|
Edited on Sat Apr-08-06 10:30 PM by Kagemusha
Having said that, the procedures are established by the President himself via executive orders; the President can violate his own executive orders at will, because executive orders are merely enacting his powers as President upon the executive branch, which he governs. The procedures are in place to prevent declassifications that damage national security. But, the President CAN violate those procedures. Even if it was strictly illegal, he did this in his capacity as President and punishing him after leaving office would be insanely difficult. But, it's simply a rule the President made up and rules he makes up are rules he can break without legal consequence. I am not familiar with the penalties for breaking these rules. However, it doesn't really matter because the rule only applies to the President to the extent he chooses it to.
It is an abuse of entirely legal power.
And note that in Bush's mind, this leak PROMOTED national security. We can dispute his judgment, but that judgment is his to make, if he wishes to make it.
Edit: The point I'm making is, Bush does not lose inherent Presidential powers simply because he writes an Executive Order saying such and such procedures are to be followed. Executive Orders are not laws. I imagine there are laws that punish the leaking of still-classified data? Even so, the definition under which someone would be punished relies on the President's say-so. The President can say otherwise in a closed Oval Office meeting and not tell anyone. As I said: Executive Orders are NOT laws. They are EXECUTIVE **ORDERS**. Bush can issue new orders at his leisure. It may be scummy to issue verbal orders in violation of the written orders, but that is not a *crime*.
It's an abuse of power.
|