The Intelligence Branch gets to decide unilaterally what information will be released and what information will be kept secret. There is no entity outside the Intelligence Branch, and yes that includes the President of the United States, who can supersede the classification authority of the Intelligence Branch. This is something 99.9% of the people on our side get totally and frustratingly wrong.
This was news to me, and comes from a GREAT article (Part 1 of 4) from CTH:
Well I read it. And I found the part you are referencing. And you have misrepresented the original intent of this part of the article. I don't know if you did it on purpose, or if you did it unwittingly. However, if you quote, try actually quoting instead of entangling your interpretation of the writing with parts of the quote.
Because it said, "Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an agency, even a traditionally -->((superior agency))<-- like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control."
This article even recognizes the office of the president as superior. This whole article talks about how fabricated and unbridled these intellegence agencies are.
Furthermore, this article says that classifications are created by the intelligence agencies for intelligence agencies, for work products of the agencies as well as for outside agencies as well.
So basically, unconstitutional/non-elected/self-governing/unbridled power wielding agencies get to supercede our entire government??? Not anymore. Because even this article lines out how they are barely even a part of our actual government. I would even consider them on the same status as a contractor after reading this article.
What happens if the president doesn't listen to this unconstitutional agency? Do they declare war on a sitting or even former president of the United States? Who are these people?
You know, the more I find out about about these agencies, it really makes me wonder how they even exist.
I'm not sure why you chose to have an aggressive response to my comment. I started it by saying that 'it was news to me'. The long and well-sourced article describes how the Intelligence Community has twisted the 'superior' and 'inferior' aspects of the Executive branch such that - as it stands today - the President does not have the unilateral ability to declassify (whether by law or by 'common practice').
Based on your snarky comment to me, it seems that you fully understand that -- so how could you say that I 'misrepresented' anything?
Whether by law or practice, it is not (currently) 'understood' that a President can unilaterally declassify. He 'requests it', and (if the IC says they 'refused') it is not declassified. (I think it's an illegitimate power grab, but if that powerhasbeen usurped, it is something we should be aware of. Do you mistakenly think that recognizing thefactof a power grab somehow makes me 'on their side'?)
Now perhaps there are specific laws that clearly spell out that the President has such unilateral power, and perhaps those original laws have not been 'overwritten' by new ones, but that doesn't appear to be the case (per the article).
Our quest here in this forum is to research, and -- importantly -- to 'get it right'. I stand by my 'prudent' comment to be cautious and aware that the 'common understanding' of Presidential autonomy in this situation might not be the (current) 'law of the land'.
Do you know for a fact that it is? Can you cite the source? Can you confirm that there haven't been any 'overriding' laws/statues/directives -- passed by Congress -- that have taken the President's power away?
Perhaps you missed his response (to someone else) where he says that I 'like to spin'.
That's a direct accusation of (my) intent, and it kinda set the tone for how I read his response to me, especially when he said that I might have 'misrepresented...the article...on purpose'.
This was news to me, and comes from a GREAT article (Part 1 of 4) from CTH:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/08/11/part-1-why-did-the-doj-and-fbi-execute-the-raid-on-trump-the-story-behind-the-documents/
Lots of sourcing and information in this article. Take the time to read it -- it's quite long, but well worth it.
Well I read it. And I found the part you are referencing. And you have misrepresented the original intent of this part of the article. I don't know if you did it on purpose, or if you did it unwittingly. However, if you quote, try actually quoting instead of entangling your interpretation of the writing with parts of the quote.
Because it said, "Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an agency, even a traditionally -->((superior agency))<-- like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control."
This article even recognizes the office of the president as superior. This whole article talks about how fabricated and unbridled these intellegence agencies are.
Furthermore, this article says that classifications are created by the intelligence agencies for intelligence agencies, for work products of the agencies as well as for outside agencies as well.
So basically, unconstitutional/non-elected/self-governing/unbridled power wielding agencies get to supercede our entire government??? Not anymore. Because even this article lines out how they are barely even a part of our actual government. I would even consider them on the same status as a contractor after reading this article.
What happens if the president doesn't listen to this unconstitutional agency? Do they declare war on a sitting or even former president of the United States? Who are these people?
You know, the more I find out about about these agencies, it really makes me wonder how they even exist.
I'm not sure why you chose to have an aggressive response to my comment. I started it by saying that 'it was news to me'. The long and well-sourced article describes how the Intelligence Community has twisted the 'superior' and 'inferior' aspects of the Executive branch such that - as it stands today - the President does not have the unilateral ability to declassify (whether by law or by 'common practice').
Based on your snarky comment to me, it seems that you fully understand that -- so how could you say that I 'misrepresented' anything?
Whether by law or practice, it is not (currently) 'understood' that a President can unilaterally declassify. He 'requests it', and (if the IC says they 'refused') it is not declassified. (I think it's an illegitimate power grab, but if that power has been usurped, it is something we should be aware of. Do you mistakenly think that recognizing the fact of a power grab somehow makes me 'on their side'?)
Now perhaps there are specific laws that clearly spell out that the President has such unilateral power, and perhaps those original laws have not been 'overwritten' by new ones, but that doesn't appear to be the case (per the article).
Our quest here in this forum is to research, and -- importantly -- to 'get it right'. I stand by my 'prudent' comment to be cautious and aware that the 'common understanding' of Presidential autonomy in this situation might not be the (current) 'law of the land'.
Do you know for a fact that it is? Can you cite the source? Can you confirm that there haven't been any 'overriding' laws/statues/directives -- passed by Congress -- that have taken the President's power away?
I didn't find his comment aggressive or snarky at all tbh.
Perhaps you missed his response (to someone else) where he says that I 'like to spin'.
That's a direct accusation of (my) intent, and it kinda set the tone for how I read his response to me, especially when he said that I might have 'misrepresented...the article...on purpose'.