Jump to content

John Brennan's Security Clearance


3rdnlng

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

The sweet potato with Tourette's (nicely put) needs to either keep his mouth shut or realize his words mean something.

 

Do you think the formal statement is more a reflection of the truth or what comes out of his mouth?

 

Always defer to the formal statements, if they make sense.  And in this case it does, in addition to taking in to consideration that Trump routinely speaks with the precision of a blind, drunken bowler with Parkinson's.  Most - not all, mind you - of his formal statements are clear and specifically Constitutional (and yes, I have complained about those that weren't - I was absolutely irate over the first travel ban, which was insanely stupid and ignorant.) . 

 

I also work in the government sphere, so I have some insight in to how the sausage is made.  Trump speaking alone, vs. multiple people preparing a statement and mitigating Trump's stupidity?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Aand if he is doing so because he is miffed at the fact that an individual had some input into an investigation involving his administration, the LEgislative bracnch has a constitutional duty to check the abuse of that power.

 

Oh, and your silly little !@#$ing thing.  Grow up.

Your posting style and stubborn belief that you are right, regardless of what has been explained to you reminds me very much of gator/Tiberius. I'm serious.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, joesixpack said:

 

You're a buffoon. He has the authority to revoke a clearance for whatever reason he chooses.

 

Congress has no business with regard to it, no matter what you believe.

 

And you're a child.  The Executive branch does not have unfettered power to do whatever it wants whenever it wants.  What is it about the constitution and checks and balances that you don't understand?

 

He has the right to get rid of Brennan for cause.  I would have for him lying about the CIA spying on members of Congress.  But he sad today he did so because he helped start an investigation into his own administration's role with the Russia thing.  That then becomes an issue for the Legislative and/or Judicial branches to take on.

 

Did none of you live through Watergate?

1 minute ago, joesixpack said:

 

NO THEY DO NOT.

 

Yes they do.  It is called checks and balances.  Honestly, read the Constitution.  Executive power does not mean you can flagrantly abuse that power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

They keep them on for institutional memory and non partisan cooperation through different administrations. Human capital is a stupid thing to waste for partisan temper tantrums. 

Just because your enemy slides a knife through your 4th and 5th ribs while pretending to be about the greater good does not mean you should let him 

 

There is no need to run around like chicken little wondering about all the vast knowledge he might be able to provide, if needed, after he clocks out at the end of his day job.  If it's that crucial, we can always kick the rock back and ask him. 

Edited by leh-nerd skin-erd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

And you're a child.  The Executive branch does not have unfettered power to do whatever it wants whenever it wants.  What is it about the constitution and checks and balances that you don't understand?

 

He has the right to get rid of Brennan for cause.  I would have for him lying about the CIA spying on members of Congress.  But he sad today he did so because he helped start an investigation into his own administration's role with the Russia thing.  That then becomes an issue for the Legislative and/or Judicial branches to take on.

 

Did none of you live through Watergate?

Yes they do.  It is called checks and balances.  Honestly, read the Constitution.  Executive power does not mean you can flagrantly abuse that power.

 

You're calling the right of the president to rescind security clearances an "abuse of power" when it is CLEARLY within the president's domain as the head of the executive.

 

How many hours till the early bird special? Wouldn't want your stewed prunes getting cold.

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Your posting style and stubborn belief that you are right, regardless of what has been explained to you reminds me very much of gator/Tiberius. I'm serious.

Nixon tried to use his Executive power to halt an investigation into his administration, and the Legislative and Judicial branches properly used their duties under the constitution to act as checks and balances against that abuse of power.

 

If the current administration starts taking away clearances or say starts firing people or giving pardons to circumvent examination of its role in the Russian election issue then it's a similar abuse of Executive power.

 

We don't have kings or emperors in our government, we have three co-equal branches of government

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Nixon tried to use his Executive power to halt an investigation into his administration, and the Legislative and Judicial branches properly used their duties under the constitution to act as checks and balances against that abuse of power.

 

If the current administration starts taking away clearances or say starts firing people or giving pardons to circumvent examination of its role in the Russian election issue then it's a similar abuse of Executive power.

 

We don't have kings or emperors in our government, we have three co-equal branches of government

 

Your entire premise hinges on an "if" that has yet to happen. 

 

What "if" what I'm laying out is accurate, that there was a seditious coup attempt which originated inside the CIA/FBI/DOJ against then candidate Trump and carried over to President elect Trump? Does that calculus change? Or nah?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Nixon tried to use his Executive power to halt an investigation into his administration, and the Legislative and Judicial branches properly used their duties under the constitution to act as checks and balances against that abuse of power.

 

If the current administration starts taking away clearances or say starts firing people or giving pardons to circumvent examination of its role in the Russian election issue then it's a similar abuse of Executive power.

 

We don't have kings or emperors in our government, we have three co-equal branches of government

How does revoking Brennan's clearance affect the investigation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, joesixpack said:

 

You're calling the right of the president to rescind security clearances an "abuse of power" when it is CLEARLY within the president's domain as the head of the executive.

 

How many hours till the early bird special? Wouldn't want your stewed prunes getting cold.

 

You can continue acting like a child with the 2nd grade insults, or you can try to have an intelligent conversation.

 

If they had pulled his clearance for the reasons stated in the formal White House statement that would be one thing.  But in his WSJ interview he stated that is was because of his being involved in the whole Russia thing.  And that starts to draw close to abuse of that power to thwart investigation into his campaign. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Your entire premise hinges on an "if" that has yet to happen. 

 

What "if" what I'm laying out is accurate, that there was a seditious coup attempt which originated inside the CIA/FBI/DOJ against then candidate Trump and carried over to President elect Trump? Does that calculus change? Or nah?

I think I've already answered that.  The Mueller team needs to get to the bottom of what happened, no mater who it affects, no matter where the blame goes.  If your premise is correct, any such individuals should be arrested and charged with treason as far as I'm concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

You can continue acting like a child with the 2nd grade insults, or you can try to have an intelligent conversation.

 

If they had pulled his clearance for the reasons stated in the formal White House statement that would be one thing.  But in his WSJ interview he stated that is was because of his being involved in the whole Russia thing.  And that starts to draw close to abuse of that power to thwart investigation into his campaign. 

 

:lol: You're nuts. You're so blinded by your hatred for Trump that you can't see the plainly obvious. Brennan is no longer part of the government, and can have his clearance rescinded at any time for any reason.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oldmanfan said:

I think I've already answered that.  The Mueller team needs to get to the bottom of what happened, no mater who it affects, no matter where the blame goes.  If your premise is correct, any such individuals should be arrested and charged with treason as far as I'm concerned.

 

And is not the swath of firings inside the DOJ/FBI of high level officers evidence that this cleanup is ongoing? Or nah?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LBSeeBallLBGetBall said:

How does revoking Brennan's clearance affect the investigation?

I'm not sure.  My understanding is the president said in an interview today that he pulled his clearance in response to Brennan's involvement in initiating the Russia investigation.  The only way to find out exactly how would be for Brennan to tell what he knows to the special prosecutor and to Congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And is not the swath of firings inside the DOJ/FBI of high level officers evidence that this cleanup is ongoing? Or nah?

 

My guess? He'll say nah. Or issue some mealy-mouthed "well, if bobby mueller finds something on someone..." answer.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMF, Brennan instigated the investigation but not in the way you think. Think of a car accident that is under investigation. Brennan was driving the car that ran a stop light and hit another car. Mueller is investigating Trump, based on Brennan's lies.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, joesixpack said:

 

:lol: You're nuts. You're so blinded by your hatred for Trump that you can't see the plainly obvious. Brennan is no longer part of the government, and can have his clearance rescinded at any time for any reason.

 

 

Am I a fan of Trump?  No.  I think our president should be a better representative of all the people and quit acting like a petulant, spoiled child.  I like some of his policies though.  I'm for tax cuts, although we need draconian spending cuts to go with them.  I'm OK with rescinding some regulations. 

 

But as far as the Russian investigation goes, doesn't matter to me one iota whether it was Democrats or Republicans, whoever is responsible needs to pay, and that's what Mueller needs to find out.   What I do know is that the president indicated today that the impetus for the Brennan thing stems from him being involved in starting the Russia thing.  And that is a dangerous thing for our democracy in my opinion. 

 

I said in my initial post on this subject, just terminate all outgoing security clearances when a new administration comes in and this issue goes away.  Because you know and I know if the coin was flipped and it was a Democrat doing this you and others would be going nuts about him doing so.

 

5 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

OMF, if you would have fired Brennan for reason would you have rescinded his security clearance too?

Yes. 

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And is not the swath of firings inside the DOJ/FBI of high level officers evidence that this cleanup is ongoing? Or nah?

I hope so.  I thought the firing of Comey was justified; I would have done so if I were Obama for violating departmental policies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...