Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1406
    15 Aug '18 21:48
    With the revocation on John Brennan's security clearance Donald Trump has sent a clear signal to the intelligence community:

    Say only nice things about Donald Trump or we'll punish you!

    Mr. Brennan served in the intel. community for decades under both Republican and Democratic Presidents. This childish and unwise move by Trump only serves to weaken our national security, intelligence community and our military's ability to make command decisions. Thanks Mr. President for all you've done for us (NOT!)



    https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/15/politics/john-brennan-security-clearance/index.html
  2. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    15 Aug '18 22:122 edits
    Originally posted by @mchill
    With the revocation on John Brennan's security clearance Donald Trump has sent a clear signal to the intelligence community:

    Say only nice things about Donald Trump or we'll punish you!

    Mr. Brennan served in the intel. community for decades under both Republican and Democratic Presidents. This childish and unwise move by Trump only serves to weaken ou ...[text shortened]... us (NOT!)

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/15/politics/john-brennan-security-clearance/index.html
    Everyone in the intelligence community already knows that the President is the Commander-in-Chief
    and has the ultimate authority (whatever one's reasons) to revoke a security clearance.

    Does Mchill believe that anyone should have the absolute *right* to keep a security
    clearance even after one has lost the confidence of the President?
  3. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1406
    15 Aug '18 22:442 edits
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Everyone in the intelligence community already knows that the President is the Commander-in-Chief
    and has the ultimate authority (whatever one's reasons) to revoke a security clearance.

    Does Mchill believe that anyone has the absolute *right* to keep a security clearance
    even after one has lost the confidence of the President?
    Does Mchill believe that anyone has the absolute *right* to keep a security clearance
    even after one has lost the confidence of the President?




    Mchill believes the sitting President has the legal right to revoke security clearances.. Mchill also believes this is an unwise and childish move. Mr. Brennan has many international intelligence contacts and decades of experience in this area, and to cut Mr. Brennan off from the intel. community represents a weakening of the intl. community as a whole.

    Mchill also believes Duchess is challenging me on this point, not in the interests of learning anything or to discuss this issue in a civilized manner, but rather out of dislike and spite. That's OK though, I'm trained to deal in offences. 🙂
  4. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    15 Aug '18 22:552 edits
    Originally posted by @mchill
    Does Mchill believe that anyone has the absolute *right* to keep a security clearance
    even after one has lost the confidence of the President?

    Mchill believes the sitting President has the legal right to do this. Mchill also believes this is an unwise and childish move. Mr. Brennan has many international intelligence contacts and decades of experience i ...[text shortened]... r, but rather out of dislike and spite. That's OK though, I'm trained to deal in offences. 🙂
    The lying troll Mchill shows his usual ignorance of the historical context.
    (And does Mchill know how to spell 'intelligence'?)

    During the McCarthyist period, many Americans lost their security clearances because
    they were wrongly suspected of disloyalty. And they often had their careers ruined.

    This was much worse than what President Trump has done so far to Brennan or a few others.
    But would Mchill have hurled the same insults at Presidents Truman or Eisenhower?

    "During the McCarthy era, hundreds of Americans were accused of being communists or
    communist sympathizers and became the subject of aggressive investigations and
    questioning before government or private industry panels, committees and agencies.
    The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the
    entertainment industry, educators and labor union activists. Suspicions were often given
    credence despite inconclusive or questionable evidence, and the level of threat posed
    by a person's real or supposed leftist associations or beliefs was sometimes exaggerated.
    Many people suffered loss of employment or destruction of their careers; some even suffered imprisonment."
    --Wikipedia
  5. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    15 Aug '18 23:02
    Originally posted by @mchill
    With the revocation on John Brennan's security clearance Donald Trump has sent a clear signal to the intelligence community:

    Say only nice things about Donald Trump or we'll punish you!

    Mr. Brennan served in the intel. community for decades under both Republican and Democratic Presidents. This childish and unwise move by Trump only serves to weaken ou ...[text shortened]... (NOT!)



    https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/15/politics/john-brennan-security-clearance/index.html
    So what went wrong about the US intelligence that Iraq had those WMD's under Bush?
  6. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1406
    15 Aug '18 23:04
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    The lying troll Mchill shows his usual ignorance of the historical context.

    During the McCarthyist period, many Americans lost their security clearances because
    they were wrongly suspected of disloyalty. And they often had their careers ruined.

    This was much worse than what President Trump has done so far to Brennan or a few others.
    But would Mchill have hurled the same insults at Presidents Truman or Eisenhower?
    During the McCarthyist period, many Americans lost their security clearances because
    they were wrongly suspected of disloyalty. And they often had their careers ruined.

    This was much worse than what President Trump has done so far to Brennan or a few others.
    But would Mchill have hurled the same insults at Presidents Truman or Eisenhower?



    Mchill does not see this as "hurling insults" but rather only giving his opinion. An opinion that is shared by millions of Americans both Conservative and Liberal. Mchill is not however in the habit of calling people "lying trolls" nor does Mchill engage normally in name calling. Mchill has now decided he will refrain from responding to Duchess until she has had a chance to calm down a little. Mchill recommends Duchess try Yoga, deep breathing, or some other calming activity before posting any more inflammatory messages here. 🙂
  7. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1406
    15 Aug '18 23:05
    Originally posted by @whodey
    So what went wrong about the US intelligence that Iraq had those WMD's under Bush?
    You find out, please let me know.
  8. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    15 Aug '18 23:293 edits
    Originally posted by @mchill
    During the McCarthyist period, many Americans lost their security clearances because
    they were wrongly suspected of disloyalty. And they often had their careers ruined.

    This was much worse than what President Trump has done so far to Brennan or a few others.
    But would Mchill have hurled the same insults at Presidents Truman or Eisenhower?

    Mchi eathing, or some other calming activity before posting any more inflammatory messages here. 🙂
    'Lying' is a factually accurate description of the troll Mchill's common misbehavior.
    The tireless troll Mchill has does not object to lying; he objects only to citing evidence to point out his lying.

    Would Mchill have denounced Presidents Truman or Eisenhower as 'childish' (to quote him)
    when many more Americans were deprived of their security clearances during the McCarthyist era?

    I already know that the racist troll Mchill can find many other self-pitying white American
    men who agree with him that white men are the most oppressed people in the USA.
  9. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35841
    16 Aug '18 02:22
    Originally posted by @whodey
    So what went wrong about the US intelligence that Iraq had those WMD's under Bush?
    You act like Republicans lying is news to you.
  10. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56284
    16 Aug '18 05:54
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Everyone in the intelligence community already knows that the President is the Commander-in-Chief
    and has the ultimate authority (whatever one's reasons) to revoke a security clearance.

    Does Mchill believe that anyone should have the absolute *right* to keep a security
    clearance even after one has lost the confidence of the President?
    Yeah. Obviously.

    The president (political powers) shouldn’t have any powers to appoint / remove the civil service.

    The secret service does not serve the president, it serves the United States and its people / interests.
  11. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    17 Aug '18 18:04
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    Yeah. Obviously.

    The president (political powers) shouldn’t have any powers to appoint / remove the civil service.

    The secret service does not serve the president, it serves the United States and its people / interests.
    John Brennan's no longer employed by the US government or has protected status as a civil servant.
    Should a retired CIA employee expect to keep one's security clearance in perpetuity?
  12. Joined
    07 Feb '09
    Moves
    138583
    17 Aug '18 18:28
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    John Brennan's no longer employed by the US government or has protected status as a civil servant.
    Should a retired CIA employee expect to keep one's security clearance in perpetuity?
    Good point for discussion.
    However the real issue in this thread is that the power granted to the President has to be used wisely and responsibly.

    That is clearly not the case here.

    Same goes for tariffs.
    Applying tariffs on another country because Donald feels disrespected by another leader is just displaying the behaviour of a 12 year old.
  13. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    17 Aug '18 18:31
    Originally posted by @mghrn55
    Good point for discussion.
    However the real issue in this thread is that the power granted to the President has to be used wisely and responsibly.

    That is clearly not the case here.

    Same goes for tariffs.
    Applying tariffs on another country because Donald feels disrespected by another leader is just displaying the behaviour of a 12 year old.
    I am not defending President Trump's judgment or motives.
    I am pointing out that his treatment of John Brennan pales in comparison with how unjustly
    many loyal Americans were treated by the US government during the McCarthyist period.
  14. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    17 Aug '18 18:48
    Bruce Ohr's evidently still a US civil servant, working for the Department of Justice.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/08/16/who-is-bruce-ohr-why-does-trump-keep-tweeting-about-him/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f08276307c77

    "Who is Bruce Ohr and why does Trump keep tweeting about him?"

    "Ohr exists in a netherworld — a subject of fascination in right-leaning media, barely a mention in mainstream media."

    "As yet, there is little evidence to support Trump’s contention that Ohr helped Steele find dirt on Trump. ...
    Trump’s mention of Ohr’s wife appears gratuitous. Her role in the matter, as yet, appears minimal."
  15. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52853
    17 Aug '18 19:281 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Bruce Ohr's evidently still a US civil servant, working for the Department of Justice.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/08/16/who-is-bruce-ohr-why-does-trump-keep-tweeting-about-him/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f08276307c77

    "Who is Bruce Ohr and why does Trump keep tweeting about him?"

    "Ohr exists in a netherworld — a subject of fascinati ...[text shortened]... mp’s mention of Ohr’s wife appears gratuitous. Her role in the matter, as yet, appears minimal."
    The point about why would a retired high level government employee would want to keep his or her security clearance is this: Those people are funds of information for the newer generation of intelligence people. They can contribute to the historical aspects of the intelligence community, like who was doing what to whom in the past and how that affects the present. Losing the security clearance means they no longer can be counted on by the new kids on the block. That is the reason for high level government people to retain their clearances.

    The McCarthy era was very bad, some of my friends were directly effected by those policies.
    The present course Trump is taking sends chills throughout the US intelligence community, like can they trust the government employing them in the jobs they love, protecting the US from foreign interference?

    The McCarthy era was a mistakenly pro active effort to stop communism in the US.

    The Trump era is all about personal vindictiveness not caring a damn about protecting the US from hostile powers.
    In fact, encouraging Russia to interfere as was shown by the speech Trump gave as candidate, the one where he specifically asks the Russians to find the '30,000' Hillary emails. And just so conveniently the Russians do exactly that the very same day.

    No collusion? Sounds a LOT like it to me and MILLIONS of other Americans and millions of non-Americans all around the world.

    The US is diminished by this despot would be POTUS where he doesn't listen AT ALL to his own intelligence people, thinking he is SO smart he doesn't need anyone.

    Narcissistic much?
Back to Top