Think about this: if there were a dispute on the need to know something, who would be the ultimate arbiter on that disagreement?
It’s the President, of course.
He’d most likely get some pushback, some requests from department heads as to why he needs that info and if there are specific questions he’d like them to answer. If he made it clear he wanted that list and wanted it now, he’d probably get some people threatening to resign and go to the press. But yes, he’d eventually get the list.
I have no reason to believe that this has ever happened with a sitting President, but there was one time that a Speaker of the House was barred from a budget presentation. The slides included details he had not been cleared to receive. I think the Marines who blocked his entry may well have developed PTSD from the ensuing temper tantrum.
On what basis do you make this conclusion?
Because the Constitution, executive orders and the law certainly does not support the position of these supposed department heads.
The Marines don’t guard budget meetings. Sounds like bunk.
On the basis that no reasonable President would ask for such a list, and the department heads would like to keep that information from people who don’t really need it. I think they’d say “Mr. President, these agents are valuable assets working at great danger to themselves, and giving this information to anyone who doesn’t have a specific, clear reason for needing it only increases the risk to them. Is there a specific reason you’d like to have it?” Or are you claiming that no government employee would ever question anything the President told them to do, for any reason? Do you honestly think if the President called the head of the CIA and asked for that list, that he’d just meekly turn it over without explaining why he personally thinks it’s not a good idea?
Yes, of course if he made a case of it, the President would get the list. But I don’t see anything in the Constitution, executive orders, or the law that says a government employee can’t tell his supervisor, up to and including the President, why what he’s asking for isn’t in the best interests of the USA.
He’d get pushback and resignations, not because the President can’t give the order, but because he shouldn’t give the order.
Personally, I don’t see what the problem would be, so long as he’s not threatening to make the list public or otherwise do something detrimental to those on the list.
But what does he want to do with it then? Just read the list of names to see if his old college buddy is on it? Make crank calls to the agents? Sleep with it under his pillow? That’s the thing - there’s nothing to do with the list that isn’t detrimental to those on it.
I’d be surprised if such a list even existed in a single place. There are no doubt CIA personnel who know the identity of one or a few agents, but I sincerely doubt there’s a piece of paper or excel spreadsheet or anything that just lists them all in alphabetical order.
Secrets are kept by restricting the number of people who have the information. Unless you could ensure that the President and only the President would get the list and no aide, assistant, secretary, or analyst would see it then you increase the chance of the information getting out. The President may not have any intention of releasing the information, but it would likely increase the chances that the information gets out.
Heck, even collating and copying the list is a security risk.
I suggest that those who say that a member of the intelligence community would refuse or question the President’s ability to know specific sources and methods are relying on conjecture and perhaps a bit of conspiracy theory. The law on this is so clear that to argue contrary will require evidence of that position – and I’m not talking “I once heard a story that Reagan wasn’t cleared to be briefed on such-and-such!!1!” or “I read it on the Internet that Kennedy couldn’t be told about the Space Aliens!!”
The responsibility for protection of classified information rests with the President. He may delegate that responsibility, but it is fundamentally his power that is used. “The President, after all, is the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” U.S.Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security . . . flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President.” So says the Supreme Court.
One of many reasons that the government has argued against release of the highly classified President’s Daily Brief is that they “include sensitive information such as: “a) undisseminated raw operational information, sometimes including true names of sources and/or cryptonyms…” Cite.
I would like those who purport to factually state that the President may be denied classified information to quote one law, one executive order, or one court decision which makes an employee of the executive branch beholden to some standard for sharing (or not sharing) classified information that is not dependent on the President’s constitutional authority to prescribe how classified information is shared. The clear fact is that President makes the rules.
I think we’re arguing past each other here. The President’s daily brief may include actual names of agents because the people who prepared the brief believe the President needs that info. If the President saw a report from an unnamed agent, and said something like “I need to know the source of this, so I can judge it’s veracity for myself,” I think he’d get it ASAP.
That’s very, very different than the President just requesting sensitive information out of the blue, with no stated reason for it, as Whack-a-Mole suggested. “I need to know the name & address of every covert agent in Israel” is a request no sane President would make, so yes, I think those who control that information would try to talk him out of it, request the order in writing to cover their own asses, and if necessary, resign to show their displeasure. Would the President get the list if he really wanted it? Yes. Would it cause an enormous uproar in the intelligence community? Yes.
I don’t anyone in this thread is claiming the President can be denied classified information. They’re stating that, for certain information, subordinates might express their doubts that the President needs it, and maybe there’s another way they could satisfy the request. People in position to know extremely sensitive information aren’t there simply for data retrieval, they’re also there to provide analysis and guidance.
False assumption. They were attending the meeting.
Yes, the President has what is called ‘fuck you’ power over classified information.
POTUS: Get me the white house chef’s recipe for nachos!
Chief of Staff: Mr. President, that’s sensitive info.
POTUS: Fuck you, I want me some nachos!
But there’s a point to be made that those subordinate to the President (i.e. everyone in the executive branch regardless of agency) have the right to request clarification on his requests or even make the argument that he doesn’t need it. One could even make the argument that they have the RESPONSIBILITY to do so in making clear the potential consequences of sharing the info. But in the end if the President wants it - he gets it.
There is also the strategy of making it diffcult to find out who knows. You have to ask the right office, and the right person, which can be extraordinarily difficult to determine.
This approach is used often with FOIA requests. Again, I have no reason to believe that it’s been used with a sitting president, only that it’s a potential strategy.
So in the case of the list in question, the field office for each specific region may hold the true identities, so you’d have to find the correct point of contact for each, and then make the formal request through cleared channels, and then there’s always the courier to arrange, as such a thing can’t be sent through e-mail. . . Eventually it becomes necessary to find the addresses of 32 field offices, and send a cleared courier to each, in order to compile the information. . . which may or may not include the true identities, as opposed to the names to which pay checks are sent. . .
A determined agency could find a way to cooperate very inefficiently.
The question arises from the DoE’s use of Need-To-Know based security. If the president hasn’t established his/her need to know procedurally, then an information request would be denied. The president can apply for the proper status simply by saying he’s the president and the president needs to know everything about national security. I haven’t read the book, but it wouldn’t surprise me if certain innocuous events are described in a dramatic manner.
Yes, but since the president is head of the executive, couldn’t he just abolish the procedure if it’s clear they are stalling?
Of course he could. I’m not saying he wouldn’t have strategies of his own. . . I’d imagine he could stall their funding as well if he needed to.
\
Only Cecil knows the truth…