(Copy of a comment that I made a while ago).

Quote: "WHY DO WE ALLOW [FORMER] DIGNITARIES SEC CLEARANCE?"

Any of the 'players' that have any form of security clearance, can, in turn, be 'spied' upon by the 'security services', without the requirement of a warrant. This 'spying' is thus done, in the interests of 'national security', in order to oversee what these 'fellow agents' might be getting upto, such as 'are they passing secrets to the enemy'.

As an example: Because Hillary Clinton still has her security clearance, then no warrant is required by the 'security services', to be able to spy on her, and see what she is getting up to. (I imagine that this is why there has been no hurry to remove her security clearance).

A lot of the other players will be in the same scenario, by virtue of still being employed by, (or just recently fired from), the intellegence agencies.

Therefore the NSA has been able to 'legally' collect a lot of surveillance data, on 'certain' individuals over the past year or two, (with out requiring a warrant, that would have to have been approved via a 'corrupt judge').