Yea, what you're getting at is the phenomena of the president's power being largely based on persuasion, and every single one of them has had to deal with slowwalking bureaucrats, etc. That's a different issue than legal authority, which is vested in his office. The executive branch is unitary, they all report to him. And note, I said "legal" authority, not moral authority.
The president, when it comes to classification authority, can do whatever the hell he wants, if he wants to deal with the consequences and can get the bureaucrats to obey. Past presidents can't bind future presidents with sealing documents unless the future president is willing to go along with it. So he may be impeached (they can impeach on anything) if he reveals national secrets, but what he didn't do, was break a law.
Hmm, but legal authority doesn't act on the president's behalf at all. He wields executive privilege and appoints the Attorney General. Executive privilege, executive decisions, orders, are bound by law, hence the AG advises or acts on his behalf to uphold law, often by advising, hang on that won't become law, by aiding in legislation and legal duties. But Executive Orders doesn't always become law, the Vax mandates under Biden. Or under Trump something basic that he had responsibility over, like the border. The president wields the army, although he can't even send them to war. Rather defend the nation. Okay, but emergency the vax, a national mandate is kinda outside of it. But they're subject to the law. Despite their obvious station, and orders.
Again with National secrets it gets real mirky with all those agencies answering to national secrets legislation, possibly passed into law from other presidents, or bills passed by Congress into law, preventing anybody else blabbing about them. Finally the agencies are also bound by legislation, this passed into law on their founding by other presidents, protecting their secrets. Stuff like the military, the nukes. Sure a President can try, but then they're impeached. It becomes more serious when it is treason. He took an oath of office, signing the national secrets act, I presume. I recall all his staff did, his daughter's clearance, her husband's etc. Would it even get aired today. How would that work with his team of secret service, or his presidential staff, vetting and recording everything he says.
Wouldn't it be like one of those cheesy movies are we Live? Cut, cut, the mike is still running, wait, the recordings are seized, and every TV in America running through the NSA, or something has their feeds interrupted with the static. Beware of the static. Then a spokesperson comes on, I believe what the president meant to say is something else. The president has had a spot and a dose of, and is recovering in the labotomy hospital, having been sent for immediate modifications. No, but seriously.
The confusion here is a president can request declassification, or unseal, certain documents, certain documents, whether it is fully or partially upheld remains to be given, look at the JFK stuff, and the UFOs. What is given was it all of it. Who knows with secrets. What came back was still redacted. It is protecting other individuals and secrets.
Hmm, but the legal authority resides entirely in the president, therefore, all the rest of your verbiage is based on a false premise. While it may be perfectly logical, it's a house built on sand.
No it doesn't. The Supreme Court, can declare executive orders unconstitutional. Congress can prevent war. File impeachment.
D'oh. Stop down voting me. It proves your obvious intelligence. I haven't been wrong. You're making erratic claims.
You state the president is. No. There is a process. I have provided examples. You won't accept, question, or even acknowledge. But something is wrong with your claims.
The president is primarily responsible for the army. Defending the nation. That's kinda of how it was set up under Washington. But of course his office is supposed to uphold the citizen's vote, policy which got them elected. But there is a ton of litigation prior. A process of passing executive orders into law. The president isn't an Emperor. He doesn't decree anything and it magically appears. He signs an order. It can be challenged.
We were talking about Secrets in any event. It had drifted into, god forbid. But it is another process, I tried to explain, one they also took an oath to uphold.
You are way out in left field an very off topic. Yes, there are checks and balances, but no, none of those have ever been put to the test like you say with regard to the classification powers of the president.
Yea, what you're getting at is the phenomena of the president's power being largely based on persuasion, and every single one of them has had to deal with slowwalking bureaucrats, etc. That's a different issue than legal authority, which is vested in his office. The executive branch is unitary, they all report to him. And note, I said "legal" authority, not moral authority.
The president, when it comes to classification authority, can do whatever the hell he wants, if he wants to deal with the consequences and can get the bureaucrats to obey. Past presidents can't bind future presidents with sealing documents unless the future president is willing to go along with it. So he may be impeached (they can impeach on anything) if he reveals national secrets, but what he didn't do, was break a law.
Hmm, but legal authority doesn't act on the president's behalf at all. He wields executive privilege and appoints the Attorney General. Executive privilege, executive decisions, orders, are bound by law, hence the AG advises or acts on his behalf to uphold law, often by advising, hang on that won't become law, by aiding in legislation and legal duties. But Executive Orders doesn't always become law, the Vax mandates under Biden. Or under Trump something basic that he had responsibility over, like the border. The president wields the army, although he can't even send them to war. Rather defend the nation. Okay, but emergency the vax, a national mandate is kinda outside of it. But they're subject to the law. Despite their obvious station, and orders.
Again with National secrets it gets real mirky with all those agencies answering to national secrets legislation, possibly passed into law from other presidents, or bills passed by Congress into law, preventing anybody else blabbing about them. Finally the agencies are also bound by legislation, this passed into law on their founding by other presidents, protecting their secrets. Stuff like the military, the nukes. Sure a President can try, but then they're impeached. It becomes more serious when it is treason. He took an oath of office, signing the national secrets act, I presume. I recall all his staff did, his daughter's clearance, her husband's etc. Would it even get aired today. How would that work with his team of secret service, or his presidential staff, vetting and recording everything he says.
Wouldn't it be like one of those cheesy movies are we Live? Cut, cut, the mike is still running, wait, the recordings are seized, and every TV in America running through the NSA, or something has their feeds interrupted with the static. Beware of the static. Then a spokesperson comes on, I believe what the president meant to say is something else. The president has had a spot and a dose of, and is recovering in the labotomy hospital, having been sent for immediate modifications. No, but seriously.
The confusion here is a president can request declassification, or unseal, certain documents, certain documents, whether it is fully or partially upheld remains to be given, look at the JFK stuff, and the UFOs. What is given was it all of it. Who knows with secrets. What came back was still redacted. It is protecting other individuals and secrets.
Hmm, but the legal authority resides entirely in the president, therefore, all the rest of your verbiage is based on a false premise. While it may be perfectly logical, it's a house built on sand.
No it doesn't. The Supreme Court, can declare executive orders unconstitutional. Congress can prevent war. File impeachment.
D'oh. Stop down voting me. It proves your obvious intelligence. I haven't been wrong. You're making erratic claims.
You state the president is. No. There is a process. I have provided examples. You won't accept, question, or even acknowledge. But something is wrong with your claims.
The president is primarily responsible for the army. Defending the nation. That's kinda of how it was set up under Washington. But of course his office is supposed to uphold the citizen's vote, policy which got them elected. But there is a ton of litigation prior. A process of passing executive orders into law. The president isn't an Emperor. He doesn't decree anything and it magically appears. He signs an order. It can be challenged.
We were talking about Secrets in any event. It had drifted into, god forbid. But it is another process, I tried to explain, one they also took an oath to uphold.
You are way out in left field an very off topic. Yes, there are checks and balances, but no, none of those have ever been put to the test like you say with regard to the classification powers of the president.