John Brennan as reported by the Associated Press (2018-08-19) when appearing of NBC’s: Meet the Press, is considering legal action against the President of the United States to forestall any other revoking of government clearances. Really John are you so moronic as to feel the need to embarrass yourself further. “If my clearances and my reputation as I’m being pulled through the mud now, if that’s the price we’re going to pay to prevent Donald Trump from doing this against other people, to me it’s a small price to pay,” Brennan said. “So I am going to do whatever I can personally to try to prevent these abuses in the future. And if it means going to court, I will do that.” More like the pot calling the kettle black, after all the outrageous comments you have recently made about the President. Perhaps your mental condition should be evaluated?
Is he, in the reference to “others” meaning Hillary Clinton, the avowed “resistance leader”? Or perhaps the former FBI Peter Stolze, who most recently was fired for numerous violations? When they use a generality to describe, it only means they hope someone will jump up and shout “ME! ME!” in support. I say get them all. I exclude ex-presidents only for the simple reason that hopefully they would not wish any harm to their country, for which they were entrusted with its wellbeing.
I see no reason for any person other than the ones being actively employed in a governmental position retaining a clearance of any type, ok maybe a passing pass to get on the lot. It seems anarchy is rampant amongst former government employees, which is deeply disturbing considering the level of insistence for the downfall of the present government. It only shows, to me at least, the political motivation of the supposedly un-biased agencies which Americans have so long accepted as being “neutral”.
Clearances are a sign of trust and privilege for the performance of assigned duties, not a life time right. I can see nowhere, that it is a legally sanctioned entitlement. It appears to be a highly coveted mark of “nobility” amongst former employees, as if to say I was a former manager at McDonalds, in a sense (and I mean no offence to the managers past or present).
I am truly amused at how the news media has portrayed the loss of said clearances as an attack on free speech, if they were truly informed of how clearances work then they would be reporting the opposite. Once you sign a clearance agreement you swear to never divulge any information pertaining to the scope of your work, under penalty of law. You are forbidden to speak even in broad generalities of anything you are privy too. At no point before or after the revoking of a clearance are you hindered from speaking on any topic, other than that you swore not too. I am becoming more and more disillusioned with the news reporting and their attempts to spin a story to place a negative view on all things. That in its self insults my intelligence.
Back to John, all his ballyhoo seems more of an effort to promote himself and that means a bigger paycheck. Perhaps he can get this included into the Mueller investigation, or even better go on a national tour with stormy daniels campaigning for Michael Avenatti. See the comparison; all three are selling their bodies.
With what I’ve see of the justice system of late I have no doubt that he will find a judge with the same demented view of law as himself to try and hinder the due process. To all ex-employees of the government I say, give the clearances up, as a sign of patriotism and love of country.
P.S. John grow up and stop the crybaby tantrum, if you can, I mean
Thank you for taking the time to read this
THE COMMENTARY GAZETTE®
CONTRIBUTOR: Eddy Toorall