Posted on 08/12/2022 4:33:46 PM PDT by ConservativeInPA
One of the members of Congress who commented after the newspaper’s revelations was Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho. According to CNN, he told reporters, "The minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."
The majority ruling in the 1988 Supreme Court case Department of Navy vs. Egan -- which addressed the legal recourse of a Navy employee who had been denied a security clearance -- addresses this line of authority.
"The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’" according to Article II of the Constitution, the court’s majority wrote. "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."
(Excerpt) Read more at politifact.com ...
I never knew where the term DS came from or what it really meant anyway.
No, not everyone who disagrees with you or Trump is a “DS”.
You will lose if you have to contest with me on conservative principles.
So cut the childish accusations.
Ever worked in classified? Ever hear of a president being able to fire off weapons unilaterally on his own with no consult and agreement and someone to actually follow through?
I am not saying I understand all the nuances. It could officially be perfectly fine for him to have a box of classified, all by himself, declare it unclassified, and walk away with it without anyone being aware of any of that happening.
I am saying be very careful what you approve of. Never mind whether it is correct or not.
He can and there will be push back. Some on somewhat legitimate concerns like “sources and methods” issues etc. could be argued to not do it, slow it down until “sources and methods” issues are mitigated. However, legally he has the final say. If the Prez is willing to take the risk & “political heat” it can be done quickly. It still has to be documented etc. That’s where recalcitrant bureaucrat could screw the President. For example, if he just says it and its not documented how does he prove he did it?
If Trump declassified something while he was president, and then Biden gets in the office and classifies the same thing again, it is classified. The fact that it was declassified for sometime becomes ineffective.
**********
Think about what you are saying. Once a document is de-classified, it’s into the public domain, where it can be distributed to anyone. So how can a re-classification allow the government to restrict free speech by demanding that every web site, every email, etc., delete any mention of it?
Gen. Michael Flynn
George Papadopoulos
Dinesh D'Souza
Tom Delay
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison,
Texas state Rep. Mike Martin
Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox
Gov. Rick Perry
Senator Ted Stevens (Alaska),
Scooter Libby
Rep. Duncan Hunter (CA)
Rep. Rick Renzl (AZ)
Some of those on the list plead guilty to the charges against them. They did so as the best option to reducing the time they would spend in jail or other factors. Truth is, many of those on the list would never have been charged if they were Democrats.
Feel free to add those whom I missed to the list.
I’m not aware a former president can possess classified.
Need to know.
Any more than I could take home classified things I had possessed but am no longer employed.
Good point. That is my question. Everyone here seems to think he can just declare all by himself without it being “documented” which means verified by at least one other person.
If he turned around and took the docs while he was all alone, that isn’t documented.
Make the DMV Appalachia! Make America Great Again.
BEARS REPEATING! ALSO, they have SCIF's within their homes and their homes have extraordinary security.
A former United States President is no ORDINARY civilian. He is PERMANENTLY entrusted and TRUSTED to protect America's best interests, but the Marxists in charge have NO RESPECT for the office of the Presidency, otherwise they'd NEVER EVEN CONSIDER RAIDING A FORMER PRESIDENT'S HOME.
What Merrick Garbage and his Sting Wray did is FAR WORSE than anything Trump could've EVER done because they are acting in a HIGHLY UNETHICAL and INSURGENT manner. You can bet the FARM Biden KNEW about this, 100%, and IF THEY DIDN'T consult with POTUS on this THEY SHOULD BOTH BE PROSECUTED for endangering national security.
The FBI raiding a former president's home and taking whatever they want SHOULD be a crime. PERIOD.
The supreme court had already ruled on it. Presidents can declassify anything they want
Yes.
Over the past two days, I've listenined to #NeverTrumpers Rich Lowry's National Review podcast and John Podhoretz' Commentary podcast while driving home to and from work and even these folks and their fellow podcast hosts, concede that there are no set-in-stone procedures for how a president must declassify documents and that in doing so would make the president answerable to a higher authority in regards to declassifying documents.
The president can, quite simply, wave a wand.
These powers are not dependent upon some underling, some office drone, going through the legwork of replacing classification labels. If it were, then the president would be beholden to these individuals, hamstrung waiting for them to perform their jobs. This is absurd.
Now, if it is decided that this power needs to be restrained and allowed only after certain procedures are followed, this would require congress to pass a law.
Congress has not passed such a law.
All the hosts pretty much conceded that if President Trump said he declassified all of those documents, then he did exactly that.
When you've got Rich Lowry, Erick Erickson, and John Podhoretz claiming that Trump didn't do anything wrong, that this was a fishing expedition, vociferously defending him, and lamenting that the idiots in Biden's Justice Dept. are going to get him re-elected, it's not hard at all to think that the the MAL raid was entirely out of bounds and Trump is procedurally innocent of any wrongdoing.
And these folks ARE NOT fans of President Trump.
Sorry doesn’t work that way. To declassify a document, the document itself needs to be remarked. If Trump is in possession of a properly remarked (declassified) document, Biden can’t just waive his hand and change that classification.
THE DOCUMENT ITSELF needs remarked. Now if Crappy Pants’ FBI Goons remarked the documents after the raid that’s Illegal.
Legally a President doesn't have to prove anything. Or a former President. If he says he declassified something then it's declassified.
In this case though Kash Patel has stated that he witnessed Trump declassifying the documents Trump was taking with him.
Documents at Mar-a-Lago Marked ‘Classified’ Were Already Declassified, Kash Patel Says
I doubt if he personally physically handled anything. He didn’t call up Van Lines or hire a U-Haul. I am sure some flavor of Feds did the sorting and packing. Signed out that they did it and supposedly did it right. The onus is on whoever was in charge of the “move”.
Where in the Constitution is documentation required?
It isn't.
And that's all President Trump has to say.
As I posted above, if congress wants to pass a law and have President Biden sign it that draws out procedures for the execution of executive authority in regards to declassifying documents, then they are free to do so.
As of the raid on MAL, they have not done anything such.
Exactly right in everything you’ve said.
What Garland and Wray have done is one of the worst breaches of public trust in the history of the country. It is absolutely an insurrection.
A President would have possession of such documents only if he had a need to know in the first place.
Then later how is it proven it was done?
In this case he has a witness. Better than nothing! However, the witness is a Trump man so not a disinterested party. He could be challenged in court. We don’t want this to go to court!
I hope there was a process behind him that recorded and documented it!
Wouldn't that really require a revision of the Constitution? After all, the SCOTUS ruling on this was on the meaning of the Constitution itself not on statutes or acts passed by Congress and how they might fit the Constitution.
Their decision flatly states that Congress has no authority to intervene on the matter.
Actually, if Congress passed such a law I think the current Supreme Court would find it unconstitutional. That’s the entire point of the court ruling cited in the article. The logic is simple. The US Constitution provides the powers of the chief executive and command in chief. Given the separation of powers, the legislature cannot change the constitution. Likewise, a president cannot either. It requires a constitutional amendment.
You are straight out of Libtard Land.
Compare yourself to the presidency often?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.