Trump Wants To Take Away Former Intelligence Agency Employees Security Clearances

[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.

The revocation of a security clearance does not require a jury. Any judge can deem a person ineligible to posses a security clearance...

"There is, however, no jury and the judge will make a recommendation to the agency based on the evidence presented."

Security Clearance Revocation Hearings - The Law Office of Eric Roper, P.A.

You need to read your links. The judge can make a recommendation but the agency makes the final decision.

 

[2aguy]

Trump the petty tinpot dictator – needlessly lashing out that those whom he incorrectly perceives to be ‘enemies.’

what makes him a dictator again? To be a dictator you actually have to do things that dictators do.....by calling him that when he hasn't done any of that, you are showing what a moron you are.

 

[Kosh]

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.

So what? He took a job with the best slime and destroy agency in Washington. He gets what he was paid to do. Some folks will do anything for political power or money.

I suppose that would include laundering criminal Russian money in exchange for material support in an election....

And yet Hilary still lost...

 

[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.

Clapper is fighting to stay out of handcuffs and CNN is an accomplice. He recently essentially accused Trump of treason because he suggested that the President is "a Russian asset". He's going down. And old ex chief spies don't go down without a fight.

Clapper: Russia is handling Trump as an 'asset' - CNN Video

He is not. There is no investigation of Clapper going on. The FBI and DOJ are not Trump's personal security force.

 

[miketx]

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.

They don't have to keep their mouths shut. Security clearances should not be politicized.

They do concerning security issues. If people like you had been in charge we would have been wiped out in WW2.

View attachment 206621

You don't have a clue what you are talking about. Security clearances should not rely on politics as long as they use the information properly. Their politics should have nothing to do with it.

As already stated, it's not a first amendment issue. You can't keep protecting criminals you know.

 

[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..

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

So what? He took a job with the best slime and destroy agency in Washington. He gets what he was paid to do. Some folks will do anything for political power or money.

I suppose that would include laundering criminal Russian money in exchange for material support in an election....

Careful with that laundering allegation. Because if it DID happen, you have to prove INTENT and KNOWLEDGE of the scheme. Selling Real Estate to Russians is NOT a crime. Never has been. But that's not the topic here. The topic is unhinged crazy people running around out of job with the Nations' highest levels of security 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.

 

[Kosh]

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.

Clapper is fighting to stay out of handcuffs and CNN is an accomplice. He recently essentially accused Trump of treason because he suggested that the President is "a Russian asset". He's going down. And old ex chief spies don't go down without a fight.

Clapper: Russia is handling Trump as an 'asset' - CNN Video

He is not. There is no investigation of Clapper going on. The FBI and DOJ are not Trump's personal security force.

Yet you had no problem when Obama used it as his security force..

The Stench at Obama's DOJ and FBI | RealClearPolitics

 

[OldLady]

''bout damn time

Because his own kids can't get security clearances....

He did get it, finally. Just took a year.

 

[deanrd]

Sorry need more information on this other than a far left religious cult followers take on this..

Any link?

View attachment 206591

Trump is trying to strip Obama's intelligence chiefs of their security clearance | Daily Mail Online

So these people no longer work for the government and still have their security clearances?

If they no longer in those positions in government and no longer work in the government, why would they need to keep their security clearances?

I'll pretend that's a serious question because it's so stupid.

Government is complicated. Obama didn't replace everyone from the Bush Administration right away because because there were questions.

The Trump administration being incompetent probably won't benefit from expertise because they are always going to be incompetent.

Just to show how stupid they are, two of the six don't even have a clearance. I know that. But they don't.

Look at Trump, he's so stupid that even as president, he still thinks Obama was born in Kenya.

He has the worlds best intel and yet, he's so stupid, he thinks Obama tapped his phones.

This guy is afraid of a security breach and yet, he gives classified material to Russians.

Trump is such an idiot, he gave Jared Kushner a Top Secret clearance.

Trump is such a fool, he's worried people might benefit off the government and yet his daughter made 82 million last year.

You have to be a fool to follow this fool. There is no other possible explanation.

 

[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.

Nobody has a First Amendment right to a security clearance. I'm ambivalent on this action, but it may not be a bad idea. Clapper should be in prison over the fact he lied to Congress and the American people over illegal NSA spying and they're still doing it. Rice lied about the motive behind the Benghazi attacks and Comey was grossly incompetent. If this had been the private sector these people would have been out on their ass almost immediately and some of them prosecuted for what they did.

I didn't say that. I said that by him taking away from only people that say things he doesn't like IS. If you only take it away from people that say things you don't like, and let those that say things you agree with, it does violate their first amendment rights.

 

[dave p]

He's flailing badly. Very badly. Things are getting way toooooo close!

IVANKA AND JARED AREN'T MONETIZING THEIR SECURITY CLEARNANCES??

Sarah Sanders: Trump considering pulling security clearances for Brennan, Comey, Clapper, Hayden, Rice and McCabe

BRAD REED
23 JUL 2018 AT 14:52 ET



Aaron Rupar

✔@atrupar
replying to @atrupar

Sanders says Trump is considering taking away security clearances from Brennen, Comey, McCabe, Clapper, and Rice "because in some cases they have monetized their security clearances."

2:49 PM - Jul 23, 2018

• 
  10
• 
  22 people are talking about this

Sarah Sanders: Trump considering pulling security clearances for Brennan, Comey, Clapper, Hayden, Rice and McCabe

You’re a special kind of idiot

 

[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.

Moron....security clearences are not a 1st amendment issue......

Moron, that isn't what I said.

 

[dave p]

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.

Nobody has a First Amendment right to a security clearance. I'm ambivalent on this action, but it may not be a bad idea. Clapper should be in prison over the fact he lied to Congress and the American people over illegal NSA spying and they're still doing it. Rice lied about the motive behind the Benghazi attacks and Comey was grossly incompetent. If this had been the private sector these people would have been out on their ass almost immediately and some of them prosecuted for what they did.

I didn't say that. I said that by him taking away from only people that say things he doesn't like IS. If you only take it away from people that say things you don't like, and let those that say things you agree with, it does violate their first amendment rights.

That’s not what he is doing. You alarmist are quite comical.

 

[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.

Nobody has a First Amendment right to a security clearance. I'm ambivalent on this action, but it may not be a bad idea. Clapper should be in prison over the fact he lied to Congress and the American people over illegal NSA spying and they're still doing it. Rice lied about the motive behind the Benghazi attacks and Comey was grossly incompetent. If this had been the private sector these people would have been out on their ass almost immediately and some of them prosecuted for what they did.

I didn't say that. I said that by him taking away from only people that say things he doesn't like IS. If you only take it away from people that say things you don't like, and let those that say things you agree with, it does violate their first amendment rights.

That’s not what he is doing. You alarmist are quite comical.

It's exactly what he is trying to do. Look at the list of people.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Like I've said before, when they sent me my retirement paperwork to sign and send back (was located in a remote station at a MEPS and had to handle personal paperwork over the phone to PSD Corpus Christi), three of the documents were non disclosure agreements saying that my clearance was going away and that I couldn't talk about any classified information for at least 10 years.

No, if you leave government service, your clearance should go away as well. As far as the investigation that needs to be done when they are reinstated? Not a problem, they just have to be investigated from the time they left to the time they were reinstated, because their previous investigation is already on file.

 

[toobfreak]

Sorry need more information on this other than a far left religious cult followers take on this..
Any link?

Trump is trying to strip Obama's intelligence chiefs of their security clearance | Daily Mail Online

So these people no longer work for the government and still have their security clearances?

If they no longer in those positions in government and no longer work in the government, why would they need to keep their security clearances?

incompetent incompetent stupid stupid idiot fool
Trump is such a fool, he's worried people might benefit off the government and yet his daughter made 82 million last year.

Don't you just love people whose every other word out of their mouth is what incompetent, stupid, idiot fools OTHER people are all the while making a world-class boneheaded remark like claiming that Ivanka's business profits came off of the government!

 

[Kosh]

Sorry need more information on this other than a far left religious cult followers take on this..

Any link?

View attachment 206591

Trump is trying to strip Obama's intelligence chiefs of their security clearance | Daily Mail Online

So these people no longer work for the government and still have their security clearances?

If they no longer in those positions in government and no longer work in the government, why would they need to keep their security clearances?

I'll pretend that's a serious question because it's so stupid.

Government is complicated. Obama didn't replace everyone from the Bush Administration right away because because there were questions.

The Trump administration being incompetent probably won't benefit from expertise because they are always going to be incompetent.

Just to show how stupid they are, two of the six don't even have a clearance. I know that. But they don't.

Look at Trump, he's so stupid that even as president, he still thinks Obama was born in Kenya.

He has the worlds best intel and yet, he's so stupid, he thinks Obama tapped his phones.

This guy is afraid of a security breach and yet, he gives classified material to Russians.

Trump is such an idiot, he gave Jared Kushner a Top Secret clearance.

Trump is such a fool, he's worried people might benefit off the government and yet his daughter made 82 million last year.

You have to be a fool to follow this fool. There is no other possible explanation.

So you don't have a real answer just far left religious dogma..

If you were fired from a top level government position, you should not be able to keep any security clearances. But if you no longer work for the government and are a talking head on CNN, you certainly do not need a security clearance any more.

 

[dave p]

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.

Nobody has a First Amendment right to a security clearance. I'm ambivalent on this action, but it may not be a bad idea. Clapper should be in prison over the fact he lied to Congress and the American people over illegal NSA spying and they're still doing it. Rice lied about the motive behind the Benghazi attacks and Comey was grossly incompetent. If this had been the private sector these people would have been out on their ass almost immediately and some of them prosecuted for what they did.

I didn't say that. I said that by him taking away from only people that say things he doesn't like IS. If you only take it away from people that say things you don't like, and let those that say things you agree with, it does violate their first amendment rights.

That’s not what he is doing. You alarmist are quite comical.

It's exactly what he is trying to do. Look at the list of people.

You are wrong.

 

[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.

Nobody has a First Amendment right to a security clearance. I'm ambivalent on this action, but it may not be a bad idea. Clapper should be in prison over the fact he lied to Congress and the American people over illegal NSA spying and they're still doing it. Rice lied about the motive behind the Benghazi attacks and Comey was grossly incompetent. If this had been the private sector these people would have been out on their ass almost immediately and some of them prosecuted for what they did.

I didn't say that. I said that by him taking away from only people that say things he doesn't like IS. If you only take it away from people that say things you don't like, and let those that say things you agree with, it does violate their first amendment rights.

That’s not what he is doing. You alarmist are quite comical.

It's exactly what he is trying to do. Look at the list of people.

You are wrong.

Wow that's a deep rebuttal.