This should be the policy for all government employees, right?
Including military personnel.
You don’t know why it’s beneficial for them to keep their clearances, do you? And why no previous president has gone out of his way to revoke them?
Wonder if Loretta Lynch still has her clearance?
The mention of a “matter” is a reference to Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee last year, in which he said Lynch requested he minimize Clinton’s email investigation, urging him to call it a “matter” instead of an “investigation.”
Wittes described how Lynch appeared to be “only too happy to have Comey fall on this particular grenade,” in reference to how, according to Comey’s book, Lynch told him, “Try to look beat up” about the renewed email probe.
“Comey told me this story shortly after it happened, and for a lot of reasons, it has bothered me ever since. Partly because of it, I very much look forward to how the forthcoming inspector general’s report on the Clinton email investigation treats the attorney general,” Wittes wrote.
Wittes also decried how Lynch and her deputy, Sally Yates, appeared to finesse the situation so that Comey remained the face of the investigation, even though Lynch never recused herself, even after her controversial tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton.
“Yet Lynch refused to recuse herself, even as she also said she would accept the recommendations of her investigative team — a kind of non-recusal recusal that all but guaranteed that the investigation would not close credibly,” Wittes wrote. “Her deputy, Sally Yates, did not persuade her to step aside. In October, when Comey decided to inform Congress of new investigative steps, both women contented themselves with staff-level messages objecting.”
There are WAY too many active clearances out there that need closed out.
They’re not monetizing their clearances. That’s idiotic.
Refining them also has nothing to do with national security. In fact, if anything national security could be harmed by doing so.
High level employees retain their clearances after they leave because from time to time they’re asked to come back in (at the discretion of current employees) to brief, give advice, or otherwise provide assistance given their precious high level knowledge and experience, which require clearances.
This just removes their ability to do so.
None of what you cite requires ongoing clearance.
It is a salary power up in the private sector.
Sure it does. Coming back in to assist current employees of these agencies requires they have understanding of the current situation and this means access to classified materials.
Nothing Brennan is doing now for salary requires he maintain a security clearance.
1 Like
Which is why he does not need one.
If he really needs to help out for a crisis, he can be briefed with just the essential information. No need to maintain clearance.
You’re not understanding how this works.
Without clearance, he can’t be briefed on anything, let alone “the essentials”.
I think you’re conflating clearance and access.
And if the “essential information” is classified, which is certain given his precious occupation, he would not be able to be briefed without a clearance.
It is sad to see Trump supporters just blindly follow their master. He is blowing it on this one.
He is being vindictive and not putting our national security the priority it requires. I hope the Republicans on the hill will call him on this. But I’m not holding my breath.
Current intelligence officials often use former ones as a resource. That’s why they traditionally keep their clearances when they leave office.
4.1 million Americans have security clearances, enabling them to cash in as lobbyists and contractors, and to reap whopping speaking fees and book deals. Some even lobby for foreign governments and AIPAC. Here’s hoping masses of swamp creatures lose their clearance just like John Brennan.
Also, John Brennan is the guy who gave billions of dollars in arms to ISIS and Al-Qaeda terrorists masquerading as “freedom fighters” in Libya and Syria.
He also oversaw a secretive drone program that killed thousands of civilians, including many children and women.
Good riddance, get a job as a Walmart greeter, John.
Are you suggesting clearance is an all or nothing proposition?
He can be cleared on a need to know basis for future consulting, IF and that is the operative…IF such a situation should arise.
This isn’t complicated.
I’m saying that you don’t understand how this works.
You are conflating clearance with access.
Access is always need to know. Brennan did not have access to any classified material, even before Trump revoked his clearance.
So what would they know WITH an active clearance that they would not know based on experience when they actually needed that clearance when on duty?
Saying they NEED to maintain clearance is not logical and IMO is counterproductive to security goals. Need to know…???
The intelligence community disagrees with you.
Did Sandy Berger have access and clearance when he stuffed his socks with unfavorable Clinton documents?
What is the problem with revoking and re-establishing clearance?
Sounds like a hole in the system to me to just assume clearance is always valid and proper.
Obviously. Unfortunately for such an intelligent community it appears at a loss to justify assumed lifetime clearance for its former staff.
The answer has been given. You just disagree with it.
