Talkin' in circles. "Declassified vs. Classified information."

For those who aren't able to watch the press briefing this morning, here's a summary.

McClellan says that the president was right to say that anyone who leaks information will be dealt with severely. There's no hypocrisy in what he said, no deception, because===GET THIS:

The constitution gives the president the inherent ability to declassify information. If the president releases information, he has thusly declassified it and is not guilty of leaking classified information. "There is a difference in providing declassified information when it's in the nation's interest and leaking classified information." He is asserting that the president authorizing the disclosure to the press of Plame's identity was in the nation's interest???

Ok, let's take it one step further: according to McClellan, the only people who are saying that the president leaked classified information are the Democrats who are trying to make something dirty out of this.

He actually had the audacity to talk about "lumping things together" and "ethics classes."

So, in a nutshell, the president can leak DECLASSIFIED INFO, which before he leaked it might have been CLASSIFIED INFO, because the constitution gives him the right to do so.


DUers, chime in. Have I left anything out?

who can't. Frankly, I'm surprised that Scotty just didn't say Bush has presidential infallibility and therefore can do whatever he wants.

See my post here on executive order 12958 (later amended by Mr. Bush).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2557135&mesg_id=2557135

For the pertinent EO text go here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030325-11.html

And Please K&R my request for DU legal analysis independent of the Vile Media's Gang of Experts.

Knew "inherent power" would come into play (but then it was a no-brainer since it's their excuse for everything)

in order to leak it to the press ??? What was the intention?

He wasn't smearing anyone.. was he?
Or outing and endangering the life of a covert agent... was he?

Why did the President leak?

have been asked by members of the press...but Scott said that he won't comment on an ongoing investigation.

Despicable. Utterly and completely despicable.

Is that the argument?

This is beginning to smell a lot like the "divine right" of kings.

(... leaving now to find my pitchfork and torch ...)

And "divine right" is an appropriate comparision.

But to do that there has to exist an official 'declassification guide' document which will have a date on it which will establish exactly when and by whom the NIE was declassified. Either the guide exists or it doesn't, and if it exists then either it was issued before or after the leak. These are simple facts that can readily be established.

I haven't been able to sit down and learn much more since hearing about all of this yesterday.

I keep asking myself, "How much longer is this going to take?"

The claim has been made that the declassification guide was issued (actually the specific claim has been made that the NIE was 'formally declassified', as if there was some legitimate way to 'informally declassify', an informal declassification is a felony,) on July 18, 2003 which was weeks after the initial leak.

The law has been broken again. And once again I suspect that our Democratic Leaders are going to grasp at the 'informal declassification' straw offered them to avoid a crisis. Fitzgerald, on the other hand appears to have a pretty good case of a high level conspiracy directed from the office of and with the knowledge of the president to discredit Wilson, part of which conspiracy included the outing of covert agent Plame, and which included a serious of false statements to investigators by all involved. Democratic Leadership will take a pass, as evidenced by Biden's behavior last night on the Bill Mahr show, (he had nothing to say about the leaker in chief and did not comment on Simmon's bullshit) but Fitzgerald is going to bring this whole thing down.

The crisis is coming despite our chicken shit leadership.

Just my opinion.

What I don't understand is why our Democratic leadership is so intent on "avoiding a crisis" as you put it. I just don't understand what they're hanging on to. As far as I can see, there's nothing to lose and everything to be gained by stepping up to the plate and doing the right thing. Are they afraid of their own skeletons, are they afraid of the exposure of their own ethical lapses? Why the delay in governing responsibly? Is it because of our minority status? Is action going to have to wait until after the elections?

Sorry. I tend to rattle out lots of questions when I'm drinking coffee. That's really all just one big question with lots of intervening question marks.

Thank you.

(Inflation adjusted of course.) I don't have an answer, and their lack of courage here is driving me and you and almost all of us to distraction.

Can't turn it off though I might miss something. but

classified information... because if HE says it, it is, ipso facto declassified. Is this the kind of world we live in now?

And the press ain't buyin it--nor will the majority of Americans.

ANY freakin thing he wants Cause he's king which was announced in the Patriot Act because we are a Nation at war...

If they use that argument just like Gonzales uses that line when Bush can violate the law to wiretap

That means we Declared Bush king in the year 2001

He can do now wrong cause he is king...


This is really stupid ... and Bush will only be able to get away with this defense until Congress turns democratic...

did you know the magna carta did a "tour" of the united states several years ago and no one knew about it? i doubt this would have happened during clinton...

It makes a couple of very important points.
Ignoring all the religious speak (it was probably written by an Abbot and was addressed to the Pope, so you have to make allowances . . .) --
----------------------------------------------------
"But from these countless evils we have been set free, by the help of Him Who though He afflicts yet heals and restores, by our most tireless Prince, King and Lord, the Lord Robert. He, that his people and his heritage might be delivered out of the hands of our enemies, met toil and fatigue, hunger and peril, like another Macabaeus or Joshua and bore them cheerfully. Him, too, divine providence, his right of succession according to or laws and customs which we shall maintain to the death, and the due consent and assent of us all have made our Prince and King. To him, as to the man by whom salvation has been wrought unto our people, we are bound both by law and by his merits that our freedom may be still maintained, and by him, come what may, we mean to stand. Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself."

-- excerpted from the Declaration of Arbroath, 1320

i`m bookmarking to research later thanks

it doesn't even explicitly indicate that the entire concept of classified information is permissible. so arguing that the constitution lets him DEclassify information without any paperwork is ridiculous.

the constitution also does NOT say anything about the president being exempt from the laws of the land, such as the laws on revealing classified information.

The president only has the powers granted to him explicitly by the Constitution.


Congress has enacted laws (Only congress can enact laws) dealing with classified information. Some of those laws delegate power to the president as to how information can be declassified. Some of them specifically spells out what can and cannot be classified.


The presidents order (posted somewhere else here on DU) specifically spells out the procedure for declassification. (Declassification Guide). So, when Scotty says that when the President says something is declassified, then it is de facto declassified, he is lying. And I am really pissed, that I, sitting in Florida, know this, but paid professional journalist does not (or at least don't call him on it).

The President has to follow procedures, even his own. Otherwise, we are a country of men, and not of laws.


The other thing that pissed me off about the press briefing is, that the NIE clearly stated that the Aluminum tubes, could not be used for nuclear weapon production. Rice, told congress, she never heard such a thing. Again, I know this, but not the professional journalists?

Absurd.

Mr. Bush can produce the Declassification Guide for the NIE anytime he wants, and that will clear up this matter.

would know more and not be near as dizzy if I had cleaned my litter box as I was headed that way when I saw the little snot on TV and stopped to listen. :silly:

is time better spent than listening to anyone in the Boosh Admin.

wait a minute....where in the constitution does it say the president is above the law?

constitution?

http://www.now.org/issues/economic/eratext.html
The Equal Rights Amendment

see they have been trying since the 20`s...doesn`t that sound like ancient history? most people who were born in the 1923 are pretty much dieing or dead

His credibility on the assertions of WMD threats were being challenged (snotty says by "false" allegations *LOL*) and so Bush instantaneously declassified and leaked certain portions of the NIE to counter those challenges (snotty says "in the best interests of the American people").

Now, in real speak what that means is that, when the administration's WMD assertions were proven false, they utilized classified info to cover-up their lies and to smack the man who revealed their misrepresentation (in addition to possibly covering up WMD activities the administration did NOT want to be exposed by a CIA op).

Monica conformed to dietary laws and was ritually pure. IOW, she was Kosher.

What Republican wife would accept, "No, I didn't go out with that redhead, dear," later to find out it was the blond instead. Is she going to smack her forehead and say, "well, at least he didn't lie to me!"

I think that the 9/11 ~connection~ to Iraq, which was obviously a point made by Bush, Condi, and Cheney, among others, and then last week Bush's "I made SURE that I didn't say those words directly," even opened the eyes of some of the most dedicated supporters --- or at least it should have.

emdee