Security clearances: The ultimate swamp perk

The following are two headlines in Saturday's Washington Post.  I wonder if any journalist or other Democrat can spot the problem.

GOP fundraiser Broidy under investigation for alleged effort to sell government influence

White House drafts more cancellations of clearances as Trump aims to punish critics

Here is a hint.  The only reason all the former government employees, especially former CIA director John Brennan, want to keep their security clearances is so they can go out and sell their information, or the appearance of having secret information, as a sort of credibility-enhancer, on CNN and elsewhere.  They are selling their government influence on a day-to-day basis, so why aren't they being investigated as the Republican fundraiser, cited above, is?  Their bread is being buttered because they are selling privileged information. 

When employees leave private companies, they do not have access to private information, so why would anyone think government employees should, especially when it is classified?  Brennan, along with former National Intelligence director James Clapper, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, fired FBI director James Comey, fired former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, and others, didn't keep things secret while they were on the taxpayer payroll.  Quite a few of them specialized in leaks.  Why should they be trusted now?

Presumably, the security clearance is not a live invitation to go dipping into secrets, but a classification that allows them to see secrets on the assumption they would be there to help the government if they could.  That's not working as it's supposed to.  If there is a need to give back the security clearance to a guy like Brennan to help the country, well, that can be given back on an individual basis. 

It's worth noting that Obama eased security clearance procedures right before he left office.  Why?  He never gave a damn about security while he was in office with Hillary and others.  He did it to cheapen the advantage of America having secrets

The guidelines now allow staffers with dual passports, tax problems and suspicious lie detector test results to receive clearances.  They may not seem like major changes.  But John V. Berry, a Virginia lawyer who represents people going through the security clearance process, described them as "big," saying they offer people more chances to receive waivers and conditional clearances than before.  "They're easier in my opinion," he said.  "I don't think you can argue that they're tougher." 

Obama also made it easier to unmask names and share classified stuff on his way out, the better to propagate the leak culture of the swamp. 

In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government's 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The media never gave a darn while Obama and the IRS violated the free speech and free association rights of political opponents.  They don't care if Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and others violate people's free speech rights, especially if they are conservative, but now they supposedly care about free speech when someone's security clearance is taken away.  I call BS.  Trump is not limiting Brennan's or anyone's ability to speak.  He is limiting their ability to leak to news outlets and that is what the media cares about.  They don't like losing their anonymous mouthpieces.

The following are two headlines in Saturday's Washington Post.  I wonder if any journalist or other Democrat can spot the problem.

GOP fundraiser Broidy under investigation for alleged effort to sell government influence

White House drafts more cancellations of clearances as Trump aims to punish critics

Here is a hint.  The only reason all the former government employees, especially former CIA director John Brennan, want to keep their security clearances is so they can go out and sell their information, or the appearance of having secret information, as a sort of credibility-enhancer, on CNN and elsewhere.  They are selling their government influence on a day-to-day basis, so why aren't they being investigated as the Republican fundraiser, cited above, is?  Their bread is being buttered because they are selling privileged information. 

When employees leave private companies, they do not have access to private information, so why would anyone think government employees should, especially when it is classified?  Brennan, along with former National Intelligence director James Clapper, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, fired FBI director James Comey, fired former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, and others, didn't keep things secret while they were on the taxpayer payroll.  Quite a few of them specialized in leaks.  Why should they be trusted now?

Presumably, the security clearance is not a live invitation to go dipping into secrets, but a classification that allows them to see secrets on the assumption they would be there to help the government if they could.  That's not working as it's supposed to.  If there is a need to give back the security clearance to a guy like Brennan to help the country, well, that can be given back on an individual basis. 

It's worth noting that Obama eased security clearance procedures right before he left office.  Why?  He never gave a damn about security while he was in office with Hillary and others.  He did it to cheapen the advantage of America having secrets

The guidelines now allow staffers with dual passports, tax problems and suspicious lie detector test results to receive clearances.  They may not seem like major changes.  But John V. Berry, a Virginia lawyer who represents people going through the security clearance process, described them as "big," saying they offer people more chances to receive waivers and conditional clearances than before.  "They're easier in my opinion," he said.  "I don't think you can argue that they're tougher." 

Obama also made it easier to unmask names and share classified stuff on his way out, the better to propagate the leak culture of the swamp. 

In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government's 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The media never gave a darn while Obama and the IRS violated the free speech and free association rights of political opponents.  They don't care if Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and others violate people's free speech rights, especially if they are conservative, but now they supposedly care about free speech when someone's security clearance is taken away.  I call BS.  Trump is not limiting Brennan's or anyone's ability to speak.  He is limiting their ability to leak to news outlets and that is what the media cares about.  They don't like losing their anonymous mouthpieces.