No. This is the kind of decision that if Obama had used against a Bush senior official would have produced essentially the exact same rhetoric from the exact same people, simply reversed. The bulk of people condemning Trump would be explaining how the Republicans simply want to see Obama fail, and that a security clearance cannot be used as a sword against the administration that grants it. And the same people now defending Trump would be apoplectic at the politicalization of clearances by Obama.
Either case can be passionately defended. The key is: do you consistently apply a single view, or does your answer change based on the occupant of the Oval Office?
So that’s why I ask about the law. The delivery that dispassionate result. The same action is either legal or illegal, regardless of which President takes it.