Government officials, both current and former, have had their security clearances rescinded by the Trump administration.
In a move that has been met with controversy, the Trump administration has revoked the security clearances of 37 current and former national security officials. This action, which is part of a broader campaign to wield the levers of government against perceived adversaries, has been justified by the administration as a response to alleged misconduct related to intelligence tradecraft or safeguarding classified information.
The revocation of clearances targeted officials who have served under multiple administrations, including those involved in sensitive assessments like Russian interference in the 2016 election. Some of those who were targeted in the latest action were part of Joe Biden's national security team.
The decision to revoke these clearances has been met with opposition, with critics viewing it as retaliatory and an abuse of authority. Some have suggested that the move potentially violates privacy laws by publicly naming cleared officials without evidence.
Many of the targeted officials only learned of the action from news reports on Tuesday. Some of these individuals reportedly only held their clearances for a short period, while others have been working in the intelligence community for decades. Among the affected officials are those who publicly criticized Trump, such as by supporting his impeachment inquiry.
The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has accused the singled-out individuals of politicization or weaponization of intelligence, failing to safeguard classified information, and failing to adhere to professional analytic tradecraft standards. However, the administration has provided no evidence in the public memo announcing the action to support these claims.
The revocation of clearances risks chilling dissenting voices from an intelligence community accustomed to drawing on a range of viewpoints. This tactic aligns with previous efforts by Trump to use security clearances as a political tool against perceived adversaries, aiming to chill dissent or undermine critics within the intelligence community.
Mark Zaid, a national security lawyer whose clearance was revoked by the Trump administration, called the decision unlawful, unconstitutional, and hypocritical. Zaid, who represented a whistleblower involved in Trump's first impeachment, argued that the administration's actions were designed to silence critics and protect the president from scrutiny.
In addition to the revocation of clearances, the Trump administration is considering declassifying a series of years-old documents meant to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference. This move could bring fresh scrutiny to Obama-era officials and further fuel the ongoing debate over Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Two former government officials who were on the list are pondering whether to take legal action against the administration's decision. As the debate over the revocation of clearances continues, it remains unclear what practical impact this action will have on the intelligence community and the broader political landscape.
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
