Security clearances are quite valuable if you wish to be employed by a company that has government contracts.
But THAT is NOT what is driving these characters totally loony toons.
Security clearances are not normally revoked for any well behaved clearance holder. (Though some can expire.)
“The Need to Know” is the normal gate control for classified information. If your Government Approved “Need to Know” matches your security clearance, then you get to know.
BUT...
When a security clearance is REVOKED, it triggers an Automatic Review of everything. (Everything, as in ALL Comms, public and private. Financial transaction records. Travel records. You know, as in “We Have it ALL”.)
Them’s just the rules.
People with high level security clearances know things. Determination of risk must be performed. Assessment of mitigation strategies. Much to be done when a high level clearance is actually revoked.
You see, to even get a high level security clearance in the first place, one has to agree to all of this. Up Front. On the Dotted Line. You get to be an open book if you screw up.
National Security is at stake, after all.
Now do these public meltdowns begin to make sense?
Makes sense but the point of my post was that one takes on ^voluntarily^ government suppression of first amendment rights through a security clearance.
Arguing that a security clearance is equal to free speech is stupidity on the highest level.
Ooooh! I did not know that. Indeed, they do make sense.
Sounds like meltdown could be a metaphor for full blown blood curdling panic.
How do you introduce evidence?