"Eagle USA" is another of those "2004" signups who is likely a Democrat troll.
-----
Nice try Spur but far from it. When it comes to a little objectivity, you lose. The only point being made here is that there is no evidence that a declassification process was conducted, which by the way to serve your ignorance, is required to declassify documents and information, was conducted prior to release of information. There is a process that can take various paths depending on who the declassifying requestor is and the nature of the information.
So take your mindless criticism and name calling somewhere else. The question I asked was a fair question -- which Bush Bots do not want to hear an answer to. And the LAST thing I am is a Dem troll -- just someone looking for a fair answer to fair question.
And the LAST thing I am is a Dem troll Upon reviewing your posting history, I simply do not believe you.
What's more, you're dumb. How many times do you have to be told that the President can declassify any document he chooses whenever he chooses just by releasing the document?
There is no "declassification process" when the President chooses to declassify. It just happens.
And exactly WHO requires the declassification process????
The Commander in Chief.
This is a good explanation of this.
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/62024.htm
DUBYA CAN'T LEAK
Email Archives
Print Reprint
Feeds Newsletters
April 7, 2006 -- AND INFO WAS ALREADY PUBLIC
IT'S amazing how the common topics and subjects of discussion three years ago should vanish so quickly from memory.
Yesterday, breathless news reports suggested that President Bush had directed the "leak" of classified information in July 2003. Yet the "leak" in question was from a document called the National Intelligence Estimate, or NIE - and by the time this "leak" occurred, the contents of the NIE as they related to Iraq were almost entirely public.
On Oct. 7, 2002, nine months before Bush's supposed "leak," the administration released an unclassified version of the very same NIE at the urging of Senate Democrats. And in early 2003, reporters hostile to the administration (primarily John Judis and Spencer Ackerman of The New Republic) were being told all sorts of things about the still-classified portions of the NIE.
And this "leak" wasn't a leak in any case. A "leak" is the unauthorized release of government information. The leak of classified information is a crime. But according to Scooter Libby, the former chief of staff to the vice president who gave the information from the NIE to a reporter, he only released it because he was authorized to do so by the president himself.
Constitutionally, the authority to declare documents "classified" resides with the president. So, under the terms of an executive order first drafted in 1982, he can declassify a document merely by declaring it unclassified.
The language of the executive order reads as follows: "Information shall be declassified or downgraded by the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position . . . [or] a supervisory official." In the executive branch, the president is the ultimate "supervisory official."
We have found out about the president's decision to declassify information from the 2002 NIE because the special prosecutor who has charged Libby with perjury and obstruction of justice revealed elements of Libby's grand-jury testimony in new court papers.