Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again, he does not. If you'd bothered to read the thread, you'd see that TexasLawyer even cited a case that the Trump Administration won, in which the court ruled/agreed that there is a specific process to declassifying information and it takes more than the President speaking about it.
You can also look up The Atomic Energy Acts of 1946 and 1954, might want to take a peek at the 1988 Supreme Court case Navy v. Egan, too.
I have not seen this document, care to cite the relevant passage that you think makes your point? I don't feel like ready 45 pages and try to read your mind and figure out which portion you thought was relevant.
From numerous print media Biden categorically denies knowing about the raid in advance. Emails reveal otherwise and will be introduced into court tomorrow morning.
If proved to be true, the Trump team will in the drivers seat. End of story.
From numerous print media Biden categorically denies knowing about the raid in advance. Emails reveal otherwise and will be introduced into court tomorrow morning.
If proved to be true, the Trump team will in the drivers seat. End of story.
Which emails, specifically? Knowing about the investigation and knowing the details of when the search warrant will be executed are two very different things.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
22,977 posts, read 12,099,826 times
Reputation: 10204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
No, the president literally has the authority to declassify anything he wants to.
The thing is, the president has plenary power to declassify whatever he wants to. There is so much we do not know about the particulars about what Trump did, what he took with him.
You and others are essentially saying that when the president decides to declassify a document, that he must get permission form someone first? Which federal statute cites the person or body the president must defer to, in order for him to obtain permission to declassify any document?
In order for our form of government to operate and not become terminally bogged down in bureaucratic red tape, the president was give sole and final authority to do a great many things, one of them being the sole power over classification or declassification of documents.
Even the left's favorite go-to never wrong fact finder, Politifact, backs up what you say.
Quote:
Our ruling
Risch said, "The minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."
We found broad agreement that a president, using powers granted by the Constitution, is able to declassify essentially anything. However, experts added that Risch’s comment was not entirely on point for the particular situation involving Trump.
In this case, it appears Trump didn’t actually use his declassification power before talking to the Russian officials, and just because Trump’s actions were legal doesn’t necessarily mean they were wise. These caveats add nuance to analyses of what Trump did.
The statement is accurate but needs clarification and additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.
And in a previous example I posted, if any president were to reveal classified material live on TV, could he be prosecuted for "never declassified anything" ahead of time?
Our presidents are given a lot of plenary powers to do a great many things. Anyone else doing what they do would be subject to the law, but not a president. In their political animus against Trump, the Biden admin are trying to thread the needle here on presidential powers. First Biden waved Trump's executive privileges, now he is trying to wave Trumps presidential powers and authority to declassify materials, while he was president.
We are heading into a Constitutional crisis here, and the dems, with Biden leading the way here, are the ones trying to blow everything up. All so that they can take political revenge against Trump.
There is no evidence that Trump ever even mentioned to anybody that he was declassifying certain documents.
From numerous print media Biden categorically denies knowing about the raid in advance. Emails reveal otherwise and will be introduced into court tomorrow morning.
If proved to be true, the Trump team will in the drivers seat. End of story.
What do you think it will matter if Biden knew about the search in advance? Even if he did, what’s the difference?
Biden personally no doubt had deep knowledge that this whole issue was unfolding, as well he should as the sitting President faced with literallly unprecedented circumstances. But he very likely did NOT have hands-on involvement in the legal or investigatory details. Both he and Garland (that is, the White House and the DOJ) are treading very carefully. These are serious people who understand the import of what they are doing. Biden has been allowing the DOJ to work unimpeded (unlike some former POTUSes I could name).
There is no way this is a political witch hunt, paranoid ramblings on right wing media to the contrary. There are obviously very big stakes here and only time will tell us the whole story.
With respect to the never-ending declassification debate, again I ask Trump supporters—what does it matter? Let’s say all the documents were appropriately declassified. So what? Why did he have them in his home and refuse to relinquish them when asked again and again?
From numerous print media Biden categorically denies knowing about the raid in advance. Emails reveal otherwise and will be introduced into court tomorrow morning.
If proved to be true, the Trump team will in the drivers seat. End of story.
LOL. And if he did, so what? Do you think that magically negates the fact that Trump stole classified documents? All of this goes just goes away?
I look forward to tomorrow afternoon to see what next fantastical thing you come up with when this has produced exactly nothing.
Kind of a neat concept, if person A lies about their awareness of a raid, it somehow nullifies the crimes committed by person B. What legal principle does that fall under?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
