Trump pulls security clearance of ex-CIA Director John Brennan

[jimnyc]

And it does bring up a good question as posed - why do these folks keep their security clearances long after gone? And if from a party that disagrees, like that can't spell trouble. Good to see this blabber mouth go without access now.

---

Trump pulls security clearance of ex-CIA Director John Brennan

President Donald Trump on Wednesday revoked the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan, who has become a harsh critic of the president, and appeared to be targeting others who have disagreed with the administration.

“Mr. Brennan’s lying and recent conduct characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary is wholly inconsistent with access to the nation’s most closely held secrets and facilities, the very aim of our adversaries which is to sow division and chaos,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said, reading a statement from Trump while briefing reporters on Wednesday.

“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,“ the president‘s statement continued.

In addition, Sanders said, the administration is evaluating clearances for former FBI Director James Comey, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former National Security Agency Director Michael Hayden, former national security adviser Susan Rice, former FBI attorney Lisa Page, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strozk, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose security clearance was deactivated after he was fired earlier this year, and Bruce Ohr, who is still in the Justice Department although he was demoted from associate deputy attorney general.

“More broadly, the issue of Mr. Brennan’s security clearance raises larger questions about the practice of former officials maintaining access to our nation’s most sensitive secrets long after their time in government has ended,” Sanders said.

Rest - https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/15/trump-pulls-security-clearance-of-ex-cia-director-brennan-778791

[jimnyc]

The whining has begun! What he is worried about? WHY does he need clearance at this point?

Figures he's on MSNBC. And he IS being suppressed! Because of his own bad mouthing and talking about shit from behind the scenes. Why take chances? If someone is no longer on the team and there, I would remove ALL of them. And that applies too all parties if/when they take over office.

And "free speech" isn't the ability to have security clearance when not employed there. That's ridiculous.

---

Brennan: Revoking My Clearance to ‘Suppress’ Criticism – Behavior of ‘Tyrants an Despots’

On Wednesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Deadline: White House,” former CIA Director John Brennan reacted to the revocation of his security clearance by stating he believes the action is intended to “intimidate and suppress” criticism of the Trump administration and that “I’ve seen this type of behavior and actions on the part of foreign tyrants and despots…I never, ever thought that I would see it here in the United States.”

Brennan said, “I do believe that Mr. Trump decided to take this action, as he’s done with others, to try to intimidate and suppress any criticism of him or his administration. And revoking my security clearances is his way of trying to get back at me. But I think I have tried to voice the concerns of millions of Americans about Mr. Trump’s failures, in terms of fulfilling the responsibilities of that sacred and solemn office of the presidency, and this is not going to deter me at all. I’m going to continue to speak out.”

He continued, “I am very worried about the message that it appears that Mr. Trump is trying to send to others, including those that currently hold security clearances within the government. … Is this an effort to try to cow individuals both inside and outside of the government to make sure that they don’t say anything, either that is critical of Mr. Trump or with which he disagrees? And I’ve seen this type of behavior and actions on the part of foreign tyrants and despots and autocrats for many, many years during my CIA and national security career. I never, ever thought that I would see it here in the United States.”

https://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/08/15/brennan-revoking-my-clearance-to-suppress-criticism-behavior-of-tyrants-an-despots/


John Brennan: Revoking Security Clearance an Attack on ‘Free Speech’

Former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director John Brennan called President Donald Trump’s decision Wednesday to revoke his security clearance an “attempt to suppress freedom of speech” and to “punish critics.”

Brennan was a controversial figure during the Obama administration

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders read a statement earlier Wednesday from the president that explained his decision, citing his constitutional authority and duty to protect the nation’s secrets:


Mr. Brennan has a history that calls in to question his objectivity and credibility. In 2014, for example, he denied to Congress that CIA officials under his supervision had improperly accessed the computer files of congressional staffers. He told the Council on Foreign Relations that the CIA would never do such a thing. The CIA’s Inspector General however contradicted Mr. Brennan directly, concluding unequivocally that agency officials had indeed improperly accessed congressional staffers files. More recently, Mr. Brennan told Congress that the intelligence community did not make use of the so-called Steele dossier in an assessment regarding the 2016 election, an assertion contradicted by at least two other senior officials in the intelligence community, and all of the facts.

Additionally, 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. Mr. Brennan’s lying and recent conduct, characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary is wholly inconsistent with access to the nation’s most closely held secrets and facilities, the very aim of our adversaries which is to sow division and chaos.

Rest - https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/08/15/john-brennan-revoking-security-clearance-an-attack-on-free-speech/

[Russ]

If I were President, Brennan would have had his security clearance revoked a year and a half ago, and who give a hoot if other CIA Directors have traditionally been allowed to keep their clearances . At least the other CIA Directors kept their mouths shut, and didn't use their former position and their security clearance to get political. His security clearance was an undeserved favor, not anything he was "owed". Same goes for James "the NSA doesn't spy on Americans" Clapper.

By the way, in my opinion, Brennan is dumb as dirt. And not regular dirt, either - dumb dirt. The kind of dirt that the other dirt makes fun of, for being such an idiot. It is inexpicable that he got the CIA position. He barely qualifies to clean the rest room at the BiLo gas station.

[aboutime]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-919AZkQmDnM/TjA98CLzW2I/AAAAAAAADLk/uOZgtfyasIg/s1600/yes.gif

[jimnyc]

This was actually prior to his clearance going bye bye, and shows why.

---

Former Obama CIA Director and Hack John Brennan Disses President Trump – Remains Mute on Claims He’s QB of Spygate

Former CIA Director John Brennan was outed this week for being the quarterback of Spygate while he was head of the CIA under President Obama. He claims he is ‘Nonpartisan’ but the facts show a different story.

Two days ago, , President Trump’s attorney, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, outed John Brennan as the man in charge of ‘Spygate’. Rudy claims Brennan was orchestrated the ‘Spygate’ scandal and was the quarterback –

Brennan did not refute this, instead he bashed President Trump with a couple tweets. He claims in his Twitter handle that he is ‘nonpartisan’ –

Giuliani claimed that Brennan was behind the scandals to prevent candidate Trump from winning the 2016 election and then prevent him from running the government when he did. Brennan set the President up using outright lies that slandered the President in an effort to have him removed. But when he was outed, he didn’t deny the charges he dissed the President instead.

His first tweet attacked the President’s character which is stunning since Brennan is being accused of crimes related to the Russia scandal. Brennan claims the high road –

You’re absolutely right. If you were “presidential,” you would focus on healing the rifts within our Nation, being truthful about the challenges we face, & showing the world that America is still that shining beacon of freedom, liberty, prosperity, & goodness that welcomes all. https://t.co/zRHRYAFEAo

— John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) August 13, 2018

His second tweet again attacked the President.

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. https://t.co/eI9HaCec1m

— John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) August 14, 2018

Also, note above that Brennan has only 339 thousand followers and yet Twitter reports that he received more than 60 thousand likes on his latest tweet. President Trump has 53 million followers and yet Twitter reports he only received 67 thousand likes on his recent tweet. Something doesn’t make sense with Twitter reporting. #shadowban

Brennan’s actions show he is not nonpartisan and he is guilty as claimed related to the phony Trump-Russia scandal. He is a crook and conspirator and he should be in jail for what he’s done to America and this President. Lock Him Up

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/08/former-obama-cia-director-and-hack-john-brennan-disses-president-trump-remains-mute-on-claims-hes-qb-of-spygate/

[LongTermGuy]

https://www.glocktalk.com/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fbb4FMR S.jpg&hash=42bacf281cd39e94d9b86d954cf1f323

[FakeNewsSux]

If I were President, Brennan would have had his security clearance revoked a year and a half ago, and who give a hoot if other CIA Directors have traditionally been allowed to keep their clearances . At least the other CIA Directors kept their mouths shut, and didn't use their former position and their security clearance to get political. His security clearance was an undeserved favor, not anything he was "owed". Same goes for James "the NSA doesn't spy on Americans" Clapper.

By the way, in my opinion, Brennan is dumb as dirt. And not regular dirt, either - dumb dirt. The kind of dirt that the other dirt makes fun of, for being such an idiot. It is inexplicable that he got the CIA position. He barely qualifies to clean the rest room at the BiLo gas station.

I think his appointment by Obama as CIA Chief is quite easily explained. The Dear Leader needed a political hack that would do his bidding (eg initiating and organizing an effort to preserve Obama's legacy by trying to derail the GOP candidate's campaign and later his presidency) and no self respecting intelligence professional would do it.

[FakeNewsSux]

https://www.glocktalk.com/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fbb4FMR S.jpg&hash=42bacf281cd39e94d9b86d954cf1f323

Hey LTG, did you get punked by 5stringJeff in the Photo Web Page Thread? Ever since you replied to him the Xed out photo icon is the only thing that shows up. Did you enter step 2 from his post?

[Elessar]

AOL's report on this:

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/08/15/john-brennan-responds-after-trump-revokes-his-security-clearance/23502988/

All the people on that list are implicated, one way or another, in
all the scandals that began right after the election.

Jim's question, How long do they last?

Some in high positions are sworn to remain silent and secretive for life.
They are the highest classification of clearance.
TS is good for 10 years before renewal.
Secret is good for 5.
Confidential, I am unsure.

[darin]

This is a non-issue. having a clearance doesn't mean one has access. It's just goofy to make an issue out of something that is generally part of the process upon leaving federal service - after two years (if i recall) the clearance goes inactive anyway and an investigation would probably have to be re-done upon returning to service.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Every person that the obama placed in *his service* that has any type of high level security clearance should not only have been fired immediately after Trump was sworn in but should also have had their security clearances revoked....
This is just common sense, IMHO..
Did Trump even know what obama was?
Does he , even now know?
One look at what the America hating , muslim dogturd did to this nation should have told him and Trump should take far greater steps at removing that crap the traitor installed.
And take any legal action that he can to expose what that fkking traitor the dem
muslim in hiding, POS obama did to ==ALL OF US!!!--Tyr

[pete311]

Has anyone even found out EXACTLY what security clearance he had? I have to believe he had the lowest level of CONFIDENTIAL. Big deal. Criticize Trump and you get spanked. God bless America.

[jimnyc]

Has anyone even found out EXACTLY what security clearance he had? I have to believe he had the lowest level of CONFIDENTIAL. Big deal. Criticize Trump and you get spanked. God bless America.

It was a little more than just criticizing him.

[aboutime]

Has anyone even found out EXACTLY what security clearance he had? I have to believe he had the lowest level of CONFIDENTIAL. Big deal. Criticize Trump and you get spanked. God bless America.


Since you have obviously NEVER had a Govt. Security Clearance. You probably don't know...IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT LEVEL of clearance you might have. Using the information to attack the U.S. Govt. as an Active, or Former member of Govt. with classified information of any kind, is AGAINST CIA, FBI, and FEDERAL Laws.

The President's primary job is to PROTECT AMERICA, and AMERICANS. Therefore. He has the ability, and power to REMOVE anyone from Govt. Employment, and Security Clearances of ANY KIND.
Too bad you sound so much like the CRYBABIES on the Left, who make up their own rules.

[Elessar]

Has anyone even found out EXACTLY what security clearance he had? I have to believe he had the lowest level of CONFIDENTIAL. Big deal. Criticize Trump and you get spanked. God bless America.

Nobody that is the head or high-ranking in an Intel or L.E. agency will carry only
CONFIDENTIAL.

It would be the highest level, Top Secret that is an executive level. CONFIDENTIAL
is for very low level persons that do not get involved in any business except cutting the
grass around the building and have to be escorted in any secure space.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._security_clearance_terms

[LongTermGuy]

"You do not have a right to security clearance once you leave government and you are not entitled to it." Judge Jeanine ...

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1030152544016728065/pSysqbt5?format=jpg&name=600x314
`White House Sends The Deep State A CLEAR WARNING: Brennan Is ONLY THE BEGINNING!`

https://en-volve.com/2018/08/16/white-house-sends-the-deep-state-a-clear-warning-brennan-is-only-the-beginning/

[pete311]

Retired Adm. William McRaven, the man who oversaw the 2011 Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden, issued a stunning rebuke of President Donald Trump's decision to revoke the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan on Thursday, defending the former spy chief as "one of the finest public servants I have ever known."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/16/politics/mcraven-trump-brennan-security-clearance-revoke/index.html

[aboutime]

Retired Adm. William McRaven, the man who oversaw the 2011 Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden, issued a stunning rebuke of President Donald Trump's decision to revoke the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan on Thursday, defending the former spy chief as "one of the finest public servants I have ever known."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/16/politics/mcraven-trump-brennan-security-clearance-revoke/index.html


Doesn't matter if GOD himself said Brennan was a nice guy. He violated the OATH of the CIA, and Relinquished his access to a security clearance when he lied to Congress, and broke the law.
As for that Admiral. Imagine that. He has publicly made statements that sounded just like Brennan. And, since he is retired from the Navy. He stands to lose his Clearance as well.
NOBODY...not even you petey....are ABOVE THE LAW.

Betrayal of your Sworn Oath to the United States of America...has Consequences.

[LongTermGuy]

Brennan (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Brennan?src=hash) should've never been hired by the DOJ much less had any security clearance. He's calling Trump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump) treasonous...I don't remember him calling Barack Obama (https://twitter.com/BarackObama) that when he forced the Iran deal on taxpayers and flew pallets of cash to them in the dead of night.....

[darin]

This is a non-issue. having a clearance doesn't mean one has access. It's just goofy to make an issue out of something that is generally part of the process upon leaving federal service - after two years (if i recall) the clearance goes inactive anyway and an investigation would probably have to be re-done upon returning to service.

Again. Relax folks. :)

[pete311]

Brennan (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Brennan?src=hash) should've never been hired by the DOJ much less had any security clearance. He's calling Trump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump) treasonous...I don't remember him calling Barack Obama (https://twitter.com/BarackObama) that when he forced the Iran deal on taxpayers and flew pallets of cash to them in the dead of night.....


We either have free speech or we don't.

[darin]

We either have free speech or we don't.


That's a false dilemma. We have BOTH free and regulated speech. If anyone is using Confidential or higher info for political or business purposes, we can't claim 'free speech' issues.

[darin]

Silly Graphics department...

http://a57.foxnews.com/hp.foxnews.com/images/2018/08/768/320/6cfd0965aed63dbbedeae3509742f0fc.jpg

Uh - it can't be confidential AND Top Secret....(sigh)

[Elessar]

Silly Graphics department...

http://a57.foxnews.com/hp.foxnews.com/images/2018/08/768/320/6cfd0965aed63dbbedeae3509742f0fc.jpg

Uh - it can't be confidential AND Top Secret....(sigh)

Good Catch!

[pete311]

That's a false dilemma. We have BOTH free and regulated speech. If anyone is using Confidential or higher info for political or business purposes, we can't claim 'free speech' issues.

Criticism does not equal political. You now have dozens of past high level intel officers coming out to condemn Trump's action on Brennen.

[FakeNewsSux]

We either have free speech or we don't.

Pete, there is a difference between freedom of speech and freedom from consequence. The First Amendment protects us against government sanction for simply saying something. I am not aware of Mr. Brennan being jailed or shunted off to a gulag for the vile, unsubstantiated commentary he is vomiting nightly on national television. However, he is now suffering the consequences of his actions. I am not aware of a constitutional right to a to high level security clearance, much less a right to use state secrets to personally profit from. I don't give a damn about a security clearance, I've always coveted diplomatic immunity. I believe there is a little known codicil in the constitution that grants extraordinary powers in times of national emergency to give deserving members of Debate Policy diplomatic immunity...

[pete311]

Pete, there is a difference between freedom of speech and freedom of consequence. The First Amendment protects us against government sanction for simply saying something. I am not aware of Mr. Brennan being jailed or shunted off to a gulag for the vile, unsubstantiated commentary he is vomiting nightly on national television. However, he is now suffering the consequences of his actions. I am not aware of a constitutional right to a to high level security clearance, much less a right to use state secrets to personally profit from. I don't give a damn about a security clearance, I've always coveted diplomatic immunity. I believe there is a little known codicil in the constitution that grants extraordinary powers in times of national emergency to give deserving members of Debate Policy diplomatic immunity...

I never said it was illegal or unconstitutional. All I said is it is vindictive. The message is clear. Criticize the president and get spanked. Do we really want to set this precedent? This is what 3rd world countries do.

[jimnyc]

I never said it was illegal or unconstitutional. All I said is it is vindictive. The message is clear. Criticize the president and get spanked. Do we really want to set this precedent? This is what 3rd world countries do.

And meanwhile, every other flunkie from the Obama admin and prior still has their clearance. Brennan had his revoked when more and more is coming out about his involvement with the lame dossier and attempts against a running president. His repetitive and inane comments against the president on the daily basis doesn't help his cause. And WHY should anyone retain their clearance after leaving office, left or right? Keeping the clearance & vomiting on the news left and right about all things government - those folks SHOULD have their clearance revoked.

Of course you call it 3rd world actions because you refuse to see ANY wrongdoing by the left. It's hardly vindictive when it's the right thing to do. If he was a righty and he did the same, he should have his clearance revoked. It comes with responsibilities - and if you don't want to adhere to them anymore, then perhaps ask to have it removed like the other fellow you posted. Now you don't need to adhere to the clearances and responsibilities.

And depending on how much he was involved in with the dossier, and involvement by the CIA and FISA warrants and spying - he very well may end up being charged. Like Comey who should be up on charges, alongside Hillary. And quite a few more that were actively involved in using the government and it's intelligence agencies to try and secure an election, while whining about Russia doing the same at the same time.... and much of that is a bunch of crap too, if not almost all. Starting with the fake hacking by Russia of their servers.

[jimnyc]

Mark Levin: 'There Is No Constitutional Issue'; What the Hell Did Brennan Do With His Clearance Anyway?

(CNSNews.com) - Conservative talk show host and constitutional lawyer Mark Levin said President Trump was right to revoke the security clearance of former CIA director and perpetual Trump critic John Brennan.

Brennan, who has called Trump "treasonous" among other harsh criticism, said Trump is just "trying to get back at me. I've seen this type of behavior and actions on the part of foreign tyrants and despots and autocrats for many, many years during my CIA and national security career. I never, ever thought I would see it here in the United States," Brennan said on Wednesday.

Levin told Fox News's Sean Hannity on Wednesday that having a security clearance is a "privilege."

The fact of the matter is, nobody's stopping Brennan from speaking. In fact, nobody could stop him. He has a big mouth, he will never shut up, he'll go on TV and be the kook that he is. The idea that he has a right to access to information because he served in the Obama administration at the CIA is a preposterous argument, but of course the ACLU will take up the case because they take up a lot of stupid cases. That's number one.

Number two, who else is the president looking at? Comey -- and people who are keeping score -- Comey is a Republican. How many times have the media told us, Mueller's a Republican, Comey's a Republican, and even they question the president! OK, you got a Republican. And by the way -- for the media -- most of these people the president is looking at are white. I know that's very important to you.

Now Comey was fired at the recommendation of Rosenstein. Comey was a leaker and he absconded with government documents when he left. His security clearance should be pulled. (Andrew) McCabe is under criminal investigation. The number two from the FBI. Never before in history, media -- his security clearance should be pulled!

Peter Strzok was just fired, the guy in charge of counterintelligence investigations, for misconduct. His security should be pulled! James Clapper committed perjury. He lied to the American people and Senator Wyden and that committee a long time ago, his security clearance should have been pulled.

Bruce Ohr, another one. Pulled! (Sally) Yates -- another one, not because the president has a problem with Democrats or liberals, he has a problem with these people. And we haven't even gotten to the unmasking issue yet. So this is not a First Amendment issue.

Meanwhile -- meanwhile! When these people had security clearances, what the hell did they do with them? Well, let's take a look. The Russians interfered in our election, right? Well, who was president, who was head of the CIA, who was national security adviser, who was the head of the FBI?

All these people with their security clearances in positions of power did nothing effective to stop the Russians from interfering in our election. They did nothing to stop China from stealing our technology. They did nothing to stop North Korea's nuclear program. And even worse, they awarded the Islamo -- hold it, Mark! -- the terrorist regime in Tehran with $150 billion, right? With $150 billion and provided them with a pathway to nuclear.

Good job, boys and girl in the Obama administration, with your security clearances. The fact that Obama appointed these people and gave them security clearances, it's not the obligation of this president to let them retain their security clearances. There is no constitutional issue. That's just nonsense. And again, one of them's a Republican. So that makes this all okay.

Levin also mocked the liberal media's outrage over the revocation of Brennan's clearance:

“All these blabbermouths who know nothing, you are going to see Clapper on TV until you throw up on your loafers. You're going to see Comey, he had his book thing; you are going to see Brennan all over the place, all these phony victims and so forth and so on.

“Meanwhile when they were in office, when they had their security clearances, when they had power, they didn't stop the Russians, they didn't stop the Red Chinese, they didn't stop the North Koreans, they funded the Iranians, and, in fact, they are responsible for the greatest scandal in American history by interfering with our election and trying to undermine the Trump campaign.”

Rest - https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/mark-levin-there-no-constitutional-issue-what-hell-did-brennan-do-his

[jimnyc]

Ex-CIA Chief Brennan's Security Clearance Should Have Been Revoked Long Ago

Democrats and spy agency bureaucrats squealed with rage after President Trump pulled former CIA Director John Brennan's security clearance. Why are they upset? Brennan clearly abused his privileged security clearance by using it for political purposes and profit.

"Mr. Brennan's lying and recent conduct, characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary, is wholly inconsistent with access to the nation's most closely held secrets and facilities, the very aim of our adversaries, which is to sow division and chaos," said White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, reading a statement.

There's no question that Brennan lied, both to Congress and the American people, more than once and under oath.

And for someone with continued privileged access to the nation's secrets to call the president "treasonous" merely for speaking to Vladimir Putin isn't an exercise of freedom of speech — it verges on a threat.

Brennan tweeted his response: "My principles are worth far more than clearances. I will not relent."

Among his many left-leaning defenders, Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal had by far the most absurd response, calling it an "illegal" violation of the First Amendment.

Huh? A security clearance is not a right, otherwise all of us would have it. It's a privilege and, as with all privileges conferred by the government, it is subject to revocation if the person who has it abuses it.

Sadly, Brennan didn't just abuse it as a private citizen by leveraging his access for lucrative TV gigs in which he did little other than trash the president and mislead the public.

There's also ample evidence he abused his security clearance by violating the law while acting as the CIA's chief, a far more serious charge, in our opinion.

In 2014, he flat-out denied hacking into computers used by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which was at the time investigating the CIA's use of harsh interrogation measures against terrorists.

After the computer break-ins were proven beyond a doubt, Brennan apologized but refused to acknowledge wrong-doing by the CIA. Despite calls for his dismissal even by Democrats, President Obama stood by his man. Brennan stayed.

But this wasn't the last time Brennan's CIA spied on U.S. citizens. Far worse than spying on Congress was the CIA's involvement in the 2016 election, which increasingly appears to be not just out of bounds, but outright illegal.

Brennan's CIA ran an operation with the FBI that targeted the Trump presidential campaign, using foreign-based assets like CIA and MI6-linked Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, to lure Trump campaign aides into potentially politically-compromising meetings.

Rest - https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/brennan-security-clearance-removed/

[aboutime]

I never said it was illegal or unconstitutional. All I said is it is vindictive. The message is clear. Criticize the president and get spanked. Do we really want to set this precedent? This is what 3rd world countries do.
https://i1.wp.com/www.politicoat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Mainstream-Media.jpg?resize=648%2C359&ssl=1https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.377892322.7695/mp,550x550,gloss,ffffff,t.3.jpg
https://www.sott.net/image/s20/415863/full/CNN_FAKE_NEWS_600.jpg

In order to hear both sides. I often push myself to listen to your Sources, and Oddly, YOU REPEATED THE WORDS THEY SAID....As you set the precedent you treat as honest???

[FakeNewsSux]

I never said it was illegal or unconstitutional. All I said is it is vindictive. The message is clear. Criticize the president and get spanked. Do we really want to set this precedent? This is what 3rd world countries do.

And that is what endears this President with his supporters. He meets vindictiveness with vindictiveness unlike the Bushes who identified more with the Swamp than with the population as a whole. Also, you need to pick up a history book if you think that the precedent is just now being set. One could argue that it goes back as far as Marbury vs Madison. And yes, 3rd world countries do this but usually employ other methods such as deportation, imprisonment or firing squad. But I suppose that in the deep dark fever swamps where today's progressives reside, stripping someone of a security clearance is the moral equivalent. By the way, why all the badmouthing of the 3rd world? Is this your way of calling them shitholes? My oh my, what a good little fascist you're becoming, Pete.

[FakeNewsSux]

Let's hear from from the real heroes on the topic of Brenan's situation:

Special ops shoot down Brennan and his defenders: 'You put your politics before us'http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/17/special-ops-shoot-down-brennan-and-his-defenders-put-your-politics-before-us.html

[pete311]

Mark Levin: 'There Is No Constitutional Issue'; What the Hell Did Brennan Do With His Clearance Anyway?


Rest - https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/mark-levin-there-no-constitutional-issue-what-hell-did-brennan-do-his

Levin knows, he's just partisan. It's no secret ex chiefs keep their clearances because they are often consulted about events during their time that are related to events now. That keeps the chain of experience strong.

[pete311]

And that is what endears this President with his supporters. He meets vindictiveness with vindictiveness unlike the Bushes who identified more with the Swamp than with the population as a whole. Also, you need to pick up a history book if you think that the precedent is just now being set. One could argue that it goes back as far as Marbury vs Madison. And yes, 3rd world countries do this but usually employ other methods such as deportation, imprisonment or firing squad. But I suppose that in the deep dark fever swamps where today's progressives reside, stripping someone of a security clearance is the moral equivalent. By the way, why all the badmouthing of the 3rd world? Is this your way of calling them shitholes? My oh my, what a good little fascist you're becoming, Pete.

Why stop at the clearance? Let's put Brennan in jail. Better yet, let's hang him. Too far? All part of the same scale. All because Trump has thin skin.

[jimnyc]

Levin knows, he's just partisan. It's no secret ex chiefs keep their clearances because they are often consulted about events during their time that are related to events now. That keeps the chain of experience strong.

Sure, he's partisan, and he's correct. Brennan and many others no longer need their clearance and are actively working on stations talking out daily against the government. And that's fine, that's his right, but he doesn't get that right AND the clearance.


Why stop at the clearance? Let's put Brennan in jail. Better yet, let's hang him. Too far? All part of the same scale. All because Trump has thin skin.

And you fail to ever find any wrongdoing by anyone connected with the left. You excuse it, argue and debate it, no matter how obvious the wrongdoing is. We get that, Pete. And when you can't find yet another way to excuse it, that's when you disappear from threads or start posting unrelated BS, which is usually around post #2.

[jimnyc]

Why stop at the clearance? Let's put Brennan in jail. Better yet, let's hang him. Too far? All part of the same scale. All because Trump has thin skin.

You also keep harping about Trump, his thin skin and his actions. Even if...

Tough shit! Deal with it. This is what happens when a party tries to lie, cheat and steal into victory & still loses. And then like little children turn red and stomp their feet - for 2 years running.

It's so much fun to watch the anger and drooling & knowing there really isn't jack shit they can do about it. They obstruct everything to death, so if they, as I predict, take over the house, it'll just be another day with the same actions continued. And they'll still have to deal with Trump and the actions & like it, since they can't do jack shit about it.

And the way the left acts, and the media supporting them acts, and the way the left ignores all wrongdoing by their own side - is why Trump will have a good chance at winning reelection in 2020. And as a lame duck president, oh boy will it be fun!

[FakeNewsSux]

Why stop at the clearance? Let's put Brennan in jail. Better yet, let's hang him. Too far? All part of the same scale. All because Trump has thin skin.

Thank you for proving my point about the effects of the progressive fever swamp. Your fascist training is nearly complete:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ6nF6JKtRc

[jimnyc]

Yup, he's vindictive, and there was no reason to remove Brennan's clearance :rolleyes:



Gregg Jarrett: Ex-CIA Director Brennan shouldn't have a security clearance - He's a national security risk

Former CIA Director John Brennan is a serious national security risk, and President Trump was wise and correct to revoke his security clearance Wednesday.

Brennan has repeatedly shown he cannot be trusted with classified or top-secret information. He has a history of leaking and exploiting confidential material for partisan reasons. Maybe it keeps him on TV, but it also jeopardizes national security.

The primary job of the agency Brennan ran for President Obama is to collect, process, and analyze intelligence information from all over the world. This valuable material is then utilized to protect Americans from harm.

However, Brennan has demonstrated that he is all too willing to use this information to harm Americans, including President Trump. He did so in the 2016 presidential election.

As I explain in Chapter 6 of my new book, “The Russia Hoax,” Brennan politicized and weaponized what was false intelligence to damage the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump.

Brennan surely knew that the anti-Trump “dossier” paid for by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's campaign was nothing more than a preposterous collection of rumors, innuendo, supposition and wild speculation. He knew it was derived from multiple hearsay accounts from inherently unreliable and anonymous sources in Russia who specialize in lies and disinformation.

Yet Brennan did more than anyone to promulgate the fabricated and uncorroborated “dossier.”

The author of the document, former British spy Christopher Steele, was trained in deception and chicanery, and was inherently untrustworthy. Steele was on the record telling the U.S. Justice Department that he was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected” and “passionate about his not being president.”

It is improper to use a discredited source with such severe and pervasive bias. Yet Brennan and his FBI counterparts didn’t care. Even after Steele was fired for lying, they continued to use him as a covert source in their illicit scheme to frame Trump for crimes he never committed.

Brennan was the instigator. By advocating the use of the “dossier,” he managed to orchestrate the investigation of Trump that was formally launched by FBI Director James Comey and his underlings, including Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe. All three have since been fired for their egregious misconduct.

But it was Brennan who played a central role in promoting the fictitious Trump-Russia “collusion” narrative.

There is no good or legitimate reason for Brennan to maintain a security clearance. We expect CIA directors to be nonpartisan and apolitical. Brennan, always the devoted Clinton acolyte and sycophant, was not.

Brennan’s constant political and personal condemnation of President Trump only underscores his devious motivations for misusing classified information and disseminating false intelligence.

Consider this Brennan Twitter rant aimed at President Trump: “When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history.”

Rest - http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/08/16/gregg-jarrett-ex-cia-director-brennan-shouldnt-have-security-clearance-hes-national-security-risk.html

[jimnyc]

Good, about time that some dirtbags be removed from the problematic list.

---

Brennan is the first, but he won't be the last

President Trump’s stripping John Brennan of his security clearance is not a First Amendment or "freedom of speech" issue.

No one has a right to a top secret clearance.

The only American who automatically gets a clearance and doesn’t even have to undergo an interview, let alone a polygraph exam, is the incoming president of the United States.

Moreover, the incumbent president has total and utter control of the classification and clearance system of the U.S. government.

For example, even if one of his staff has a past which would negate their ever being normally granted a clearance, say due to a history of drug abuse, the president can simply “waive” the concerns of the federal investigators and agencies that do background investigations and grant that person a clearance anyway. That, for example, is exactly what the last president did with Ben Rhodes, who was denied even an interim clearance by the FBI but, nevertheless, got to spend the full eight years of the Obama administration working in the White House with a “waived” status and unfettered access to top secret intelligence.

Having a clearance is privilege of government service, service in a very specific capacity wherein you cannot perform your duties to the nation without access to sensitive and classified data. It is not a right.

The argument that some are making that the president’s decision in some way infringes John Brennan’s free speech rights is, in fact, absurd. If John Brennan publicly disclosed any information he had acquired as a result of his clearance, he would be committing a felony. The issue instead has to do with the oath Brennan took when he became a civil servant and the damage he is doing to America’s national security as a private citizen with a very public platform.

Rest - http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/402124-Brennan-is-the-first-but-he-wont-be-the-last

[pete311]

You also keep harping about Trump, his thin skin and his actions. Even if...

Tough shit! Deal with it. This is what happens when a party tries to lie, cheat and steal into victory & still loses. And then like little children turn red and stomp their feet - for 2 years running.

It's so much fun to watch the anger and drooling & knowing there really isn't jack shit they can do about it. They obstruct everything to death, so if they, as I predict, take over the house, it'll just be another day with the same actions continued. And they'll still have to deal with Trump and the actions & like it, since they can't do jack shit about it.

And the way the left acts, and the media supporting them acts, and the way the left ignores all wrongdoing by their own side - is why Trump will have a good chance at winning reelection in 2020. And as a lame duck president, oh boy will it be fun!

Republicans won't be in power forever. When that changes I will repost all this anti patriotic bullshit right back in your face like Obama 2.0

[jimnyc]

Republicans won't be in power forever. When that changes I will repost all this anti patriotic bullshit right back in your face like Obama 2.0

Feel free. You already post pretty much nothing more than BS now anyway, what will change? You're barely ever able to make it beyond 2 sentences in any of your posts/replies. You're already beyond hypocritical when it comes to posting about any news or wrongdoings. You avoid the subject 99% of the time and blab one liners about something else to counter what was posted.

And you're right, they won't be in power forever. But you assume those on the right will turn purple and get some sort of "TDS" equivalence. and non-stop hypocrisy and ignoring wrongdoing and all the other crap you do now. We'll still be us, and you'll still be a hypocritical hack.

[jimnyc]

Interesting

Special ops shoot down Brennan and his defenders: 'You put your politics before us'

John Brennan rallied numerous high-powered defenders to his corner over his security clearance clash with President Trump, but some well-known special ops heroes are firing back suggesting the former CIA director got what he deserves.

Kris “Tanto” Paronto, a former Army Ranger and private security contractor who was part of the CIA team that fought back during the 2012 Benghazi terror attack, accused Brennan of putting his “politics” before those in the field.

“He is lucky the security clearance is all he is getting away with,” Paronto told Fox News in an interview on Friday.

Responding a day earlier to Brennan’s tweet that his “principles are worth far more than clearances,” Paronto also tweeted:

“My principles are greater than clearances too John, especially when you and the @CIA kool-aid drinkers punishes us for not going along with the Benghazi cover-up story in order to protect you, @HillaryClinton’s & @BarackObama’s failures. You put your politics before us.”

Rest - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/17/special-ops-shoot-down-brennan-and-his-defenders-put-your-politics-before-us.html

[pete311]

Feel free. You already post pretty much nothing more than BS now anyway, what will change? You're barely ever able to make it beyond 2 sentences in any of your posts/replies. You're already beyond hypocritical when it comes to posting about any news or wrongdoings. You avoid the subject 99% of the time and blab one liners about something else to counter what was posted.

And you're right, they won't be in power forever. But you assume those on the right will turn purple and get some sort of "TDS" equivalence. and non-stop hypocrisy and ignoring wrongdoing and all the other crap you do now. We'll still be us, and you'll still be a hypocritical hack.

Jim there are several DP members here who post nothing but BS and are radical right. Not once, not once, do you call them out like you do me. I might be a staunch left on this board which you call me out for, but never once do you call anyone out for being far right. So that is hypocritical on you. There are members here that would rather die than ever come within a universe of agreeing with a liberal idea or backing a liberal. Where is their call out Jim? You think you're fair, but the truth is you just run a fanboy community and like Trump and his base, you'll do anything not to piss them off.

[Black Diamond]

Jim there are several DP members here who post nothing but BS and are radical right. Not once, not once, do you call them out like you do me. I might be a staunch left on this board which you call me out for, but never once do you call anyone out for being far right. So that is hypocritical on you. There are members here that would rather die than ever come within a universe of agreeing with a liberal idea or backing a liberal. Where is their call out Jim? You think you're fair, but the truth is you just run a fanboy community and like Trump and his base, you'll do anything not to piss them off.
Tissue?

[pete311]

Tissue?

My point exactly

[Elessar]

Yup, he's vindictive, and there was no reason to remove Brennan's clearance :rolleyes:



Gregg Jarrett: Ex-CIA Director Brennan shouldn't have a security clearance - He's a national security risk.


There is no good or legitimate reason for Brennan to maintain a security clearance. We expect CIA directors to be nonpartisan and apolitical. Brennan, always the devoted Clinton acolyte and sycophant, was not.

Rest - http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/08/16/gregg-jarrett-ex-cia-director-brennan-shouldnt-have-security-clearance-hes-national-security-risk.html

That one line sums it up perfectly. I know in the military, all members, under the UCMJ, are subject to THAT rule. I have to imagine
Federal Agencies are as well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Code_of_Military_Justice#General_provision s

Scrolled down in the Punitive Articles section, and I saw 6 that Brennan violated,
Arts 81, 89, 92, 102, 117, 132.

[jimnyc]

Jim there are several DP members here who post nothing but BS and are radical right. Not once, not once, do you call them out like you do me. I might be a staunch left on this board which you call me out for, but never once do you call anyone out for being far right. So that is hypocritical on you. There are members here that would rather die than ever come within a universe of agreeing with a liberal idea or backing a liberal. Where is their call out Jim? You think you're fair, but the truth is you just run a fanboy community and like Trump and his base, you'll do anything not to piss them off.

Because others here will call things equally, as you see them doing with Omarosa or others found to have been involved in wrongdoing, and there's been more than just her. I'm not going to call someone that posts defense as far right supporters, when I know they also will speak out when someone is proven to have done something illegal or harmful. Perhaps not every single time, but a lot lot more than "never" which is what you do. And I couldn't give a fuck about others and that shit, I post to debate with things I disagree with the most. You're finding another reason to whine like a bitch because you're the only one being called out. Well, you're the only one who is consistently whistling in the wind and acting like they are deaf when it comes to being even somewhat fair in what it is you defend and don't defend. Again, you're a hack.

[jimnyc]

"freedom of speech" - which Petey has mentioned several times. HOW has that been halted in any manner whatsoever? He simply had his clearance within the government removed, but is free to continue talking as he has been. I fail to see where his ability to speak has been infringed upon in the slightest bit.

[Elessar]

Jim there are several DP members here who post nothing but BS and are radical right. Not once, not once, do you call them out like you do me. I might be a staunch left on this board which you call me out for, but never once do you call anyone out for being far right. So that is hypocritical on you. There are members here that would rather die than ever come within a universe of agreeing with a liberal idea or backing a liberal. Where is their call out Jim? You think you're fair, but the truth is you just run a fanboy community and like Trump and his base, you'll do anything not to piss them off.

Well, I am not radical right. I was moderate Republican up until Obama started his garbage.

Your biggest problem is you think you are an expert in things you have never lived with or dealt with,
refuse to listen those of us who have, and throw conniptions like many other liberals when called on it.

There are at least half a dozen of us in this forum that have been through high level briefings
and activities, yet you think you are smarter than any of us. That is spoiled and juvenile.

[pete311]

Well, I am not radical right. I was moderate Republican up until Obama started his garbage.

Your biggest problem is you think you are an expert in things you have never lived with or dealt with,
refuse to listen those of us who have, and throw conniptions like many other liberals when called on it.

There are at least half a dozen of us in this forum that have been through high level briefings
and activities, yet you think you are smarter than any of us. That is spoiled and juvenile.



I am not smarter than you, just know that guys aren't half as smart as you think you are. That was on point with the Omarosa bit. I may not know military like you, but I know arrogance and it's all over you guys.

[pete311]

The Latest: 60 more ex-CIA officials criticize Trump

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-trump-expects-revoke-ohrs-security-clearance-57242997

But they are just Obama folk right? You guys got a lot of nerve to side with Trump against 60 career CIA officials.

[jimnyc]

The Latest: 60 more ex-CIA officials criticize Trump

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-trump-expects-revoke-ohrs-security-clearance-57242997

But they are just Obama folk right? You guys got a lot of nerve to side with Trump against 60 career CIA officials.

Yeah, EX cia officers, who likely aren't in the know about latest dealings behind the scenes and things coming out about Brennan, the guy you idolize and find perfect and whom never committed any wrongdoing of any kind. :rolleyes:

[pete311]

Yeah, EX cia officers, who likely aren't in the know about latest dealings behind the scenes and things coming out about Brennan, the guy you idolize and find perfect and whom never committed any wrongdoing of any kind. :rolleyes:

Yet somehow you know more about Brennan than them? They don't have access to FoxNews? Idolize Brennan? Find him perfect and innocent of any wrong doing? You putting words into my mouth now? Proof please.

[jimnyc]

Pete, with boner in hand, thinking of Brennan and how he has something to whine about some more.

[aboutime]

The Latest: 60 more ex-CIA officials criticize Trump

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-trump-expects-revoke-ohrs-security-clearance-57242997

But they are just Obama folk right? You guys got a lot of nerve to side with Trump against 60 career CIA officials.

You really need to turn off all of your LEFTIST sources, and do some real, personal investigations to back up your brainwashed attitude from the Liberal SNOWFLAKE camp, where pills are being handed out for Trump Derangement Syndrome....picked up from the sidewalks of San Francisco, before the city workers get their POOPER SCOOPERS busy.:laugh:

[FakeNewsSux]

The Latest: 60 more ex-CIA officials criticize Trump

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-trump-expects-revoke-ohrs-security-clearance-57242997

But they are just Obama folk right? You guys got a lot of nerve to side with Trump against 60 career CIA officials.

I'm pretty sure that none of us expected the permanent swamp dwellers to sit back quietly and accept an outsider coming in and taking back control of the federal government for the people. If the permanent bureaucratic class is willing to bankrupt states and cities all over the country to continue their right to salaries, benefits and pensions that no one but the top 1% enjoys, why would the intelligence community act any differently? Ain't it interesting that the focus of evil, according to the progressives, throughout the 60's and 70's are now the paragons of reason and defenders of all things constitutional because they now defend the overarching, all powerful federal government and its' standard bearers.

[aboutime]

The Latest: 60 more ex-CIA officials criticize Trump

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-trump-expects-revoke-ohrs-security-clearance-57242997

But they are just Obama folk right? You guys got a lot of nerve to side with Trump against 60 career CIA officials.


How does it feel, seeing the number of Swamp Dwellers being exposed enough to step forward to DEFEND themselves....while wondering WHO WILL BE NEXT?
Of course all of those LEFTOVER OBAMA folks who were planning great futures with HILLARY as their president....must do the normal, Liberal, DNC agenda...pointing accusing fingers AWAY from themselves. NOTE TO PETEY....THE JIG IS UP. The President is CLEANIN' HOUSE, and SEWER.

How's it feel to get some of your own MEDICINE????

[Elessar]

I am not smarter than you, just know that guys aren't half as smart as you think you are. That was on point with the Omarosa bit. I may not know military like you, but I know arrogance and it's all over you guys.

POT...Meet Kettle..funny line: "I am not smarter than you, just know guys aren't half as smart as you think you are"

In conclusion, by your very own statement you are less than half as smart as you think you are.

Brilliant!

[aboutime]

I am not smarter than you, just know that guys aren't half as smart as you think you are. That was on point with the Omarosa bit. I may not know military like you, but I know arrogance and it's all over you guys.


You just won't ever get it, will ya petey. You're not even smart enough to recognize when ALL OF US are imitating YOU. It's your arrogance that makes us almost feel sorry for you, until we laugh at you. We've all learned your tactics, taken directly from the DNC playbook.
You have been taught to always accuse, and blame in order to avoid being proven to be the dummy you want to hide from us. BUT petey...it simply ain't workin' for ya!:laugh:

[jimnyc]

And this is the truth. Brennan has been out there speaking more & speaking more negatively of course. His speech has not been limited in the slightest. And now, folks want to interview him even more. His clearance was rightfully revoked, and removes his access to confidential information, but doesn't limit his speech.

I wonder if Dick Cheney still has clearance, and how the liberals would feel if his were revoked. They HATE that man and he also loves to speak out. If his were removed, I couldn't care less. And if he were speaking out like Brennan does, and was involved in things like the dossier and helping limit or bring down a running candidate for the highest office in the land - I would GLADLY see it removed.

Bruce Ohr should have had his removed long ago, same with Peter Stzrok and Lisa Page. Comey should be on the list as well. ANYONE fired from either side should have it removed instantly.

...

Another thing to point out - Brennan is now making it seem as if Trump DID collude, and that his claims now that he never colluded are "hogwash". As many have pointed out - then WHERE was he when he was in office and this was all happening? Oh, that's right, working to bring down Trump.

---

Trump on Silencing Critics by Revoking Security Clearances: ‘If Anything, I’m Giving Them a Bigger Voice’

(CNSNews.com) - President Donald Trump said Friday that he’s not silencing his critics by revoking their security clearances, if anything, he said, he’s giving them a bigger voice.

“There's no silence. If anything, I'm giving them a bigger voice. Many people don't even know who he is, and now he has a bigger voice, and that's okay with me, because I like taking on voices like that. I've never respected him,” Trump said about former CIA Director John Brennan.

“I've never had a lot of respect, and Senator Burr said it best: If you knew anything, why didn't you report it when you were before all of these committees, including their committee?” the president told reporters before boarding Marine One to go to New York. “So he had a chance to report. He never did.”Trump was referring to Brennan’s op-ed in The New York Times on Thursday saying Trump’s claims of no collusion are “hogwash."

“Mr. Trump’s claims of no collusion (with Russia) are, in a word, hogwash,” Brennan wrote.

In response, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he wants to know on what information Brennan is basing his statement.

“If Director Brennan’s statement is based on intelligence he received while still leading the CIA, why didn’t he include it in the Intelligence Community Assessment released in 2017?” Burr said in his statement. “If his statement is based on intelligence he has seen since leaving office, it constitutes an intelligence breach. If he has some other personal knowledge of or evidence of collusion, it should be disclosed to the Special Counsel, not The New York Times.”

“This was just -- came up lately, and it's a disgusting thing, frankly. Look, I say it. I say it again: That whole situation is a rigged witch hunt. It's a totally rigged deal. They should be looking at the other side. They should be looking at all the people that got fired by them, all of the people that got fired,” Trump said.

“They should be looking at Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie for dealing with, by the way, indirectly, Russians. They should be looking at Steele. They should be looking at all these FBI guys who got fired and demoted,” he said. “It’s not us. It is a rigged witch hunt. I’ve said it for a long time.”

When asked about revoking Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr’s security clearance, Trump said, “I think Bruce Ohr is a disgrace. I suspect I’ll be taking it away very quickly. I think that Bruce Ohr is a disgrace, with his wife, Nellie. For him to be in the Justice Department, and to be doing what he did, that is a disgrace. That is disqualifying for Mueller, and Mr. Mueller has a lot of conflicts, also, directly yourself. So you know that.”

Rest - https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/trump-silencing-critics-revoking-security-clearances-if-anything-im

[Elessar]

Because others here will call things equally, as you see them doing with Omarosa or others found to have been involved in wrongdoing, and there's been more than just her. I'm not going to call someone that posts defense as far right supporters, when I know they also will speak out when someone is proven to have done something illegal or harmful. Perhaps not every single time, but a lot lot more than "never" which is what you do. And I couldn't give a fuck about others and that shit, I post to debate with things I disagree with the most. You're finding another reason to whine like a bitch because you're the only one being called out. Well, you're the only one who is consistently whistling in the wind and acting like they are deaf when it comes to being even somewhat fair in what it is you defend and don't defend. Again, you're a hack.

Jim...

Only far left liberals speak in absolute terms , using words like 'never', 'everyone', and 'all'
to name a few.

[Black Diamond]

I never said it was illegal or unconstitutional. All I said is it is vindictive. The message is clear. Criticize the president and get spanked. Do we really want to set this precedent? This is what 3rd world countries do.
Third world countries would have Brennan boiled in oil in public. Get your head out of your ass.

[Gunny]

Levin knows, he's just partisan. It's no secret ex chiefs keep their clearances because they are often consulted about events during their time that are related to events now. That keeps the chain of experience strong.You've really stated some dumb, partisan crap throughout this thread.

It IS a "secret" that "ex chiefs" keep their clearances for consultation purposes. That is pure bullshit. As has been stated and I will reiterate ... clearance and access are two, VERY different things.

What goes with the clearance is anything you have learned that is classified in nature is just THAT (tough one for you, I know :rolleyes:) CLASSIFIED. You are NOT allowed to discuss it nor divulge ANY of the info without express, written permission to do so by PROPER AUTHORITY. Leftwingnut MSM is NOT "proper authority".

Access compartmentalizes classified info. The clearance alone grants you access to NOTHING. "Access", granted (again) by PROPER AUTHORITY allows you to view, participate in and/or whatever ONLY those things SPECIFICALLY detailed in the access letter, in writing.

I had a TS. AT had a TS. If I walked into his comm center and started trying to read whatever the F I wanted he'd have me in the brig in a minute. If he walked into a mission brief without access, I would shut everyone down and kick him the f out. The purpose to keep boneheads like apparently everyone on the left and withing the DOJ from just blurting out anything they want whenever they feel like it.

THAT is how it works. I don't care if you don't agree with it, like it, or it disagrees with your politics THAT is HOW IT IS.

NOTHING allows Brennan to divulge ANY classified information on his own. And his access was or should have been withdrawn the second he was removed from his position that required the access.

Quit trying to tell people who handled classified material how the system is. It's tattooed on our eyelids because if we aren't some special lefty political appointee, it means our asses to f*ck up even once. We're busted to pvt, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, BCD and hard time. Ask John Walker. He's what happens to us mere mortals when we pull a Brennan or a Hillary.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Has anyone even found out EXACTLY what security clearance he had? I have to believe he had the lowest level of CONFIDENTIAL. Big deal. Criticize Trump and you get spanked. God bless America.
Criticize obama and you got crucified.

[Gunny]

Jim there are several DP members here who post nothing but BS and are radical right. Not once, not once, do you call them out like you do me. I might be a staunch left on this board which you call me out for, but never once do you call anyone out for being far right. So that is hypocritical on you. There are members here that would rather die than ever come within a universe of agreeing with a liberal idea or backing a liberal. Where is their call out Jim? You think you're fair, but the truth is you just run a fanboy community and like Trump and his base, you'll do anything not to piss them off.I missed THIS. pete311

You are nothing but a leftwing, radical drone. You never post anything original. You never post anything on policy. You post anti-Trump rhetoric. PERIOD. If it's about Trump and it's bad, true or not, you're Johnny on the spot.

Tell you what. Get yourself a leftwingnut stance ON AN ISSUE, not a person, and get yourself a space in the one-on-one debate forum where you won't feel all threatened by all the mean, radical rightwingers here and I'll get Kathianne to moderate.

Now, since you live in a cave and don't get the significance of that, she and I have been critical of Trump more than a few times. If you need evidence, feel free to go back starting about the Republican primaries and read on up to a few weeks ago. I don't think I can make it any more fair than THAT for you.

Bring your big boy panties and your lunch.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I missed THIS. @pete311 (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1821)

You are nothing but a leftwing, radical drone. You never post anything original. You never post anything on policy. You post anti-Trump rhetoric. PERIOD. If it's about Trump and it's bad, true or not, you're Johnny on the spot.

Tell you what. Get yourself a leftwingnut stance ON AN ISSUE, not a person, and get yourself a space in the one-on-one debate forum where you won't feel all threatened by all the mean, radical rightwingers here and I'll get @Kathianne (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=8) to moderate.

Now, since you live in a cave and don't get the significance of that, she and I have been critical of Trump more than a few times. If you need evidence, feel free to go back starting about the Republican primaries and read on up to a few weeks ago. I don't think I can make it any more fair than THAT for you.

Bring your big boy panties and your lunch.
.............. :popcorn:

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Ya know who Brennon reminds me of? BAGHDAD BOB!

He's a TOTAL POS, and he's DIRTIER and more CORRUPT and UNHINGED than a JUNK YARD DOG with RABIES, and evidently little Pete LIKES gutter trash that votes for COMMUNISTS... YEAH OH HELL YEAH... he should keep his security clearance so he can keep LEAKING classified and whatever information to the democrat propaganda wing... pfft... you have to be an absolute MORON to be arguing that... and a HACK...

CIA Director Once Voted for Communist Presidential Candidate

https://freebeacon.com/politics/cia-director-once-voted-for-communist-presidential-candidate/

[pete311]

I missed THIS. @pete311 (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1821)

You are nothing but a leftwing, radical drone. You never post anything original. You never post anything on policy. You post anti-Trump rhetoric. PERIOD. If it's about Trump and it's bad, true or not, you're Johnny on the spot.

Tell you what. Get yourself a leftwingnut stance ON AN ISSUE, not a person, and get yourself a space in the one-on-one debate forum where you won't feel all threatened by all the mean, radical rightwingers here and I'll get @Kathianne (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=8) to moderate.

Now, since you live in a cave and don't get the significance of that, she and I have been critical of Trump more than a few times. If you need evidence, feel free to go back starting about the Republican primaries and read on up to a few weeks ago. I don't think I can make it any more fair than THAT for you.

Bring your big boy panties and your lunch.

I am anti-Trump. So... you gonna pull my clearance or something?

[Elessar]

I am anti-Trump. So... you gonna pull my clearance or something?

Don't sweat it. You would probably not be granted one anyway.

[Black Diamond]

I am anti-Trump. So... you gonna pull my clearance or something?
So you're walking away from Gunny's challenge. Disappointing.

[pete311]

So you're walking away from Gunny's challenge. Disappointing.

Unlike apparently most of you, I have a job, two actually.

[pete311]

Don't sweat it. You would probably not be granted one anyway.

Don't be so sure, have you seen the group Trump hired? Most are under investigation. Hiring the best!

[Elessar]

Don't be so sure, have you seen the group Trump hired? Most are under investigation. Hiring the best!

Nothing proven yet, but a hell of a lot more from Obama's administration are feeling the heat and trying to hide
and obfuscate...and notice Obama is silent all of a sudden?

[Black Diamond]

Yes. I know Gunny would own my ass so I'll be a pussy and continue to troll threads with mindless parroting
Fixed it for you.

[Black Diamond]

Nothing proven yet, but a hell of a lot more from Obama's administration are feeling the heat and trying to hide
and obfuscate...and notice Obama is silent all of a sudden?
Obama will eventually flee the country.

[Abbey Marie]

I never said it was illegal or unconstitutional. All I said is it is vindictive. The message is clear. Criticize the president and get spanked. Do we really want to set this precedent? This is what 3rd world countries do.

When you say, “we either have free speech or we don’t, you more than imply it is unconstitutional.

[Gunny]

Unlike apparently most of you, I have a job, two actually.I have a life that requires my attendance. Kathianne is a school teacher. So? Feeling lonely in the boat?

Fact is, you bitch all over this board about how you are treated yet I offer you a debate by the rules, one-on-one with a school teacher as a moderator and you run from battle.

'Nuff said.

[pete311]

I have a life that requires my attendance. Kathianne is a school teacher. So? Feeling lonely in the boat?

Fact is, you bitch all over this board about how you are treated yet I offer you a debate by the rules, one-on-one with a school teacher as a moderator and you run from battle.

'Nuff said.

Tissue?

[pete311]

When you say, “we either have free speech or we don’t, you more than imply it is unconstitutional.

Then I retract that point.

[Gunny]

Tissue?Wish I had some for ya, bro, but my granddaughters keep them at elementary school. Try keeping your baby crap in one thread huh? This one has a topic that isn't about you.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Unlike apparently most of you, I have a job, two actually.
You find plenty of time to spew your sass.

You're a pussy.