Benjamin WittesVerified account

Clock the words 'per normal practice'. It makes sense that none of these people would have security clearances after leaving governmental service. More blowing smoke from dt? (@safeagain1)

Comey's & Clapper's responses seems little more than mild bemusement at dt and his desperate need to look like he's doing something 'strong' in spite of the fact that he is not. Facts haven't gotten in his way so far, so...

It's a very authoritarian stance - despite its fallacy as there are none to revoke. It could be "testing" the waters to see how far they can take this type of thing- a trial run. See what they can get away with.?

Exactly! Throw out a false premise and see how 'they' react. You are so very right.

Don't be too surprised if the Trump admin starts pushing for repeal of the First Amendment. #dictatormoves

I think they'll just ignore it. Trump's strategy has always been, "You don't like it, sue me."

Sounds like something Trump would do, now that you mention it. After all, he considers Jeff Sessions and the attorneys at the DOJ to be his personal attorneys.

So I guess this is like that Muhammad Ali pardon?

No, this is very different. It's a symbolic gesture that comes from a place of wanting to punish dissent, and from that perspective is antithetical to the very nature of our country and the principles on which it was founded.

Yeah, I was just joking about how they keep throwing stuff against the wall like this for attention without doing basic coordination or research

She understood. It’s just that the Ali thing was funny. This is not. None of it is anymore.

It's kinda funny, in a sick twisted, omfg how can this much horror be coupled with that much complete idiocy kind of way.

I worked in personnel security for a long time, when the person is debriefed they no longer have access to classified but they still have clearance eligibility. Sometimes the terms are used interchangeably. I believe Trump is referring to taking away their eligibility. #scary

No, it's actually their clearance. Some of these folks hold onto security clearance for a while after their jobs in gov't have ended, so they can be tapped for advice & input by their replacements. Also, it can help them in private sector jobs to have that clearance.

Yeah Rachel, you don’t understand. We ALL unless we do something wrong hold onto our Security Clearance Eligibility when we leave. Its worth $. It would be non sensical for Trump to go after their access. They have already said they have none. He is going after their Eligibility.

But Hayden tweeted this today: "I don't go back for classified briefings. Won't have any effect on what I say or write." If he could still go to classified briefings, didn't he have access, not mere eligibility? But I'm going off only things I've read, and admit much ignorance.

these people don't have regular access to classified info. They keep their clearance so that the people who replaced them can ask their opinion if they want to talk to the retired guy about a current issue.

That's what I've come to understand, yes.

If this were to cause monetary or career loss, Trump might find himself in a very actionable position.

Yeah, I read that elsewhere. That he could be sued, simply *because* it's politically motivated.