Gabbard’s Move Slashes Clout – Biden, Harris, Clinton, Cheney, more, affected.

3 CommentsWhite House

Tulsi Gabbard, as Director of National Intelligence, has revoked the security clearances and access to classified information for former President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, former White House Russia expert Fiona Hill, and retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. This action, announced on March 28, 2025, was carried out under a directive from President Donald Trump, reflecting a broader move to strip clearances from several of his political adversaries.

What Does This Mean?

Revoking security clearances means these individuals no longer have authorized access to classified information, which includes sensitive national security data typically restricted to those with a “need to know” as determined by government policy. For former officials, retaining clearances post-tenure is common, especially for high-ranking figures like presidents, vice presidents, or secretaries of state, to facilitate consultation on past policies or ongoing national security matters. Losing this access isolates them from such information, potentially limiting their ability to engage in informed public discourse, advise current officials, or leverage classified knowledge in legal or political contexts.

This move is largely symbolic for many on the list, however, it carries political weight, signaling retribution against Trump’s critics—many of whom, like Cheney, Kinzinger, Hill, and Vindman, played roles in his impeachment proceedings or opposed him publicly. For Biden, it mirrors a tit-for-tat action after he revoked Trump’s access to intelligence briefings in 2021. Practically, it ensures these individuals cannot access materials like the President’s Daily Brief (PDB) or other classified briefings unless explicitly reauthorized.

What Information Were They Receiving?

The specific information these individuals had access to depends on their past roles and whether they retained clearance post-tenure. Typically, former presidents and senior officials may receive courtesy briefings, such as the PDB—a daily summary of high-level intelligence on global threats—or ad hoc updates on issues tied to their expertise.

It’s a potential wrecking ball to post-office gigs. High-profile ex-officials often parlay clearances into lucrative board seats or consulting roles with defense contractors, think tanks, or corporations like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, or Booz Allen Hamilton. These outfits value clearance-holders because they can access sensitive info, offer strategic insights, or navigate government contracts. No clearance? No seat at that table.

Real Examples of Classified Information They Might Have Accessed:

  1. Joe Biden: As a former president, Biden likely had access to the PDB during and potentially after his term, unless explicitly cut off earlier. For example, during his presidency, the PDB included updates on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, such as troop movements or cyber threats, based on historical leaks like those from 2022 showing detailed U.S. intelligence assessments. Post-tenure, he might have received similar briefings if consulted on foreign policy continuity.
  2. Kamala Harris: As vice president until January 2025, Harris received the PDB alongside Biden, covering issues like Iran’s nuclear activities or China’s military maneuvers in the Indo-Pacific. Post-tenure access would depend on informal arrangements, though no specific examples post-January 2025 are public.
  3. Hillary Clinton: As former Secretary of State (2009–2013), Clinton’s clearance likely persisted for consulting purposes. Historical examples include her handling of classified emails on Benghazi or diplomatic cables, as revealed in the 2016 FBI investigation. Post-tenure, she might have accessed briefings on Middle East stability if requested, though no recent specifics are documented.
  4. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger: As former House members on the January 6 Committee, they accessed classified FBI reports and intelligence on the Capitol riot, such as threat assessments from 2021. Post-Congress, their clearances might have allowed limited briefings on domestic extremism, though this is speculative without current evidence.
  5. Fiona Hill: A former National Security Council official, Hill testified in 2019 about Trump’s Ukraine dealings, drawing on classified briefings about Russian influence. Post-tenure, she might have accessed updates on Eastern European security if her clearance remained active.
  6. Alexander Vindman: As an NSC official in 2019, Vindman handled classified calls, like Trump’s July 25, 2019, Ukraine call transcript, later declassified in part. After retiring, any access would likely relate to Ukraine-Russia dynamics if he retained clearance.

These examples are rooted in their documented roles, but post-tenure access isn’t publicly detailed beyond clearance status. The revocation, reported by Fox News on March 28, 2025, and confirmed by Gabbard on X, ensures they can no longer request or receive such information, aligning with Trump’s stated intent to limit his rivals’ influence.

For Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Fiona Hill, and Alexander Vindman, the revocation of their clearances doesn’t just cut them off from classified briefings. It’s a potential wrecking ball to their post-office gigs. High-profile ex-officials often parlay clearances into lucrative board seats or consulting roles with defense contractors, think tanks, or corporations like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, or Booz Allen Hamilton. These outfits value clearance-holders because they can access sensitive info, offer strategic insights, or navigate government contracts. No clearance? No seat at that table.

Biden, with his $400,000 pension secure, still leans on his elder-statesman aura for influence; losing clearance dims that shine, potentially shrinking his advisory pull with private entities or foreign leaders. Harris, freshly out of the VP slot, might eye corporate boards—her clearance was a golden ticket to roles needing classified insight. Now, she’s sidelined.

Cheney and Kinzinger, post-Congress, could’ve angled for defense or security consulting, leveraging their January 6 Committee creds. Clearances kept them in the game; without them, they’re less marketable. Hill and Vindman, national security pros, built careers on expertise tied to classified access—think tanks like Brookings or private firms pay top dollar for that (Vindman’s book deal aside, consulting’s his lane). No clearance, and their stock drops hard.

This isn’t “just a gesture.” Boards and firms don’t mess around—clearance is often a hard requirement, not a perk. A 2023 study from the Center for Strategic and International Studies noted ex-officials with active clearances snag 30-40% higher compensation in private-sector roles tied to defense or intelligence. Trump’s move, via Gabbard, kneecaps their earning power and clout. It’s real, and it stings.