Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

[Lewdog]

Ll

Sooo he wants to take away the 1st Amendment rights of former federal employees to be able to talk about their life experiences because he doesn't like what they have to say. His excuses is they are making money off of it and that what they are saying is lies.

So a couple of things here... Almost EVERY former higher up federal employee have done interviews, done speeches, and written books after their retirement. That includes former Presidents. Why is Trump picking on ONLY people saying bad things about him? Shouldn't this be a universal decision to take it away from ALL FORMER federal employees?

The second and largest thing is, they are using the excuse that it is inappropriate to criticize Trump because of their former position and that they are doing so without any evidence. Well then does Trump want them to instead go on air and tell the truth and all the stuff they know whether it is Top Secret information? What a chicken shit thing for the White House to say... "You can't criticize the President about something you aren't showing proof of" when they KNOW that they can't share the Top Secret information they DO KNOW.

There's no link to source this thread.
No one has a right to classified info. This has nothing to do with speech. Get back to the 60's and stay there.

It's all over the news and was referenced by Sarah Sanders in her daily press conference. Maybe you should actually pay attention to politics if you are going to come to a political forum to comment?

The forum usually demands a link for source. Why they haven't in this case is beyond me.

Because it is all over the news and was in the White House press conference?

If it makes you feel better here is a link, but you won't read it.

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

 

[dave p]

Your self importance and believe that these threads are nothing more than amusing is a bit concerning. I and most everyone else come here for comic relief. I guess you think your post will change the world.

It's political forum where people discuss politics. Do I think my post are reflective of my self importance? Are you fucking kidding? No, my work at the university and the way I treat those in my community, and the needy I help in my community is how I work to change the world. Get over yourself. What a fucking ridiculous statement to make. Just because my posts isn't going to change the world doesn't mean I'm not going to discuss a serious topic. If you came to this forum for jokes, you might want to get your head checked. Go read some comic strips.

It's obvious you are the one with delusions of grandeur.

You are the delusional one. I m not the one talking about my university. And trying to get kudos for what I do, that’s you in your last post. Calm down there buckwheat and realize these threads aren’t what gets things done. This forum is full of jokes, as your self importance shows. Lighten up , I don’t want to hear about you climbing the clock tower naked with a gun.

All that being said, your inability to effectively prove your shows that you aren’t correct.

No, you are the one that thinks you are so cool that you have to come to a political forum just to point out you are too cool for the forum. Seriously... go hang out with people you think you are worthy of hanging out with.

At what point did I say this thread was going to change the world? Why do you keep repeating that strawman?

I never said I was cool ( whatever that means). Seriously, calm down you are going to give yourself a heart attack. It’s nice you have all the words like Strawman. You have read well and indoctrinated yourself. Lighten up, really it’s just a website where people spout off. Calm the fuck down.

I'm fine, I just don't understand why you are still responding to me and posting here. Go somewhere you can have whatever you think is fun.

This is fun. Watching you get all worked up an feeling self important.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Ll

Sooo he wants to take away the 1st Amendment rights of former federal employees to be able to talk about their life experiences because he doesn't like what they have to say. His excuses is they are making money off of it and that what they are saying is lies.

So a couple of things here... Almost EVERY former higher up federal employee have done interviews, done speeches, and written books after their retirement. That includes former Presidents. Why is Trump picking on ONLY people saying bad things about him? Shouldn't this be a universal decision to take it away from ALL FORMER federal employees?

The second and largest thing is, they are using the excuse that it is inappropriate to criticize Trump because of their former position and that they are doing so without any evidence. Well then does Trump want them to instead go on air and tell the truth and all the stuff they know whether it is Top Secret information? What a chicken shit thing for the White House to say... "You can't criticize the President about something you aren't showing proof of" when they KNOW that they can't share the Top Secret information they DO KNOW.

There's no link to source this thread.
No one has a right to classified info. This has nothing to do with speech. Get back to the 60's and stay there.

It's all over the news and was referenced by Sarah Sanders in her daily press conference. Maybe you should actually pay attention to politics if you are going to come to a political forum to comment?

The forum usually demands a link for source. Why they haven't in this case is beyond me.

Because it is all over the news and was in the White House press conference?

If it makes you feel better here is a link, but you won't read it.

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

Not blaming you. I just see threads devoid of a source consistently being shut down by forum moderators.

 

[Lewdog]

It's political forum where people discuss politics. Do I think my post are reflective of my self importance? Are you fucking kidding? No, my work at the university and the way I treat those in my community, and the needy I help in my community is how I work to change the world. Get over yourself. What a fucking ridiculous statement to make. Just because my posts isn't going to change the world doesn't mean I'm not going to discuss a serious topic. If you came to this forum for jokes, you might want to get your head checked. Go read some comic strips.

It's obvious you are the one with delusions of grandeur.

You are the delusional one. I m not the one talking about my university. And trying to get kudos for what I do, that’s you in your last post. Calm down there buckwheat and realize these threads aren’t what gets things done. This forum is full of jokes, as your self importance shows. Lighten up , I don’t want to hear about you climbing the clock tower naked with a gun.

All that being said, your inability to effectively prove your shows that you aren’t correct.

No, you are the one that thinks you are so cool that you have to come to a political forum just to point out you are too cool for the forum. Seriously... go hang out with people you think you are worthy of hanging out with.

At what point did I say this thread was going to change the world? Why do you keep repeating that strawman?

I never said I was cool ( whatever that means). Seriously, calm down you are going to give yourself a heart attack. It’s nice you have all the words like Strawman. You have read well and indoctrinated yourself. Lighten up, really it’s just a website where people spout off. Calm the fuck down.

I'm fine, I just don't understand why you are still responding to me and posting here. Go somewhere you can have whatever you think is fun.

This is fun. Watching you get all worked up an feeling self important.

I'm not worked up? Schadenfreude is an ugly practice, and then bragging about it is even worse.

 

[dave p]

You are the delusional one. I m not the one talking about my university. And trying to get kudos for what I do, that’s you in your last post. Calm down there buckwheat and realize these threads aren’t what gets things done. This forum is full of jokes, as your self importance shows. Lighten up , I don’t want to hear about you climbing the clock tower naked with a gun.

All that being said, your inability to effectively prove your shows that you aren’t correct.

No, you are the one that thinks you are so cool that you have to come to a political forum just to point out you are too cool for the forum. Seriously... go hang out with people you think you are worthy of hanging out with.

At what point did I say this thread was going to change the world? Why do you keep repeating that strawman?

I never said I was cool ( whatever that means). Seriously, calm down you are going to give yourself a heart attack. It’s nice you have all the words like Strawman. You have read well and indoctrinated yourself. Lighten up, really it’s just a website where people spout off. Calm the fuck down.

I'm fine, I just don't understand why you are still responding to me and posting here. Go somewhere you can have whatever you think is fun.

This is fun. Watching you get all worked up an feeling self important.

I'm not worked up? Schadenfreude is an ugly practice, and then bragging about it is even worse.

And yet I’m happy, secure and well adjusted. I noticed you had a question mark after I’m not worked up. A little Freudian slip.

 

[Aba Incieni]

All former intelligence employees should have their clearances revoked.

 

[Lewdog]

No, you are the one that thinks you are so cool that you have to come to a political forum just to point out you are too cool for the forum. Seriously... go hang out with people you think you are worthy of hanging out with.

At what point did I say this thread was going to change the world? Why do you keep repeating that strawman?

I never said I was cool ( whatever that means). Seriously, calm down you are going to give yourself a heart attack. It’s nice you have all the words like Strawman. You have read well and indoctrinated yourself. Lighten up, really it’s just a website where people spout off. Calm the fuck down.

I'm fine, I just don't understand why you are still responding to me and posting here. Go somewhere you can have whatever you think is fun.

This is fun. Watching you get all worked up an feeling self important.

I'm not worked up? Schadenfreude is an ugly practice, and then bragging about it is even worse.

And yet I’m happy, secure and well adjusted. I noticed you had a question mark after I’m not worked up. A little Freudian slip.

Nope. I'm enjoying watching you and your ego. I find people like you to be strange creatures.

 

[toobfreak]

Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are no longer part of the government.

 

[flacaltenn]

Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Brennan is a talking head on some news show. Should Hannity have top secret clearance?

 

[toobfreak]

Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Then these people no longer need security clearances. When they leave government, they are charged with keeping secrets secret and revealing any info they have to anyone qualified that needs it. They don't need to continue receiving updates. Further, I'm still hard pressed to believe we are a government where individuals alone know important things that no one else knows. Not only is that dangerous, but it is stupid.

 

[flacaltenn]

Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Brennan is a talking head on some news show. Should Hannity have top secret clearance?

You just made me do this --- The thought of Hannity working in surveillance or intel is just hysterical.

 

[flacaltenn]

Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Then these people no longer need security clearances. When they leave government, they are charged with keeping secrets secret and revealing any info they have to anyone qualified that needs it. They don't need to continue receiving updates. Further, I'm still hard pressed to believe we are a government where individuals alone know important things that no one else knows. Not only is that dangerous, but it is stupid.

Can't go that far. Makes me uncomfortable to explain it.

 

[Aba Incieni]

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Brennan is a talking head on some news show. Should Hannity have top secret clearance?

You just made me do this --- The thought of Hannity working in surveillance or intel is just hysterical.

Agree.

Brennan, not so much.

 

[toobfreak]

The question begs why any FORMER employee would still have a security clearance in the first place? When I quit a job, I no longer keep keys, passwords and the like! What if they are now working for the Russians? And what the hell does any of this to do with 1st amendment rights? Jees, what a CRACKPOT.

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Then these people no longer need security clearances. When they leave government, they are charged with keeping secrets secret and revealing any info they have to anyone qualified that needs it. They don't need to continue receiving updates. Further, I'm still hard pressed to believe we are a government where individuals alone know important things that no one else knows. Not only is that dangerous, but it is stupid.

Can't go that far. Makes me uncomfortable to explain it.

Then let me put it this way: I retire from my CIA or whatever job and take with me all that I know. No one asks me to quantify these facts, and since I alone know these things, no one else even knows I know them! So I might as well not know them at all. But if they know I know them without knowing what it is that I know, and don't want to know what I know until some later date, when the time comes that they need these things, then they will call me up to ask about them! Then they will know them too. So they could have asked before I left. That is assuming I don't die, get in a car crash or defect to a foreign power---- then that knowledge is lost.

Government is a machine. The very best machines have a built in reliability (parallel redundancy). The worst machines are serially mapped so that any one part can take down the entire system which no other part can replace. This is the government. Is it any wonder why we are in the mess we are in where it cost $80 for a 5¢ nut?

The Deep State doesn't just happen, we manufacture it. Out there is an entire body of people whom no one elects and they pretty much operate above the law. Can't afford to arrest or charge them, they have secrets we need! And therein lies the Clinton conundrum: the only reason why she walks free on the street while other burn (literally) for her crimes is that she holds secrets too powerful over others to ignore.

 

[Lewdog]

Because not everything classified is written down. MOST classified knowledge is actually in people's heads. (believe or not it's true). Extend you imagination to cases where these folks need to be consulted after they leave.

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Then these people no longer need security clearances. When they leave government, they are charged with keeping secrets secret and revealing any info they have to anyone qualified that needs it. They don't need to continue receiving updates. Further, I'm still hard pressed to believe we are a government where individuals alone know important things that no one else knows. Not only is that dangerous, but it is stupid.

Can't go that far. Makes me uncomfortable to explain it.

Then let me put it this way: I retire from my CIA or whatever job and take with me all that I know. No one asks me to quantify these facts, and since I alone know these things, no one else even knows I know them! So I might as well not know them at all. But if they know I know them without knowing what it is that I know, and don't want to know what I know until some later date, when the time comes that they need these things, then they will call me up to ask about them! Then they will know them too. So they could have asked before I left. That is assuming I don't die, get in a car crash or defect to a foreign power---- then that knowledge is lost.

Government is a machine. The very best machines have a built in reliability (parallel redundancy). The worst machines are serially mapped so that any one part can take down the entire system which no other part can replace. This is the government. Is it any wonder why we are in the mess we are in where it cost $80 for a 5¢ nut?

The Deep State doesn't just happen, we manufacture it. Out there is an entire body of people whom no one elects and they pretty much operate above the law. Can't afford to arrest or charge them, they have secrets we need! And therein lies the Clinton conundrum: the only reason why she walks free on the street while other burn (literally) for her crimes is that she holds secrets too powerful over others to ignore.

Think how dangerous that might be though. Can you imagine what a person like Trump would do to you, if he knew that you knew things about him that he doesn't want the world to know?

Or even worse, if it was documented somewhere that you knew things about a guy like Putin that he obviously didn't want the world to know... and he KNEW your name, where you lived, your family... etc.

It's one thing for a foreign government to know you worked for the U.S. intel agency, it is another for them to know specific information... or specific information they might want to know.

 

[flacaltenn]

Think how dangerous that might be though. Can you imagine what a person like Trump would do to you, if he knew that you knew things about him that he doesn't want the world to know?

He'd write you a check for $350 grand and make you sign a non-disclosure. That's cruel aint it?

 

[Lewdog]

Think how dangerous that might be though. Can you imagine what a person like Trump would do to you, if he knew that you knew things about him that he doesn't want the world to know?

He'd write you a check for $350 grand and make you sign a non-disclosure. That's cruel aint it?

You mean Michael Cohen would...

 

[Hellokitty]

Weird how this came out of know where. Makes me wonder if TRUMP is putting this out there to get the MSM and liberals to defend Brennan, Clapper and Rice for having SC, before the charges come out.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I can totally accept that except when they leave their jobs, it assumes:
A). That they know things which no one else knows!
B). Why not just ask them to write down or tell anything they exclusively know to someone else.
C). A security clearance opens the way for someone to CONTINUE to receive classified info, not give it. Why would a person no longer working a security job need that?

I can't imagine a nation where there are top secrets held by people that only THEY know alone. Nor one where such people still need to receive security info when they are longer part of the government.

A is obviously true. B is impossible and sometimes more risky than just keeping it in the head that it NEEDS to reside in. C is not true. It swings both ways.

Then these people no longer need security clearances. When they leave government, they are charged with keeping secrets secret and revealing any info they have to anyone qualified that needs it. They don't need to continue receiving updates. Further, I'm still hard pressed to believe we are a government where individuals alone know important things that no one else knows. Not only is that dangerous, but it is stupid.

Can't go that far. Makes me uncomfortable to explain it.

Then let me put it this way: I retire from my CIA or whatever job and take with me all that I know. No one asks me to quantify these facts, and since I alone know these things, no one else even knows I know them! So I might as well not know them at all. But if they know I know them without knowing what it is that I know, and don't want to know what I know until some later date, when the time comes that they need these things, then they will call me up to ask about them! Then they will know them too. So they could have asked before I left. That is assuming I don't die, get in a car crash or defect to a foreign power---- then that knowledge is lost.

Government is a machine. The very best machines have a built in reliability (parallel redundancy). The worst machines are serially mapped so that any one part can take down the entire system which no other part can replace. This is the government. Is it any wonder why we are in the mess we are in where it cost $80 for a 5¢ nut?

The Deep State doesn't just happen, we manufacture it. Out there is an entire body of people whom no one elects and they pretty much operate above the law. Can't afford to arrest or charge them, they have secrets we need! And therein lies the Clinton conundrum: the only reason why she walks free on the street while other burn (literally) for her crimes is that she holds secrets too powerful over others to ignore.

Think how dangerous that might be though. Can you imagine what a person like Trump would do to you, if he knew that you knew things about him that he doesn't want the world to know?

Or even worse, if it was documented somewhere that you knew things about a guy like Putin that he obviously didn't want the world to know... and he KNEW your name, where you lived, your family... etc.

It's one thing for a foreign government to know you worked for the U.S. intel agency, it is another for them to know specific information... or specific information they might want to know.

I don’t think trump or Putin give a shit what anyone knows about them. They both wear it on their sleeves.
Hillary and obama are a different story.