This might be a little smarter move, politically â put the focus on the âuntrustworthyâ thing. Of course, coming from a Congressman when Congress has such a dismal record of leaking classified stuff, itâs kind of rich. And it could also be seen as unwarranted and politically motivated.
The more one digs into the email controversy, I suspect, the less sympathetic one would be to Ryanâs move, here. Itâs just too easy for people to remember their own email foibles.
So youâre alright with Donald Trump getting classified briefings but you want to bar Hillary Clinton from getting them. Wow
Nope. Her clearance would have to be revoked and she gets administrative and judicial reviews first. Congress has no control over it. Itâs an Executive decision.
http://fas.org/sgp/clinton/eo12968.html
Sec. 5.2. Review Proceedings for Denials or Revocations of Eligibility for Access.
(a) Applicants and employees who are determined to not meet the standards for access to classified information established in section 3.1 of this order shall be:
(1) provided as comprehensive and detailed a written explanation of the basis for that conclusion as the national security interests of the United States and other applicable law permit;
(2) provided within 30 days, upon request and to the extent the documents would be provided if requested under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) or the Privacy Act (3 U.S.C. 552a), as applicable, any documents, records, and reports upon which a denial or revocation is based;
(3) informed of their right to be represented by counsel or other representative at their own expense; to request any documents, records, and reports as described in section 5.2(a)(2) upon which a denial or revocation is based; and to request the entire investigative file, as permitted by the national security and other applicable law, which, if requested, shall be promptly provided prior to the time set for a written reply;
(4) provided a reasonable opportunity to reply in writing to, and to request a review of, the determination;
(5) provided written notice of and reasons for the results of the review, the identity of the deciding authority, and written notice of the right to appeal;
(6) provided an opportunity to appeal in writing to a high level panel, appointed by the agency head, which shall be comprised of at least three members, two of whom shall be selected from outside the security field. Decisions of the panel shall be in writing, and final except as provided in subsection (b) of this section; and
(7) provided an opportunity to appear personally and to present relevant documents, materials, and information at some point in the process before an adjudicative or other authority, other than the investigating entity, as determined by the agency head. A written summary or recording of such appearance shall be made part of the applicantâs or employeeâs security record, unless such appearance occurs in the presence of the appeals panel described in subsection (a)(6) of this section.
Ryan said he was still looking to see if Congress could do anything to keep Clinton from classified information.
The next journalist to speak with Ryan should read this back to him. Then they should ask Ryan what he proposes should Clinton win the election.Good point - that comparison will inevitably be drawn.
I would also bet that, if they do hold hearings, in public, and Comey has to provide more details, it might really undermine the implication that Clinton was âcarelessâ from a reasonable person point of view.
He says they found classified markings in âa fewâ email chainsâwhich could mean one. How many of us have been added to a long email chain and responded without reading every email buried in the chain?
And he says Clinton âshould have knownâ some of the material would be considered classified (possibly by other agencies). But he doesnât say how she should have known â and if he really felt strongly about it, he would have made the case for culpable negligence, which, of course, he did not do.
Ryan may also be miscalculating, here: âuntrustworthyâ covers a lot of ground, and while some people may see her as a cold, calculating politician who doesnât handle email well, they may still see her as trustworthy when it comes to keeping secrets. After all, if $200 million in investigations couldnât uncover anything, she ought to be pretty good at not disclosing things she shouldnât, no?
He is just making political hay. It is really nice of TPM to spread this.
Talk about grandstanding!!!
Well, I guess Vice-President Ryan has the power to do that. Oh, waitâŚHa, ha, ha! Loser!
Isnât he precious? Bless his little heart.
Oh youâre just flailing now, Paulie. Yes, Iâm sure the Obama administration will get right on that 
Does Clintonâs trustworthiness really matter to the majority of the electorate one way or the other? If you donât want Trump as President youâve already made up your mind to vote for Clinton. There would have to be video of her beheading a small child to flip you to supporting and voting for Trump. Trump voters believe sheâs not trustworthy regardless this e-mail kerfuffle. They wouldnât vote for her if the FBI and Justice published proof she was framed by Shin Bet. I have no polling or proof, but I believe itâs likely more than 90% of the electorate knows right now how theyâre voting, and the rest arenât weighing Trump or Clinton on their merits, theyâre confused about everything in their life, including politics.
Trump is going to spend the next 4 months hoping something truly deplorable emerges about Clinton, more heinous than garden variety political intrigue. Clinton will be content to allow Trump to continually make an ass out of himself, and similarly hope something game changing about her stays hidden.
Perhaps someone should explain to Paulie that the President decides who gets classified briefings and what is contained in those briefings.
He seems to have a lot of trouble understanding the separation of powers doctrine.
Donald is going to change a lot of laws on Day One. Maybe heâll address this.
Did anyone who should not have seen Clintonâs emails, see Clintonâs emails? No.
Did Clinton share anything from her emails with anyone who should not have been given that information? No.
And Trump is a stable guy who should received classified briefings? No.
Her clearance would have to be revoked and she gets administrative and judicial reviews first. Congress has no control over it.
Lord High Marshal Trump will fix that silliness pronto.
Thatâs the money quote.
Keep it classy, you little twerp. You have decided that a rubbermouth that blabs EVERYTHING is more worthy for classified briefings than a woman that NEVER GOT HACKED although she âcould haveâ when the big bad guvmint State Department DID GET HACKEDâŚand WHO LEAKS? What an ahole.
Last I checked, it is not for Ryan to decide. I guess heâll sue the President over this?
BTW, how long after Trump starts getting classified briefings will he broadcast secrets? My guess is about as long as it takes for him to get in front of the first microphone following the briefing.
And the 1st time Trump tweets out something that alludes/relates to a NSA briefing (because he literally can not help himself) this backfires violently.