The POTUS cannot declassify everything.

The Supreme Court seems to disagree with your memery. Who's going to tell them that they are wrong? See: Dep't of the Navy v. Egan - 484 U.S. 518, 108 S. Ct. 818 (1988)

The ability to classify and declassify documents comes from the President's Constitutional powers.

There are exceptions. Do you not understand the meaning of that word?

Tell me where in the Constitution the exceptions exist.

You can't. Because there are none. The sole ability to classify and declassify resides in the office of President.

It wouldn't be in the Constitution. Sheesh.

"The sole ability to classify and declassify resides in the office of President."

That's a dumb statement right there. Military officials up and down the line classify new information every day. And they don't consult the President. I had the ability to classify information. And I did.

All of these people you cite as being responsible for classifications are in the military or the executive branch of government. Who is their boss? I'll give you a hint...it begins with a P and rhymes with resident. Anything they can do comes from the powers of the office above them.

Sheesh. This isn't really a complicated issue. This is basic governance.

I can hear libs screaming for packing the Supreme Court... LOL

That may be true but does that apply to:wanna be Dictators, Kings, Autocrats and CULT leaders?

Apparently not. 😆 I'm also finding out why some memers disable comments, what with the idiots on the unhinged Right who don't know shit chiming in.

Yet again, you’re wrong.

Nope. Only the Department of Energy can declassify nuclear information, and only the Director of National Intelligence can declassify SCI.

If that's what Risch thinks, he's either an idiot or a complete Trumptard. Or just parrotting something he heard. I worked with SCI for several years, so I know considerably more about it than you do.

LOL... sure you do...

btw... when Politifact says mostly True on something like this you know it's TRUE...

"Mostly"...as in not completely true...as in there are exceptions...am I using too many big words for you?

LOL... not what Politifact said... the internet too hard for you?

Then why did they say "mostly true" instead of "true"?

Because that's how "fact checkers" admit to truths that they don't want to admit to because it would damage the political narrative that they are trying to keep you trapped within. They try to couch it with some potential gotchas, often times not even related to the matter at hand.

Bullshit.

They don't buy a word of it when we cite it. Selective belief.