Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The OP stated "wants to take away first amendment rights".

Which is absolutely true, and done by disincentivizing free speech unde penalty of losing a security clearance.

You either feel this violates the first amendment, or you do not. No need for the hissy fit.

 

[busybee01]

If he did that the cheering across the nation would be loud...no citizen with a brain likes Obama's goon squad..... Presidents are not suppose to use the top law enforcement agencies as his personal police force....aimed at his political foes.....
Maybe no one told the first black president that when he snaked into office...

Go tell Trump that. That is what Trump is trying to do.

 

[JGalt]

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.

And as already correctly noted: Trump is petty, vindictive, and spiteful – Trump is clearly unfit to be president.

One more mindless drone whose head is full of ****. You are ill-informed, low-information, and in all possibility, will never understand what has taken place in your own country.

 

[miketx]

The OP stated "wants to take away first amendment rights".

Which is absolutely true, and done by disincentivizing free speech unde penalty of losing a security clearance.

You either feel this violates the first amendment, or you do not. No need for the hissy fit.

One can only ask what you are talking about. All I did is point another lying lib, clearly and concisely.

 

[busybee01]

What's that mean? I have never heard any of these people divulge any classified information. What does he mean, "monetized?"

I DO think it is weird that they keep their security clearances after leaving their jobs, though.

That is the way it works for everyone. If you were in the military then you keep your clearances. Some jobs require a security clearance.

 

[bodecea]

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.

And as already correctly noted: Trump is petty, vindictive, and spiteful – Trump is clearly unfit to be president.

One more mindless drone whose head is full of ****. You are ill-informed, low-information, and in all possibility, will never understand what has taken place in your own country.

Your post was all about the poster...what about content?

 

[JGalt]

None of these ex Intelligence clowns should have an active clearance. Those are the very clear rules regarding clearances. If they are active, they should immediately be put to inactive status and thus their access to TS information blocked as it should be.

That is not the way it works. Clearances have nothing to do with which side of the political spectrum you are in. There are rules and no one has violated them.

Anyone who thinks just because someone works for an intelligence agency that they are completely unbiased and don't have their own political prejudices, is not thinking clearly.

There are rules, but the fact is that several high-ranking intelligence officials have attempted to circumvent and abuse those rules. This is by now general knowledge, a proven fact, and to claim otherwise, is either ignorance or sheer denial.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The OP stated "wants to take away first amendment rights".

Which is absolutely true, and done by disincentivizing free speech unde penalty of losing a security clearance.

You either feel this violates the first amendment, or you do not. No need for the hissy fit.

One can only ask what you are talking about. All I did is point another lying lib, clearly and concisely.

And I spelled out why you are wrong. You know this, which is why you have no better response.

 

[flacaltenn]

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.

He's pretty much wreck any reputation or legacy. He's fighting to stay out of cuffs at the moment. And CNN is an accomplice to his criminal sedition. He looks like loony bin material accusing the Prez of treason and STILL lying his ass off as an analysis for CNN.

America can't stop him from looking like a moron. But -- this guy should not have continuing access to spy on anything.

But it isn't just Brennan. They listed Clapper, Haden, Rice, Comey, McCabe along with him. But there are people on Fox that make crazy ass statements as well. Flynn parlayed his old position to use it to make money as a consultant for a former country. That fits under the same thing Trump is accusing all these people from too.

I don't agree with many of those. They are not acting deranged and vindictive. It's the VINDICTIVENESS that affects the clearance issue. I would NOT include McCabe, Hayden and maybe Comey. Although Comey is suffering today from a delusion that he is the Democratic Party Moses.

Flynn was well in his rights to consult on security matters in the world. There are giant security corporations which are joint ventures between EX -- CIA/NSA employees and EX KGB agents in Russia. LEADERSHIP positions to boot. And THAT is not necessarily a "national security concern". So people over-react to what ex spies and spooks decide to do when they leave public service.

If you BEHAVE -- you never actually LEAVE those positions. Which is why so many Agency heads are GIVEN "courtesy clearances". Because their actions are subject to monitoring for the rest of their lives.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Clapper is in on the silent coup. Of course that is sedition and he should lose his clearance

 

[busybee01]

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.

Those people whose security clearances he wants to revoke have abused their power and have done some very bad things, among which is failure to indict the Democratic candidate for the numerous felonies she committed, the attempted unseating of a standing President, and the overturning of a legal American presidential election.

They should not only have their clearances yanked, they should be behind bars. If you don't see this by now, you really don't understand what has happened in this country.

This is not a banana republic. They have not abused their power and there is no evidence of a crime. Innocent until proven guilty in court is the standard. They should not be behind bars. If you don't see this then you are a fascist pig.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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 is no first amendment right to a security clearance. In a nutshell this is just another lie by the left.

No, but revoking one based on nothing but speech crtiical of president ***** does raise some first amendment issues. Pay attention!

THEY are no LONGER employed so have no NEED for a clearance.

 

[busybee01]

If they can't keep their mouths shut they should lose their clearance and it's a stretch for the OP to say Trump wants to take away their first amendment rights. That's ridiculous but then look who is saying it.

There are people with Security Clearances on Fox network who use their positions to make money there... but they aren't on Trump's list. THAT'S why it is a First Amendment issue.

Trump is only doing this to his political opponents, NOT ALL people with former positions and Security Clearances that are making money from it.

THEY (others with clearances) are not using their Network contract to DEFEND their OWN criminal actions and blowing chaff. Clapper is.. This is not about silencing him. It's about cutting off his access to national security secrets because he's acting deranged. I know my clearances would be yanked for less.

You do not know that. The only one acting deranged is Trump.

 

[flacaltenn]

He's fighting to stay out of cuffs at the moment.

How is he in any legal jeopardy whatsoever? this is the first I have heard of this.

And, of course, nothing he has done meets any legal standard of "sedition", so I have to wonder who is giving you legal advice...

Clapper? He lied about the dossier. MARKETED it as an "Official US Intel Report". Has his fingers all over leaks to media that made the POS document sound important enough to USE as the primary excuse to SPY on an opposition political campaign with the MOST AWESOME spy tools ever known to man.

He's one of main culprits in that sedition. And he lies about most everything. INCLUDING the existence and substance of Patriot Act Big Brother system that HE tossed the keys to the FBI to use to undermine and influence an election.

Biggest political scandal of your lifetime. You just don't realize that yet tho..

 

[JGalt]

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.

And as already correctly noted: Trump is petty, vindictive, and spiteful – Trump is clearly unfit to be president.

One more mindless drone whose head is full of ****. You are ill-informed, low-information, and in all possibility, will never understand what has taken place in your own country.

Your post was all about the poster...what about content?

Why should I waste my time on you by doing your own damned homework? No amount of links substantiating something everyone else has already figured out, is going to change your opinion one iota.

Leftists such as yourself, are like those handful of Japanese soldiers who hid out in the caves in those Pacific island after the war, continuing to fight on for the glory of Imperialist Japan. They never received word that they had lost, so they continued to fight on.

Even in Nazi Germany, there were many not unlike yourself, who continued to fight the advancing Allied troops, in hope of resurrecting Hitler's dream of the Vaterland.

There will always be a few select individuals who are so stubborn, so mule-headed, or so ignorant, that they just don't get it. No matter what.

Maybe it's time to face up to the facts: Trump won the election. Hillary lost. Donald Trump is now your President, no matter how you feel or what you believe.There is nothing, verily, not a single thing that you can say or do, that will change that fact.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What's that mean? I have never heard any of these people divulge any classified information. What does he mean, "monetized?"

I DO think it is weird that they keep their security clearances after leaving their jobs, though.

That is the way it works for everyone. If you were in the military then you keep your clearances. Some jobs require a security clearance.

Only for a SHORT time. I am afraid all the people mentioned have no clearance anymore.

 

[JGalt]

If they can't keep their mouths shut they should lose their clearance and it's a stretch for the OP to say Trump wants to take away their first amendment rights. That's ridiculous but then look who is saying it.

There are people with Security Clearances on Fox network who use their positions to make money there... but they aren't on Trump's list. THAT'S why it is a First Amendment issue.

Trump is only doing this to his political opponents, NOT ALL people with former positions and Security Clearances that are making money from it.

THEY (others with clearances) are not using their Network contract to DEFEND their OWN criminal actions and blowing chaff. Clapper is.. This is not about silencing him. It's about cutting off his access to national security secrets because he's acting deranged. I know my clearances would be yanked for less.

You do not know that. The only one acting deranged is Trump.

Yet another poor, lost soul who doesn't get it and probably never will.

 

[Lewdog]

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.

He's pretty much wreck any reputation or legacy. He's fighting to stay out of cuffs at the moment. And CNN is an accomplice to his criminal sedition. He looks like loony bin material accusing the Prez of treason and STILL lying his ass off as an analysis for CNN.

America can't stop him from looking like a moron. But -- this guy should not have continuing access to spy on anything.

But it isn't just Brennan. They listed Clapper, Haden, Rice, Comey, McCabe along with him. But there are people on Fox that make crazy ass statements as well. Flynn parlayed his old position to use it to make money as a consultant for a former country. That fits under the same thing Trump is accusing all these people from too.

I don't agree with many of those. They are not acting deranged and vindictive. It's the VINDICTIVENESS that affects the clearance issue. I would NOT include McCabe, Hayden and maybe Comey. Although Comey is suffering today from a delusion that he is the Democratic Party Moses.

Flynn was well in his rights to consult on security matters in the world. There are giant security corporations which are joint ventures between EX -- CIA/NSA employees and EX KGB agents in Russia. LEADERSHIP positions to boot. And THAT is not necessarily a "national security concern". So people over-react to what ex spies and spooks decide to do when they leave public service.

If you BEHAVE -- you never actually LEAVE those positions. Which is why so many Agency heads are GIVEN "courtesy clearances". Because their actions are subject to monitoring for the rest of their lives.

But under what Trump was saying, which is monetizing their positions, Flynn would be included in that but Trump didn't name him. Now even if they did start taking them away based on whether they thought they were misusing them, it would have to be done by an impartial division or person like the IG. Just letting a Trump appointee do it would just mean like it has been said today, the only ones getting called you would be those who say something bad about Trump only.

 

[Wry Catcher]

''bout damn time

He's getting ready to Wag the Dog. The closer Trump gets to being impeached, the closer Trump will get to put our military into harms way.

 

[Lewdog]

He's fighting to stay out of cuffs at the moment.

How is he in any legal jeopardy whatsoever? this is the first I have heard of this.

And, of course, nothing he has done meets any legal standard of "sedition", so I have to wonder who is giving you legal advice...

Clapper? He lied about the dossier. MARKETED it as an "Official US Intel Report". Has his fingers all over leaks to media that made the POS document sound important enough to USE as the primary excuse to SPY on an opposition political campaign with the MOST AWESOME spy tools ever known to man.

He's one of main culprits in that sedition. And he lies about most everything. INCLUDING the existence and substance of Patriot Act Big Brother system that HE tossed the keys to the FBI to use to undermine and influence an election.

Biggest political scandal of your lifetime. You just don't realize that yet tho..

Steele had actually been a U.S. intel asset many times before the dossier.