Trump revokes ex-CIA chief's security clearance, slamming critic

[webfact]

Trump revokes ex-CIA chief's security clearance, slamming critic

By Steve Holland and Jeff Mason

 

FILE PHOTO: Former CIA Director John Brennan arrives for a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing evaluating the intelligence community assessment on "Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections" on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., May 16, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump moved to penalize a sharp critic on Wednesday, revoking the security clearance of Obama-era CIA Director John Brennan for making what he called "a series of unfounded and outrageous allegations" about his administration.

 

The Republican president, in a statement read to reporters by White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders, also announced he was evaluating whether other former high-ranking officials, all of whom have criticized him, should have their security clearances withdrawn as well.

 

The decision came a day after Brennan, who headed the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency under Democratic President Barack Obama, levelled a blistering attack against Trump for the president's tweeted criticism of former White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman, who wrote a book critical of Trump.

 

"It’s astounding how often you fail to live up to minimum standards of decency, civility, & probity. Seems like you will never understand what it means to be president, nor what it takes to be a good, decent, & honest person. So disheartening, so dangerous for our Nation," Brennan wrote.

 

Trump, without mentioning specific comments made by Brennan, said the former CIA leader had engaged in "frenzied commentary" and had sought to "sow division and chaos" about the Trump administration.

 

"Mr. Brennan has recently leveraged his status as a former high-ranking official with access to highly sensitive information to make a series of unfounded and outrageous allegations – wild outbursts on the internet and television – about this administration," Trump said.

 

Brennan, in a tweet, said he would not back down.

 

"This action is part of a broader effort by Mr. Trump to suppress freedom of speech & punish critics. It should gravely worry all Americans, including intelligence professionals, about the cost of speaking out. My principles are worth far more than clearances. I will not relent," he said.

 

Trump said he may also revoke the clearances of other critics, including former U.S. national intelligence director James Clapper, former FBI Director James Comey, former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice, former National Security Agency director Michael Hayden and former deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, among others.

 

Also on the list was Bruce Ohr, a current Justice Department official in the criminal division.

 

"BANANA REPUBLIC"

Republican lawmakers gave mixed reviews to Trump's decision, with some criticizing it and others saying Brennan had acted inappropriately with his comments about the president.

 

“I don’t like it at all," said Republican Senator Bob Corker, referring to Trump's decision. "It feels very much like a banana republic kind of thing.”

 

Brennan has frequently appeared on cable television news shows and sent out lashing tweets to attack Trump's foreign policy positions.

 

He was particularly biting about the president's joint news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki a month ago.

 

Trump said he tended to believe Putin's denials about Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election despite the U.S. intelligence community view that Moscow was to blame.

 

Brennan suggested in a tweet that Trump could be impeached, saying his performance in Helsinki "rises to & exceeds the threshold of 'high crimes & misdemeanours'” and was "nothing short of treasonous."

 

High-ranking government officials sometimes retain their security clearances after leaving office, allowing them the ability to provide advice as needed to their successors.

 

"At this point in my administration, any benefits that senior officials might glean from consultations with Mr. Brennan are now outweighed by the risks posed by his erratic conduct and behaviour ... That conduct and behaviour has tested and far exceeded the limits of any professional courtesy that has been due to him," Trump said.

 

Brennan faces no formal charges or allegations of violating any regulations or laws. Another former CIA director, John Deutch, had his security clearance revoked in 1999, three years after he resigned as CIA chief, after he violated security rules for keeping classified information on computers at his home.

 

Ned Price, a former National Security Council spokesman for Obama and former CIA official, said Trump was trying to shift public attention away from the critical book by Manigault Newman.

 

"The proximate target was John Brennan, but the real intent of today’s announcement was to simultaneously shift and silence," he said.

 

"The White House knows as well as anyone that Brennan, in his criticism of Trump, has never disclosed classified information. And that’s always been the metric when it comes to a revocation of a clearance," Price said.

 

Hayden, asked for his response to Trump’s announced review of his security clearance, replied in an email, “Meh.”

 

“With regard to the implied threat today that I could lose my clearance, that will have no impact on what I think, say or write,” Hayden wrote.

 

(Reporting by Steve Holland and Jeff Mason; additional reporting by Jonathan Landay and Patricia Zengerle; Editing by James Dalgleish and Tom Brown)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-08-16

[Samui Bodoh]

What a petty, petty man.

 

I have said it before and (sadly) need to say it again;

 

Donald Trump is an ever-expanding cloud of toxic waste that defiles everything it touches.

 

I sincerely hope, for them and for the entire world, that the US manages to sort itself out before it is too late.

 

God help us all.

 

[Get Real]

Talk about losing confidence. Mr. Trump really know how to make that happen. Why not let the investigations proceed? If everything is so clear and right, then they will prove that.

On the other hand, we all know that this little momma´s boy wants to use the powers given to him to hide as long as he can, before his little unwashed and dirty arse will show itself in proper light. He is nothing but a crazed hill billy in a to expensive suit that just dosen´t fit him.

Edited August 15, 2018 by Get Real

[Credo]

48 minutes ago, webfact said:

....had engaged in "frenzied commentary" and had sought to "sow division and chaos" about the Trump administration.

It's difficult to believe that Trump would accuse someone else of frenzied commentary and sowing division and chaos.   Unbelievable.

 

[Lacessit]

I'm wondering if America can afford a President who makes so many enemies.

[utalkin2me]

i am at the point where i am blaming other republicans as much as teump himself. sitting by and letting this stuff happen is just not ok. they are all the same unfortunately. 

[Chomper Higgot]

The letter announcing the removal of Brennan’s security clearance was signed on 26th July but the action was only taken yesterday.

 

So clearly no urgent security risk behind this move.

 

Petty punishment of detractors seems more the point.

[attrayant]

What a petty, stupid move.  This will have the opposite effect of what was intended, namely to ensure that Brennan now appears on all the talk shows and continues doing the same thing.  This is known as the Streisand effect.

 

The Streisand effect is a phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet. It is an example of psychological reactance, wherein once people are aware that some information is being kept from them, their motivation to access and spread it is increased.

[Spidey]

Prams and toys yet again. This is getting boringly predictable.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Spidey

[Scott]

It's my understanding that the security clearance is only active when the person is called on for official business.   I had a security clearance from employment with the Dept of State which remained in effect when I left the job for another position.   The new employment was related to the Dept of State job.   I no longer was privy to any classified information, however, should I be called back, I would not have to get a new security clearance.  

 

So, these guys don't get classified information.   They simply don't have to get a new clearance should they be called back for any reason, such as a terrorist attack.  

 

[Credo]

It's not surprising given this report from Newsweek:

 

Trump's Ego Is so Fragile, His 'Fluffer' Secret Service Agents Have to Tell People to Say Nice Things to Him, Deutsch Says

President Donald Trump has such a fragile ego, his secret service agents are forced to act like “fluffers” and tell people to say nice things to him before he enters a room, Donny Deutsch has claimed.

Speaking in an interview with Morning Joe on Wednesday, the TV personality and pundit, who has moved in similar circles to President Trump, said he has been told that Trump needs to hear positive things when he enters a room.

“Donald is all about being loved… and he’s got his 40 percent now he’s going to turn and be Ronald Reagan and he’s going to have everybody because that’s what he wants… and he’s done the opposite,” Deutsch said in a discussion of whether the president had acted like a dealmaker since taking office, suggesting that he had been surprised by Trump’s behavior.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/trumps-ego-so-fragile-his-fluffer-secret-service-agents-have-tell-people-say-1074290

 

[Jingthing]

The plot sickens.

 

[BuaBS]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump revokes ex-CIA chief's security clearance, slamming critic

Trump was right again . It's all in the title : EX-cia. No reason to keep his security clearance.

[Jingthing]

8 minutes ago, BuaBS said:

Trump was right again . It's all in the title : EX-cia. No reason to keep his security clearance.

It was just a diversion. Everyone knows "trump" wouldn't be doing stuff like this to people that praise him. Don't you get that? This is BANANA REPUBLIC stuff. The USA can't hold itself up as any kind of good example of governance to the world anymore. This was Putin's plan along. Make the USA appear to be just as bad as his dictatorship. 

[Scott]

7 minutes ago, BuaBS said:

Trump was right again . It's all in the title : EX-cia. No reason to keep his security clearance.

Not necessarily so.   Those people who have been stripped do not have access to current classified information.   Should even a mundane consultation by a current director of the CIA be wanted, it no longer can.  

 

Anyone who has worked in any administrative position knows that there is a lot of carry over from one administration to the other.  

 

I certainly got calls for quite a while about particular situations and wanting to know whether this or that had happened in the past.   If the new people needed to fill me in, they could do so, as long as I had a current security clearance.  

 

 

[BuaBS]

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

Not necessarily so.   Those people who have been stripped do not have access to current classified information.   Should even a mundane consultation by a current director of the CIA be wanted, it no longer can.  

 

Anyone who has worked in any administrative position knows that there is a lot of carry over from one administration to the other.  

 

I certainly got calls for quite a while about particular situations and wanting to know whether this or that had happened in the past.   If the new people needed to fill me in, they could do so, as long as I had a current security clearance.  

 

 

Well he can be consulted over things that happened during his time there but with no access to clasified information , new or old . Especially when he missuses his knowledge like this happy looking guy does :

[Scott]

2 minutes ago, BuaBS said:

Well he can be consulted over things that happened during his time there but with no access to clasified information , new or old . Especially when he missuses his knowledge like this happy looking guy does :

 

No, he can't.   That is the point of allowing the security clearance to continue.   These people are not given classified information.   Classified information is not sent out to former employees.  

 

Should any current intelligence office come across someone, some situation they can call these people and discuss with them any previous situations that might be a cause for concern.   That door is now closed and that is harmful to the agencies.  

 

[sfokevin]

[UncleTouchyFingers]

53 minutes ago, Scott said:

It's my understanding that the security clearance is only active when the person is called on for official business.   I had a security clearance from employment with the Dept of State which remained in effect when I left the job for another position.   The new employment was related to the Dept of State job.   I no longer was privy to any classified information, however, should I be called back, I would not have to get a new security clearance.  

 

So, these guys don't get classified information.   They simply don't have to get a new clearance should they be called back for any reason, such as a terrorist attack.  

 

So you reckon because of your own personal employment history, in whatever capacity within the Dept of State, (or its subcontractors), that is in any way an indicator as to what the highest echelon spooks go through, or use their security clearance for after they leave their post.... That is a downright laughable comparison. 

 

Ive also had employment by the Department of State, and also had Security Clearance - both terms are extremely vague and lack serious context as to position held and and clearance level. 

 

14 minutes ago, Scott said:

Should even a mundane consultation by a current director of the CIA be wanted, it no longer can.  

 

Patently false, and should Brennans "expertise" ever be required again he can get temp clearance or the president himself can choose to loop him in. Plenty of avenues available, if needed. Brennan is a hack who has decided to monetize his employment history and politicize himself and is no longer (like he has ever been) an unbiased and objective Gov employee. He can now do whatever he wants and talk to whoever he wants with his First Amendment Rights and Twitter/News Media meltdowns. 

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

Prams and toys yet again. This is getting boringly predictable.

As are BuaBS's emojis. So sad. ?

Edited August 16, 2018 by Spidey

[Scott]

3 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

So you reckon because of your own personal employment history, in whatever capacity within the Dept of State, (or its subcontractors), that is in any way an indicator as to what the highest echelon spooks go through, or use their security clearance for after they leave their post.... That is a downright laughable comparison. 

 

Ive also had employment by the Department of State, and also had Security Clearance - both terms are extremely vague and lack serious context as to position held and and clearance level. 

 

 

Patently false, and should Brennans "expertise" ever be required again he can get temp clearance or the president himself can choose to loop him in. Plenty of avenues available, if needed. Brennan is a hack who has decided to monetize his employment history and politicize himself and is no longer (like he has ever been) an unbiased and objective Gov employee. He can now do whatever he wants and talk to whoever he wants with his First Amendment Rights and Twitter/News Media meltdowns. 

Not false.   A new security clearance has to be granted, temporary or not.

 

[helpisgood]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump, without mentioning specific comments made by Brennan, said the former CIA leader had engaged in "frenzied commentary" and had sought to "sow division and chaos" about the Trump administration. 

 

Then, pursuant to the Covfefe Law ?, Trump needs to have his own security clearance removed.  If you "pour" over [sic] Trump's tweets (see J. K. Rowling's trolling of a Trump tweet in early July, pretty funny), they often lack cogency, there's some puerile taunts and, in general, conduct unbecoming of his office .  Sad.

[Spidey]

Sara Saunders has now announced a list of 10 people that Trump is considering pulling the security clearances for. Comprises of people that have criticised him and those having a part in the Muller investigation.

 

Not currently on the list but many suspect Trump is considering, is Muller himself, which would effectively end the investigation.

 

Trump is really, really worried.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Spidey

[UncleTouchyFingers]

12 minutes ago, Scott said:

Not false.   A new security clearance has to be granted, temporary or not.

 

You said "he no longer can" and thats completely false. The president has the authority to loop anyone in to classified information if necessary. Brennan can get interim clearance as well, so thats false. I dont want to argue semantics, your post stated and implied that Brennan was permanently "out" like that was a negative. Thats not true. Brennan can no longer use his security clearance credentials and "in the know" networks for spots on the media. He is now out of the loop and thats as it should be, unless hes required. 

 

Edited August 16, 2018 by UncleTouchyFingers

[sfokevin]

Totally possible!... Trump has even been known to grant the Russian Ambassador temporary security clearance on the fly... 

[johnnybangkok]

You know what, this really reminds me of the time Obama had that situation with his ex-CIA...… actually no, sorry, I'm getting mixed up.

Or the time Obama called one of his ex-employees a dog....wait no, sorry wrong person again.

Or the time Obama threw his own intelligence services under the bus in favour of Russia ….wait...no....sorry...wrong person again.

Or the time Obama paid of that porn star with $130,000 no......wait..... sorry wrong person again.

Oh ok I've got, do you remember that time Obama wore that tan suit? Pff. What a scandal that was.

 

[Becker]

36 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

He can now do whatever he wants and talk to whoever he wants with his First Amendment Rights and Twitter/News Media meltdowns. 

Is a supporter of the man-child accusing others of Twitter meltdown??

[Silurian]

Just another petty action from a petty man child.

 

It does nothing and proves nothing.

 

Most likely a "Squirrel!" comment to look away from the Manafort trial since the actual date on the letter was weeks ago only to be brought out to change the news narrative.

 

Edited August 16, 2018 by Silurian

[Peasandmash]

what he can't get a consulting job using tax payer provided status and gathered information to qualify as a sme? unless you're Brennan, who the F- cares?  more fake political news.

[connda]

2 hours ago, Scott said:

It's my understanding that the security clearance is only active when the person is called on for official business.   I had a security clearance from employment with the Dept of State which remained in effect when I left the job for another position.   The new employment was related to the Dept of State job.   I no longer was privy to any classified information, however, should I be called back, I would not have to get a new security clearance.  

 

So, these guys don't get classified information.   They simply don't have to get a new clearance should they be called back for any reason, such as a terrorist attack.  

 

The upper level executives, like Brennan, Rice, and Comey maintain their clearances for life.  The conventional thought being that their expertise could be tapped at a later time as a expert consultant to those who needed the expertise such as congress or a future administration.
The only problem being is when their expertise becomes politically oriented.  Historically these individuals normally remain apolitical.

Edited August 16, 2018 by connda