“Given the constellation of what happened before”–meaning no criminal prosecution of former presidents including Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan and vice presidents–Cannon suggested Trump could have reasonably expected he was in the clear.
Also of interest: Jay Bratt claiming there is no official process for a president to obtain or keep a security clearance. His argument is Trump’s clearance automatically expired at the end of this term–which contradicts how former government officials maintained clearances long after their service ended. Trump’s elimination of John Brennan’s clearance was raised. But there is a problem. The Dept. of Energy, learning of Smith’s indictment against Trump in the summer of 2023, retroactively revoked Trump’s “Q” security clearance. Bratt says the government has emails and a draft memo to revoke Trump’s clearance. Cannon’s counterargument is–but if there is no formal process for authorizing or removing a president’s security clearance–why did DOE need to memorialize it post-indictment. Bratt didn’t really have an answer.
Here's something that makes you go hmmmm: the biggest movie of last year, which just now won Best Picture Oscar and several other prizes, centered around removing someone's Q clearance.
Trump has Q clearance. Emails and a draft memo don’t make it go away and definitely not retroactively.
👍🏻
So a charge brought revokes a clearance regardless of the verdict?
I think it demonstrates that the bureaucrats in the deep state are scrambling like rats on a sinking ship.
retroactively = coverup
u/#sinking
Ex post facto is a no no.
Jack Smith and Mark Zuckerberg in trouble?
u/#q1014
You don't get to cancel the CIC's clearance, and thinking you can just might end up with charges of treason and/or sedition.
Can we add this to the list of proofs?
Here's something that makes you go hmmmm: the biggest movie of last year, which just now won Best Picture Oscar and several other prizes, centered around removing someone's Q clearance.