Should DJT Receive Intelligence Briefings?

Biden Press Sec'y. Says Administration 'Reviewing' DJT Getting Further Briefings

Sen. Adam Schiff of CA famously said on CBS Face the Nation January 17, 2021 that, "There's no circumstance in which this president should get another intelligence briefing, not now, not in the future. I don't think he can be trusted with it now, and in the future he certainly can't be trusted."

Today, Jen Psaki said that question, “Is something that is under review,” by the Biden Administration.

Providing former presidents with intelligence briefings after they have left office is common courtesy traditionally extended to them. Trump's record as a trustworthy occupant of the WH is blackened by his secret phone calls, his capitulations to Putin, his attempts to blackmail foreign leaders; and his own high sucsceptability to same. Finally, even the Russians announced last week that Trump has been a 40-year "asset" they've cultivated and reaped the rewards for their efforts during his administration.

The Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee says, "Basta!" I don't imagine the current bosses of the intelligence agencies will give the thumbs up. I don't see that courtesy being extended to a man facing his second impeachment for inciting an attempted coup.

Besides, by his own admission, he didn't read intelligence briefings when in office, anyway.

What do you think -- should he or shouldn't he?

He should not. One less revenue stream.

Why the hell would J. Random Citizen be getting intelligence briefings?

I've never been too keen on the idea of any president getting intelligence briefings once they leave office, other than information that would directly affect them.

I remember that story of when Reagan was elected and, at the same time, Iran was freeing the hostages as a good-will gesture. Apparently right after the inauguration Carter called the situation room to find out if it was true, and it being slightly after noon, they told him they could not tell him anything.

So, yes, it doesn't make sense to me.

Bet the review of whether to brief Trump will be as lengthy as the audit of Trump's tax returns--and likewise result in no documents released. Besides Trump and the scurrilous people he meets can be expected to appear from time to time in the intelligence briefings?

>6 margd: "Say Mr. Predecessor, your name keeps coming up repeatedly as a good person to bribe--can you explain that to us, please?".

I would not allow him briefings but really I don't see it becoming much of an issue. I think most of us are aware that Donald's intellectual curiosity hovers somewhere around 0--his ability to comprehend what he hears for what it really is is pretty much nil as well--that he doesn't like to read and has no real attention span for anything that he can't gain some personal benefit from. He doesn't really care and never has.

>8 lriley: Unless it can be monetized. Don’t forget, he has henchmen to do the real reading.

#9--not sure that he could bring surrogates with him for these briefings. They'd have to have security clearances anyway.

Maybe give Trump fake reports with phony data. Like x number of secret agents in y country have died of COVID-19. Trump would sell it to Putin, Putin would discover the truth, and become mad at Trump. And if Putin’s mad at you, you might want to think twice about changing your underwear.

From what I understand, these briefings are handy if a current president wants advice from a predecessor. I can't see Biden wanting any advice from Trump except maybe which McDonald's delivers.
So, no, I don't think Trump should get security briefings.

Trump should get all the intelligence briefings his heart desires from the US Department of Agriculture.

>13 davidgn: The department he kicked out of Washington? I think he should get briefings about the pandemic.

>14 mamzel: As long as they're from Fauci.

DJT seldom showed any interest in them when he occupied the Oval Office. Why continue the charade?

The answer is simple.

It goes against logic that the president who leads the party that has impeached DJT for what boils down to treason -- inciting a riot against another branch of government in order to stay in power -- should be extended a single courtesy by the Biden Administration.

Of any kind.

#17--the best answer here. He should lose whatever benefit from his 4 years just on the harm he's done to this country trying to overturn an election.

Should Sleepy Joe get intelligence briefings? Even if you think he's technically President, he's still a senile, disloyal loon. Sounds like a needless risk.

I smell Trumpty-Dumbpty tears over the Inter Tubes.

If Sleepy Joe is senile, an impossible conclusion to arrive att simply by examining the work and clear headed decisions and policies made in the last two weeks since the inauguration, I'd say >19 Kuiperdolin: may wish to be that senile. Immediately.
_______________________________________
Meanwhile, in the reality based community, the expressed orientation of Biden's Chief of Staff to the question of Trump having intelligence briefings is most sensible.

Ron Klain said, "We'll certainly look for a recommendation from the intelligence professionals in the Biden-Harris administration once they're in place and act on that recommendation."

Trump's former deputy director of national intelligence Sue Gordon wrote in an op-ed published in The Washington Post. . .that Trump "might be unusually vulnerable to bad actors with ill intent" once he is no longer President."

Having heard from the left and right of American politics, what about the Independents?

Sen. Angus King (ME-I), a. . .member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said. . .that Biden should cut Trump off from briefings. "There's a grave danger of him inadvertently or willfully revealing classified information that would compromise sources and methods. . .There is no upside, there is no reason that he needs to have this information. It's a courtesy that's been passed on from president to president, but there is no legal requirement and I think given his past history of being fast and loose with intelligence data, it ought to be -- that ought to be an easy decision for the incoming President."

Couldn't agree more.

I don't know how long it's going to last but so far Biden really hasn't done anything egregiously bad. As a matter of fact I think his presidency is off to a much better start than Obama's. I like the focus being kept on the crisis' facing this country--namely Covid first and stimulating the economy after. He's not gotten bogged down by demonizing the opposition. They're welcome to be part of the solution but if not and the same can be accomplished without opposition help that works too. The focus is on the things that matter most.

There are of course areas that I disagree with Biden/Harris greatly. M4A for one. People who call them left or Socialist are really out to lunch. Still it doesn't mean that we're not a lot better off than we were a month or so ago.

I, for one, think that the predecessor could benefit immeasurably from intelligence briefings. He's never going to become a Rhodes scholar, but I do believe that it would help to give him some civics lessons, since he apparently never got any in school.

>22 MsMixte: He can start with picture books for civics lesson. Those appear best suited for his reading comprehension ability and would give him the basics he should have known decades before becoming POTUS.

In response to the topic's question: Absolutely not.

>19 Kuiperdolin: I don't think that someone who believes that Donald Trump wrote a book should be casting stones about anyone else's cognitive capacities.

Trump Doesn't Ask for Intelligence Briefings

Nice to know that Trump's interest in getting more intelligent hasn't changed. He's still opposed.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said on Monday she was not aware of any request from Donald Trump for an intelligence breifing, but reaffirmed that President Joe Biden would allow intelligence officials to make the decision on whether to grant access to them for the former Republican President. Reuters

Nice to know that Trump's access has become an "as needed, when needed, if we say so" basis for deciding whether he gets access to our national security secrets. I doubt intelligence officials need additional practice in saying, "No," to unsolicited requests for their info. And I'm willing to bet Trump won't wear them out for such a response, either. It's a foregone conclusion.

Beer & Peanuts and State Secrets? The Trump-Putin Bromance

Trump translator says listening to calls with Putin 'felt like eavesdropping on two friends chatting in a bar.'

The Russian translator who was the only American to hear several secret conversations between President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin. . .reveal(ed) one disturbing fact about their relationship.
(SNIP)
"Marina Gross," Politico says, "who interpreted many of Trump's calls and meetings with Putin, told associates that listening to their conversations often felt like eavesdropping on two friends chatting in a bar, according to one former official."
(SNIP)
Hardly how the leader of the free world would be expected to deal with the head of the regime some have called a state sponsor of terrorism.

Does any person in their right mind believe a former president who is friends with this man should have access to the intelligence briefings that reflect the policies of his hated rival who unseated him as president?

Putin attacked America in the years leading up to the 2016 presidential election, helped Trump win the White House, and has benefited from his mysterious relationship with the billionaire real-estate mogul turned disgraced and twice-impeached president. Russia has since attacked the U.S., including with its cash-for killing U.S. soldiers bounty program, and its continued attacks on American elections.

Russia is considered America's enemy by most national security experts, but Trump never treated it as an enemy.

And if I correctly interpret the interpreter's remark, Trump never treated Putin as anything but a buddy with whom to share a bowl of peanuts. And possibly state secrets, too.

"Possibly"? We know he shared state secrets with the Russians, this was done in public

No. I don't understand why any former President would receive intelligence briefings, anyway. If they're called in for consultation, yes (not that I think that any President would ask DJT for the time of day, let alone anything requiring a briefing). But in general, they're 'retired' from the job, and shouldn't want such briefings.

>20 Limelite: every time I read one of your posts I wish to be senile enough to forget it.

>28 BruceCoulson: I expect it was a courtesy that was extended back in the good old days when we could assume that someone elected to the presidency would be of sound mind and loyal to this country. Obviously, this was a bit of wishful thinking given that Ronald Reagan was a traitor who sold out the Iran hostages in order to win the 1980 election and was hopelessly lost to Alzheimers in his second term (if not before)... but "if it prosper, none dare call it treason" (or dementia).

>29 Kuiperdolin:

Don't worry, we believe you're already "safe" from the truth.