Trump revokes security clearance for former CIA director John Brennan

President Trump has revoked the security clearance for former CIA director John Brennan, the White House announced Wednesday, in the first decision to come from a review of access for several top Obama-era intelligence and law enforcement officials.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders read a statement on behalf of the president during the start of the press briefing, saying Brennan “has a history that calls his credibility into question.”

The statement also said that Brennan had been "leveraging" the clearance to make "wild outbursts" and claims against the Trump administration.

“The president has a constitutional responsibility to protect classified information and who has access to it, and that’s what he’s doing is fulfilling that responsibility in this action,” Sanders said Wednesday.

Source: Trump revokes security clearance for former CIA director John Brennan

In addition to former DIRCIA, other former senior officials had theirs revoked as well:

1. DIRNAI (James Clapper)
   
2. DIRFBI (James Comey)
   
3. DIRFBI (James Comey)
   
4. DIRFBI (Andrew McCabe)
   
5. DIRCIA (Gen. Michael Hayden)
   
6. DepAG (Sally Yates)
   
7. NatSecAdv (Susan Rice)
   
8. FBISA (Peter Strzok)
   
9. FBI Lawyer (Lisa Page)
   
10. JD Official (Bruce Ohr)
    

This is HIGHLY irregular for a POTUS to make these decisions. It is typically a professional courtesy to allow former heads such as these directors to retain their clearances. However, Clapper, for one, has been publicly bad mouthing the POTUS on the MSM.

This act concerns me and smells of political retaliation on the part of the POTUS.

ATS, your views?

It's about time!
If he was using it to undermine The United States that is treason.

The CIA and many other agencies are chock-full of traitors.

Some do it for money.
Some do it for power.
Some do it for status.

But they're traitors none the less- they have turned their back on the american public. They need to be found and removed, even if it means taking a salted earth policy out on these agencies.

The fool was leaking classified information and you wonder why his security clearance was revoked?

Really? Just wow.

a reply to: Krakatoa

This is HIGHLY irregular for a POTUS to make these decisions. It is typically a professional courtesy to allow former heads such as these directors to retain their clearances.

What is highly irregular is former directors that decide to use their former positions to attempt to undermine a sitting President.

As well as cashing in on it, be it taking a position in CNN to writing a book and doing a tour.

So if they are going to make it about politics, as far as I see the President doesn't really have a choice.

sedition (sɪˈdɪʃən)
n
1. speech or behaviour directed against the peace of a state
2. (Law) an offence that tends to undermine the authority of a state
3. (Law) an incitement to public disorder

So all the President is doing is his job... I'm pretty sure he has the authority to just throw them in Gitmo until it was sorted out as well.

Which would be a bad political move, true. But it would be fun to watch.

a reply to: Krakatoa

They were abusing their privileges and positions to push agendas counterproductive to US interests undermine US diplomacy.

Taking away those privileges only makes sense.

a reply to: Metallicus

Can you provide a link as to prove what you are saying? Or is this your opinion?

a reply to: lordcomac

Agreed. Starting with Trump and Sessions! Whats good for the goose is good for the gander! Or do you have a double standard? Last I checked it's Trump and his admin that are under fed investigation! Not any of the folks listed. Trump is trying to cover his rear end. He is still going to be removed!

a reply to: Krakatoa

I want to say 3 or 4 of those people already had their security clearance revoked when they were fired. So that's a pretty good indicator of the nature of this list.

It's not like the rest of the people receive briefings or walk into SCIFs at will and start poking around. The biggest reason they maintain security clearances is so that they can be consulted at later dates about classified matters by their successors.

It's a stunt in an effort to capture the news cycle for a day.

a reply to: Krakatoa

The irony in the article where a former coworker of Brennan says Brennan never made money from his security clearance. Given that info then there is no reason Brennan, or Democrats, should be upset. Nothing gained, nothing lost.

Let's see how long he remains at MSNBC w/out his clearance.

All former government officials who leave government service need to have their clearance revoked. Allow their successors the latitude to be able to call up the person they replaced for info if need be on a case by case basis. Allowing them to keep their security clearances while they go on tv to trash the administration is insane.

Given the facts to date about how some of them conspired to bring Trump down is further evidence on why this needs to happen.

Now they need to do the same to the rest, including Clinton.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Oh yeah, Brennan must be a saint right?

He has been linked to leaks of classified information....

If it was one of Trump's family the Dem's would obsess for months,
and make up all kinds of fake news about fake news.

@@

OMG TRUMP REVOKED A SECURITY CLEARANCE!!

100,000 babies in heaven died today

a reply to: Krakatoa

whats wrong with that and why are you so concerned , its like if you're out of my company then you have no access to it, its as simple as that, why the concern ?

this is the government not a company or a small business, when people leave they leave for good, period, and if they are needed in the future they can be hooked in again, isn't that logical?

a reply to: theantediluvian

It's a stunt in an effort to capture the news cycle for a day.

compare that to an almost two years stunt of "But Russia"

originally posted by: toysforadults
OMG TRUMP REVOKED A SECURITY CLEARANCE!!

100,000 babies in heaven died today

You're better than this. ATS is a discussions board, contribute, articulate a point. Or all threads turn into this. Poor.

a reply to: cameralens86

ATS is a discussions board

to be fare some members lost it ever since Trump won and never got over it and they went rouge like the media, go figure

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Krakatoa

I want to say 3 or 4 of those people already had their security clearance revoked when they were fired. So that's a pretty good indicator of the nature of this list.

It's not like the rest of the people receive briefings or walk into SCIFs at will and start poking around. The biggest reason they maintain security clearances is so that they can be consulted at later dates about classified matters by their successors.

It's a stunt in an effort to capture the news cycle for a day.

If you currently hold a clearance, you can use it for job opportunities. Quite a few contractors pay big dollars for an IT guy with TS, and many other positions as well. Revoking that might hurt their chances of gaining monetarily with it.

Professional courtesy?
Well, I think we can say that Trump is justified in not extending that to the list of traitors he has revoked clearance for.
If you invited someone into your house as a courtesy and they sh** on the living room floor, you'd obviously throw them out.

a reply to: burntheships

Oh yeah, Brennan must be a saint right?

He has been linked to leaks of classified information....

In what year? He lied to Congress in 2014 but if that was the actual reason, you'd think he would have had his security clearance revoked at some point in the last year and a half.

In fact, the date on the original statement given to the press was... wait for it.... July 26th.

And what does any of that have to do with the others? And what is the purpose of announcing that you're looking into removing the security clearance of people who already don't have security clearance?

If it was one of Trump's family the Dem's would obsess for months, and make up all kinds of fake news about fake news.

You are an ardent supporter of a habitual liar whose administration responds to any controversy with a 2-3 different lies until the "fake news" backs them so thoroughly into a corner that they have to no choice but concede to reality. How much do you really care about the truth?

Does Mike Flynn still have security clearance? Yes, he does. This is despite illegally lobbying for Turkey while part of the Trump campaign and getting paid through a cut out to conceal it, despite plotting the extralegal extradition of Gulen (for what was it? $8 million?) and despite lying to the FBI.

originally posted by: theantediluvian

You are an ardent supporter of a habitual liar whose administration responds to any controversy with a 2-3 different lies until the "fake news" backs them so thoroughly into a corner that they have to no choice but concede to reality. How much do you really care about the truth?

Does Mike Flynn still have security clearance? Yes, he does. This is despite illegally lobbying for Turkey while part of the Trump campaign and getting paid through a cut out to conceal it, despite plotting the extralegal extradition of Gulen (for what was it? $8 million?) and despite lying to the FBI.

Oh get off your horse Ante, your really going to defend Brennan?

He was caught spying on a U.S. Senator, and his drone all in Afghan
program has killed more innocent people than most murderers on death row.

Funny how some people like to ignore the most blatant immorality,
but oh Trump is orange and he lied. Hypocrite much?