Wrong. I want everybody treated the same. Got it? I donât like one set of rules for one group and another for the other. ThatâŚis the bigger problem and so thatâŚis what I want remedied first. I will not start with one, until the bigger, older problem is addressed.
You are wrong when you say the President has the ârightâ to do anything at all.
The Constitution grants rights to citizens but it grants no rights to the office of the President. The Presidency, and each other branch of government is granted âpowersâ.
The difference is essential to how the Constitution works. Rights are (almost) absolute and can be abridged only in extreme circumstances. (No right to shout âFire!â in a crowded theater, for example. Powers are limited and inherently set up so powers granted to different branches of government balance one another.
I wish I was astounded that the same people who claim they only want judges who will interpret the Constitution as written, sit by silently when their chosen President trashes the intent of the Constitution regarding the very nature of government.
Thatâs a fascinating claim. Since the classification of information was first established during the Truman Presidency, I wonder how prior Presidents made such decisions?
You might consider a less absolute approach to history.
Anyone is of course free to decide for themselves if it was an appropriate thing to do or not and I wouldnât argue their opinion was false, if however they want to claim some law was broken or that it was illegal, yes I will point out Presidents canât illegally leak classified information.