Skip to main content

U.S. President Donald Trump abruptly revoked the security clearance of ex-CIA director John Brennan on Wednesday, an unprecedented act of retribution against a vocally critical former top U.S. official.

Mr. Trump also threatened to yank the clearances of a handful of individuals, including former top intelligence and law-enforcement officials, as well as a current member of the Justice Department. All are critics of the President or are people whom Mr. Trump appears to believe are against him.

Mr. Trump in a statement denounced Mr. Brennan’s criticism and spoke anxiously of “the risks posed by his erratic conduct and behaviour.” The President described his own action as fulfilling his “constitutional responsibility to protect the nation’s classified information.”

Story continues below advertisement

However, Democratic members of Congress said it smacked of an “enemies list” among fellow Americans and the behaviour of leaders in “dictatorships, not democracies.” Mr. Brennan, in a phone interview with MSNBC, called the move an “abuse of power by Mr. Trump.”

“I do believe that Mr. Trump decided to take this action, as he’s done with others, to try to intimidate and suppress any criticism of him or his administration,” he said, adding that he would not be deterred from speaking out.

Mr. Trump’s action, critics and nonpartisan experts said, marked an unprecedented politicization of the federal government’s security-clearance process. It also was a clear escalation in Mr. Trump’s battle with members of the U.S. intelligence community as the investigation into Russia election meddling and possible collusion and obstruction of justice continues.

And it came in the middle of the president’s latest controversy – accusations of racism by former adviser Omarosa Manigault Newman and his bitter reaction to them. Mr. Trump’s statement, distributed to reporters, was dated July 26, 2018, suggesting it could have been held and then released when needed to change a damaging subject. The White House later released a new version without the date.

Mr. Trump, his statement read by his press secretary, accused Mr. Brennan of having “leveraged his status as a former high-ranking official with access to highly sensitive information to make a series of unfounded and outrageous allegations, wild outbursts on the internet and television about this administration.”

“Mr. Brennan’s lying and recent conduct characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary is wholly inconsistent with access to the nation’s most closely held secrets,” Mr. Trump said.

Mr. Trump told The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that he was prepared to yank Mr. Brennan’s clearance last week but that it was too “hectic.” The President was on an extended working vacation at his New Jersey golf club last week.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Brennan has indeed been deeply critical of Mr. Trump’s conduct, calling his performance at a news conference last month with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Finland “nothing short of treasonous.”

Mr. Brennan continued that criticism on Wednesday. “I’ve seen this type of behaviour and actions on the part of foreign tyrants and despots and autocrats for many, many years during my CIA and national security career. I never, ever thought that I would see it here in the United States,” he said.

Mr. Brennan said he had not heard from the CIA or the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that his security clearance was being revoked, but learned it when the White House announced it. There is no requirement that a president has to notify top intelligence officials of his plan to revoke a security clearance. “The President has the ultimate authority to decide who holds a security clearance,” the ODNI said in a statement.

Former CIA directors and other top national-security officials are typically allowed to keep their clearances, at least for some period, so they can be in a position to advise their successors and to hold certain jobs.

Mr. Trump’s statement said the Brennan issue raises larger questions about the practice of allowing former officials to maintain their security clearances, and said that others officials’ were under review.

They include former FBI director James Comey; James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence; former CIA director Michael Hayden; former national-security adviser Susan Rice; and Andrew McCabe, who served as Mr. Trump’s deputy FBI director until he was fired in March.

Story continues below advertisement

Also on the list: fired FBI agent Peter Strzok, who was removed from the Russia investigation over anti-Trump text messages; former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, with whom Mr. Strzok exchanged messages; and senior Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, whom Mr. Trump recently accused on Twitter of “helping disgraced Christopher Steele ‘find dirt on Trump.“’ Mr. Ohr was friends with Mr. Steele, the former British intelligence officer commissioned by an American political research firm to explore Mr. Trump’s alleged ties with the Russian government. He is the only current government employee on the list.

At least two of the former officials, Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe, do not currently have security clearances, and none of the eight receive intelligence briefings. Mr. Trump’s concern apparently is that their former status gives special weight to their statements, both to Americans and foreign foes.

Former intelligence officials are also wondering how far Mr. Trump will go, according to a former senior intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity to share private conversations he’s had with people who have worked in the field.

They said Mr. Trump has moved from threatening to revoke security clearances of former intelligence officials who have not been involved in the Russia investigation to former officials who did work on the probe. And they wonder if he will next choose to target those who currently work on the investigation, which Mr. Trump has called a “witch hunt.”

The CIA referred questions to the White House.

Mr. Clapper, reacting on CNN, called Mr. Trump’s actions “unprecedented,” but said he didn’t plan to stop speaking out. Asked what linked those threatened by the White House, Mr. Clapper said he and the others have been outspoken about the Trump administration, have “directly run afoul of it” or have taken actions the President dislikes.

Story continues below advertisement

“So I guess that’s what we all have in common,” Mr. Clapper said.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Mr. Trump’s press secretary, insisted the White House wasn’t targeting only Trump critics. But Mr. Trump did not order a review of the clearance held by former national-security adviser Mike Flynn, who was fired from the White House for lying to Vice-President Mike Pence about his conversations with Russian officials and later pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

Democrats, and even some Republicans, lined up to denounce the President’s move, with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi slamming it as a “stunning abuse of power.” Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, warned that a “dangerous precedent” was being set by “politicizing the way we guard our national secrets just to punish the President’s critics.”

And California representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, tweeted, “An enemies list is ugly, undemocratic and un-American.”

Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen tweeted, “Trump is now categorizing dissent and free speech as ‘erratic behaviour.’" He added, “Leaders behave like this in dictatorships, not democracies.”

Several Republicans also weighed in, with Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, saying, “Unless there’s something tangible that I’m unaware of, it just, as I’ve said before, feels like a banana republic kind of thing.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan had previously dismissed Mr. Trump’s threat as nothing more than presidential “trolling.”

Report an error
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter