Posted on 07/24/2018 6:02:11 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Washington (CNN) -- President Donald Trump's latest gambit to choke off the flow of information for past spy chiefs who have criticized him is a disturbing move that again exposes an imperious streak out of place in American democracy.
The President's threat to rip security clearances from some of the nation's most decorated former intelligence officials may turn out to be a classic Trumpian distraction play that whips up a media storm and drowns out stories that are damaging to the White House. But the idea that it is being seriously contemplated will send a chilling effect throughout Washington. The wielding of presidential power to punish prominent critics would take this White House perilously closer to potential abuses of executive authority -- perhaps moving it onto territory not tested by any commander in chief since Richard Nixon.
Singling out dissenting former public servants in this way is a norm-busting power play that might seem tame in political systems ruled with an iron grip by Russia's Vladimir Putin and China's Xi Jinping, who Trump admires. But it would be fueled by a strongman's instinct that both those leaders might recognize.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
If he were muzzling critics, he’d have Jim Acosta institutionalized.
why should the known Communist ex-head of the CIA still have a security clearance?
I can’t set foot inside of my former employers’ offices without an escort and no longer have computer access.
Note the dishonesty. “choke off the flow of information from past spy chiefs.” They can keep talking any time or place, just without the privilege of security briefings that they do not deserve.
They should all be in jail. Why the even have their security clearance still, is rather quite shocking.
There's a nice tree and a rope waiting for you, Seditionboy....
Hey, Collinson, these dirtbags were not Trump critics; they were trying to overthrow the duly elected President of the United States.
Comey, Brennan, Clapper, McCabe, and the rest of the cabal committed sedition and they should all be locked up.
I agree. Why does someone no longer working for the US require a security clearance? I had a TS clearance much of my life, but I’m retired and I no longer have one. Oh golly! What a shock!
Something about “need to know”...
And these former intelligence people are actively working to illegally overthrow the government. If it were me, I’d be thinking “jail”.
There go all the “unnamed sources.”
On the plus side, the President forced Stephen to take the time to write this article, and for that time, Seditionboy won't be ripping the clothes from little boys and sodomizing them, as is his wont.
Good.
The quicker the better.
5.56mm
And nail-studded baseball bats.
I think back to Clinton’s crony using his post-term access privileges to remove and destroy compromising notes relating to the 9-11 attacks and the Clinton administration.
I guess the question is why announce it they way they did during briefing. It should have be done discretely and quietly.
Seems to me they can talk all they want...
...just not about classified information.
More ridiculous hyperbole by the media.
If former officials are on TV regularly opining about things, the fact they have security clearances gives them additional credibility they do not deserve.
They don’t need security clearances to be pundits.
In fact, as pundits, they are presumably checking with past colleagues for information. If they have clearance, their former colleague will be more apt to share classified information; if they had no clearances, their colleague will be more guarded; which they should be.
The distinction should be what they are doing with their clearances after leaving the government. If they work for a contractor or need the clearance for a new role in the private sector, fine; if they are just another pundit / journalist, they should NOT have security clearance.
This is not a move to silence speech. It is a move to keep these criminals from leaking classified info to the media they work for.
They can still spew their hate.
Wanna bet?
Why in the world should any former employee’s security clearance be maintained after their employment ends. A security clearance serves the needs of the government by allowing people access to classified information or facilities necessary to do their job. Once the job is over access to classified information should be terminated.
If they’ve leaked classified info, then why aren’t they charged with doing so?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.