your company runs its operations on a daily basis?
That is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.

You could never understand the issue with it if you are comparing a private sector company to an unconstitutional federal bureaucracy.

TN, what you are not understanding is that the intelligence agencies do actually do a job, just like any other company. The fact that it is a bureaucracy or if you think it is CONSTITUTIONAL is totally beside the point.

Do you mean intelligence agencies doing their job(s) like "saw my first Bernie Sander bumper sticker. Made me want to key his car" or "So look, you say we can text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can't be traced" or like "no, we'll stop him" or hoping that Paul Ryan "fails and crashes in a blaze of glory" or like "insurance policies" or like "need to lock in" some one in "formal chargeable way" or like the "sense of loss" that "their" Director Comey was fired, that he could have made the FBI great again... Or maybe its like how somehow /all/ of these fucking damning biased texts between Strzok and Page magically went missing from the fucking FBI for months?

Yeah, you go ahead and trust /those/ people "doing their job" properly. I'd rather see if we can shove this dumpster truck into our "intelligent agencies" collective asses...

35,000 people work for the FBI, and you are going to judge the entire operation on the personal comments of one man? And it seems you are willing to not only do that but judge all the other intelligence agencies on that one man's personal comments, too.
You've been had.

hmmm your math is a bit bad, but I'll excuse it cause that shit was just from /two/ of them. There's actually at least 5 investigators/agents, one prosecutor, and one director thus far.

Further, I have little doubt more will be coming out in the wash. Reality is that you can't just "accidentally" have such biased bullshit happen in an agency with checks and balances like FBI, CIA, you need big wigs who allow it, who push for it, who propagate it, etc. I recall an underground story from 2015 about NYPD and Weiner pedo shit, we all know that's true now. During the same time frame there was also an underground from them regarding the soft co against Trump (which we're seeing evidence of that now) the claim was that almost half the FBI were involved in it. So how long would it take for us to filter out 17.5K bad actors? (And no I don't think it's actually that many, but I'd not be at all surprised to see a good 100 or more get the boot for similar shit to Page and Strzok in the coming years. No doubt the public will hear little of it from the MSM, and in this particular case, I'd be glad to see it; I do feel for the good agents who have maintained their integrity and are being/have been undermined by these bad actors. However, that does not mean that I can or will trust them - not until the internal investigations to clear out the chaff are completed anyway.)

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

If you are not in a position, why do you need it?
This should be common practice!
Do it to everyone.

No one should throw away the accumulated experience of years and years of intelligence gathering, TN. Without access to certain current information, these guys couldn't be consulted. It is the currently employed intelligence people who want them to be available for questions when needed. That should be their call, not mine or yours. Or Trump's.

Nope. It should most definitely NOT be "their call", particularly regarding the Obama administration.

You super partisans are going to wreck this country if you have your way. Your views are dangerous, as well as inaccurate.

I am not partisan, but American. The Democratic Party is not, and they offer nothing but destruction and chaotic social nonsense.

I want them politically castrated.

Feel free to define my inaccuracy and "dangerous views".

Sorry, you are nothing but partisan. Dangerous division: "They offer nothing but destruction and chaotic social nonsense. I want them politically castrated" There is nothing constructive or even sensible in that statement. You are turning a group of people with different ideas into a mindless, faceless monster that exists only in your imagination.

Nah. The Democratic Party has removed the mask in recent years, revealing finally the mindless, faceless monster that has slipped so far off the American cracker as to have absolutely no redeeming qualities with which to consider joining with them. They have become an alien interloper, a party of the abnormal with which actual Americans want nothing to do.

 

[Old Rocks]

Why would he still need it?

Idiot. He does not need it. The nation needs his knowledge and advice in times of crisis. And that goes for all the men that have served in high places.

 

[TNHarley]

Why would he still need it?

Idiot. He does not need it. The nation needs his knowledge and advice in times of crisis. And that goes for all the men that have served in high places.

His knowledge? Lol
"Mr. Trump, just in case you didnt know, the 52nd state is Iran"

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Why would he still need it?

Idiot. He does not need it. The nation needs his knowledge and advice in times of crisis. And that goes for all the men that have served in high places.

....Like we need the Halfrican Americans advice on anything related to America.
Now if I wanted to learn about the quran I'll give him a call.

 

[dave p]

Why would he still need it?

Indeed. Take Bush's, Clinton's, Bush's, and Carter's as well. If a situation arises wherein Trump wants advice on a particular issue, all he need do is call them.

You cannot "call" someone for advice who has been out of the loop for months if not years. Additionally, you Trumptards need to understand what Donald does not. Having security clearance doesn't mean someone can access intel on their computer. It means they would come in - probably to a SCIF - meet with the appropriate people and view the appropriate materials.

Why do you think Trump yanked his clearance?
John Brennan has proved to be a security risk in the past, and his sedicious, over the top rants on MSNBC only reinforced this belief.

Why not just face the face that Trumpelthinskin simply cannot take criticism. The slightest bit and he pitches a tantrum like an 8 year old and lashes out. If he can't take the heat, then he should get the fuck out of the kitchen.

As soon as you can make a cohearant statement that is t filed with jr high hyperboles, maybe then someone will take you seriously. I doubt you are a capable.