Can We Say I-N-C-O-N-S-I-S-T-E-N-T?

In the extreme actually.

Who you ask? Well, the New York Times. Not too long ago with respect to the Plame Game and Patrick Fitzgerald's mess ups the President's Administration asserted as the top executive officer the President has the final say in what is classified and what is not. So, for instance if the President decides to declassify and release a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) he is well within his powers to do so. In fact, this is exactly what happened with respect to the dust-up with Joe Wilson (and Valerie Plame and Scooter Libby et al). The NIE had certain pieces of information and then it was released to rebut Mr. Wilson.

Well, the NYT editorialized shortly after the claim it was not within Presidential Powers to declassify documents. Well now what is the New York Times saying?

"Others said it was possible that Ms. McCarthy, who began attending law school at night several years ago and had announced her intention to retire from the C.I.A., had grown disenchanted with the methods that the Bush administration used for handling Al Qaeda prisoners since the September 2001 terror attacks and felt she had no alternative except to go to the press."

Source: Chicken Hawk Express - Leaker Updates and Liberal Excuses Hmmm, sounds like the rule the NYT wants to follow is lawful leaks that help the Bush Administration are bad and illegal leaks that hurt the Bush Administration and its prosecution of the War on Terror are good. Does all of this make sense to you? The President can not declassify documents but minor lackeys in the CIA can do so for whatever reason?

So sorry for you NYT, your whimsy fiat is not law.