Biden considers revoking Donald Trump's right to national security briefings

[thekev]

Former presidents - if consulted by a serving president - can bring a lot of experience, (not just of being in office, but the fact that they can remember what it feels like), knowledge, objectivity (they are less likely to be swayed by party considerations and much more likely to consider the national interest) and support, to the act of giving, or tendering advice, and can be a very valuable resource to a serving president.

Current presidents have their own set of advisors, including department heads and various cabinet members. Selective sharing of information with former presidents that the current one may wish to confer with can also be established, but it goes against common security practices in other areas to treat sharing of information as the default behavior. Also in Trump's case, I'm surprised it was a mere consideration rather than an immediate action.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Current presidents have their own set of advisors, including department heads and various cabinet members. Selective sharing of information with former presidents that the current one may wish to confer with can also be established, but it goes against common security practices in other areas to treat sharing of information as the default behavior. Also in Trump's case, I'm surprised it was a mere consideration rather than an immediate action.

Sure, they have current advisers, - very bright and well-qualified - but sometimes, a wise old (and experienced) owl - one no longer constrained by the need to appear to adhere to party lines, someone who has lived with that job and knows, first-hand, what it is like - can see things - and counsel accordingly - that bright youngsters will never be able to spot.

In the case of Mr Trump, no argument.

Not only should he be deprived of all access to sensitive briefings, in my opinion, he should be behind bars.

 

[thekev]

Sure, they have current advisers, - very bright and well-qualified - but sometimes, a wise old (and experienced) owl - one no longer constrained by the need to appear to adhere to party lines, someone who has lived with that job and knows, first-hand, what it is like - can see things - and counsel accordingly - that bright youngsters will never be able to spot.

As I mentioned, I don't have a problem with that practice. My comment was that I don't view continued briefings without reason to be a good default practice. I see no problem with selectively authorizing for ex-presidents that the current potus may wish to confer with, regardless of political party.

If you're referring to my earlier comment that it's fine if the next guy does the same to Biden, the underlying point there is that such a change in convention could be seen as partisan, but it doesn't actually need to be performed with malicious intent. This is actually a good time to consider such practices, because Trump is likely to be a bigger security than others who have occupied that role.

In the case of Mr Trump, no argument.

Not only should he be deprived of all access to sensitive briefings, in my opinion, he should be behind bars.

I have been wondering whether Leticia James will go after Trump.

 

[Yoused]

My understanding is that Joe the President has taken a non-position on this issue. ShitGibbon does not receive PDBs to begin with, as a matter of course: he must request them, which seems improbable (one would have to assume that such a request would originate from Jarvanka or some other ally). Joe has punted the question to his NSA, letting the intel community decide whether to fulfill the request. Which sounds entirely fair. If the request does not say "no words over 2 syllables, plus lotsa pics, only the best pics, and bigly blank pages for drawing stuff” it would sound like the info is meant for Sweet Vlad.

 

[Clix Pix]

According to The Washington Post:

"The White House on Saturday said President Biden’s statement that his predecessor should not receive intelligence briefings did not represent a final decision on the matter, which will instead be resolved by intelligence officials.

Biden made his views known during an appearance on “CBS Evening News” with Norah O’Donnell. Asked whether former president Donald Trump should receive the briefings, as is customary for ex-presidents, Biden said, “I think not.”
“What value is giving him an intelligence briefing?” Biden said in a portion of the interview aired Friday. “What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?”
Biden has the unilateral authority to deny intelligence access to anyone he chooses, and his remarks seemed to suggest he considered Trump enough of a risk to do so. But his aides said he would leave that decision to his intelligence team."

 

[Alli]

Biden has the unilateral authority to deny intelligence access to anyone he chooses, and his remarks seemed to suggest he considered Trump enough of a risk to do so. But his aides said he would leave that decision to his intelligence team."

Imagine having a president who does not make uninformed unilateral decisions and consults with his experts.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Imagine having a president who does not make uninformed unilateral decisions and consults with his experts.

Not only that, but a president who acknowledges their expertise, and allows his experts to show their mastery of their material and to speak freely, rather than demand that they hone and refine their skills in sycophancy.