Author Topic: The US Presidency 2018  (Read 50582 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 72,742
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 468
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #400 on: August 17, 2018, 07:10:58 »
When you are at the level that these folks are, it is routine that they keep their security clearances so that the next administration can consult with them on new and ongoing issues. By having current clearances such consultations can happen rapidly without having to go through the vetting process needed to issue or reinstate a clearance. This is especially handy in crisis situations. All in all it's primarily to help the new administration rapidly access corporate memory to assist them in making sound and informed decisions.

 :cheers:

To be honest would you want to bring in this man to consult with him? Seeing all the far out things he has said the past while. He is openly hostile.
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 90,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,936
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #401 on: August 17, 2018, 07:19:48 »
Optio

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 85,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,853
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #402 on: August 17, 2018, 08:06:57 »
Addition to the above post, Secretary Mattis himself on the MSNBC report of a $92M parade cost:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5ISXJPZEQU&rel=0&modestbranding=1&controls=0
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 85,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,853
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #403 on: August 17, 2018, 08:24:28 »
FJAG:
Quote
When you are at the level that these folks are, it is routine that they keep their security clearances so that the next administration can consult with them on new and ongoing issues. By having current clearances such consultations can happen rapidly without having to go through the vetting process needed to issue or reinstate a clearance. This is especially handy in crisis situations. All in all it's primarily to help the new administration rapidly access corporate memory to assist them in making sound and informed decisions.

 
kkwd:
Quote
To be honest would you want to bring in this man to consult with him? Seeing all the far out things he has said the past while. He is openly hostile.

The Director of the CIA is a non partisan position. As soon as he leaves the position, he starts bashing the new administration and POTUS. He recently said to the TV audience, picked up by other media, that Trump had committed treason (punishable by death), but offered no proof. He said in the last several days that losing his security clearance is a violation of his First Amendment rights. He said that on TV, on Twitter, etc then wrote on op-ed. Seems like he doesn't comprehend what the First Amendment says.

On TV, a host stated, second hand, that without a security clearance, he can't go back to check files for his book. Everyone in Washington writes a book. ;D

Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 100,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,309
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #404 on: August 17, 2018, 08:36:38 »
What's wrong with a parade ? It wont include anything heavy as it might damage the streets.
As to the issue of security clearances you don't own it like a car its on a need to know basis. These former Obama administration types should not rquire one. If they get another top level job in another administration they should be able to pass the background check unless they are advocating the overthrow of the government.

http://www.burnhamgorokhov.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Security-Clearance-Introduction.pdf

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 90,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,936
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #405 on: August 17, 2018, 09:01:48 »
What's wrong with a parade ? It wont include anything heavy as it might damage the streets.
As to the issue of security clearances you don't own it like a car its on a need to know basis. These former Obama administration types should not rquire one. If they get another top level job in another administration they should be able to pass the background check unless they are advocating the overthrow of the government.

http://www.burnhamgorokhov.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Security-Clearance-Introduction.pdf

To be honest nothing.  I assume that there are already veteran's day parades in the US.  This year does mark the 100th anniversary of the end of the 1st world war as well.

I'm curious how much our own commemoration parades will cost this year.  We'll have a contingent in Belgium and various cities across Canada not to mention this year's remembrance day ceremonies as well as an army contingent at Buckingham palace at that time. 
Optio

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -3325.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 268,277
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,266
    • Army.ca
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #406 on: August 17, 2018, 10:03:26 »

As to the issue of security clearances you don't own it like a car its on a need to know basis. These former Obama administration types should not rquire one. If they get another top level job in another administration they should be able to pass the background check unless they are advocating the overthrow of the government.

http://www.burnhamgorokhov.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Security-Clearance-Introduction.pdf

See, now that's what I thought. Given FJAG's reply, I would have to assume that the current administration feels that they would have no need to consult. Therefore, no need for them to retain the clearance.

I've seen people, in the CAF, wear their clearance like some sort of status symbol. Perhaps that's the case here? I don't know. It makes sense though. He won't be able to have lunch with colleagues, if they decide to talk government or agency business. I think the animosity shown by the previous administration warrants a move like this. Who wants to let the fox back into the hen house?
Diversity includes adverse opinions, or it is not diversity.
Inclusive includes adverse opinions, or is not inclusive.

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 90,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,936
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #407 on: August 17, 2018, 10:15:05 »
let's not try and make this about a simple administrative thing.  This is clearly a tit for tat thing with a very specific list of people that the president feels slighted by. 

If it was something as simple as them not feeling they need to consult then a lot more people would be on that list.

All that said though, it is well within his right and purview to do this.  But don't expect people to not be offended by this. 

But if a guy like Admiral McCraven takes issue with this then maybe some people should listen. 
Optio

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 85,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,853
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #408 on: August 17, 2018, 10:22:31 »
You should read this and compare names the with
Quote
a very specific list of people that the president feels slighted by. 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/strzok-joins-list-of-25-top-fbi-doj-officials-who-have-been-recently-fired-demoted-or-resigned_2624607.html

List of 25 Top FBI, DOJ Officials Who Have Been Recently Fired, Demoted, or Resigned
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 522,925
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,674
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #409 on: August 17, 2018, 10:28:47 »
These former Obama administration types should not rquire one.
Which ignores former-Reagan and Bushx2 administration types retaining clearances. 


ps - various Canadian government department 'types' (including retired-CAF) have also retained security clearances, by the way.  Not everything is a politicized conspiracy.  :boring:

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 90,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,936
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #410 on: August 17, 2018, 10:29:32 »
You should read this and compare names the with
https://www.theepochtimes.com/strzok-joins-list-of-25-top-fbi-doj-officials-who-have-been-recently-fired-demoted-or-resigned_2624607.html

List of 25 Top FBI, DOJ Officials Who Have Been Recently Fired, Demoted, or Resigned

A few do belong on that list.  But not all.

This is politically motivated. 
Optio

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 85,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,853
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #411 on: August 17, 2018, 10:45:03 »
Probably to some degree.

This house of cards wrt the investigation is unravelling fast based on the now public emails of the instigators.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 90,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,936
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #412 on: August 17, 2018, 10:49:01 »
The simple solution going forward is to just revoke all security clearances once a job or position is done. 
Optio

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 100,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,309
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #413 on: August 17, 2018, 11:01:29 »
Some civilian defense contractors need a security clearance hence the need by industry to hire retired officers.Trump has canceled the parade due to cost but he left the door open for maybe next year.
   

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-cancels-military-parade-blames-dc-officials-for-high-cost/ar-BBM36aO?ocid=spartandhp
« Last Edit: August 17, 2018, 11:25:31 by tomahawk6 »

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 60,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,649
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #414 on: August 17, 2018, 12:39:40 »
Everything McRaven wrote about Brennan can be true, and it can still be true that Brennan deserved to have his clearance revoked.  Whatever his alleged integrity, Brennan was caught in several high-profile lies and obfuscations (regarding: the CIA's illegal access of Senate computers, the CIA's illegal acquisition of other protected communications, the allegation of zero drone strike collateral casualties, denial of knowledge of the Steele dossier).

In the previous administration, Brennan (Dir CIA), Comey (Dir FBI), and Clapper (Dir NI) were significant players in the US defense/security establishment responsible for preventing things like foreign interference with US elections.  It has been established beyond doubt that the Obama administration knew about the (Russian) attempts but did not pursue the matter as aggressively as it might have.  Whether the directors' hands were tied in their respective areas of authority by the administration is almost beside the point; the customary principle is that if you can't get behind a policy, you should resign.  So presumably they "got behind" the policy.  Nevertheless, there was a failure on "their watch".  If they have useful advice to offer, it is the sort of thing done quietly through established channels.  Carping openly serves no agenda but destabilizing the new administration.  If they wish to be critics or to pin blame, they surely have a right to do so - but they do not necessarily deserve special access.

Here is what revoking the clearance really does: prevents anyone from sharing (leaking) classified material with Brennan without risk of committing a felony.  It discourages leakers inside from using Brennan as a delivery conduit.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 161,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,838
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #415 on: August 17, 2018, 13:00:37 »
Everything McRaven wrote about Brennan can be true, and it can still be true that Brennan deserved to have his clearance revoked.  Whatever his alleged integrity, Brennan was caught in several high-profile lies and obfuscations (regarding: the CIA's illegal access of Senate computers, the CIA's illegal acquisition of other protected communications, the allegation of zero drone strike collateral casualties, denial of knowledge of the Steele dossier).

In the previous administration, Brennan (Dir CIA), Comey (Dir FBI), and Clapper (Dir NI) were significant players in the US defense/security establishment responsible for preventing things like foreign interference with US elections.  It has been established beyond doubt that the Obama administration knew about the (Russian) attempts but did not pursue the matter as aggressively as it might have.  Whether the directors' hands were tied in their respective areas of authority by the administration is almost beside the point; the customary principle is that if you can't get behind a policy, you should resign.  So presumably they "got behind" the policy.  Nevertheless, there was a failure on "their watch".  If they have useful advice to offer, it is the sort of thing done quietly through established channels.  Carping openly serves no agenda but destabilizing the new administration.  If they wish to be critics or to pin blame, they surely have a right to do so - but they do not necessarily deserve special access.

Here is what revoking the clearance really does: prevents anyone from sharing (leaking) classified material with Brennan without risk of committing a felony.  It discourages leakers inside from using Brennan as a delivery conduit.

Care to back up some of your bald-faced allegations with some legitimate sources?

 :waiting:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 100,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,309
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #416 on: August 17, 2018, 13:29:02 »
Wasn't Brennan responsible for the Ben Gazi coverup ?

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 90,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,936
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #417 on: August 17, 2018, 13:37:06 »
Wasn't Brennan responsible for the Ben Gazi coverup ?

There were 10 investigations including 6 republican led ones.  Which one exactly discovered a cover up?
Optio

Offline Blackadder1916

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 161,350
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,817
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #418 on: August 17, 2018, 14:15:52 »
. . .
Here is what revoking the clearance really does: prevents anyone from sharing (leaking) classified material with Brennan without risk of committing a felony.  It discourages leakers inside from using Brennan as a delivery conduit.

Unless something is vastly different in security procedures between us and the USA, that simple phrase "need to know" covers any such eventuality.  Oh yes, the Yanks use the same thing as in this definition from the primary directive for "Access to Classified Information" (Executive Order 12968)

https://www.dni.gov/index.php/ic-legal-reference-book/executive-order-12968
Quote
(h) “Need-to-know” means a determination made by an authorized holder of classified information that a prospective recipient requires access to specific classified information in order to perform or assist in a lawful and authorized governmental function.

. . .

Sec. 1.2. Access to Classified Information.

 (a) No employee shall be granted access to classified information unless that employee has been determined to be eligible in accordance with this order and to possess a need-to-know.
Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 60,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,649
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #419 on: August 17, 2018, 15:44:39 »
>Care to back up some of your bald-faced allegations with some legitimate sources?

FYI, I'm in the habit of confirming details about events I think I remember before I post.

Brennan's integrity:

The Guardian.

The Washington Post.

Law and Crime.

Knowledge of Russian interference, and less than full-court response:

Bloomberg.

Yahoo! news service.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 60,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,649
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #420 on: August 17, 2018, 15:45:44 »
>Unless something is vastly different in security procedures between us and the USA, that simple phrase "need to know" covers any such eventuality.

True; but a revoked clearance is a distinct signal that puts a definitive chill on things.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 161,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,838
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #421 on: August 17, 2018, 16:03:25 »
90 million does not seem that far off the mark once you factor in security related costs.

While they're thinking about that maybe they should pay up Palm Springs' overtime bill for $5.7 million for Trump's Mar-a-Lago security.

Quote
PALM BEACH —
Palm Beach County taxpayers fronted more than $5.7 million to help protect President Donald Trump during his 10 visits to Mar-a-Lago between November and April, figures provided Thursday show.

The federal government is expected to reimburse local governments for the expenses. A congressional budget agreement signed by Trump in March sets aside $41 million to repay local law enforcement agencies for “extraordinary … personnel costs” to protect the president when he visits his private residences in Palm Beach, New York and New Jersey.

A similar pot of federal money was used in 2017 to reimburse Palm Beach County taxpayers for $3.4 million in security costs incurred during the first three months of Trump’s presidency.

Most of the 2017-2018 law enforcement costs were racked up by the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office, which takes the lead among local agencies in assisting the Secret Service during presidential visits. The agency spent $5.6 million on overtime during Trump’s 2017-18 trips, sheriff’s spokeswoman Teri Barbera said Thursday in response to a query from The Palm Beach Post.

Aside from the sheriff’s costs, the town of Palm Beach said in April that it spent $115,156 on police overtime during Trump’s 2017-18 visits and West Palm Beach said it spent $68,500.

Trump’s 10 trips to Mar-a-Lago covered at least a portion of 47 days and included Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter visits as well as an April summit with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

The sheriff’s presidential details are paid entirely with overtime so that routine law enforcement operations are not compromised, Sheriff Ric Bradshaw has said.

Bradshaw last month told the Palm Beach County School District that the commitment to protect the president is one of several reasons the sheriff’s office “CAN NOT provide a large number of deputies on an overtime basis” to help beef up school security.

Bradshaw also said regional anti-terrorism efforts, staffing large concerts and “numerous extra duty assignments” put a limit on available deputy overtime hours.

Rather than dip into overtime, Bradshaw offered to hire and provide 50 full-time deputies for school patrols for one year, for an estimated $7 million.

Trump personally thanked local law enforcement officers in April at the end of his last Mar-a-Lago visit for the 2017-18 season. The president greeted motorcycle officers and posed for pictures at Palm Beach International Airport before he boarded Air Force One.

“Thank you to the incredible Law Enforcement Officers from the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. They keep us safe and are very cool about it!” Trump later tweeted along with a picture of himself surrounded by local officers.

https://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/national-govt--politics/county-seeks-reimbursement-for-trump-mar-lago-security-bill/XTOrIYDQ1vpNFSpa1e13uK/

Security for these type of events is usually provided by officers working on overtime as the normal day to day policing functions still have to be performed.

I couldn't find a budget figure but this year's Bastille Day parade used some 17,000 police and emergency forces.

Quote
Bastille Day surrounded by RING OF STEEL: 17,000 police and soldiers patrol Paris parade
BASTILLE DAY parades will be protected by a ring of steel as French authorities impose unprecedented levels of security around Paris fearing the city could be the target of yet another terrorist attack.

By ROMINA MCGUINNESS PUBLISHED: 06:22, Sat, Jul 14, 2018

A total of 12,000 police officers and 3,000 rescue workers have been deployed to the capital’s streets and its suburbs for France’s national day today, which just two years ago brought terror on the streets of Nice when an ISIS jihadi ploughed a truck through crowds killing 86 people.

Another 2,000 counter-terrorism “Sentinelle” soldiers will also be on patrol around the Champs Elysées avenue during a major military parade to celebrate the day, Paris Police Chief Michel Delpuech said.

Some 2,900 police officers will be stationed on the Champs Elysées during the parade, he added.

The extra security comes after French football fans clashed with police in Paris after qualifying for the World Cup final on Tuesday.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/988481/bastille-day-paris-parade-nice-terror-attack-Champs-Elys-es

Note that for the World Cup, France deployed 110,000 security personnel.

For Trump's visit to the UK alone, the UK deployed an extra 4,000 officers with a budget of US$15.8 million for what was a fairly low-key, not very public affair.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/12/uk-spending-millions-on-security-for-trumps-controversial-visit.html

 :cheers:

Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline beirnini

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 4,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 67
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #422 on: August 18, 2018, 11:18:37 »
Quote from: Brad Sallows
It has been established beyond doubt that the Obama administration knew about the (Russian) attempts but did not pursue the matter as aggressively as it might have.  Whether the directors' hands were tied in their respective areas of authority by the administration is almost beside the point; the customary principle is that if you can't get behind a policy, you should resign.  So presumably they "got behind" the policy.  Nevertheless, there was a failure on "their watch".

So now if Brennan is both intimately aware of the severity of the threat that he failed over and  categorically ignored by the present administration what are his options with regards to acting on this threat? Is acting on such a threat to national security truly just "an agenda"? He already acted in the interests of stability ("stood-down" to avoid "tipping the scales") under Obama. How long was he supposed to continue doing so if what he says is true?

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 60,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,649
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #423 on: August 18, 2018, 13:14:10 »
If Brennan were objectively interested in thwarting Russian interference, his option would be to provide assistance to the current administration.  That is customarily done through established channels quietly, not by waging an information war in the media.

From his actions, I conclude Brennan is working to destabilize and hinder a legitimately elected president, not to buttress the institutions of democracy in the US.

People opposed to Trump pay lip service to the idea that Trump is undermining democratic institutions (almost never, it seems, citing a specific example).  A self-arrogated duty to hinder a presidential candidate or the president on the part of members of government agencies specifically undermines the ideal of the non-partisan public service.  As much as possible, conduits of information to the outside - journalists, political operatives, former government employees - should be severed and chilled.

People who aren't going to productively use a security clearance shouldn't have one.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 100,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,309
Re: The US Presidency 2018
« Reply #424 on: August 18, 2018, 17:08:12 »
There were 10 investigations including 6 republican led ones.  Which one exactly discovered a cover up?
[/]
             
https://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/10/23/gowdy-committee-verifies-timeline-of-hillary-clintons-benghazi-cover-up/