[tomder55]

They better make that move prior to November.

wouldn't matter Art 1 sec 9 prohibits Congress from passing ex post facto law

[jlisenbe]

wouldn't matter Art 1 sec 9 prohibits Congress from passing ex post facto law

Not what I meant. I was just saying that after the Nov elections, the dem majority in the House will be history.

[tomder55]

I'm beginning to wonder about the red wave.

NY 19th district had a special election . The Repub Marc Molinaro tried to make the economy ,crime and inflation the issue. The Dem upset winner Pat Ryan made the SCOTUS Dobbs abortion decision the issue. NY 19th is a bell weather district that voted for consecutively the emperor; Trump, Clueless.

This comes after the surprising abortion decision in Kansas.
Special elections are often a measure of voter enthusiasm for party or issues.

The margin of error is getting too close for comfort. I have no doubt that the Repubs will take the House ,but maybe not by this wave they expect and better dare not assume

The Senate is way too close for comfort . . A REAL wave could go a long way to pushing the Repubs over the edge.

[tomder55]

The so called process of classification and declassification was clarified in EO 13526 by the emperor

The President Executive Order 13526 | National Archives

I want to highlight a key section :

Information originated by the incumbent President or the incumbent Vice President; the incumbent President’s White House Staff or the incumbent Vice President’s Staff; committees, commissions, or boards appointed by the incumbent President; or other entities within the Executive Office of the President that solely advise and assist the incumbent President is exempted from the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section,"

This was affirmed by SCOTUS in 1987 'Dept. of Navy v Egan '
The President, after all, is the "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States." U.S. Const., Art. II, 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant. See Cafeteria Workers v. McElroy, 367 U.S. 886, 890 (1961). This Court has recognized the Government's "compelling interest" in withholding national security information from unauthorized persons in the course of executive business. Snepp v. United States, 444 U.S. 507, 509 , n. 3 (1980). See also United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258, 267 (1967); United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1, 10 (1953); Totten v. United States, 92 U.S. 105, 106 (1876). The authority to protect such information falls on the President as head of the Executive Branch and as Commander in Chief

DEPARTMENT OF NAVY v. EGAN | FindLaw


The new spin i'm hearing is that classified or not the DOJ used statutes in the affidavit that do not rely on the classification status of the docs .

[tomder55]

The question is who runs the government ...... the elected chief executive President of the United States or some permanent unelected bureaucracy ?

[jlisenbe]

The idea that, "It's wrong if Trump does it, but it's OK for liberal dems," should concern us. That unequal application of law is a serious enemy.

The question is who runs the government ...... the elected chief executive President of the United States or some permanent unelected bureaucracy ?

Good question.

[Wondergirl]

The question is who runs the government ...... the elected chief executive President of the United States or some permanent unelected bureaucracy ?

Our government is run by three branches -- executive, legislative, and judicial -- that cooperate with each other and with none overriding the other two.

[jlisenbe]

The legislative and executive branches routinely check each other with no participation at all from SCOTUS. One checks the other.

[Wondergirl]

The legislative and executive branches routinely check each other with no participation at all from SCOTUS. One checks the other.

Thus, "the elected chief executive President of the United States" does not "run the government".

[tomder55]

Our government is run by three branches -- executive, legislative, and judicial -- that cooperate with each other and with none overriding the other two.

lol I disagree Each branch has unique and specific functions and we would be better off if all the branches understood that and did not encroach on each other's powers .

There is nothing in the Constitution that says the legislative or judicial branches can make executive decisions. In fact the Constitution is very clear
The 1st sentence of Article 2 states

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.


Deciding what is and what is not classified is an executive decision.

Likewise a President who makes an EO that "forgives " student loans encroaches on the power of the Legislative Branch as Madam Mimi correctly stated a year ago.


Likewise there is nothing in Article 3 that gives courts the power to legislate ;as our courts have so often done.

[Wondergirl]

There is nothing in the Constitution that says the legislative or judicial branches can make executive decisions.

I didn't say they can.

[tomder55]

then you agree that the chief executive of the US RUNS the government much like every chief executive of every business in the world runs the business. They may not own it but they are selected to run it .

[Wondergirl]

then you agree that the chief executive of the US RUNS the government much like every chief executive of every business in the world runs the business. They may not own it but they are selected to run it .

Not at all! The three branches are in this governing thing together and consult, communicate with each other. Chief executives consult with others in the company before making decisions.

[tomder55]

no there is only ONE chief executive in any company and there is only one President who by Constitutional authority is the sole and only chief executive .
To help you understand ; the Constitution gives each branch it's own distinct role .

Congress ,may make law but it is the President who enforces the law . In a company that may be the Chief financial officer who gives a budget to the CEO , and of course they are all answerable to the board of directors ..... in the case of the government that is the American people through the electoral process .

Checks and balances are written in ;but there in no ambiguity that the President is the chief executive

Specifically he alone decides what is classified or not .

If you can show me the instance where Congress had any say in that then please let me know .

[Wondergirl]

The chief executive does not take decisive action on his own. He does his homework first and that includes consulting with other company branches and/or employees.

[jlisenbe]

Thus, "the elected chief executive President of the United States" does not "run the government".

The Pres does "run" the country within the confines of laws decided on by the legislative branch and interpreted by the Supreme Court. But if you really believe what you have said above, then why are you not being critical of Biden? He made a unilateral decision to make some Americans pay for the dumb debt decisions of other Americans. Why do you seem to be OK with that? Isn't he breaking the rules you laid out above?

[tomder55]

Whether the CEO consults with staff or not ;the final call is the CEOs .

Who would you have decide what is classified ;the geek running the national archives ?

I can repeat this all day . It has been confirmed by SCOTUS . The President decided what is and what is not classified . Before Trump left office he made a blanket declassification . The only REAL question is if the docs in question should be given to the National Archives .
As I have previously commented ;that has traditionally been done through negotiations ;not a bum rush gestapo raid of the President's residence.

[Wondergirl]

why are you not being critical of Biden? He made a unilateral decision to make some Americans pay for the dumb debt decisions of other Americans. Why do you seem to be OK with that? Isn't he breaking the rules you laid out above?

Biden is not part of this conversation. Neither is Trump.

[jlisenbe]

Biden is not part of this conversation. Neither is Trump

. Title of the thread. "How far will the left go to get rid of Trump ?"

[Wondergirl]

. Title of the thread. "How far will the left go to get rid of Trump ?"

Not the title of the thread, but the conversation side road that tomder and I took.