- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Well Well.... Looks like the Obama Admin scrubbed security clearances 2013
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:36 pm to LSUGrrrl
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:36 pm to LSUGrrrl
quote:
He only needs security clearance to criticize Trump with top secret info.
Link to him doing that? I'd support the removal of his clearance if he did that. At least he's misusing classified info.
I don't support removing clearance because you disagree with his opinion.
2
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:38 pm to boosiebadazz
What kind of blow and weed did you score in the islands? are you high, Clarice? Brennan is beyond speaking out about his 'politics,' he said Trump colluded with Russia after everyone has said Trump didn't. He also said Trump committed treason.
Anyone who is one ioda intellectually honest can see Brennan is flapping off because he got caught. Even Clapper and Burr have said that Brennan needs to hush it.
Clapper: Brennan's rhetoric is becoming an issue | TheHill
LINK
Richard Burr blasts John Brennan for Russian collusion claim - Washington Times
LINK
Anyone who is one ioda intellectually honest can see Brennan is flapping off because he got caught. Even Clapper and Burr have said that Brennan needs to hush it.
Clapper: Brennan's rhetoric is becoming an issue | TheHill
LINK
Richard Burr blasts John Brennan for Russian collusion claim - Washington Times
LINK
This post was edited on 8/20/18 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:39 pm to boosiebadazz
He was spending his time on the talk show circuit. Can you give one reason why he should retain his clearance?
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:40 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
What kind of blow and weed did you score in the islands? are you high, Clarice? Brennan is beyond speaking out about his 'politics,' he said Trump colluded with Russia after everyone has said Trump didn't. He also said Trump committed treason.
Anyone who is one ioda intellectually honest can see Brennan is flapping off because he got caught. Even Clapper and Burr have said that Brennan needs to hush it.
Did he misuse any classified info? Did he disseminate it unlawfully? That should be grounds for losing your clearance, not because you think the guy in charge is an idiot.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:42 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Can you give one reason why he should retain his clearance?
Consult in time of crisis. Up to current director/member of admin on whether the want to consult him.
If he is so unhinged, it seems current official would stay far away from him.
After the Obama IRS scandals and the like, I'm surprised to see you guys supporting the punitive pulling of clearances. That's it.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:43 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Consult in time of crisis.
odds Trump would ever consult Brennan in a crisis? If the next president wants to grant his clearance, they can. Come on boosie. That can’t be the real reason you think he should retain clearance. quote:
After the Obama IRS scandals and the like, I'm surprised to see you guys supporting the punitive pulling of clearances.
Wait. Are you comparing the IRS targeting of certain non-profits to removing clearances of ex-employees? I really hope so. Let’s go down that rabbit hole.
This post was edited on 8/20/18 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:44 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Only if that opinion is adverse to the party in power or just a blanket rule of rescission following any public statements?
So since you seem to have an affection for this, do you think that someone who was terminated should still have access to top secret information? Does your company do that after they terminate someone?
Is there any reason for them to have access to this type of information after no longer working for said company? Just want to see what your justification is besides, mean ol Trump doesn't like what is being said.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:44 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Sure. Show me the list of all former officials getting their clearances pulled. The above-board explanations I've seen are that no former officials need them. The more insidious suggestion would be that only officials who criticize the President don't need them.
Here have fun LINK
quote:
Do McMaster and Tillerson still have their clearances?
Oh so if two former admin members appointed by THIS administration still have their clearances that somehow totally proves your point? Great comparison
There is a difference between “disagreeing politically” and accusing the sitting President of a crime that is punishable by death with no evidence
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:44 pm to BBONDS25
I think you should keep your clearance until you do something to lose it.
I don't think speaking out against the current administration should be something that qualifies you to lose it.
Apparently you guys do
I don't think speaking out against the current administration should be something that qualifies you to lose it.
Apparently you guys do
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:45 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Did he misuse any classified info? Did he disseminate it unlawfully? That should be grounds for losing your clearance, not because you think the guy in charge is an idiot.
Actually , erratic behavior is a well established reason to lose a security clearance, and there is no doubt that Clapper has been behaving erratically as of late.
Also, tough shite, elections have consequences and this is the President's call.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:46 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I think you should keep your clearance until you do something to lose it.
Why? Is getting fired doing something to lose it? Is accusing the president of committing a crime sufficient?
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:47 pm to BBONDS25
And the wheel goes round and round....
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:47 pm to boosiebadazz
People who are not partisan ultimately had to have made the decision to revoke his clearance. I don't think Rand Paul would suggest Brennan leaked to the media-lightly. Burr is a gang of eighter and he backed Trump. But it doesn't matter Trump has the authority to revoke it. Period.
quote:
President Trump was right to revoke the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan on Wednesday. Brennan, who now works as a national security analyst for MSNBC and NBC News and frequently appears on TV, has no business browsing through our country’s most important and sensitive national security secrets.
Clearance to classified information is granted based on a “need to know.” Brennan has none, so there was no reason to allow him continued access. He does have a long pattern of misuse of his authority and lying about it.
It has been customary to allow former senior officials to keep their clearances so current officials can consult with them. No one in the Trump administration is or should be consulting with someone as partisan as Brennan, so pulling his clearance was right and proper.
Some are claiming this is political retribution, but the overtly political nature of Brennan’s attempts to undermine the Trump administration are a real problem. And even if he had a reason to keep his clearance, his actions and statements are grounds to cut him off.
Extending Brennan’s clearance was a privilege no longer justified by any value he provides to the government. His unhinged rants against President Trump would land any serving clearance holder with a suspension and possibly even a referral for psychiatric evaluation.
These include an unfounded claim on television that President Trump is being blackmailed by Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying the Russians “may have something” on President Trump, and tweets that do not represent the communications of a stable person.
To cite just one example, Brennan tweeted in March, directing his comments to 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. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America...America will triumph over you.”
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., pointed out that Brennan has a history of unethical actions around classified information and has lied to Congress. Paul stated: “I filibustered Brennan’s nomination to head the CIA in 2013, and his behavior in government and out of it demonstrate why he should not be allowed near classified information”
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:49 pm to the_watcher
quote:
There is a difference between “disagreeing politically” and accusing the sitting President of a crime that is punishable by death with no evidence
I'm going to disagree with you here. You're punishing political speech because of the content of that speech. I'm going to always err on the side of allowing speech without repercussion from the govnerment. It's up to the free marketplace of ideas to elevate or ignore that speech.
And I don't even agree with Brennan. I think the treason calls are ridiculous at this pint base don what we know. shite, the impeachment calls are ridiculous based on what we know.
But I don't agree with punishing former officials for saying dumb shite. Maybe that's just me.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:50 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
You're punishing political speech because of the content of that speech. I'm going to always err on the side of allowing speech without repercussion from the govnerment
Are agreeing with Brennan that security clearance is a first amendment right?
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:50 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
Actually , erratic behavior is a well established reason to lose a security clearance, and there is no doubt that Clapper has been behaving erratically as of late.
And you don't see the slippery slope of classifying an opinion you disagree with as "erratic behavior" with no due process built in?
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:51 pm to BBONDS25
No, I don't think the First Amendment encompasses unfettered access to certain information.
And considering the need of a security clearance in some private sector jobs, I'd be curious to see if (and how) a court would treat a person's property right(s) into a security clearance.
I'm not arguing it shouldn't be discretionary for the government, but should there be more due process built in?
And considering the need of a security clearance in some private sector jobs, I'd be curious to see if (and how) a court would treat a person's property right(s) into a security clearance.
I'm not arguing it shouldn't be discretionary for the government, but should there be more due process built in?
This post was edited on 8/20/18 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:51 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:\
with no due process built in?
Due Process?
Jeebus...dude wasn't arrested. He had an honorific rescinded.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:52 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
But I don't agree with punishing former officials for saying dumb shite. Maybe that's just me.
Losing a security clearance that holds no value and doesn't give you access to any classified material anyway is not a punishment
What the frick part of that is so hard to understand? This was entirely symbolic and political on BOTH sides.
Posted on 8/20/18 at 1:53 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I'm going to disagree with you here.
You can be wrong all you want
quote:
You're punishing political speech because of the content of that speech. I'm going to always err on the side of allowing speech without repercussion from the govnerment. It's up to the free marketplace of ideas to elevate or ignore that spee
I can’t belive you typed this. You’re a lawyer. This is not a free speech issue. He wasn’t arrested and thrown in jail. He can say whatever he likes but he doesn’t have a constitutionally protected right to keep a security clearance.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News