New Power to the President, Declassify in Mind?

Its proof.

 

There is no process. However, the Constitution does guarantee me protection from the government. Therefore no classification/declassification authority on documents not under his control.

 

I can visualize a circumstance where just thinking it would be a very reasonable.

The president is in a meeting and decides that it is in the best interest to share classified information with someone in the room who would normally not have access. He decides to share it. Nothing written. Only a thought.

 

Keep your hat on it is coming

 

Like he did when he spilt Israeli intelligence to the Russians?

 

Yerrrrsss and it is a statement that contains proof

 

Obviously a stupid thing to do.

 

Sure, what's your favorite?

 

Well, is that not you preferred "discourse" position?

 

Of course it is.

 

The Inconvenient Truth: 'Intel does just abandon assets to be killed.' even though it is illegal for them to do that.

OTOH, there is no law to prevent a POTUS from abandoning "assets".

"Well, I think, first of all, there is an awareness that the threat of retaliation is increased because of the action against bin Laden. I think that there has been great — ” and then he stopped, wondering if he should continue down this path.

Then he resumed: “Frankly, a week ago Sunday, in the Situation Room, we all agreed that we would not release any operational details from the effort to take out bin Laden. That all fell apart on Monday — the next day.”

That’s a pretty amazing statement. Here you have the nation’s warlord calling out his senior colleagues inside the Obama Administration for spilling the beans. Although he didn’t name names, there was ire inside the Pentagon at White House homeland security chief’s John Brennan’s Monday on-the-record briefing, which offered far more detail than a background session conducted the same day at the Pentagon. Brennan spoke in front of cameras about bin Laden being protected by female human shields, and implied he was armed — both of which had to be retracted as untrue the next day (the very act of retraction means the speaker had drifted into discussing operational details that had to be…retracted).

At least they can keep their lips zipped at the Pentagon: during that Defense Department confab with reporters, one asked

Can you confirm that it was a SEAL team?

…to which the senior defense official, who under the ground rules of the briefing cannot be further identified, responded: Not going to comment on units or numbers.

How tough was that? Apparently too tough for two of the nation’s top leaders. Later the same day, May 3, Vice President Joe Biden let the cat out of the bag. While the press had been reporting SEAL Team 6 carried out the mission, no one in government had confirmed that fact."
TIME, TERRORISM, The Outing of the SEALs Has SecDef Ticked Off, By Mark Thompson, May 13, 2011.
https://nation.time.com/2011/05/13/the-outing-of-the-seals-has-secdef-ticked-off/

 

We can depend on you for that.
It would be difficult to make sense of anything without your input.

"Whereas earlier, on the basis of etymology, we concluded that nonsense depends on sense, we can now say, on the basis of function, that sense depends upon nonsense."
Susan Stewart, NONSENSE, Aspects of Intertextuality In Folklore and Literature, Johns Hopkins Univ. Press Baltimore 1989, p 5.

 

Liz Cheney is right—Trump should never again get close to the Presidency.

I could never support DeSantis because of his anti-abortion views, but I don't see him as dangerous to our representative federal republic.

 

Based on the article, they are misquoting the supreme court case. Nowhere in Nixon v Administrator of General Services did the Supreme Court rule that a former President has executive authority. Yes, current office holders of the Office of the President have that privledge, but not one court case has made that claim.

Per this link, the court recognized several things:

Nowhere in this summary does it mention what the article implied. Yes, some, conservative lawyers who are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole type of thing, have made this claim, but are actually misquoting what the Supreme Court Ruling has made.

 

I used your exact quote Trix. Nothing more, nothing less. Maybe you should reread what you wrote, especially that last paragraph/sentence you wrote.

 

Courts do not make criminal referrals. Second, there is a process, called an investigation that can be done by either the DOJ, the FBI or other Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, or both. That is still ongoing.

What the court does is weigh in on the criminal procedures, let the attorneys argue their case, and allow the jury to determine who is more believable and who is not. Or the person can waive a jury and allow the judge to decide based on the preponderance of the evidence.

 

That is what Trump said, but none of his court filings have made that claim, and that is what counts. And that is why Judge Dearie and the 11th Appeals Court have made that determinination.

 

That statement, they were marked classified, is proof.

 

What they are referring to is Judge Dearie and the 11 Appeals Court Ruling that was 3-0 not in favor of Trump. Being on trial is a criminal violation, determined by the legal process of a grand jury indictment, the defendant pleading not guilty, requesting a trial, and that has not started yet.

 

The 4th Amendment guarantees you protection from unreasonable search and seizures. The question you have to ask yourself is what constitutes a reasonable search and seizure. A search warrant is one, but it is not the only avenue. The Supreme Court has allowed some 11 or so exceptions to reasonable search and seizures without a warrant. Furthermore, the Constitution guarantees you against incriminating yourself in a criminal trial, not in a civil trial, and that no excessive bonds shall be issued to the crime you are accused of, among others.

However, under federal law, there is a process for classifying and declassifying government documents. The first step is to determine whether the government document meets automatic declassification after 25 years or the exception, such as national security defense information.

 

Seeing as the Orange Messiah can declassify docs telepathically do you think he can also do that Darth Vader thing when he choked the guy who questioned his power without touching him? If I were Latisha James I'd be worried about that.

 

Simple.
1. He doesn't appeal. He follows the procedures he put in place because he understands the importance, one aspect of which I pointed out.

2. This question is concocted and is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

 

Your problem if you "don't get it".

 

Try to keep up.

 

You're being ridiculous. Declassification is a process with the result being a stamp on the document indicating it is declassified.

Yeah, I know someone who is playing a childish game is going to say "prove it" like a broken record.