I heard President Trump is thinking about revoking the security clearance of several former hi level officials that were appointed by obama . These officials have been caught lying to congress or worse yet, to the American public. I wonder why they still have the right to see top secret info and they don't even work for the government" officially that is" anymore. These people are John Brennan James Comey , Susan Rice, James Clapper , and former FBI director Macabe. Somewhere on video you can find where these people lied over and over. I think it's long overdue for these folks to lose their government privledge . If this is done than I think it will be a good start on revealing and removing the deep state.

Thats easy actually. Along with the job title/position will come the description of required clearance. Whatever job clearance is required in THEIR position to do THEIR job should be provided.

ABSOLUTELY 100%!!!
REVOKE!

Except that they no longer have those jobs.

It should have been revoked the moment that Trump said " so help me God" and the Chief justice said "thank you Mister President"

Exactly.

then I dont personally see why they need the clearance or ANY other person not in a clearance job needs clearance.

But then again, I dont know completely the precedent or the reasons people may retain those clearances and Im wondering why it would not just be a standard rule for ANYONE not in a clearance position, as opposed to just isolated or singled out individuals.

I wonder if its just another juicy tidbit our POTUS likes to dabble in to keep the masses rooting for him, because it makes sense that if this is the precedent, that clearances be revoked when someone leaves, it would already have happened and would be a non issue. I always have to wonder until I research because the POTUS has been known to throw things out as fact or issue even though he doesnt really know if they are.

Same here. When the job is gone, the security clearance should be gone, too, regardless of who the person is.

Exactly. I'm some what bewildered that they can maintain it after their tenure.

this

the reason I heard they still keep their clearance is to help in transition of officials or to provide past details on matters concerning individuals or events.

that makes some sense to make transitions more efficient than starting all over again, I guess.

I would think its a good thing even if you EVER HAD the clearance to indicate your ability to be trusted with information.

I dont really care so much, as long as the rules are applied consistently.

not really, anyone's security clearance can be revoked, but I'm not sure if they need a conviction or not...they may not be learning anything new, but what they already know needs protection...

the government is weird like that... When I was in the Navy, they made me get a low security clearance just for the fact we had some nukes on board, even tho my rate didn't need one...so if they caught me talking to anyone about them, I would have been in trouble

Unless certain clearances come with an
expiration date, they're generally for life.


Unless...
Otherwise surrendered, suspended,
or revoked.