Oh, this is getting good. Sooner or later you knew they were going to start turning on one another. It happened over the weekend when former Director of National Intelligence (a position for which brains might be required) James Clapper took former CIA Director John Brennan to task for speaking his mind and drawing attention to himself and what he might know about all the Russia Russia Russia stuff.
“John and his rhetoric have become an issue in and of itself,” Clapper said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “John is subtle like a freight train and he’s gonna say what’s on his mind.”
Clapper said he empathized with Brennan, but voiced concerns for Brennan’s fiery rhetoric toward Trump and his administration.
“I think that the common denominator among all of us [in the intelligence community] that have been speaking up … is genuine concern about the jeopardy and threats to our institutions,” Clapper said.
Can’t go around trumpeting the fact that they all might know something that the rest of us don’t, now can we. It might draw the public’s attention to that fact, and then lived in the shadows would get awfully bright.
Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Senator Richard Burr took the criticism a step farther.
“If his statement is based on intelligence he has seen since leaving office, it constitutes an intelligence breach. If he has some other personal knowledge of or evidence of collusion, it should be disclosed to the special counsel, not The New York Times,” Burr said.
Burr added that Trump has the “full authority” to rescind security clearance if the statements were “purely political and based on conjecture.”
Which begs the question, why did President Trump revoke Brennan’s security clearance at that time? With all the programming backdoors and other ways of getting information, what was Brennan up to? And why choose the New York Times to publish information?
With all luck, these questions will be answered in due time. For now, pass the guacamole.