Joe Biden won’t have final say in revoking Donald Trump's access to intelligence briefings, says White House
The White House has said that President Joe Biden cannot solely decide whether to revoke Donald Trump’s access to intelligence briefings. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed on Saturday, February 6, that Biden won’t have the final say on whether to take away the right of the former President to get classified security briefings. As reported by the Daily Mail, Psaki said, “The president was expressing his concern about former president Trump receiving access to sensitive intelligence, but he also has deep trust in his own intelligence team to make a determination about how to provide intelligence information if at any point the former president Trump requests a briefing.” However, it’s not clear when the decision will be finalized in this case.
The latest statement from the White House came after Biden while speaking with Norah O’Donnell on CBS Evening News on Friday night, February 5, said that the Republican won’t get intelligence briefings because of his “erratic behavior” meaning “he might slip and say something”. He continued, “I would rather not speculate out loud. I just think there is no need for him to have that intelligence briefing?” before adding: “What value is giving him an intelligence briefing? What impact does he have at all, other than he might slip and say something?” Besides, Psaki had also earlier shared that the national security team was reviewing the matter. “This is a good question. It’s something that’s obviously under review,” she stated when a reporter asked whether the current administration would “continue to extend the privilege” of classified information to the former leader.
RELATED ARTICLES
It’s a kind of a tradition in the US that even after leaving the office, the ex-presidents receive routine intelligence briefings and access to classified information, though not at the very highest level as the leader. The step allows the outgoing presidents to continue to support the nation's interests. However, this year several things happened non-traditionally, which included Trump leaving the White House without welcoming Biden and his family. Even after losing the 2020 presidential election, he alleged that voting machines were rigged and that helped the Democrat to win, which resulted in the January 6 riots at the Capitol building that killed five people, including a police officer.
However, just not the riots, but there are more reasons behind taking away Trump's access to intelligence briefings. One of the most controversial is his meeting with Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and then-ambassador to the US Sergei Kislyak in 2017. At the time, it was reported that he disclosed to them the highly classified information about the Islamic State provided by a US ally, reportedly Israel. The 74-year-old had also shared once what seemed to be a classified photo of an Iranian nuclear facility on Twitter and said he had the power to declassify things.
Earlier, in January, former principal deputy director of national intelligence Susan M. Gordon also said that Trump should not be provided with confidential information once he leaves office. Writing an op-ed for the Washington Post, Gordon stated, “He leaves, unlike his predecessors who embraced the muted responsibilities of being a ‘former,’ with a stated agenda to stay engaged in politics and policy. No departing president in the modern era has hinted at or planned on becoming a political actor immediately after leaving office.”
She added: “Trump has significant business entanglements that involve foreign entities. Many of these current business relationships are in parts of the world that are vulnerable to intelligence services from other nation-states. And it is not clear that he understands the tradecraft to which he has been exposed, the reasons the knowledge he has acquired must be protected from disclosure, or the intentions and capabilities of adversaries and competitors who will use any means to advance their interests at the expense of ours.”