Comments by "k98killer" (@k98killer) on "If the DOJ Indicts Trump it is Evidence That They are Insane" video.

The laws cited make no mention of the classification system, which was created by executive orders for bureaucratic control of information that may be subject to those laws. The president does not have total discretion to reveal information protected by those laws as far as I'm aware.
1
@jsross33 the wording of the statute does not support this notion as the classification system did not exist when it was written, nor does it mention any executive privilege or presidential discretion in determining what information is covered by the statutes. The fact that a former president was never prosecuted holds some weight as precedent, but I'm unsure where that comes from other than "we don't hate the guy enough because he isn't Orange".
1
@jsross33 again, the statutes cited in the warrant make no mention of the classification system. Does that court case involve the Espionage Act and explicitly clarify that POTUS decides what information does or does not count as protected under those statutes?
1
@jsross33 the constitution does not mention anything about information that could advantage a foreign nation. Article I, Section 8 lists the following as powers of Congress: "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces;" and "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Office thereof." Article II, Section 2 declares that the President is "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States". Is the argument that this role as Commander in Chief supercedes any requirements created by Congress in the Espionage Act? It seems to me that the powers of Congress are more extensive in this regard.
1
@jsross33 Navy v Egan held only that the President has the authority to sequester sensitive information and grant authorization to access it. "This Court has recognized the Government's 'compelling interest' in withholding national security information from unauthorized persons in the course of executive business. ... The authority to protect such information falls on the President as head of the Executive Branch and as Commander in Chief." It is not clear from the ruling that the President can decide what does or does not constitute information as described by the Espionage Act (18 USC 792-799), and the ruling has nothing to do with the Espionage Act but rather the procedures for firing someone who lacks adequate security clearances.
1
@jsross33 fwiw, I'm hoping you are correct. Perhaps it is a distinction without a difference. But even the quote from that SCOTUS case that you cited does not mention the power to declassify or disseminate any information, regardless of how it might endanger the national security or advantage a foreign nation; it rather concerns the power to prevent such dissemination through the classification system. The source you cite does not say what you think it says, so I remain unconvinced. However, if this unenumerated power of deciding what information is or is not sensitive is somehow implicit in the Commander in Chief role rather than the Congress, then that would be sufficient.
1