*** DONALD J TRUMP HAS OFFICIALLY BEEN INDICTED ***
Comments
-
He wouldn’t. It’s a vague claim but presidential authority is also vague as is the process as it relates to a president specifically. A president can declassify what they want. Trump tweeted highly classified spy photos of Iran while president. That’s his right, perfectly legal. No process no paper trail saying they are declassified. He didn’t have to write a memo declaring the status change. Magic declassification. The only hint they were declassified was the fact the picture was posted publicly.mickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
If Biden reclassified that’s a different point. We have no idea if he did or didn’t or when if he didmrussel1 said:
I don't understand your point. Biden is the executive branch.Cropduster-80 said:
Yes that’s true.mrussel1 said:It doesn't matter if Trump argued that he declassified them. Biden could re-classify them as well, requiring any return of the documents. And the possession of them, regardless of classification, is still a criminal violation.However the Supreme Court EPA case was this in reverse and was 6-3. The EPA as part of the executive can’t create laws or regulations which bypass congress. Since they are in effect legislatingthat was the executive branch interfering with the legislative branch. It’s reasonable to assume they could say declassifying national security information is the job of the executive not legislative as are what to do with presidential records.You’ve got the same separation of powers issue dealing with the specific functions of each branch in both cases
First, we don't know if Trump's lawyers made the argument that he de-classified them. But if they did, I am confident that Biden would reverse that, and instruct the DOJ to collect them. Trump's lawyers would then be put on notice to return them. All that could have taken place over the last 18 months. I don't understand a counter argument. There is only one head of the executive branch. We already know that EOs only last a long as the current executive allows them.I’m saying if he didn’t reclassify them and am working on that assumptionAll the laws and regulations including the presidential records act could be the legislative branch interfering with the executive
1. trump could have declassified using any process he wanted and thus didn’t commit a crime related to classified documents.
2. any laws in relation to presidential records in general are unconstitutional infringements on the executive branch from the legislative.Thus all his records were both declassified (at least at some point between the day he left office and today) and his records, rendering everything else moot.Trump’s lawyers don’t really have a choice. They have to argue he declassified them and they are his
given no paper trail of the alleged declassification how could Biden have known?Can he declassify and should he declassify aren’t the same thing. He obviously shouldn’t have, but he can and has in similarly shady circumstances
as to presidential records being “personal records”
basically the judgment was if Clinton had the records in his possession they are therefore personal records and his. Trump will use this case reguardless of what the presidential records act statesThe 10-year-old court ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, rejected arguments by a conservative watchdog group that sought access to dozens of tapes recorded by Mr. Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during his administration.
“What it highlights is that under the law, and the Justice Department’s prior legal positions, if Clinton had the tapes, they are presumably personal,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Washington Times. His group filed an unsuccessful lawsuit seeking the Clinton recordings.
Those tapes (presidential records) were at Clinton’s house
The point is simply there is a window to get out of both the classified angle and the possessing records at his house angle. If you can successfully argue they are both declassified and personal, what crime is there?
If possession of the records is the standard for them being “personal” it doesn’t even matter what’s in those records. We have no idea what the Clinton tapes contain for example. The content seemed to be irrelevant
Post edited by Cropduster-80 on0 -
Cropduster-80 said:
He wouldn’t. It’s a vague claim but presidential authority is also vague as is the process as it relates to a president specifically. A president can declassify what they want. Trump tweeted highly classified spy photos of Iran while president. That’s his right, perfectly legal. No process no paper trail saying they are declassifiedmickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
If Biden reclassified that’s a different point. We have no idea if he did or didn’t or when if he didmrussel1 said:
I don't understand your point. Biden is the executive branch.Cropduster-80 said:
Yes that’s true.mrussel1 said:It doesn't matter if Trump argued that he declassified them. Biden could re-classify them as well, requiring any return of the documents. And the possession of them, regardless of classification, is still a criminal violation.However the Supreme Court EPA case was this in reverse and was 6-3. The EPA as part of the executive can’t create laws or regulations which bypass congress. Since they are in effect legislatingthat was the executive branch interfering with the legislative branch. It’s reasonable to assume they could say declassifying national security information is the job of the executive not legislative as are what to do with presidential records.You’ve got the same separation of powers issue dealing with the specific functions of each branch in both cases
First, we don't know if Trump's lawyers made the argument that he de-classified them. But if they did, I am confident that Biden would reverse that, and instruct the DOJ to collect them. Trump's lawyers would then be put on notice to return them. All that could have taken place over the last 18 months. I don't understand a counter argument. There is only one head of the executive branch. We already know that EOs only last a long as the current executive allows them.I’m saying if he didn’t reclassify them and am working on that assumptionAll the laws and regulations including the presidential records act could be the legislative branch interfering with the executive
1. trump could have declassified using any process he wanted and thus didn’t commit a crime related to classified documents.
2. any laws in relation to presidential records in general are unconstitutional infringements on the executive branch from the legislative.Thus all his records were both declassified (at least at some point between the day he left office and today) and his records, rendering everything else moot.Trump’s lawyers don’t really have a choice. They have to argue he declassified them and they are his
given no paper trail of the alleged declassification how could Biden have known?
as to presidential records being “personal records”
basically the judgment was if Clinton had the records in his possession they are therefore personal records and his. Trump will use this case reguardless of what the presidential records act statesThe 10-year-old court ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, rejected arguments by a conservative watchdog group that sought access to dozens of tapes recorded by Mr. Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during his administration.
“What it highlights is that under the law, and the Justice Department’s prior legal positions, if Clinton had the tapes, they are presumably personal,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Washington Times. His group filed an unsuccessful lawsuit seeking the Clinton recordings.
Those tapes (presidential records) were at Clinton’s house
The point is simply there is a window to get out of both the classified angle and the possessing records at his house angle. If you can successfully argue they are both declassified and personal, what crime is there?
If possession of the records is the standard for them being “personal” it doesn’t even matter what’s in those records. We have no idea what the Clinton tapes contain for example. The content seemed to be irrelevant
the documents as described are in no way personal. the letters etc mixed in are. documents marked with a classification of any degree belong to the united states. even IF he declassified some or all, there is a procedure for doing so. there does not appear to be any record of such declassification and STILL THEY ALL BELONG TO THE UNITED STATES
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Not according to the Clinton case.mickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
He wouldn’t. It’s a vague claim but presidential authority is also vague as is the process as it relates to a president specifically. A president can declassify what they want. Trump tweeted highly classified spy photos of Iran while president. That’s his right, perfectly legal. No process no paper trail saying they are declassifiedmickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
If Biden reclassified that’s a different point. We have no idea if he did or didn’t or when if he didmrussel1 said:
I don't understand your point. Biden is the executive branch.Cropduster-80 said:
Yes that’s true.mrussel1 said:It doesn't matter if Trump argued that he declassified them. Biden could re-classify them as well, requiring any return of the documents. And the possession of them, regardless of classification, is still a criminal violation.However the Supreme Court EPA case was this in reverse and was 6-3. The EPA as part of the executive can’t create laws or regulations which bypass congress. Since they are in effect legislatingthat was the executive branch interfering with the legislative branch. It’s reasonable to assume they could say declassifying national security information is the job of the executive not legislative as are what to do with presidential records.You’ve got the same separation of powers issue dealing with the specific functions of each branch in both cases
First, we don't know if Trump's lawyers made the argument that he de-classified them. But if they did, I am confident that Biden would reverse that, and instruct the DOJ to collect them. Trump's lawyers would then be put on notice to return them. All that could have taken place over the last 18 months. I don't understand a counter argument. There is only one head of the executive branch. We already know that EOs only last a long as the current executive allows them.I’m saying if he didn’t reclassify them and am working on that assumptionAll the laws and regulations including the presidential records act could be the legislative branch interfering with the executive
1. trump could have declassified using any process he wanted and thus didn’t commit a crime related to classified documents.
2. any laws in relation to presidential records in general are unconstitutional infringements on the executive branch from the legislative.Thus all his records were both declassified (at least at some point between the day he left office and today) and his records, rendering everything else moot.Trump’s lawyers don’t really have a choice. They have to argue he declassified them and they are his
given no paper trail of the alleged declassification how could Biden have known?
as to presidential records being “personal records”
basically the judgment was if Clinton had the records in his possession they are therefore personal records and his. Trump will use this case reguardless of what the presidential records act statesThe 10-year-old court ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, rejected arguments by a conservative watchdog group that sought access to dozens of tapes recorded by Mr. Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during his administration.
“What it highlights is that under the law, and the Justice Department’s prior legal positions, if Clinton had the tapes, they are presumably personal,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Washington Times. His group filed an unsuccessful lawsuit seeking the Clinton recordings.
Those tapes (presidential records) were at Clinton’s house
The point is simply there is a window to get out of both the classified angle and the possessing records at his house angle. If you can successfully argue they are both declassified and personal, what crime is there?
If possession of the records is the standard for them being “personal” it doesn’t even matter what’s in those records. We have no idea what the Clinton tapes contain for example. The content seemed to be irrelevant
the documents as described are in no way personal. the letters etc mixed in are. documents marked with a classification of any degree belong to the united states. even IF he declassified some or all, there is a procedure for doing so. there does not appear to be any record of such declassification and STILL THEY ALL BELONG TO THE UNITED STATESIt’s like the phrase possession is 9/10 of the law.
the Clinton tapes were found to be personal NOT because they were personal necessarily but because they were in his possession.The fact he has them makes them personal.
Possession = personal
not
content =personalIt comes down to who decides what is a personal record and what isn’t. Presumably the president decides when he packed them while still president. If a president doesn’t have that authority to decide, who does constitutionally?I’m not saying that makes sense. That’s what the judgment was and it’s exactly the claim judicial watch is making to support trump after losing the Clinton case arguing Clinton’s records belonged to the United States. That lawyer is advising trump
when you can point to a previous case as a precedent it’s a lot harder to lose in court. Trump may still lose the argument but he has at least some case law on his side
in no way is this as open and shut of a case as many are suggesting. The entire point of trump is his history of muddying the waters to make everything chaotic. This is absolutely that.
this entire case needs to be looked at like a game of chess not checkers .Post edited by Cropduster-80 on0 -
2021
Does everything you posit POOTWH POOTWH’s swearing to his oath of office?Cropduster-80 said:
Not according to the Clinton case.mickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
He wouldn’t. It’s a vague claim but presidential authority is also vague as is the process as it relates to a president specifically. A president can declassify what they want. Trump tweeted highly classified spy photos of Iran while president. That’s his right, perfectly legal. No process no paper trail saying they are declassifiedmickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
If Biden reclassified that’s a different point. We have no idea if he did or didn’t or when if he didmrussel1 said:
I don't understand your point. Biden is the executive branch.Cropduster-80 said:
Yes that’s true.mrussel1 said:It doesn't matter if Trump argued that he declassified them. Biden could re-classify them as well, requiring any return of the documents. And the possession of them, regardless of classification, is still a criminal violation.However the Supreme Court EPA case was this in reverse and was 6-3. The EPA as part of the executive can’t create laws or regulations which bypass congress. Since they are in effect legislatingthat was the executive branch interfering with the legislative branch. It’s reasonable to assume they could say declassifying national security information is the job of the executive not legislative as are what to do with presidential records.You’ve got the same separation of powers issue dealing with the specific functions of each branch in both cases
First, we don't know if Trump's lawyers made the argument that he de-classified them. But if they did, I am confident that Biden would reverse that, and instruct the DOJ to collect them. Trump's lawyers would then be put on notice to return them. All that could have taken place over the last 18 months. I don't understand a counter argument. There is only one head of the executive branch. We already know that EOs only last a long as the current executive allows them.I’m saying if he didn’t reclassify them and am working on that assumptionAll the laws and regulations including the presidential records act could be the legislative branch interfering with the executive
1. trump could have declassified using any process he wanted and thus didn’t commit a crime related to classified documents.
2. any laws in relation to presidential records in general are unconstitutional infringements on the executive branch from the legislative.Thus all his records were both declassified (at least at some point between the day he left office and today) and his records, rendering everything else moot.Trump’s lawyers don’t really have a choice. They have to argue he declassified them and they are his
given no paper trail of the alleged declassification how could Biden have known?
as to presidential records being “personal records”
basically the judgment was if Clinton had the records in his possession they are therefore personal records and his. Trump will use this case reguardless of what the presidential records act statesThe 10-year-old court ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, rejected arguments by a conservative watchdog group that sought access to dozens of tapes recorded by Mr. Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during his administration.
“What it highlights is that under the law, and the Justice Department’s prior legal positions, if Clinton had the tapes, they are presumably personal,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Washington Times. His group filed an unsuccessful lawsuit seeking the Clinton recordings.
Those tapes (presidential records) were at Clinton’s house
The point is simply there is a window to get out of both the classified angle and the possessing records at his house angle. If you can successfully argue they are both declassified and personal, what crime is there?
If possession of the records is the standard for them being “personal” it doesn’t even matter what’s in those records. We have no idea what the Clinton tapes contain for example. The content seemed to be irrelevant
the documents as described are in no way personal. the letters etc mixed in are. documents marked with a classification of any degree belong to the united states. even IF he declassified some or all, there is a procedure for doing so. there does not appear to be any record of such declassification and STILL THEY ALL BELONG TO THE UNITED STATESIt’s like the phrase possession is 9/10 of the law.
the Clinton tapes were found to be personal NOT because they were personal necessarily but because they were in his possession.The fact he has them makes them personal.
Possession = personal
not
content =personalIt comes down to who decides what is a personal record and what isn’t. Presumably the president decides when he packed them while still president. If a president doesn’t have that authority to decide, who does constitutionally?I’m not saying that makes sense. That’s what the judgment was and it’s exactly the claim judicial watch is making to support trump after losing the Clinton case arguing Clinton’s records belonged to the United States. That lawyer is advising trump
when you can point to a previous case as a precedent it’s a lot harder to lose in court. Trump may still lose the argument but he has at least some case law on his side
in no way is this as open and shut of a case as many are suggesting. The entire point of trump is his history of muddying the waters to make everything chaotic. This is absolutely that.
this entire case needs to be looked at like a game of chess not checkers .09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
What’s the enforcement mechanism of the oath of office? Impeachment?Halifax2TheMax said:
Does everything you posit POOTWH POOTWH’s swearing to his oath of office?Cropduster-80 said:
Not according to the Clinton case.mickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
He wouldn’t. It’s a vague claim but presidential authority is also vague as is the process as it relates to a president specifically. A president can declassify what they want. Trump tweeted highly classified spy photos of Iran while president. That’s his right, perfectly legal. No process no paper trail saying they are declassifiedmickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
If Biden reclassified that’s a different point. We have no idea if he did or didn’t or when if he didmrussel1 said:
I don't understand your point. Biden is the executive branch.Cropduster-80 said:
Yes that’s true.mrussel1 said:It doesn't matter if Trump argued that he declassified them. Biden could re-classify them as well, requiring any return of the documents. And the possession of them, regardless of classification, is still a criminal violation.However the Supreme Court EPA case was this in reverse and was 6-3. The EPA as part of the executive can’t create laws or regulations which bypass congress. Since they are in effect legislatingthat was the executive branch interfering with the legislative branch. It’s reasonable to assume they could say declassifying national security information is the job of the executive not legislative as are what to do with presidential records.You’ve got the same separation of powers issue dealing with the specific functions of each branch in both cases
First, we don't know if Trump's lawyers made the argument that he de-classified them. But if they did, I am confident that Biden would reverse that, and instruct the DOJ to collect them. Trump's lawyers would then be put on notice to return them. All that could have taken place over the last 18 months. I don't understand a counter argument. There is only one head of the executive branch. We already know that EOs only last a long as the current executive allows them.I’m saying if he didn’t reclassify them and am working on that assumptionAll the laws and regulations including the presidential records act could be the legislative branch interfering with the executive
1. trump could have declassified using any process he wanted and thus didn’t commit a crime related to classified documents.
2. any laws in relation to presidential records in general are unconstitutional infringements on the executive branch from the legislative.Thus all his records were both declassified (at least at some point between the day he left office and today) and his records, rendering everything else moot.Trump’s lawyers don’t really have a choice. They have to argue he declassified them and they are his
given no paper trail of the alleged declassification how could Biden have known?
as to presidential records being “personal records”
basically the judgment was if Clinton had the records in his possession they are therefore personal records and his. Trump will use this case reguardless of what the presidential records act statesThe 10-year-old court ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, rejected arguments by a conservative watchdog group that sought access to dozens of tapes recorded by Mr. Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during his administration.
“What it highlights is that under the law, and the Justice Department’s prior legal positions, if Clinton had the tapes, they are presumably personal,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Washington Times. His group filed an unsuccessful lawsuit seeking the Clinton recordings.
Those tapes (presidential records) were at Clinton’s house
The point is simply there is a window to get out of both the classified angle and the possessing records at his house angle. If you can successfully argue they are both declassified and personal, what crime is there?
If possession of the records is the standard for them being “personal” it doesn’t even matter what’s in those records. We have no idea what the Clinton tapes contain for example. The content seemed to be irrelevant
the documents as described are in no way personal. the letters etc mixed in are. documents marked with a classification of any degree belong to the united states. even IF he declassified some or all, there is a procedure for doing so. there does not appear to be any record of such declassification and STILL THEY ALL BELONG TO THE UNITED STATESIt’s like the phrase possession is 9/10 of the law.
the Clinton tapes were found to be personal NOT because they were personal necessarily but because they were in his possession.The fact he has them makes them personal.
Possession = personal
not
content =personalIt comes down to who decides what is a personal record and what isn’t. Presumably the president decides when he packed them while still president. If a president doesn’t have that authority to decide, who does constitutionally?I’m not saying that makes sense. That’s what the judgment was and it’s exactly the claim judicial watch is making to support trump after losing the Clinton case arguing Clinton’s records belonged to the United States. That lawyer is advising trump
when you can point to a previous case as a precedent it’s a lot harder to lose in court. Trump may still lose the argument but he has at least some case law on his side
in no way is this as open and shut of a case as many are suggesting. The entire point of trump is his history of muddying the waters to make everything chaotic. This is absolutely that.
this entire case needs to be looked at like a game of chess not checkers .
The battle is really:
the government is right based on existing law absolutely on a lot of this stuff and that’s the assumption they are going with as they have to enforce existing law. They have no choice. They don’t interpret it, they enforce it as written
Trump could be right in the sense that those laws are invalid/not applicable/unconstitutional based on a combination of executive authority and separation of powers
The definition of unconstitutional is whatever the Supreme Court says it is. It’s not black and white
trump broke the law, that’s not in question. The validity of the law(s) are
Post edited by Cropduster-80 on0 -
the tapes were generated BY Clinton. Seems that would be the fundamental difference between the 2 cases.
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Maybe but handwritten notes by trump are supposedly presidential records too. The ones he put in the toilet. Same thing.mickeyrat said:the tapes were generated BY Clinton. Seems that would be the fundamental difference between the 2 cases.It’s going to be interesting. At the end of the day we need to acknowledge that there is a possibility trump could win the legal argument.Really I don’t even think it’s about trump at all. These right wing legal circles are trying to push the trump case to make presidential authority absolute, for the next guy. Not trump. Trump is means to an endTrump could go to jail also, they won’t care he goes to jail. They will care they lost the legal argument. There is a lot of people who want to move to authoritarian government. This case is a way to move in that direction.Trump has been getting legal advise to keep the records, we already know that. Why?To advance an authoritarian agenda generally or because it’s in Trump’s best interest? I think the former. Trump is an old man, this goes beyond his lifetimePost edited by Cropduster-80 on0 -
THE FIELDfascinating reading.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0
-
2021
When POOTWH took the oath of office, he swore allegiance to the Constitution of these United States and swore to god, for what’s that’s worth, to defend the constitution and these United States from all enemies foreign and domestic. He may have, through his actions, committed treason, mentioned specifically in and prescribing punishment for in the constitution, upon conviction with two witnesses or by admission of guilt. The Congress shall have the authority to punish as they deem fit. Seeing how he wasn’t POTUS at the time, it’s kicked to the courts.Cropduster-80 said:
What’s the enforcement mechanism of the oath of office? Impeachment?Halifax2TheMax said:
Does everything you posit POOTWH POOTWH’s swearing to his oath of office?Cropduster-80 said:
Not according to the Clinton case.mickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
He wouldn’t. It’s a vague claim but presidential authority is also vague as is the process as it relates to a president specifically. A president can declassify what they want. Trump tweeted highly classified spy photos of Iran while president. That’s his right, perfectly legal. No process no paper trail saying they are declassifiedmickeyrat said:Cropduster-80 said:
If Biden reclassified that’s a different point. We have no idea if he did or didn’t or when if he didmrussel1 said:
I don't understand your point. Biden is the executive branch.Cropduster-80 said:
Yes that’s true.mrussel1 said:It doesn't matter if Trump argued that he declassified them. Biden could re-classify them as well, requiring any return of the documents. And the possession of them, regardless of classification, is still a criminal violation.However the Supreme Court EPA case was this in reverse and was 6-3. The EPA as part of the executive can’t create laws or regulations which bypass congress. Since they are in effect legislatingthat was the executive branch interfering with the legislative branch. It’s reasonable to assume they could say declassifying national security information is the job of the executive not legislative as are what to do with presidential records.You’ve got the same separation of powers issue dealing with the specific functions of each branch in both cases
First, we don't know if Trump's lawyers made the argument that he de-classified them. But if they did, I am confident that Biden would reverse that, and instruct the DOJ to collect them. Trump's lawyers would then be put on notice to return them. All that could have taken place over the last 18 months. I don't understand a counter argument. There is only one head of the executive branch. We already know that EOs only last a long as the current executive allows them.I’m saying if he didn’t reclassify them and am working on that assumptionAll the laws and regulations including the presidential records act could be the legislative branch interfering with the executive
1. trump could have declassified using any process he wanted and thus didn’t commit a crime related to classified documents.
2. any laws in relation to presidential records in general are unconstitutional infringements on the executive branch from the legislative.Thus all his records were both declassified (at least at some point between the day he left office and today) and his records, rendering everything else moot.Trump’s lawyers don’t really have a choice. They have to argue he declassified them and they are his
given no paper trail of the alleged declassification how could Biden have known?
as to presidential records being “personal records”
basically the judgment was if Clinton had the records in his possession they are therefore personal records and his. Trump will use this case reguardless of what the presidential records act statesThe 10-year-old court ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, rejected arguments by a conservative watchdog group that sought access to dozens of tapes recorded by Mr. Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during his administration.
“What it highlights is that under the law, and the Justice Department’s prior legal positions, if Clinton had the tapes, they are presumably personal,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Washington Times. His group filed an unsuccessful lawsuit seeking the Clinton recordings.
Those tapes (presidential records) were at Clinton’s house
The point is simply there is a window to get out of both the classified angle and the possessing records at his house angle. If you can successfully argue they are both declassified and personal, what crime is there?
If possession of the records is the standard for them being “personal” it doesn’t even matter what’s in those records. We have no idea what the Clinton tapes contain for example. The content seemed to be irrelevant
the documents as described are in no way personal. the letters etc mixed in are. documents marked with a classification of any degree belong to the united states. even IF he declassified some or all, there is a procedure for doing so. there does not appear to be any record of such declassification and STILL THEY ALL BELONG TO THE UNITED STATESIt’s like the phrase possession is 9/10 of the law.
the Clinton tapes were found to be personal NOT because they were personal necessarily but because they were in his possession.The fact he has them makes them personal.
Possession = personal
not
content =personalIt comes down to who decides what is a personal record and what isn’t. Presumably the president decides when he packed them while still president. If a president doesn’t have that authority to decide, who does constitutionally?I’m not saying that makes sense. That’s what the judgment was and it’s exactly the claim judicial watch is making to support trump after losing the Clinton case arguing Clinton’s records belonged to the United States. That lawyer is advising trump
when you can point to a previous case as a precedent it’s a lot harder to lose in court. Trump may still lose the argument but he has at least some case law on his side
in no way is this as open and shut of a case as many are suggesting. The entire point of trump is his history of muddying the waters to make everything chaotic. This is absolutely that.
this entire case needs to be looked at like a game of chess not checkers .
The battle is really:
the government is right based on existing law absolutely on a lot of this stuff and that’s the assumption they are going with as they have to enforce existing law. They have no choice. They don’t interpret it, they enforce it as written
Trump could be right in the sense that those laws are invalid/not applicable/unconstitutional based on a combination of executive authority and separation of powers
The definition of unconstitutional is whatever the Supreme Court says it is. It’s not black and white
trump broke the law, that’s not in question. The validity of the law(s) are
Further, Article I deals with the legislative branch while Article II deals with the executive. It would appear, if you’re a strict constitutionalist, that the founders put the power with those elected by the people over the executive. Otherwise the subject of those Articles would be reversed. The espionage act was passed by the legislative branch and has been amended and expanded a number of times since. To now claim it doesn’t apply to POOTWH or POTUS because it’s never been challenged in this context or because POOTWH got caught is specious at best, desparado at worst.
But with these white supremacists being elected and popular, nothing surprises me anymore. Good night‘Murica, I’ll turn the light out for you.Post edited by Halifax2TheMax on09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
Cropduster-80 said:
Maybe but handwritten notes by trump are supposedly presidential records too. The ones he put in the toilet. Same thing.mickeyrat said:the tapes were generated BY Clinton. Seems that would be the fundamental difference between the 2 cases.It’s going to be interesting. At the end of the day we need to acknowledge that there is a possibility trump could win the legal argument.Really I don’t even think it’s about trump at all. These right wing legal circles are trying to push the trump case to make presidential authority absolute, for the next guy. Not trump. Trump is means to an endTrump could go to jail also, they won’t care he goes to jail. They will care they lost the legal argument. There is a lot of people who want to move to authoritarian government. This case is a way to move in that direction.Trump has been getting legal advise to keep the records, we already know that. Why?To advance an authoritarian agenda generally or because it’s in Trump’s best interest? I think the former. Trump is an old man, this goes beyond his lifetimealtering or destroying government property.....his scribbling on those documents fo not nake them his. they remain the property of the united states.Post edited by mickeyrat on_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
2022tick
tockwww.myspace.com0 -
2022https://news.yahoo.com/over-trump-indicted-220111093.html
It’s Over: Trump Will Be Indicted
Brandon Bell/Getty ImagesI have finally seen enough. Donald Trump will be indicted by a federal grand jury.
You heard me right: I believe Trump will actually be indicted for a criminal offense. Even with all its redactions, the probable cause affidavit published today by the magistrate judge in Florida makes clear to me three essential points:
(1) Trump was in unauthorized possession of national defense information, namely properly marked classified documents.
(2) He was put on notice by the U.S. Government that he was not permitted to retain those documents at Mar-a-Lago.
(3) He continued to maintain possession of the documents (and allegedly undertook efforts to conceal them in different places throughout the property) up until the FBI finally executed a search warrant earlier this month.
That is the ball game, folks. Absent some unforeseen change in factual or legal circumstances, I believe there is little left for the Justice Department to do but decide whether to wait until after the midterms to formally seek the indictment from the grand jury.
The cruelest irony for Trump is that it never needed to be this way.
Put aside that in the chaos following his election loss Trump’s team never undertook the normal procedure for properly sorting through and archiving his presidential records in coordination with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Put aside that properly marked classified records were shipped to Mar-a-Lago and sat there for months until he began turning stuff over to NARA in late 2021.
If he had fully cooperated at that point, and returned all of the records to NARA last year, this likely never would have become a criminal matter. DOJ would have declined to take any action, notwithstanding the existence of the classified records, and it would have been a “no harm, no foul” situation. Just another minor story in the Trump saga of incompetence.
But Trump just could not bring himself to play by the rules. He turned over 15 boxes last January but did not turn over all the records. Political operatives from conservative organizations started whispering into his ear that he had legal precedent on his side to refuse to turn over the classified records to NARA (he did not). His lawyers surprisingly wrote a rather condescending letter to DOJ in May 2022, effectively arguing that even if there were still classified records at Mar-a-Lago the FBI lacked the authority to take any criminal action against Trump given his former status as president. Then, in June 2022 after the FBI executed a subpoena to recover more records at Mar-a-Lago, two Trump lawyers wrote (and one signed) a sworn affidavit reassuring the government there were no more classified records at the property.
We now know that statement was not true. The FBI found multiple more classified records, including some with markings for Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) during the search this month, and not just located in the storage room with the other boxes of records. They found records located in different parts of Mar-a-Lago.
Of course, there are various arguments for why a prosecution might not succeed in this situation.
There is the contention by Trump and his allies that he declassified the documents, whether through a “standing order” or more specific verbal action. No evidence has been produced corroborating that assertion, and there certainly is no indication that the classification markings themselves were ever revised to reflect the declassification. The Trump lawyers in May certainly did not provide any such evidence in their letter to DOJ, and they similarly provided no evidence of it in their “motion” filed earlier this week in district court in Florida seeking a Special Master.
And that is before we even consider if the classification status would matter for an Espionage Act prosecution, which only requires that the information relate to the national defense.
Trump’s Coup Attempt Will Always Be a Way Worse Crime Than Stealing Documents
There is also the issue of selective political prosecution and supposed bad faith by the government in its decision to pursue the case. This is something that has been mentioned ad nauseum by Trump allies on cable news, and was briefly mentioned in the “motion” filed earlier this week in court. Lacking from those arguments is anything beyond rank speculation. That will not fly in court. Just ask Sidney Powell how well it works to try to litigate in court the way you argue on cable news. Hint: it does not go well.
All in all, this case should and in my opinion will result in an indictment. Sure, an indictment does not equal a conviction. Trump is still assumed innocent until proven guilty. There are unknown variables like whether the prosecution would occur in Florida or in D.C. We do not know what evidence Trump might have to substantiate his declassification claim. And we do not know what the courts would say about his various arguments.
Get the popcorn ready either way.
Bradley P. Moss is a Partner and national security attorney at the Washington, D.C. Law Office of Mark S. Zaid, P.C. He can be found on Twitter at @BradMossEsq.
www.myspace.com0 -
THE FIELDI want him to be indicted. sort of. part of me thinks this will galvanize support for him and lead to possible violence. Watergate, this ain't.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0
-
2021
If some of the suspicions are true, it's far worse than Watergate.HughFreakingDillon said:I want him to be indicted. sort of. part of me thinks this will galvanize support for him and lead to possible violence. Watergate, this ain't.0 -
THE FIELDwhat I meant by "this ain't Watergate" I meant that even republicans accepted it was over for nixon. there was no alternate universe where he was being framed or is the rightful president or whatever.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0
-
2021
Okay I see.HughFreakingDillon said:what I meant by "this ain't Watergate" I meant that even republicans accepted it was over for nixon. there was no alternate universe where he was being framed or is the rightful president or whatever.0 -
indict him now. if the facts are now what they appear to be, he is guilty as hell. why placate his followers by letting him walk? he has broken many laws and he needs to face justice for once in his pathetic life.
i do not care about violence from his supporters. violence is inevitable now. if they do not indict him people will be angry. if they do indict him people will be angry. let those people deal with the national guard."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
what we are seeing now is a direct result of the soft reconstruction following the civil war. the confederates were not punished. the confederate leaders were not punished. the magas now believe that since confederates got away with starting a war that they can do all of this violence and not face any consequences."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
2021
No way, his supporters are all internet talkers. Cowards.gimmesometruth27 said:indict him now. if the facts are now what they appear to be, he is guilty as hell. why placate his followers by letting him walk? he has broken many laws and he needs to face justice for once in his pathetic life.
i do not care about violence from his supporters. violence is inevitable now. if they do not indict him people will be angry. if they do indict him people will be angry. let those people deal with the national guard.0 -
2021and losers.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 278 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help