8 ms·

“… 13 counts of willful retention of NDI” I highly doubt that anybody will buy “other people did this in the past too” as a defense argument. Though I am sure

by lsh123 5y ago

“… 13 counts of willful retention of NDI” I highly doubt that anybody will buy “other people did this in the past too” as a defense argument. Though I am sure lawyers will try.

lern_too_spel 5y ago
- lsh123 5y ago
  I have no direct experience with classified information process in US government. But I highly doubt that anyone can un-classify something without paperwork trail. Imagine a situation when CIA sends top secret briefing to the Secretary of State based on sensitive information from a spy. Declassification of this briefing might result in spy being executed. Thus, I highly doubt that the Secretary of State can declassify this briefing just by herself. Edit: even the president can’t just declassify docs and had to consult with FBI (and accept their redactions): https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/trump-doj-declassify-russia-probe-documents-460511 https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/trump-doj-declassif...
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    You'll have to point to the regulation that declares that the Secretary of State cannot. Wanton burning of intelligence assets is generally backstopped by the President firing an incompetent Secretary of State, not the law. For offices below the Secretary of State, there are laws.
    - lsh123 5y ago
      Ops, I pressed the wrong reply and replied to you in another thread —- sorry!
  - jancsika 5y ago
    You started: > I have no direct experience with classified information process in US government. You then have an edit where you make a broad claim about the power of the president to declassify documents. However, the article you linked doesn't make any claim about limits on the Office of the President to declassify documents. It only describes the standard process Trump was following to declassify those documents. You should take some time to look into this issue more deeply, as there is a lot written about the power of the president to declassify documents. (Unless of course you are attempting to anger the internet into revealing its answers by making bold assertions, in which case well played, my friend :)
    - lsh123 5y ago
      Thanks, sorry I should have used different wording. I agree that the president has the power to classify/declassify anything. My example was that the president on the last day in the office followed the procedure to declassify documents highly important for him instead of taking photos on the phone and posting on Twitter ;)
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  This is specifically the thing that I tend to find so exhausting about these discussions. People get so bent out of shape about their perception the rules are violated when they don't even put the time in to know what the rules are.
  - lsh123 5y ago
    So I believe this is the latest and greatest rules on the subject: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526 Reading section 3.1, Secretary of State has the power to declassify only the information that originally was classified inside that office. In my example above with a CIA briefing, only the CIA itself or the DNI can declassify it (ignoring automatic declassification because of time). And I’ll reiterate - I am sure there is a form 1234 one needs to fill in to actually declassify something.
    - lsh123 5y ago
      BTW, I read the whole EO and it is surprisingly well written and makes a lot of sense for an official government rule book.
    - shadowgovt 5y ago
      I see nothing in there specifically binding an acting Secretary of State, and since none have been prosecuted, I infer there is nothing to prosecute. You have to also factor in the National Security Act of 1947, which this EO does not supercede. At the level of Cabinet, mishandling of classified information is a political question, not a legal one. ETA: Forgot to mention, you also have to consider the actual statue, 8 U.S. Code § 798. That statute makes clear that exempt from the list of unauthorized persons are people cabinet members authorize. It seems self-evident that secretary Clinton authorized secretary Clinton (and her IT staff) to handle classified information. If one turns one's head and squints, I suppose the secretary could have been held accountable if classified information was leaked from the server to an unauthorized recipient. It didn't happen, so no way to know what the consequences might have been had it occurred.

by lsh123 5y ago

“… 13 counts of willful retention of NDI” I highly doubt that anybody will buy “other people did this in the past too” as a defense argument. Though I am sure lawyers will try.

lern_too_spel 5y ago

lsh123 5y ago
I have no direct experience with classified information process in US government. But I highly doubt that anyone can un-classify something without paperwork trail. Imagine a situation when CIA sends top secret briefing to the Secretary of State based on sensitive information from a spy. Declassification of this briefing might result in spy being executed. Thus, I highly doubt that the Secretary of State can declassify this briefing just by herself. Edit: even the president can’t just declassify docs and had to consult with FBI (and accept their redactions): https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/trump-doj-declassify-russia-probe-documents-460511 https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/trump-doj-declassif...
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  You'll have to point to the regulation that declares that the Secretary of State cannot. Wanton burning of intelligence assets is generally backstopped by the President firing an incompetent Secretary of State, not the law. For offices below the Secretary of State, there are laws.
  - lsh123 5y ago
    Ops, I pressed the wrong reply and replied to you in another thread —- sorry!
- jancsika 5y ago
  You started: > I have no direct experience with classified information process in US government. You then have an edit where you make a broad claim about the power of the president to declassify documents. However, the article you linked doesn't make any claim about limits on the Office of the President to declassify documents. It only describes the standard process Trump was following to declassify those documents. You should take some time to look into this issue more deeply, as there is a lot written about the power of the president to declassify documents. (Unless of course you are attempting to anger the internet into revealing its answers by making bold assertions, in which case well played, my friend :)
  - lsh123 5y ago
    Thanks, sorry I should have used different wording. I agree that the president has the power to classify/declassify anything. My example was that the president on the last day in the office followed the procedure to declassify documents highly important for him instead of taking photos on the phone and posting on Twitter ;)
shadowgovt 5y ago
This is specifically the thing that I tend to find so exhausting about these discussions. People get so bent out of shape about their perception the rules are violated when they don't even put the time in to know what the rules are.
- lsh123 5y ago
  So I believe this is the latest and greatest rules on the subject: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526 Reading section 3.1, Secretary of State has the power to declassify only the information that originally was classified inside that office. In my example above with a CIA briefing, only the CIA itself or the DNI can declassify it (ignoring automatic declassification because of time). And I’ll reiterate - I am sure there is a form 1234 one needs to fill in to actually declassify something.
  - lsh123 5y ago
    BTW, I read the whole EO and it is surprisingly well written and makes a lot of sense for an official government rule book.
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    I see nothing in there specifically binding an acting Secretary of State, and since none have been prosecuted, I infer there is nothing to prosecute. You have to also factor in the National Security Act of 1947, which this EO does not supercede. At the level of Cabinet, mishandling of classified information is a political question, not a legal one. ETA: Forgot to mention, you also have to consider the actual statue, 8 U.S. Code § 798. That statute makes clear that exempt from the list of unauthorized persons are people cabinet members authorize. It seems self-evident that secretary Clinton authorized secretary Clinton (and her IT staff) to handle classified information. If one turns one's head and squints, I suppose the secretary could have been held accountable if classified information was leaked from the server to an unauthorized recipient. It didn't happen, so no way to know what the consequences might have been had it occurred.