Trump's Defense Suggests His Treatment of Classified Material Was Remarkably Cavalier
Whatever threat it may have posed, the trove of government documents seized by the FBI does not reflect well on the former president's judgment.

The main justification for the FBI's August 8 search of former President Donald Trump's home at his Palm Beach resort—securing state secrets—requires us to accept the government's characterization of purloined documents that we are not allowed to see. Trump, meanwhile, insists he had no classified documents, which is even harder to believe.
According to the search warrant inventory that was unsealed last Friday, the FBI found 11 sets of classified documents, ranging from "confidential" to "top secret," at Mar-a-Lago. The top-secret documents included some that were labeled "SCI," or "sensitive compartmented information," an especially restricted category.
Trump does not dispute that the documents bore those labels. But he says "the very fact that these documents were present at Mar-a-Lago means they couldn't have been classified," because he had "a standing order" as president that said any material "removed from the Oval Office and taken into the residence" was "deemed to be declassified."
If so, Trump's treatment of classified material was remarkably cavalier. The fact that he removed documents to study in preparation for the next day's work, which is how he describes it, had no bearing on the question of whether declassifying them could compromise national security, which is supposed to be the main consideration in such decisions.
Taking Trump at his word, all of his homework, no matter how sensitive the information it involved, was automatically declassified. Theoretically, any random person could have obtained copies of those documents under the Freedom of Information Act unless another exception applied.
Trump's "standing order" was news to John Bolton, who served as his national security adviser for 17 months in 2018 and 2019. "I was never briefed on any such order, procedure, policy when I came in," Bolton told The New York Times. "If he were to say something like that, you would have to memorialize that, so that people would know it existed."
Maybe Bolton was out of the loop. But the fact that Trump's own national security adviser was unaware of this purported policy underlines how irregular and haphazard it would have been. By Trump's own account, his blanket declassification of whatever he happened to remove from the Oval Office meant that many documents marked as "top secret" were not secret at all.
On its face, Trump's handling of classified material was at least as reckless as Hillary Clinton's when she was secretary of state. Trump has long maintained that Clinton's use of an unsecured private email server when she ran the State Department was so egregious an affront to national security that she should go to prison for it.
As Trump's supporters are quick to point out, there is a legally relevant difference. As president, Trump had the unilateral authority to declassify secrets, while Clinton, as secretary of state, did not.
Assuming Trump really did declassify all the material found at Mar-a-Lago when he still had that power, that might mean he is not criminally liable under the Espionage Act, one of the statutes cited in the FBI's search warrant. Or it might not, since that law does not mention classification, referring instead to mishandling of "defense information" that "could be used to the injury of the United States."
Either way, Trump's defense raises troubling questions about his judgment and care as the nation's chief executive. So does his puzzling decision to keep indisputably unclassified government documents, such as his pardon for Roger Stone, that belonged in the National Archives under the Presidential Records Act, a potential violation of another law cited by the FBI.
I don't know whether Trump's trove of government documents posed a national security threat grave enough to justify the unprecedented and politically explosive decision to search the home of a former president who is the leading contender to oppose the current president in the next election. But its existence provides further reason, in case any was needed, to believe Trump is not qualified for that office.
© Copyright 2022 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
1. It wasn't classified Sullum. You know it, I know it, we all know it.
It's time to stop gaslighting.
2. A safe and a locked storage room with no windows in a house monitored and patrolled by the US Secret Service isn't "cavalier" by any standard.
Seriously Jacob, this is Pravda level stuff you're doing here. Aren't you ashamed? Don't you worry about how this will read in twenty years?
Libertarians for the intelligence community!
^Exactly....
But only when the word 'Trump' is muttered.
Shows just how Libertarian Reason really is when the most Libertarian administration we've seen in over a century runs through the white house.
I worked part-time from my apartment and earned $30k. After losing my previous business, I quickly became exhausted. Fortunately, I discovered this jobs online, and as a result, I was able to start earning money from home right away. Anyone can accomplish this elite career and increase their internet income by….
After reading this article…>> http://oldprofits.blogspot.com
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, I found this employment online and I was able to start working from home right away. (res-32) This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
After reading this article:>>> https://workofferweb24.pages.dev/
The party that currently controls the federal gov, their allies in the intelligence community and the mainstream media, have proven over and over that they’re the enemy of the American people’s liberty.
This said group of assholes have devoted ridiculous amounts of resources to keep Trump out of power. Maybe the question a serious journalist should be asking is:
Why?
Why are the powers that be so terrified of Trump? Is the fucking apple cart so precious that it must be protected at the cost of the deep state rearing it’s corrupt head time and time again?
To them, yes. It's the gravy train that keeps on giving at our (taxpayer) expense.
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best (lap-66) assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://smartpay21.pages.dev
It wasn't classified because the guy under investigation said so. Except there's no evidence, but that's OK, he can do it with his mind (and retroactively, presumably).
Unfortunately nobody is investigating him for failing to classify certain documents. He's not a president, and it's illegal for someone who's not the president to have boxes of sensitive government property in their basement.
“It wasn't classified because the guy under investigation said so.”
The guy under investigation was the president of the United States, no matter how much you pretend he wasn’t. Unelected bureaucrats in the executive branch answer to him.
I know you’re a true fascist, and cheer all efforts to either jail or kill your political enemies, but some of us are still trying to follow the constitution.
If it's not classified then they're not sensitive government documents.
Actually they can be. Hence the extension of the Espionage Act beyond classified documents.
The most recent executive order, 13526, Sec 1.3, (a)1 says the President and Vice President control classification without oversight. There are lots of rules for authorities, notification, documentation, and control of documents in this and succeeding executive orders, but none seem to apply to the President.
Surely, you say, the President can't just say 'it is no longer classified' and it is so, but that is what appears to be the case. If you wonder how this could be so, remember President Obama created the order, probably considered all documents were in his safe hands, and "apre moi, le deluge."
Trump would probably say in court, if it gets that far, that he would never leave classified documents just lying around in his office, so he declassified any he wanted to hold on to.
And, no, the nuclear codes in use on January 20, 2021 were not in use any day following.
Russians could see into the locked storage room guarded by the secret service all the way from their basements in St Petersburg
But they would never had hacked Hillary's home server. Russians would never do something like that.
They tried, as they do with most American servers, but never were successful.
There is no proof they were not successful, just no proof they were.
Important that there is no proof for sure, but not the same as an assurance they were not successful.
So Jacob, let's review quickly:
Trump, who had the authority to de-classify anything, had documents alleged to be classified mixed in with other documents in boxes packed by others.
To have a crime, you have to assume he INTENTIONALLY dictated that those specific documents be packed while failing to declassify them which can actually be accomplished (by previous court decision) by simply verbally declaring them de-classified. (Obviously a completely unprovable charge)
Assuming that Trump did not specifically dictate what documents were packed, (the most likely scenario) Trump MAY have had documents that were still classified in his home. Those potential documents were in boxes packed by staff, stored in a storage room with a single door, padlocked by agreement with the FBI and the Presidential Records folks, with 24 hr Secret Service presence.
A horribly risky situation indeed. (SIC)
Hillary on the other had INTENTIONALLY set up a private email server in her home for her use in official government business. This specific act is violation of Federal Regulations. In addition, this act INTENTIONALLY placed official emails with CLASSIFIED content and attachments outside of the reach of the FOA and backup by USG IT systems.
When these emails were subpoenaed by the House, she chose about half of the documents to release, then INTENTIONALLY had a contractor scrub the server using Bleach Bit and smashed her phones with a hammer.
Despite all this, SOME of these emails were recovered on other servers and these confirmed that the deleted emails included official correspondence AND included classified content and attachments.
A paragon of integrity, FBI Director Comey, upon investigation determined that laws were indeed broken but "no reasonable prosecutor" would file charges as it would be impossible to prove intent. (Note the word INTENTIONALLY repeated used above and consider that for yourself.)
According to you, INTENTIONALLY violating Federal Regulations to hide your official government records, INTENTIONALLY evading the FOA provisions, and INTENTIONALLY destroying thousands of those records is much less serious than inadvertently picking up some possibly still classified documents in moving out of the White House, locking them up securely, and negotiating with the Presidential Records folks over what documents should be returned.
That ladies and gentlemen is the peak of TDS.
Hillary also directed her subordinates to remove markings so they could send her emails.
Nothing you just said contradicts Sullum’s premise that Trump was incompetently cavalier in his handling of sensitive documents. You say several things that support Sullum’s premise.
Caw caw!
I guess when it rises to the egregious level that Hillary took things to [without consequences, btw] then we can still not care ... because it will be at a level where precedence does not allow for consequences.
Are you fucking serious? The whole premise is utter and complete bullshit to begin with. Is your TDS that damn severe?
I supposedly have TDS, yet you are the one getting all emotional. Interesting.
“Trump … had documents alleged to be classified mixed in with other documents in boxes packed by others.”
Sloppy, lazy, _cavalier_ handling of classified documents.
“Assuming that Trump did not specifically dictate what documents…”
More being cavalier…
Cunt Larsen: Trump is so…so cavalier! Aww Lawd where is my faintin’ couch?
Oh yes, so VERY cavalier ... because the President should personally pack every box and inspecting every drawer or all 400 desks. After all, Presidents don't have anything else to do, right?
Now that you mention it, why do we have all those employees working for the executive branch anyway? The President clearly has time to do every bit it himself, right?
"There is no proof they were not successful, just no proof they were."
This is the same with any kind of election fraud. You can prove if there was fraud, but you can't prove that there wasn't. Although, maybe it doesn't matter as long as it remains undiscovered for some minimum amount of time. If you get the results you want using some kind of fraud and it isn't discovered until much later, is there anything that can really be done about it by that time?
Except in this case, using Bleach Bit on her server would destroy any evidence of whether it had been hacked or not. So you could neither prove nor disprove it had been hacked.
When the subjects won't change themselves, all the nearest TDS-addled lefty shit.
Reality check: the same taxpayer funded folk that can't decide if they have a laptop (that might have belonged to a guy who's sister misplaced a diary that required a SWAT bust of journalists to recover) ALSO intermittently has a file on the murder of Seth Rich, whom they have never officially investigated. Similar to a prisoner exchange, why don't we trade the Trump secrets for the FBI secrets, and see how John Q. Public fares as a result.
Curious: With the FACTS we have so far I would have written an article titled: 3 Passports - Was the FBI/DOJ Remarkably Cavalier...
The locked storage unit that Trump and his entire staff had direct access to, none of which had an actual security clearance since 2021.
Cite on his entire staff having access.
All former Presidents have a security clearance. They can also have a Staff who also have clearances.
Are you absolutely sure about that?
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/05/politics/biden-trump-intelligence-briefing/index.html
Are you absolutely sure that a link to CNN has any credible value?
"The locked storage unit that Trump and his entire staff had direct access to, none of which had an actual security clearance since 2021."
The documents were declassified, TDS-addled shit.
"The locked storage unit that Trump and his entire staff had direct access to, none of which had an actual security clearance since 2021."
1) You pulled that out of your ass.
2)The material is no longer classified.
3) Fuck off and die, TDS-addled asshole.
So, you are saying that Trump could see Russia from his Hooose?
Actually, I think he is saying Putin could see Mar-a-Lago from his Dacha.
I'm just impressed seeing libertarians coming out FOR state secrets.
It wasn't classified Sullum.
We know this because Trump said so. And Trump never lies.
Agreed that Trump lies a lot.
But proving this in a court of law is impossible, such that no respectable lawyer would take the case as it hinges on your case being "I cant prove he lied, but he does lie a lot, but I dont have evidence he lied this time, but I dont trust him and neither should you"
That falls very far from "beyond a reasonable doubt"
So you think he is lying here, but you don't care.
Jeff I think he's saying it's a weak case that's it. I don't think he's say to do it or not to do it.
*Corrected a weak way to try a case
Kathy Newman ladies and gentlemen.
lol
We know thos because the FBI said so. And we know the FBI never lies.
If I have to choose who to believe between the FBI and someone they're investigating - I'll take the word of the accused.
+1
This comment section really needs an upvote option.
If the FBI put out a press release that said they caught Biden diddling a little girl - I'm still not going to take their word for it.
Right, so how about, instead of having extreme faith in one side (Trump is innocent because he said so!!!), or extreme paranoia against one side (The FBI always lies always about everything always!!!), why not use reason and logic and facts, and look at the empirical evidence, and make a rational decision on that basis. Is that too much to ask?
Lying Jeffy never jumps to conclusions based on the principals.
It is from an inveterate liar, such as yourself.
We know the FBI fabricated evidence before the FISA court to get an illegal surveillance warrant. The criminal who committed the crime pled guilty and got a slap on the wrist. This proves two things:
1) the FBI is a crime syndicate
2) the judges are in on it
^ this and we know that the IC loves to overclassify anything and everything because secrecy and lack of transparency are instinctive to them.
"Classified nuclear documents" could literally be a letter Kim Jong Un sent to Trump saying he would consider nuclear disarmament or a memo saying Iran might be trying to build a nuclear weapon. Not exactly earth-shattering revelations if leaked, but apparently anything to do with nukes is default labeled "top secret."
Good point
TDS runs deep in the journalism profession.
Fear not, the hand wringing will subside a bit in mid November only to rear its furrowed brow again in about November, 2023.
It’s his job to defend leftist authoritarianism.
Yes, Trump having documents that he declassified is terrible judgment. Hahaha. Yes. Unclassified info being stored is dangerous.
Good grief.
The TDS never ends.
True libertarians. Hahahahha. We side with the FBI! ????
it's not classified.... but nobody can access the documents, or even what was included in them, let alone find any documentation verifying they were declassified..... cool story, bro.
The president decides what is classified and what isn't. When he says these things are no longer classified, they are not. Therefore he can't be mishandling classified information.
I don't know how many times the commentariat has to keep 'correcting' you on this.
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-declassification-certain-materials-related-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/
"The president decides what is classified and what isn't."
Right up to January 20, 2021 Noon, and not a minute after.
So you're insinuating that he took the documents after January 20, 2021?
How?
I'm not insinuating anything.
If he took them after that date then they cannot be de-classified. If he took them before, then they could be.
How about simply reading what I wrote?
I did. That's why I asked you "how".
We both know Trump left the Whitehouse for the last time before Biden was inaugurated. He landed in Florida with an hour left in his presidency: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-departs-white-house-final-hours-president-n1254871
As far as I can see the only way your scenario of him taking documents from the Whitehouse after his presidency could work is if he snuck in somehow, days or weeks later.
That's why I asked how.
I think he was just reiterating your point by stating it plainly enough that the dummies can understand. They will ignore it, though.
He could have taken classified documents with him and had them in his possession after he left office, but failed to declassify them while he was President. With so many documents taken by Presidents when they leave, I would guess this kind of thing happens quite often.
If he took them, they’re presumed to be declassified.
"He could have taken classified documents with him and had them in his possession after he left office, but failed to declassify them while he was President..."
And it's possible you possess a braincell, but we haven't seen any evidence of that, either.
The FBI visited him months ago and went through what he had. They advised him to secure some of them, which he did per their specifications. Now suddenly this is a problem.
This is purely political. Only moronic democrat fanatics actually believe otherwise.
Well that memo is dated Jan 19, so.............?
I understand the argument, but it would seem there should be some proactive measure to declassify any document, which would have some record. A former president giving a mere word that he declassified it when it entered his property is a silly standard.
Libertarians for more bureaucracy!
Without some record, how does anyone know a document is declassified if the declassification only exists in a (former) president's head?
Jesus Christ! Again, you morons making the "I'm not telepathic" argument don't realize how childish the argument you're making actually is. Think about the alternatives to what you're suggesting:
Someone breaks into Mar-a-lago, finds their way to a locked safe in a locked storage area, breaks into those, grabs the documents, sneaks past the Secret Service, leaks them to the press, and when, inevitably, Democrats begin to chase him to some international zone, cries, "How do you know they weren't classified?!"
Someone with security clearance is led by someone else with security clearance, maybe even Trump himself, to the documents in Mar-a-lago is given the documents with some sort of instruction like "Take these plans to Joint Chiefs." or "Take these plans to the Top Secret engineers at Skunkworks.", or whatever, and, instead, takes them to the press and when, inevitably, Democrats begin to chase him to some international zone, cries, "How do you know they weren't classified?!"
Somebody with security clearance leads someone without security clearance to the safe, hands them the documents and says, "Do whatever you want with them, nobody knows if they're classified or not." and when, inevitably, Democrats begin to chase him to some international zone, cries, "How do you know they weren't classified?!"
Unless Trump altered the documents to remove or change the clearance marks, they would still be on there. Any given person giving or accepting the documents is going to be fully aware of what they're giving/receiving and, even then, Mar-a-lago isn't some magic building. Every time somebody hands or sends somebody classified information anywhere, right down to anyplace the Presidential motorcade goes, any tarmac AF-1 lands on, any hangar it parks in the exact same issues and rules are still at play. The President has the unilateral ability to declassify material and no one else. Manning, Snowden, Winner, Drake... none were convicted (or "convicted") for stealing the information alone, their crimes were distributing the information.
Seriously, what are you suggesting? What's the scenario? Trump accidentally slips the documents labeled "Top Secret: Non-Russian Eyes Only" into an envelope with the Russian Embassy's address on it? Would it be better legally if some mail intern at Biden's WH did the exact same thing?
If you don't like the laws, change the laws, reinterpreting them to convict Snowden, Manning, Drake, and Trump but not Clinton is not nakedly partisan if not worse.
Everything the democrats do is partisan. Everything.
How about, "Libertarians for writing important shit down"?
Libertarians know better than to write shit down.
Going with the succinct answer without even attempting to kick chemjeff in what little brains he has in his scrotum, where's the fun in that?
Don't write it down if you can say it, don't say it if you can nod.
"But, but, but... even if Trump did write a memo and send it out, it doesn't go out to every last person in the world! How, oh how, without a written memo, are people with or without clearance supposed to know, telepathy!?!?! If someone without clearance is having a discussion over the phone with someone who has clearance and has the documents in their possession without a memo how are they supposed to know the documents aren't sitting in an unclassified building, telepathy?!?! Without a written log of everyone who's handled, been in the same room with, been on the phone or at the other end of an email with any person, room, building, or location where confidential documents are or were, how are we to know if our secrets are safe?!?! How are we to know our secrets are safe if they aren't written down?!?!" - Former FBI Agent and Security Specialist chemjeff radical herpaderp
Yes you are of course exactly right. The only two alternatives under discussion are "write down every decision and send it to every person on the planet" or "don't write anything down".
Writing important shit down seems like a good idea if you want a nation of laws, not men.
But, then, lots of Trumpers want a nation of a man, not laws.
What the fuck do you think the memo is?
You keep posting this memo that covers one tranche of documents, and none of the others he had at Mar-a-Lago.
Really? That is your conclusion? After nearly six years of the legal community, intel community, Democratic party and their propaganda arm using every lie they can conjure to find something, anything no matter how absurd, that will stick to Trump, and you conclude that "Trumpers" object to a nation based in equal justice?
Joe Biden stumbled into the white house based on this sort of "thinking" and we will suffer because of it for many years.
And I’m the one accused of having a derangement syndrome. Sheesh.
Give up on the gaslighting.
The third option (as well as a myriad of others) of writing some stuff down, not writing other stuff down, and, in between, everyone acting like adults and getting charged when they actually hurt someone doesn't occur to you.
Gotta stick with a 13-yr.-old's outlook on life don't you?
Sounds reasonable. When the founding fathers started our new nation they took the time to write down the Constitution and even some other stuff.
Was the Constitution ever declassified?
Obviously not since most Democrats haven't even read the thing.
Why, yes, it was.
So it was originally classified? Cite?
Pedo Jeffy, you’re welcome to fuck off.
Libertarians for arbitrary presidential power?
No no. You must have faith in Lord Trump our Savior.
It'd be nice not to have to have faith in Trump, the Secret Service, the DOJ, or the FBI. But that's probably just me being paranoid about organizations that go around prosecuting their own people for even possessing the secrets they're supposed to be keeping.
Ask Jeffy now about the Lightbringer.
It’s now been SEVEN FUCKING YEARS since Trump broke your retarded smooth brain. Are you ever going to grow up, act like an adult and stop crying about a celebrity who is out of office? What a fat whiny fucking cunt you are Jeff.
That does indeed seem reasonable, however it was previously considered by a judge in the past and it was determined that a President can declassify documents verbally.
I find that to be almost a silly as the trivial crap that the government classifies. But it is what it is.
That would
1. Assume the bureaucracy didn't drag it's feet out of spite.
2. Leave declassification at the mercy of the bureaucracy.
The bureaucracy would never disobey a legal order given by Trump!
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/judicial-watch-sues-doj-release-trump-declassified
There is a procedure to declassify. But both W and Obama EOs exempt the president from following those procedures as they too declassified on whim when they needed to.
Nope. He was the president. That literally doesn’t apply. It would if her were say, a SoS keeping classified docs in a private server. That would be illegal on it’s face. Although no reasonable prosecutor would EVER prosecute that.
Far less silly than 'bureaucrats can override the president by dragging their feet on legal orders to declassify information."
Trump had full authority to declassify documents. That is NOT the same thing as saying that "When he says these things are no longer classified, they are not." There is still a process to declassifying documents that must be followed. If it was followed, there will be a record. If there is not, then those documents were never declassified no matter what Trump says then or now.
No. When you have 'full autony' you have the authority to go outside 'procedure'. That's the *point*.
I've already linked to two exwcurive orders by Obama and W stating the president is exempt from the declassification process. Likewise Navy v Egan disagrees with you.
As Elvis is Real has pointed out multiple times now, the Trump White House knew how to create a record of declassification, so odd that they didn’t seem to make any record of Trump’s claim of a standing order:
https://reason.com/2022/08/17/trumps-defense-suggests-his-treatment-of-classified-material-was-remarkably-cavalier/?comments=true#comment-9654287
None of that applies to the president.
"Trump had full authority to declassify documents. That is NOT the same thing as saying that "When he says these things are no longer classified, they are not."..."
Yes it is.
Asshole.
You keep citing this one order declassifying one specific tranche of documents as if it covers all of the documents Trump had at Mar-a-Lago.
Your cite undermines Trump’s claim that he had a verbal standing order about declassification. Your cite shows that his White House followed protocol to declassify documents in at least one known instance.
"Here is written proof that Trump formally declassified some documents. Therefore Trump declassified everything that he took!"
You’re deliberately obtuse. As usual.
he is not president right now..... there is nothing indicating he declassified any of these documents when he was....
can you hunt down and shoot someone who broke into your house 2 years ago? because that is the kind of loophole you dipshits are trying to pretend exists.
Oh, but a super special FUCK YOU for quoting John fucking Bolton. The day you guys finally go under will be a great day for libertarians everywhere.
Imagine going back to 2003 and telling the Reason staff that one day there'll be back to back articles celebrating an unrepentant Bolton and a Cheney. The latter for hosting a televised political show trial.
They'd never believe you.
Only Nixon could go to Gyna. You want them to quote AOC?
I seriously wonder why a far left piece of garbage like yourself would comment here for years? The only explanation is that you’re paid. Who pays you?
Reason, of course, for the use of my copyrighted material. You mean you give yours away for free?
You know, that might be the case. Just look at the articles Reason has been publishing.
Note you didn’t deny you’re a far left piece of garbage.
He’s a proud Marxist.
same thing
"I seriously wonder why a far left piece of garbage like yourself would comment here for years?"
Smae as sarc, jeffy asshole joe, etc; masochism. Serious mental issues, abysmal stupidity among them.
No no. Real libertarians must engage in the same tribalism as Tribe Red and Tribe Blue. It is completely forbidden to acknowledge the legitimacy of anyone outside the tribe even if they happen to be right once in a while.
How could this be about the tribalism of Red and Blue? Bolton was as "Tribe Red" as could be said!
Someone (the Donald) finally got into position to bust up this Red-and-Blue nonsense, and you're making things out to be a continuation of it? No matter how independent we are, you're going to make it like anything critical about anything is along the old lines we rebelled successfully against?
Don't you understand? To jeff everyone but him is a tribalist so that he can dismiss their arguments without logic or information. Anti trump GOP is proof of tribalism!
The tribe of Everyone But Jeff?
Dee and sarc joined his tribe.
The Order of the Open Robe Hippo.
It is a manifestation of the same tribalist impulse. The one that says that everyone who is outside of the tribe is forbidden and must never be mentioned because to do so would be to give power to the other tribes, even if they happen to be right on some issue.
I don't like Bolton as a general rule, but I do like that he thinks that protecting valid national security secrets is a legitimate concern.
Did Trump like Bolton? After all, he brought Bolton into his White House.
Seems that Trump did not like Bolton, but Trump had developed such a reputation for being a boss that would eventually turn on his hires that he could only get shitty people to work with him.
Do you make up the stupid shit you say? Or does it come form stupid talking points sent you by your fellow travelers?
No, you hate Trump more than you hate Bolton. Period. So don’t act like you’re high minded, impartial, or anything but an anti Trump leftist.
Donald J. Trump as champion of anti-tribalism? Seriously?
Seriously Dee, you bitch!
That 'stache is mesmerizing. It even got through to Jacob!
So, quoting John Bolton is an endorsement of John Bolton? Are we going with that logic, because if we are going with that logic it leads to some very bizarre logical conclusions…
You homogeneously arrive at bizarre logical conclusions every day. That’s how you can be a leftist.
The article is clearly using Bolton's quote to push the narrative. Everybody but you can see this clearly:
--------
Trump's "standing order" was news to John Bolton, who served as his national security adviser for 17 months in 2018 and 2019. "I was never briefed on any such order, procedure, policy when I came in," Bolton told The New York Times. "If he were to say something like that, you would have to memorialize that, so that people would know it existed."
----------
The only purpose of that paragraph is to imply that Trump never actually gave the order.
It is not very credible in the first place that Trump ever gave such a standing order.
What evidence do you have that Kash Patel is lying?
Trump hired Bolton. Let that sink in.
Yet what we are going to focus on is that Reason quoted Bolton.
And he was an idiot then, and Trump was an idiot for hiring him -- and I said so loudly and often when it happened. It's tough arguing with people who remain consistent, isn't it?
I don’t keep notes on what you have said or not said. It’s just really weird how you work so hard at defending Trump.
Nobody here thought hiring Bolton was a good idea Dee.
Then maybe you shouldn’t open your fucking mouth if you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. In your case that would make you largely a mute.
Taking his laptop home , even with a security escort, cost Clinton Director of Central Intelligence John Deutsch his job and a quarter million dollar fine.
So why begrudge Trump a club basement stuffed with stuff a spook would die for?
"stuffed with stuff a spook would die for?"
Oh? Such as?
TS/SCI
Clinton's Director of Central intelligence lost his job for less.
Vide supra
So trump was an employee of the SoS? What happened to Clinton? When has this law ever been used against the classification original authority?
Taking his laptop home , even with a security escort, cost Clinton Director of Central Intelligence John Deutsch his job and a quarter million dollar fine.
And? Charged with felony possession of a laptop or could he pay his fine and still legally run for President (even if not advisable)? Because, regardless of whether you or I want it one way or the other, that's what this is about. Everybody knows somebody fired for walking off with office supplies, good at their job or not.
We can hope Entelechy's case of TDS proves fatal for the asshole.
Pro-abortion Medical Organization wants to the media to suppress pro-life activists.
"Physicians for Reproductive Health — an organization of pro-abortion medical and non-medical activists — is pushing the media to ban all pro-life voices from its reporting on abortion. From the organization’s open letter to the media, “Stop Giving Airtime to Anti-Abortion Extremists“:
We are writing today with a big request: stop giving air-time to anti-abortion activists. As the undersigned over 600 providers of abortion care, people who have had abortions and will have abortions, abortion advocates, and individuals who work with the media regularly, we could not be more concerned for the safety and well-being of our communities, in part because of the misinformation, disinformation, and inflammatory threats shared and encouraged by anti-abortion activists in the media.
Of course, scientism and deference to experts play a large part in their rationale to not have any debate on the issue.
"We know your reporting standards are to cover “both sides” of any debate. Allow us to be clear: Medicine and science are not up for debate. Health care is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. And the fact is, abortion is not in the realm of theory or belief. Abortion belongs in health care, social services, and public health reporting."
Progressives seem to have no confidence in their arguments if they feel such a need to protect their ideology from dissent.
We only have Trump's word for it that the documents were declassified. If in the fairly unlikely event of a prosecution, the prosecutors simply show that the documents self-describe as classified, Trump would not merely be able to say, on the witness stand under oath, "oh, I declassified them all" and expect that this would raise an irrebuttable presumption of innocence. The jury would have to believe he was telling the truth and a prosecutor would in the mean time have a field day in cross-examination.
If a jury didn't believe him, not even the Supreme Court would overturn the verdict - perhaps...
Trump was still president when he took the documents. He was still president when he left the White House for the last time. He was still president with an hour to go when he arrived at Mar A Lago.
Explain why he would keep them classified.
Because declassifying a document involves more than waving your hand over them and saying "I declare thee documents declassified." If they weren't formally declassified, then they're not declassified no matter what Trump wanted to do with them. There is no such thing as "automatically declassified".
No it doesn't. Not for the president. Navy vs Egan.
Can you explain this? I'd never heard of Navy vs. Egan, so I looked it up. It looks like it has to do with the Navy revoking someone's security clearance. I didn't see anything having to do with the President or with classified documents.
"Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence"
[...]
"President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.
[...]
Executive Order 13526
As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries..."
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-legal-authority-declassify-intelligence/story?id=47436559
"Because declassifying a document involves more than waving your hand over them and saying "I declare thee documents declassified."
No. Not for a president. You might not like it but that's really all it takes.
Obama set the precedent, take it up with him.
You are completely wrong. The President can declassify any information he wants, for any reason he wants, in any manner he chooses. He is not bound by having to follow a process. If the President decides some foreign potentate needs to know some piece of classified info, and the two have a meeting and the President just tells the potentate the info, that info is instantly declassified. There's no waiting for some unelected functionary to do paperwork. If that were the case, then the ultimate power to declassify would rest in the hands of someone other than the President, and that's not the case at all.
You're welcome.
Biden could tell his gardener the nuclear launch codes and it would be reckless as hell, but not illegal.
what happened to the "he did not personally pack or move those documents" defense? are you suggesting that Trump knew exactly what every single document was? (and in doing so, admit that he was deliberately violating the presidential records act.... which has nothing to do with classification....)
“We only have Trump's word for it that the documents were declassified.”
I know it hurts your feelings, but he was the president. Feel free to read the constitution. Here’s a hint: The president of the United States runs the executive branch, no matter how much you hate him.
What part of "high crimes and misdemeanors" don't you understand?
Which high crime and misdemeanor exactly? 7 years and no conviction. But keep going after a man instead of a crime. Not authoritarian at all.
Lol. The evidence is building, but to convict a former President of treason requires everything to be done slowly and carefully. It'll take time, but the traitor is going to the chair.
So you haven't seen the evidence, but you "know" the evidence is out there, and therefore "know" that he's a traitor.
The left gets more authoritarian the more insane they get.
What a pile of horse shit. The legal definition of treason requires being at war or giving aid to enemies of the US. Since Congress never declared war while Trump was prez the first one is out. There has been no evidence so far that Trump aided any enemy; in fact I am not sure the US has an enemy in the legal sense.
While the warrant does mention possible crimes treason is not one of them.
Go bite a big red donkey dick.
Trump will be dead by then anyway, so what's the point?
"It'll take time, but the traitor is going to the chair."
Pure fascism.
"We haven't found a crime but if we constantly harrass him we'll eventually get one".
BTW. You know that half of America thinks the actual traitors are the ones who frauded the election and then banned everyone who talked about it.
“The walls are closing in!”
Fuck off commie faggot.
"... the traitor is going to the chair".
Libertarians for the Death Penalty for Political Opponents of the Left, unite!
"What part of "high crimes and misdemeanors" don't you understand?"
What part of blatherings from TDS-adddled shitpiles don't you understand?
What high crimes and misdemeanors are you talking about? The president acting within his authority is neither, no matter how bad you want it to be.
What part of Commander in Chief do you not understand?
Moving the documents to Maga-Lago does not automatically declassify them. Duh. We still only have his word that he did declassify them.
Why would he not declassify them? Laziness, ignorance, oversight, etc.
BTW the Constitution says nothing about classifying or declassifying documents, so I suggest you learn to read so you can find out what it actually says. The function of the executive branch is to execute the laws passed by the legislative branch. Hence if the Congress passes laws, the president is generally required to follow them. The argument that he can declassify at a whim is based not on his constitutional role as head of the executive but on his constitutional role as commander-in-chief. And that requires the kind of living-document jurisprudence that runs counter to the usual approach conservatives take.
Too funny. President has the right to declassify (or pardon) without consulting congress but suddenly congress has the right to pass laws explaining the only way it can be done. so much for SEPARATE and equal branches of government - but at least you use the weasel phrase 'generally required' so I guess you're covered.
Where is this in the Constitution?
Man, you are fucking STUPID:
"Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence"
[...]
"President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.
[...]
Executive Order 13526
As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries..."
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-legal-authority-declassify-intelligence/story?id=47436559
Now, do the world a favor: fuck off and die. But please don't mark your grave; the neighbors do not want huge crowds standing in line to piss on it.
Hey, shit-for-brains: the Constitution doesn't mention any of this. The idea that the president has the legal authority comes from his role as commander-in-chief. But nowhere is this authority explicit in the text.
BTW we still need evidence that Trump actually did declassify the docs. And such evidence is lacking.
Eat shit and die, TDS-addled asshole.
Here's the deal. If all we have is Trump's word that the documents were declassified, then those documents are still classified. Trump's authority to declassify documents does not mean that him just deciding that they're declassified means they're declassified. It means he can declassify any document he wants and his minions have to actually process that request and formally declassify that document. If that happened there will be a record of it. If there is no record of it, those documents are still classified.
Just because you repeat this assertion over and over doesn't make it true. Especially when it is wrong.
There has been a court case already in Navy vs Egan. Both W and Obama signed and utilized EOs stating the president is exempt from procedures. Congress can not regulate a power assigned to the president by the constitution.
There is precedent in Navy vs Egan.
Both W and Obama signed and utilized EOs stating the president is exempt from procedures.
Congress can not regulate a power assigned to the president by the constitution.
Now in bold for the sockpuppets here.
Won't matter; Nuh uh!
"Here's the deal. If all we have is Trump's word that the documents were declassified,..."
That's all it takes to de-classify them, TDS-addled pile of shit.
I know you don't like it, but in fact all that is required is Trump's word on it. He can verbally declassify (by previous rulings).
expect that this would raise an irrebuttable presumption of innocence
I was going to be astounded that any classical liberal since and before the creation of English Common Law would utter this phrase, then I remembered who said it.
It speaks volumes saying, "I'm innocent!" isn't a valid argument in your suspect's defense out of hand.
You don't seem to understand how criminal trials work.
"We only have Trump's word for it that the documents were declassified."
If he says they are declassified, they ARE declassified, shitpile.
No. If he say, at the time he was president, that they were delcassified then it seems they are declassified. But if he says, once he's no longer president that he declassified them, that doesn't mean they were declassified.
Trumn, Jan 19: "they're declassified!" then they're declassified.
Trump, Aug 16: "I declassified them on Jan 19", not declassified unless he has evidence that he declassified them on Jan 19.
Got that?
Hey Shrike, riddle me this.
We both know Trump left the Whitehouse, January 20, 2021, for the last time before Biden was inaugurated. He arrived in Florida at Mar A Lago with an hour left in his presidency.
Are you trying to insinuate that he somehow flew back to the Whitehouse, snuck in and grabbed the documents, after Biden was inaugurated?
Nah, he *teleported* them to Mar-A-Lago!
You keep assuming that Trump declassified them at some point before he ceased to be president. What is your evidence for this assumption?
what happened to the "he did not personally pack or move those documents" defense? are you suggesting that Trump knew exactly what every single document was? (and in doing so, admit that he was deliberately violating the presidential records act.... which has nothing to do with classification....)
and they would have to believe his word without one shred of evidence..... kind of like the mindless tards that worship him.
his success at trial would hing on filling the jury with MAGA cultists.
"If so, Trump's treatment of classified material was remarkably cavalier."
Given Reason's editorial stance on classified documents: so what, from your perspective? If you do not believe Manning and Assange committed no crimes, how has Trump? Yes, there is a statute on the books, but the past position on that is that statute is unconstitutional. He possibly broke a law you do not think is a valid law. Do not fall back that Assange was committing journalism as if that gives special dispensation, that guild does not accept him as a member.
“If you do not believe Manning and Assange committed no crimes, how has Trump?”
New here? Orange Man Bad is an acceptable journalistic premise.
I would imagine only anarchists would believe there should be ZERO classified documents.
And besides, there is a difference between taking a principled stand of "I took these documents labeled classified that shouldn't be, because the public has a right to know about these important topics", and Trump's stand of "I took these documents labeled classified because I felt like it, regardless of any public right to know, and I'll now claim they were declassified retroactively to justify my self-indulgent behavior".
You realize that one should not be prosecuted because their motives are pure, but another should be prosecuted because we think they may have bad intent is not an objective standard, right?
The standard for whether some act ought to be prosecuted is a different one than the standard for whether some act ought to be defended or opposed as a principled matter.
For example, I don't believe marijuana possession should be prosecuted as a general matter, even though that standard applies both to the marijuana user using it to treat glaucoma, and the marijuana user using it to get stoned every night and throw his life away. One of these activities is far more defensible than the other, but neither one should be prosecuted. So it would be stealing a base to claim that because some marijuana users use it to treat glaucoma, every use of marijuana is morally equivalent.
So because some individuals broke the law based on taking a principled stand (Assange/Snowden), it does not mean that every instance of breaking the law is based on the same principled stand, even if the law itself is problematic.
The standard for whether some act ought to be prosecuted is a different one than the standard for whether some act ought to be defended or opposed as a principled matter.
OK, so a revoking of Trump's security clearance and a fine is what you're calling for? Makes sense. I think it's pretty clear that there are large swaths of people who want to see him convicted specifically for political reasons. That ought not be defended and be opposed as a principled matter as well.
If that can happen to a president then it’s a threat to me, and o won’t have that. I can’t imagine anyone here worth a shit will either. Anyone representing that kind of threat should be imprisoned, or killed. So leftist faggots should crawl back under their rocks, while they can.
If not, they are welcome to suffer the consequences of their totalitarianism.
Using marijuana just to get high is immoral? Interesting.
It is the standard jeff prefers. He believes in different application of laws. He is a statist and admires countries like Venezuela that can utilize laws at will politically.
Slight disagreement:
Manning: Disclosed classified information to an unclassified entity.
Trump: (Seemingly) Didn't.
Assange: Not prescriptively responsible for handling classified material one way or the other.
The disagreement is slight as Reason routinely presents Manning as some sort of confused or misunderstood hero and the question of what distinguishes him from Trump still applies, but there are clear categorical differences between the three people.
"Trump has long maintained that Clinton's use of an unsecured private email server when she ran the State Department was so egregious an affront to national security that she should go to prison for it."
And, at the time, the media consensus was that if Trump pursued prosecuting Clinton over the e-mails it would constitute an unconscionable persecution of a political adversary, which would endanger the comity of our political system. What is the difference now?
Orange Man Bad
Trump, who had the authority to de-classify anything, had documents alleged to be classified mixed in with other documents in boxes packed by others. (you don't seriously believe he packed them do you?)
To have a crime, you have to assume he INTENTIONALLY dictated that those specific documents be packed or packed them personally, while failing to declassify them which can actually be accomplished (by court ruling) by simply verbally declaring them de-classified. (Obviously a completely unprovable charge whether you think he declassified them or not)
Assuming that Trump did not specifically dictate what documents were packed, (the most likely scenario) Trump MAY have had documents that were still classified in his home. Those potential documents were in boxes packed by staff, in a storage room with a single door, padlocked by agreement with the FBI and the Presidential Records folks, with 24 hr Secret Service presence.
A horribly risky situation indeed. (SIC)
Hillary on the other had INTENTIONALLY set up a private email server in her home for her use in official government business. This specific act is violation of Federal Regulations. In addition, this act INTENTIONALLY placed official emails with CLASSIFIED content and attachments outside of the reach of the FOA and backup by USG IT systems.
When these emails were subpoenaed by the House, she chose about half of the documents to release, then INTENTIONALLY had a contractor scrub the server using Bleach Bit and smashed her phones with a hammer in defiance of the subpoena.
Despite all this, SOME of the scrubbed emails were recovered on other servers and these confirmed that the deleted emails included official correspondence AND included classified content and attachments.
A paragon of integrity, FBI Director Comey, upon investigation determined that laws were indeed broken but "no reasonable prosecutor" would file charges as it would be impossible to prove intent. (Note the word INTENTIONALLY repeated used above and consider that for yourself.)
According to you, INTENTIONALLY violating Federal Regulations to hide your official government records, INTENTIONALLY evading the FOA provisions, and INTENTIONALLY destroying thousands of those records in violation of a subpoena is much less serious than inadvertently picking up some possibly still classified documents in moving out of the White House, locking them up securely, and negotiating with the Presidential Records folks over what documents should be returned.
Just a reminder that no charges have been brought against Trump at this time.
Trump was right. Clinton destroyed thousands of classified documents that were subpoenaed to cover her tracks. Trump held documents that he declassified as he was president and had the authority to do so.
It’s time for the democrats to go. Through any means necessary.
I appreciate Reason making it clear that they support the federal government keeping secrets.
There's no libertarian angle to the way you're framing things. It's either pro-classification or pro-unilateral presidential power.
There's a perfectly libertarian angle to the reality: even libertarians think that former presidents aren't immune to legal consequences for their crimes.
Declassifying documents isn’t unilateral presidential power. Just because you consider words to be violence doesn’t make it true.
Usually, punishment for a crime follows a trial and a guilty verdict.
this 'crime' is weak sauce.
After all the conspiracies about Russian pee tapes, kompromat, fevered dreams of grand crimes...you got for being a guy with the power to declassify things and having classified material...
Aside from the fact that other presidents have taken classified material...this is about the biggest nothing you could have cooked up. You think even if this did stick (I guarantee it wont) that anyone would even care at all?
Did you care about Hillary's emails? Probably not in the least. How much would you have cared if she also happened to be the ultimate authority on what is classified? This is how much the American people will care. Not even a little bit
No crime took place you stupid faggot.
I appreciate Reason making it clear that they support the federal government keeping secrets.
But so do you, unless you are a complete anarchist.
Maybe the government should just post the nuclear codes on a public website. Or the home addresses of all the government spies.
Just what would you do if you had nuclear codes, run down Main Street screaming them out. We have all seen plenty of movies where pinko commie creeps pose as MSM flunkies and break into the White House, take the prez hostage, and kill Secret Service agents to get the "football" used to launch the nukes but then have to torture the prez to get the nuclear codes.
Just having the nuclear codes is pointless unless you have access to a way to use them; not to mention when Trump left office they were changed.
Time for you to lay off the cheap drugs.
It’s not what chemjeff would do with them.
What do you suppose Trump would do with them?
Tell me you don’t understand how “nuclear codes” work without telling me you don’t understand how “nuclear codes” work.
Interesting that Lying Jeffy and Dee are going right along with the silly “nuclear codes” narrative being pushed by left wing media.
Of course they are. The media tells them what to think and say. Plus it’s not like they’re real people anyway.
When nobody salutes that particular pile of bullshit, there'll be something new up the flagpole tomorrow.
I got to be honest, I have no idea how "nuclear codes" work. Are the nuclear codes the contents of the biscuit, which authenticates the President to the Joint Chiefs? Or are the nuclear codes the combination that missile crews enter to arm the rockets? I'm fairly certain they aren't the same code (though, I suppose that brings up the question of what prevents the keeper of the second code from giving it to the missile crew without authority).
“Are the nuclear codes the contents of the biscuit, which authenticates the President to the Joint Chiefs?”
Yes. And, obviously they changed after Trump left office. If they got into the wrong hands… nothing would happen.
The one good thing from this shitty era of Stupid Orwellianism is that the legal system (as yet) won't stand for FOX News horeseshit like "but he declassified it with his mind!"
That shit only sells to the people. Try telling it to a judge.
Undoubtedly, the fans will see any kind of punishment of Trump as evidence that even the legal is corrupt, even as they loved it so much when it was snuffing the life out of black children for no reason. They'll insist that "he declassified it with his mind!" is so obvious a defense that the jury just had to be bought. And then they'll destroy yet another building or invade yet another government property and commit acts of terrorism. Just ask them!
Does the president control the executive branch of the federal government?
Yes, Joe Biden does.
LOL
About as well as he controls his bowels.
Pretty sure the Easter bunny has more control of the executive branch than Biden.
Then how has he accomplished so much?
You’re dumber than I thought.
…FOX News horeseshit like "but he declassified it with his mind!"”
Cite?
Unless you seem to be like those on the left that think the Kremlin runs Mar Al Lago, it's pretty hard to understand how anyone would even access these documents if they wanted to.
It's compared to an email server, but email servers are connected to the internet and can be hacked. That's not the case here.
In particular, since there has been both private security and secret service protection since the start of Trump's presidency.
And we're told no reasonable prosecutor would go forward with that one. Ha
Someone on one of the news shows said Bush and Obama had the same standing order. If true this article is for shit.
I haven't seen that one. I'm growing increasingly skeptical of Trump's claim of a "standing order" since nobody has come forth to substantiate it and nobody has shared any records or memoranda to corroborate. The only person who's come forward has denied knowledge of this standing order.
Doesn't mean Trump didn't declassify this information, but it does mean the "standing order" defense is questionable.
Kash Patel said Trump did. John Bolton, who Trump brought on in April of 2018 and fired in Sept of 2019 on bad terms. Bolton is what you'd call a disgruntled witness who wasn't present for about 2/3rds of Trump's presidency.
"I never saw him say it, but I wasn't around most of the time" is weaker testimony than "I witnessed him say it."
"I haven't seen that one. I'm growing increasingly skeptical of Trump's claim of a "standing order" since nobody has come forth to substantiate it and nobody has shared any records or memoranda to corroborate..."
Left off:
This shouldn't need repeating:
Trump did not have to recite an incantation, he did not have to write memos, he did not have ask permission, he did not have to say "mother may I"
All that was required was for him to say 'these are declassified'. If he says he did so and someone doubts it, bring on the evidence.
Bush and Obama both issues EOs exempting them from the declassification process.
OK, so if Trump issued an EO saying that anything taken out of the Oval Office and into the residence was automatically declassified, shouldn't there be a record of that order?
Oh come now. I've been told by esteemed libertarian R Mac that writing things down is just "needless bureaucracy" that libertarians should oppose. Apparently in Libertopia all laws and rules will be communicated via oral tradition.
I like when you use quotes when not using someones actual words. Makes you look extra honest.
Get to the part where you’re a democrat shill and always support pedophile friendly policies.
Ironically, the folks who would have that order are the national archivists who kicked this whole thing off. I am sure they will go out of their way to find the proof and leak it to the press.
q
Quite apart from how ludicrous your assumptions about the documents at Trump's home office are, an actual libertarian would question the legitimacy and justification for classification in the first place.
But you are no libertarian, you are a cheerleader for progressives and the big state.
Remember this next time Reason files a FOIA request for documents and gets a bunch of black paper. It's secret!
It won't be black paper, there just won't be anything because it all is on private servers like Hillary's.
Reflects on his judgement? He's done. More worrisome is how it reflects on his cult members who abound here and still number in the millions - not enough to win an election of course but enough to win elections in our less productive counties and states. And judgement is only half of it. Character and this group's inability to detect obvious indecency and dishonesty. Without the bankroll, trappings of inherited wealth, makeup, and handlers this guy couldn't make a living selling steaks, bottled water, and "university" degrees in a State Fair tent. But these idiots will go to the matt for him no matter what he does or says.
Which Matt? Welch or Walsh?
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
Finally, Joe the Retard will now enlighten us with spontaneous utterances from his spasmodic brain stem!
Oh yeah? Whatabout Obama? Whatabout Clinton? Huh? Why aren't you demanding they be searched, huh? Whatabout whatabout whatabout!?!!?
I'm sure in Germany in the 30's some folks were saying "What about the Brown Shirts?" who were above the law and fascist idiots like yourself were defending it. Stay Nazi.
You and your buddies refuse to accept the outcome of an election, storm a federal building, and then call me a fascist?
Look in the mirror, bub.
You mean refuse to accept the results of an election like most Democrats did in 2016, or Stacey Abrams in the Georgia governor's race in 2018?
Storm a federal building like antifa have so many times over the years?
Speak about whataboutism.
Why do you leftist asswipes think this is a valid argument?
'You're trying to execute this guy for something you pinned a medal on your guy for doing' IS an issue.
No matter how many times you shriek 'whatabout' to try to distract from that fact.
I'm not making an argument. I'm mocking you and other Trumptards who think "Whatabout...!?!?!" is a valid argument.
And fuck off for calling me a leftist. Mocking fascists doesn't make me a leftist.
Mocking you for not knowing what a fascist is can be fair game though.
Equal enforcement of laws is fascist?
Sarc isn't principled. When unequal Justice is applied against his enemies he cheers it on.
Funny how you look in the mirror, make observations about yourself, and claim you're talking about me. Like when you say you're handsome and likeable. Definitely talking about me, not you.
Aw shit I fucked that comment up. You trolls will be quoting that one for weeks.
LOOK WHAT SARC SAID! YUCK YUCK YUCK! WE'RE SO SMART! HAR HAR HAR!
LOL!
When Comey stated that no prosecutor would pursue charges against Clinton, that establishes a precedent standard. Why the FBI is pursuing Trump so aggressively over this is a reasonable question to ask. Is the differencw in treatment based on a different principle or a different principal?
Is the differencw in treatment based on a different principle or a different principal?
I don't know, but the outrage certainly is.
OrangeManBad. There's no other reason they need right now, just OrangeManBad.
#TrumpDocuments is now officially the biggest scandal in the history of the universe, surpassing #TrumpUkraine and #TrumpRussia. Admittedly we in #TheResistance have spent the past half decade insisting Drumpf's arrest was imminent, but this time it's totally going to happen any day now. He'll be in prison well before the 2024 election. 🙂
With that in mind, hey, can you believe how terrible this Ron DeSantis guy is? Did you know he literally made it illegal for anyone to say "gay" in the entire state of Florida? Did you know people are leaving Florida in record numbers and moving to better governed states like New York and California? Indeed, DeSantis is even worse than Drumpf.
#LizCheney2024
If you think people who criticize the government should be punished with legislation or twice elected officials who do the same should be removed from office, DeSantis is your guy - a real Libertarian, apparently.
Thank you. Always be you Joe, these two comments are perfect.
I honestly think Joe Friday just isn't very smart.
You are entirely too kind.
All of Trump's defense rest on the idea that he took the documents to the WH residence to do work after hours. There is never any evidence that Trump did much work at all while President. So why would we believe he did work after hours.
The problem is we don’t know who to trust. On the one hand is somebody who claims falsely that the 2020 election was stolen based on allegations of fraud he has been unable to prove. On the other side we have an institution that falsely accused the first guy of stealing the 2016 presidential election based on allegations they were unable to prove… And on top of it, who obtained a warrant from the FISA court by failing to Disclose exculpatory information. The fact that the government is resisting disclosure of the affidavit that supported the search warrant does not add to that side‘s credibility.
Finally, something about this whole thing is fishy. The idea that anyone, including the president, can obtain copies of the most sensitively secret information there is and then simply walk out of the White House with it does not seem plausible. There is a whole lot of the story that we do not yet know.
Personally, my bet is that the singular man who has made an entire career out of being a sloppy lazy ne'er-do-well, repeatedly and continuously lying to everyone, and then throwing his own people under the bus for "betrayal" when it all inevitably comes crashing down will, once again, turn out to have been a sloppy lazy ne'er-do-well who has been lying continuously to everyone and will, in the end, throw under the bus the very people closest to him for "betrayal" when the con simply cannot be continued any longer. Many people will not be surprised. Some will be shocked that they could have been taken in by the lies of such a man. A depressingly large contingent will double down on the belief that an honest and successful businessman did the very best he could considering all the malicious betrayers surrounding him and look forward to his next act.
You failed to mention the guy you are talking about crammed his cock into the cunt of every hot babe he could and spent mountains of money buying stuff and living large.
Trump's public image well before he became prez was nothing like what you post. He was always viewed as a loud mouth braggart who used women as disposable pleasure toys and spent a lot of money doing it. But he was also viewed as someone who could get a lot of money by hook or crook. While I may not like what he used his money and fame for I never doubted he spent long hours of real work amassing it. Bottom line is while lots of peeps want to be rich however he did it Trump was much better at getting rich than all but a very few people.
You're replying to an idiot whose brain has been turned into a pea as a result of his raging case of TDS
Just out of curiosity what institution accused the someone of stealing the 2016 election?
If you are trying to magnify the concerns about Russia influence in 2016 election, you are wrong. There was no suggestion of stealing an election but there was interference and people wanted that investigated and addressed. Very few people suggested the election was stolen. Also we know from several report, Mueller and US Senate, that Russia did interfere. This was confirmed by a recent book by Trump ally Paul Manafort who stated that he gave a Russia intelligence officer internal polling data for 2016.
Oh, you mean nobody suggested that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election and should’ve been removed from office once this allegation was proven?
I def didnt see that on...every major news network, every mainstream 'newspaper', repeated ad nauseum for 4 years with breathless coverage of the nothingburger Muller report...
I guess that all didnt happen, to the memory hole!
"There was no suggestion of stealing an election"
"Very few people suggested the election was stolen."
Jesus Christ, I think you actually believe that. Sad.
Yes. I believe that. Hillary Clinton conceded the election. A few people suggested a steal but there was nothing significant.
Hillary in 2019 said the election was stolen.
Then she showed infinitely more class than Trump and conceded.
When a Clinton has more class than someone then that someone is below the bottom of the barrel.
Of course you favor her. You hate Trump so much that it’s more important to you to push America down the road to totalitarianism.
I hope life at the bottom of a bottle is good for you. Enjoy it while your democrat masters still allow you to have your booze.
"...some people said some things..."
Hillary called Trump an illegitimate President in 2019.
Hillary and dems still repeat it to this day.
https://vimeo.com/738785281
Here's 10 minutes of democrats you'll recognize calling Donald Trump illegitimate -- ie, he didn't actually win.
On the one hand is somebody who demonstrated that the 2020 election was stolen based on the evidence, the incessant boasting of the left, and the frenzied attempts to jail or kill anyone who points it out too believably.
FTFY
And you've seen said evidence? I'd be interested in seeing it as well. I've studied the 2020 election and I've seen zero evidence of Democrats trying to steal the election, and MOUNTAINS of evidence that Trump actually did try to do so.
Over a dozen courts have now ruled election rules were illegally changed. How much research did you do?
that depends... how much research can someone do with their head up their own A-hole?
You didn’t study shit. You’re fueled by CNN bullshit and Media Matters talking points.
Now fuck off.
What's your alternative belief? That he took the papers to blackmail people with? To trade with the Russians for hookers and blow?
I think he took the papers because he wanted them for whatever stupid reason popped into his head in the moment, and he didn't really care whether they were classified or not, because he was "the boss" and in his mind could do whatever he wanted. I don't think there was any sinister intent per se. Just that he didn't give a shit.
Took the papers and when it was discovered it appears Trump then lied about returning the documents obstructing the govt's attempt to secure the documents. Innocent until proven guilty. Lol!
Commenting on your own articles, Sullum? You are reeeeeeally reaching on this one.
Sadly, this is probably correct. It very likely that he just took the papers because he wanted them and then refused to return them because he doesn't like being told to do anything. He a three-year-old in a 76-year-old body.
And you’re a stupid, slavish, Marxist faggot without the slightest bit of intelligence or self awareness.
LOL like he 'worked' in DC and then flew to Florida every night? I swear you guys get stupider every fucking day.
Man alive. I wish millions of people would simply believe whatever I say, regardless of how little evidence may support it or even how much may contradict it. How does he do it?
His followers can't help it. They've self-lobotomised. Look at all the authoritarian right-wing posters here who defend Trump at all costs, reciting "TDS" or "OrangeManBad" at any comment that is the equivalent of pointing out to Ponzi's investors who Ponzi actually was. Some of these clowns actually believe themselves to be libertarians.
many here dont really love Trump, they just can smell this witch hunt a mile away
#supposedLibertariansforshowtrials
yes yes. you don't like 'witch hunts', and you define every attempt to hold Trump accountable to be a 'witch hunt'.
Largely driven by brain-dead, TDS-addled shitpiles like n00bdragon and SRG
I'm no Trump fan, never really have been since he was a real estate developer in NYC in the 1980s. Yet, I know and recognize TDS when I see it, and you, sir, have it bad.
I started out as not a Trump fan, either, but the idiocy of places like Reason kept forcing me to defend him. That continues to this day.
Pretty sure he's revolting in person, but I'll take good policies from someone I don't like to the slimy FDR, for example.
No, we just can’t allow your kind to pull this shit. it’s time for the left to go.
The whole premise of this, beyond Orange Man Bad, is that everything declassified must be really important. Ultimately, that’s for the president to decide, whether you like it or not.
Taking Trump at his word, all of his homework, no matter how sensitive the information it involved, was automatically declassified. Theoretically, any random person could have obtained copies of those documents under the Freedom of Information Act unless another exception applied.
The horror, that random Americans could actually read up on what the government is doing.
Yeah, any random person could walk into a 50mil estate, past a gate/wall, past SS and access these files in a room locked by the FBI earlier this year. Sure, that's a completely reason concern.
Fuck Sullum, your TDS is stage 5 and rotting your brain. Seek help.
To the seething lefties showing up to tell us the walls are really closing in this time...
You really think this is it? The guy who has the authority of classification got caught with classified material? This is what's going to stick?
This is the unpaid parking ticket of "presidential crimes". Nothingburger with no cheese
Did he actually declassify? Or did he just claim afterwards that he did? We have evidence that he claimed later on that he declassified. We have no evidence other than his word, which is no better than the word of a dockside hooker that she's clean.
"Did he actually declassify? Or did he just claim afterwards that he did?"
My point is even if he does just claim after that he did, how are you going to prove in a trial that he is lying? No lawyer would take this to trial, its an unprovable claim, its the weakest of sauce
Well, faced with documentary evidence that the documents were classified and witnesses who will say that they never saw or heard any declassification from Trump, he would have to go on the witness stand under oath and say that he declassified when no-one was looking, and if the jury don't believe him, they convict.
If there were allegations of illegal conduct with prosecution witnesses and it became a he-said/she-said thing, then yes the prosecution has tough time. But the issue is that we have evidence that the documents were classified and in practice this requires Trump to show that he genuinely declassified and is not making an after-the-fact claim, at least convincing enough for the jury to have reasonable doubt.
Still, I think a prosecution unlikely.
They fail to recognize that it really doesn't matter. What he has, he had total authority to possess. The raid/not a raid and all the other hand wringing is whether he declassified is so he can still possess it. When it was within his authority to do so, and he could legally do so verbally, there is no case to be had here. They didn't find this shit on Anthony Weiner's laptop or in the dorm room of a campaign volunteer. It was locked up in a building that is under guard of the Secret Service.
On what basis do you assert that he had authority to possess the documents, given that the records act says he didn't? He had the authority to declassify, while he was president, but no-one is arguing that he doesn't.
You pathetic pile of TDS-addled shit, here"
"Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence"
[...]
"President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.
[...]
Executive Order 13526
As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries..."
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-legal-authority-declassify-intelligence/story?id=47436559
Fuck off and die. And make sure your grave isn't marked to prevent huge crowds of people from showing up to piss on it.
You don't have to prove he's lying. You have to show that there was never any documentation of those documents being declassified. It's not as simple as just declaring that they're not classified.
Again assertion from ignorance.
You misspelled "lie".
Yes it is you stupid leftist thrall.
This should not need repeating, but we are inundated by a huge number of REALLY STUPID fucks:
Trump did not have to recite an incantation, he did not have to write memos, he did not have ask permission, he did not have to say "mother may I"
All that was required was for him to say 'these are declassified'. If he says he did so and someone doubts it, bring on the evidence.
Dude, you can believe what you want. You might even be right. But can you prove what you believe when current case law says that if Trump SAID (verbally even) "it's declassified" then it is. He does not have to prove he said it. YOU have to prove he didn't.
To repeat the words of another "paragon of virtue" named James Comey "no reasonable prosecutor" would file charges on this.
Shorter Jimbo:
"He could shoot a guy on Fifth Avenue and it would still be a nothing burger"
Do you think this rises to that level?
In fact, do you think this, honestly, rises to the level of being a terrible crime that you also can prove?
I think deep down, you know the answer.
What I think, is that in your mind, no crime could ever rise to the level where you would publicly condemn Trump.
You are quite mistaken. I really dislike the man. This just appears to be another strand of spaghetti thrown at the wall, and from the look of it there is almost no chance it even makes it to the wall to attempt sticking
I really dislike the man.
lol which is why you can never find it within yourself to criticize him in any substantive way
Ok JesseAz. Whatever you say.
Ouch, that stings!
No I don't like JimboJr, I think he's another asshole Team Red tribalist who is lying now because it proves convenient to push his current narrative. He's trying to distance himself from the actual Trump cultists like Jesse who very clearly make it known that the only way Trump's actions here can be defended is to have total and complete faith in the man himself. "He said that what he did was legit, that is all the proof I need of his innocence!!!" So no I am not giving Jimbo here the benefit of the doubt, he hasn't earned it. He has treated me contemptuously for years now and he has thrown away any attempt at good will that he might have once earned from me.
He has treated me contemptuously for years now and he has thrown away any attempt at good will that he might have once earned from me.
https://reason.com/2022/08/16/gerrymandering-is-making-elections-less-competitive/?comments=true#comment-9652795
Don't be a dick.
You see right there I showed JesseAz to be a juvenile, vindictive piece of immature shit. Don't be a JesseAz.
(some would argue against "immature" and say he's hard and crunchy, but that's just semantics)
You didn’t show shit. There was no point to your link.
"...I really dislike the man..."
Me, too. But I certainly like what he did when in office.
It's better if you can mature at least a little and leave the adolescent focus on personality behind.
But that seems to be too much to ask of TDS-addled piles of shit.
Jeff doesn't care if it is true. It helps his team politically.
that's you, man
No, it’s absolutely you. Case closed. Now GTFO.
'...which is even harder to believe..' i.e. how is it possible someone with plenary power to declassify documents could be in possession of documents he declassified and you not he, has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. TDS.
So you're saying we should relegate a choice by the elected president regarding what people can see to some functionary over whom we have no established line of control??!
Well if you actually read the relevant EO, there is an actual process for declassifying stuff. It involves letting the other relevant agencies know that something is going to be declassified, and letting them give input on the decision so that they can weigh in on whether it's a good idea or bad idea. You know, giving some expert advice to the decision-maker. It is still the president's call but, following the process, after the president makes his call, the rest of the executive branch is informed of the result of that decision.
Not following the process means that no one knows what is classified or not, and therefore the default assumption will naturally be that it is classified.
If it's an EO, then it can be instantly countermanded by any subsequent executive, or even the same executive at a later time. If the executive does something contrary to the EO, then that implicitly countermands it.
What did you think executive orders are? They're just instructions by an executive to a department to handle things in a certain way, because that's what the executive finds convenient. It has no independent force that survives that executive's desire.
Like if the executive orders coffee, and then the coffee arrives and the executive doesn't want it any more, you're going to make hir drink the coffee, because it was an order?
But that is the difference between a President and a dictator. A dictator can do whatever the fuck he wants. A President has to follow rules. This isn't about ordering coffee. This is about national security secrets. The President is not the only one who has a say in how national security secrets are to be managed. Congress has passed many laws on the subject and the President's job is to execute these laws, not to ignore Congress' laws and do whatever the fuck he wants because he feels like it. So yea, this willy-nilly system of document classification that Trump is proposing, where the President gets to declassify anything he wants whenever he wants and he doesn't have to tell anyone and no one knows what is really classified or not, is not conducive either to safeguarding national security or to ensuring transparency in government.
Ok, I know you don't really care about logic, but I am going to give this a try.
Trump issued Executive Orders formally, that were instructions to the rest of the Bureaucracy (that report the the Executive Branch, ie. the President)
His very first day in office, Joe Biden revoked many, if fact nearly all, of those Trump EOs. Joe then wrote some of his own. Joe could, if he liked, replace one or all the ones he wrote with new ones at any time. Further, they are instructions to those working for him, he has the power to make exceptions any time he wants to.
That does not make Joe Biden or Donald Trump dictators, it just means that is part of their constitutional powers as the Chief Executive.
They might either one BE dictators, or want to be dictators. But not based on this.
I get that you don't like Donald Trump and are (despite your attempts to say otherwise) a progressive statist. And as the saying goes, I defend your right to be and speak. I do however, hope you understand your not liking him and disagreeing with his policies, does not make him guilty of any crime.
These repeated attempts to construe non-criminal, or non-provable allegations as crimes (Russia, Ukraine, Jan 6, and now this) drain credibility from the allegations. The reaction of even many Democrats becomes "oh hell, here we go again" and they change the channel.
It actually DOES lead to a situation where as the comment goes "Trump could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and you wouldn't believe it". Like the parable of the "boy who called wolf", when the wolf actually showed up no one came when he yelled for help.
THAT situation, is on YOUR head, and others like you.
*Unless it comes to Trump overturning DREAMERS
Their opinion doesn't actually matter, though. They have no authority to stop him from declassifying it. It doesn't matter if everyone else knows within the executive branch.
"Well if you actually read the relevant EO, there is an actual process for declassifying stuff."
Presidents cannot force future Presidents to behave in certain ways.
A President does not have to tell anybody he plans on declassifying. If he tells them and they say no --- it will still be declassified if the President wants.
Yes yes, we know. L'Etat C'est Moi and all that.
Where is the evidence this "standing order" existed? Was it written down anywhere? Is anyone willing to testify that they knew about it and when? Why hasn't anyone heard about this before? Why would anyone assume he's telling the truth?
The evidence for the standing order is in your heart, and in your faith in the Anointed One, the Exalted Patriot Lord Trump. All that is needed is to believe. Believe in the power of Trump!
Multiple people on his staff have stated it existed.
And we must also have faith in the Prophets of Lord Trump, who speak the unerring word of Patriotic Wisdom!
And you believe them because....?
Fuck off and die, asshole.
"Where is the evidence this "standing order" existed?"
Fuck off and die, TDS-addled shitpile:
"Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence"
[...]
"President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.
[...]
Executive Order 13526
As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries..."
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-legal-authority-declassify-intelligence/story?id=47436559
Simply by stating it is declassified, it is, regardless of your TDS-fueled idiocy
Remember, Trump is not the first President to do this, and Biden has this authority as well. It is established in case law BECAUSE IT WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE.
I would be happy if all politicians went to prison for a year after leaving office. Just as a matter of principle.
A year as in 365+1 days. Make them felons. No guns, no votes, no occupational licenses...
I've suggested hanging each President on the way out, but I'll go with a year plus one day in Club Fed.
I would be even happier if all leftists were deposited in landfills. But we can’t always have what we want.
“I don't know whether Trump's trove of government …justify the unprecedented and politically explosive decision to search the home of a former president who is the leading contender….
Yes, you do know. And if you don’t, you should consider taking up knitting or stamp collecting.
"On its face, Trump's handling of classified material was at least as reckless as Hillary Clinton's"
Aaaaah! He's coming around. Last article Trump's actions were worse. Of course, no one raided Clinton over her server. In fact, the FBI said they didn't feel she had criminal intent so it wasn't taking it further.
And yet here Trump isn't showing criminal intent either.
Garland’s a devout statist. Make him bleed, and you’ll find control, security and power in his blood. Ditto his DC orbit.
The idea that the man-of-the-people and anti-Christ Trump had some documents belonging to the state was untenable to him and his crowd; Garland determined-or was told-that that needed fixing’
So he went defcon 5. He figured he could sell his statist action under the “nobody-above-the-law” ruse. He’d also have the apparatchik behind him if things got messy. Yell nuclear or Russia or espionage if need be.
Well, things got messy. He opened up a hornet’s nest.
Now he finds himself in a pickle that leaves him with only one recourse: scream state secrets and hope it works. It won’t.
Yes, Garland is a statist, and a progressive. That is why he was appointed by Biden who is also a statist and a progressive.
Still, despite the "urgency" required to justify a search warrant, Garland held the request for over THREE WEEKS before approving it. So, was it urgent, or not? If he was going to hold it for three weeks it could certainly have been approved right away as a subpoena.
At best, this looks ... peculiar.
Urgency, Schmergency. That’s a myth. Urgency is an artifice, in this case, anyway. It’s cover for dismissing any rationale for using less-intrusive means. It helps to sell the defcon 5 silliness.
“What do you mean, just pick up the phone?”
There was no urgency. There never was. But there was a shot, maybe a final shot while Congress was in recess ( less resistance) or while the Jan6 kangaroo court diddled in emptiness ( might loose evidence help their case?) to take out Trump.
Find something on the guy. Humiliate him. Put a stake in his ( in their) symbolic vampire. As they say in the yard, it was worth the stretch.
To Garland the statist, this was ideological and prosecutorial opportunity. It was “find me the man, and I’ll find the crime” level stuff. It’s not peculiar at all, not to Garland.
Amd the Hag actually committed a crime, unlike Trump.
Ooooof. Dang, son. You just need to step away from the Trump pipe. Just put it down for a while and let your head clear.
What's the purpose of classification anyway?
I could understand it if there was a statutory obligation to keep info collected by certain means secret. The Census Bureau is obligated by statute to keep confidential for 72 years personally identifiable information
[got cut off prematurely, cont'd]
...collected from those required to respond to the census, so the president shouldn't be allowed to divulge that. But the president isn't going to be looking at that anyway. The president's going to be looking at the info he thinks may be relevant to making executive decisions. It may be classified because info gathered by certain bureaus may be classified by default, because its divulgence may endanger someone who dealt with it. But if the president's judgment is that there is no such danger, why shouldn't s/he have the power to declassify it? S/he's the one looking at it, so who better to judge who should be allowed to see it?
Again, it's retarded. The implicit argument in Clinton's defense, ignoring that she doesn't have the unilateral power to declassify documents, was that she took the documents but didn't divulge them. So, no harm, no foul. Admittedly, the law isn't perfectly equal but unauthorized possession, without disclosure, isn't a prison sentence. Revoking clearance is pretty typical. Berger got a fine, probation, lost his law license, and had his clearance revoked, and then lied about taking the documents as part of a separate investigation and that was after we knew the Chinese had access to nuclear weapons schematics.
Of course Team Red wants to frame the argument entirely in terms of whether the documents in question really were 'declassified' or not. In a certain sense, though, this discussion is a red herring.
The search warrant cites 3 laws: 18 USC 793, 18 USC 2071, and 18 USC 1519. None of them relate specifically to classified documents. They are all about taking official documents in an unauthorized manner, whether or not they are classified.
Of course Team Red wants to frame the argument entirely in terms of whether the documents in question really were 'declassified' or not.
Wrong, wrong , wrong, WRONG!
Someone on the other team did it first. That makes it ok. THAT is the entire argument.
Actually, a better way to look at this follows:
Prior Presidents have done the same, then spent a few years negotiating and returning specific documents before they generally all end up in a Presidential Library.
They do this because:
Other people pack up the White House offices and unintended documents get caught up.
They are planning to write a book (or have someone else write it for them) and want stuff for the book.
Like you would expect, they want momentos of specific actions or events of their term in office.
And probably other reasons.
Carter did it.
Reagan did it.
Clinton did it. (and tried to steal half the furnishings of the White House)
Bush did it.
Obama did it.
Trump did it.
and Biden is going to do it.
You mean all the leaks to the press about Trump were --- as usual, mind you --- lies?
I've accidentally walked out of my local library a couple of times with unclassified books in an unauthorized manner. Someone call the FBI and arrest the former director of The Library. I don't have telepathy!
Who knew the adults in the room could generate such a clusterfuck?
"Mommy! Johnny steals cookies all the time! Not fair!"
"Mommy! Johnny uses dad's credit card all the time! Not fair!"
"Mommy! Johnny sticks his penis in Suzy's mouth all the time! Not fair!"
No, it is definitely Team Blue that originally wanted to frame this as a national security issue. Team Red realized though that if this gets hyped up enough, whatever the truth is can't possibly live up to the hype, so they are happy to play along. Because, if America spends 3 months arguing about this and it is the biggest scandal since Watergate, etc., it is going to be a major letdown to discover that the juiciest charge is that the guy who has the power to declassify stuff forgot to do it for 11 documents he had in his possession.
Team Yellow ought to be pointing out that sending 30 FBI agents to any home for 9 hours over an argument about documents that the government almost certainly has copies of, is overkill, and that this is an object lesson in why the laws in question need to be narrowly tailored to cover things more like trying to delete/destroy all records of a mortgage lien as a way to stop paying one's mortgage, rather than a fight over some memorabilia.
The media on both sides has massive incentives to play this up, so nobody is really pointing out that this appears to be largely a civil dispute that the FBI got involved in thanks to excessive zeal, but that, honestly, if the National Archivists had decided to play hardball they probably could have gotten a writ of replevin to get the government property back, and the only difference is that federal marshals would be doing the impounding rather than the FBI.
The fun part is going to be once Team Blue realizes that hyping this is absolutely not in their interest, while it is absolutely in the interest of the media to keep pushing it. Will the media protect Team Blue or their tv ratings?
They have already managed to get everyone to agree that this "unexpected visit from law enforcement to leverage the element of surprise" should not be called a police raid, because, it was lawful and they had a warrant. Which seems to imply that all other police raid were unlawfully executed. But not matter. Going to be interesting to see how this plays out.
TDS-addled asshole Sullum:
"Whatever threat it may have posed, the trove of government documents seized by the FBI does not reflect well on the former president's judgment."
News story:
"Feds resist unsealing of affidavit for Mar-a-Lago warrant"
[...]
"The Justice Department on Monday denied efforts to make public an affidavit supporting a search warrant for former President Donald Trump’s estate in Florida, saying the investigation “contains highly classified information” and that the document contains sensitive information about witnesses.
The government’s objection came in response to a court filing by several news organizations, including the Associated Press, seeking to unseal the underlying affidavit submitted by the Justice Department when it sought a warrant to search Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate earlier this month..."
https://www.devhardware.com/feds-resist-unsealing-of-affidavit-for-mar-a-lago-warrant/
So Sullum, brain rotted to pea-size from his raging case of TDS, implies HE knows what's there while the rest of the world is asking.
Eat shit and die, Sullum.
Certainly no one at reason can support the Espionage Act drummed up by Woodrow Wilson during World War I to quash dissent. Even non-libertarians who support such an authoritarian document can't be suggesting Donald Trump was looking to do America harm and sell state secrets for sex or money. If that's what you think, you need to see a psychiatrist.
The Presidential Records Act has seldom been used outside of Sandy Berger to actually arrest somebody. It can't justify this raid either.
Which leaves.......obstruction of justice. Not another process crime please, and to justify a raid on someone's home?
This search warrant wreaks.
My screwup. Sandy Berger wasn't charged under the Presidential Records Act. It doesn't contain criminal penalties. Which doesn't make this search warrant look any better.
Sullum is such a cuck.
I think the cucks here are the "libertarians" and "conservatives" buying Trump bullshit by the gross while he rides their party and their future down into defeat - again. He's fucking you you idiots, and you're bent over like he'll be in prison.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
Fuck off and die, Asshole.
I didn't say anything about Trump for president you fucking idiot. This is about Trump deranged cucks like you and sullum who are unable to see the forest for the trees.
It is a bit tiresome to note the Russia Hoax, impeachment over a phone call et al, followed by a baseless claim that you support Trump.
This is a good article:
The GOP Is Learning What Black Folks Have Known Forever: The FBI Can Be Corrupt
https://www.newsweek.com/gop-learning-what-black-folks-have-known-forever-fbi-can-corrupt-opinion-1732342
Here's your "Russia Hoax" for you (from the GOP majority Senate Intel Comm Report):
"The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin directed the hack-andleak campaign targeting the DNC, DCCC, and the Clinton Campaign. Moscow's intent was to damage the Clinton Campaign and tarnish what it expected might be a Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and generally undermine the U.S. democratic process. The Committee's findings are based on a variety of information, including raw intelligence reporting. ...
,,,In addition to publishing the stolen documents, the Russian personas used social engineering to seed information with specific individuals associated with the Trump Campaign. The GRU also relied on U.S. social media platforms and media attention for its influence operations. -WikiLeaks actively sought, and played, a key role in the Russian campaign and knew it was assisting a Russian intelligence influence effort. The Committee found significant indications that Julian Assan e and WikiLeaks have benefited from Russian government support
While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those materials to aid Trump's electoral prospects. To do so, the Trump Campaign took actions to obtain advance notice about WikiLeaks releases of Clinton emails; took steps to obtain inside information about the content of releases once WikiLeaks began to publish stolen information; created messaging strategies to promote and share the materials in anticipation of and following their release; and encouraged further theft of information and continued leaks. (U) Trump and senior Campaign officials sought to obtain advance information about WikiLeaks through Roger Stone. In spring 2016, prior to Assange's public announcements, Stone advised the Campaign that WikiLeaks would be releasing materials harmful to Clinton. Following the July 22 DNC release, Trump and the Campaign believed that Roger Stone had known of the release and had inside access to WikiLeaks, and repeatedly communicated with Stone about WikiLeaks throughout the summer and fall of 2016. Trump and other senior Campaign officials specifically directed Stone to obtain information about upcoming document releases relating to Clinton and report back. At their direction, Stone took action to gain inside knowledge for the Campaign and shared his purported knowledge directly with Trump and senior Campaign officials on multiple occasions. Trump and the Campaign believed that Stone had inside information and expressed satisfaction that Stone's information suggested more releases would be forthcoming.
Some of the individuals the GRU targeted for outreach with the Gucci fer 2.0 persona were closely associated with the Trump Campaign, such as long-time Trump advisor Roger Stone.1249 On August 5, 2016, Stone penned an opinion piece asserting that Guccifer 2.0, not the Russians, had hacked the DNC, and repeating the false claims made by the GRU on the Guccifer 2.0 website and Twitter account.12
In addition to disseminating hacked materials through its own personas, the GRU gave information to WikiLeaks as part of a joint effort to secure wider distribution of stolen DNC documents and John Podesta emails. WikiLeaks opted to release those materials, first on July 22 and later on an ongoing basis between October 7 and the election. WikiLeaks also actively solicited and then released the documents for maximum effect, despite mounting evidence that they had been stolen by Russian government hackers. Notably, this was not the first instance that WikiLeaks had taken actions for the purpose of harming U.S. interests. Nor is it the only instance of contact between the Russian government and WikiLeaks, which have a history of parallel and sometimes coordinated actions in attacking U.S. institutions.
The Russian government has pursued a relationship with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks that includes formal partnerships with state-owned media platforms, government assistance for WikiLeaks associates and sources, and information sharing. This relationship has existed since at least 2012 and reflects an alignment between the Russian government and WikiLeaks in seeking to undermine U.S. institutions and security. (U) RT (formerly Russia Today) has provided both beneficial coverage ofWikiLeaks and a formal, compensated media platform for Assange. RT first signed a contract with Assange
(U) While the GRU and WikiLeaks were coordinating the release of hacked pNC, DCCC, and Podesta documents, Trump and senior Campaign officials sought information relating to "missing" Hillary Clinton emails as part of the Campaign's opposition research and press strategies. Beginning in April or May 2016, Roger Stone repeatedly cc;mveyed to Trump and senior Campaign staff that WikiLeaks would be releasing information damaging to Clinton. After the July 22 WikiLeaks release, Trump and senior Campaign officials believed Stone had access to non-public information about WikiLeaks' s ability and intent to release emails harmful to Clinton. (U) Thereafter, Trump directed Campaign officials to stay in touch with Roger Stone about future WikiLeaks activities regarding Clinton-related emails. Manafort in tum tasked Stone to contact Julian Assange, and Stone endeavored to reach Assange through several intermediaries. Stone reported back to senior Campaign officials and· associates, and to Trump directly, and provided advance informatio~ about another expected release relating to John Podesta, which he said would be damaging to Clinton. After WikiLeaks published the Podesta emails on October 7, Trump and the Campaign believed Stone had again acquired accurate, nonpublic information. The Committee could not reliably trace the provision of non-public information from WikiLeaks to Stone, and as a result. could not evaluate the full scope of Stone's non-public knowledge of WikiLeaks's activities. (U) The Trump Campaign strategically monitored and promoted the WikiLeaks releases of John Podesta's emails from October 7 until the· election.• The Campaign tried to cast doubton the October 7 joint DHS/ODNT assessment formally attributing the activity to Russia, and was indifferent to the significance of acquiring, promoting, or disseminating materials from a Russian intelligence services hack-and-leak campaign.....
...At approximately 4:32 p.m. on October 7-approximately 32 minutes after the release of the Access Hollywood tape-WikiLeaks released 2,050 emails that the GRU had stolen from John Podesta, repeatedly announcing the leak on Twitter and linking to a searchable archive of the documents.1677
Corsi said that after the October 7 WikiLeaks release, he and Stone agreed that they deserve.d credit and that."Trump should reward us."1682 However, Corsi said that Stone was concerned about having advance information about the Podesta release, and that Stone recruited . Corsi to make sure no one knew Stone had advance knowledge of that information. After the October 7 release, Corsi claimed that Stone directed him to delete emails relating to the Podesta information.1683 As outlined in his indictment and presented at trial, in subsequent congressional testim~ny to the HPSCI, Stone hid his communications with Corsi about WikiLeaks, and instead identified Credico as his intermediary; he also concealed communications he made directing both Corsi and Credico to obtain advance information about future WikiLeaks releases; and he made misleading and false statements about his communications with the Trump Campaign and individuals associated with the Campaign.1684 Following this testimony, Corsi said that Stone directed him to "stick to the plan"; Stone also threatened Credico to prevent him from testifying · to HPSCI and contradicting Stone's story.....
Trump, in written responses to the SCO, stated: "I do not recall discussing WikiLeaks with [Stone], nor do I recall being aware of Mr. Stone having discussed WikiLeaks. with individuals associated with my campaign."1624 Trump further claimed that he had "no recollection of the specifics of any conversations I had with Mr. Stone between June 1, 2016 and November 8, 2016."1625 Despite Trump's recollection, the Committee ass~sses that Trump did, in fact, speak with Stone about WikiLeaks and with members of his Campaign about Stone's access to WikiLeaks on multiple occasions. ...
...Despite the contemporaneous statement by the U.S. Government warning of Russian responsibility for the hacking and leaking of the DNC, DCCC, and Clinton Campaign documents and emails, the Trump Campaign considered the release of these materials to be its "October surprise."1691 ....
...While the Campaign was using the WikiLeaks documents, Trump cast doubt on the assessment that Russian government hackers were responsible for the hack-and-leak campaign. ..."
There's much more.
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/senate-intel-releases-volume-5-bipartisan-russia-report
"Mueller finds no collusion with Russia, leaves obstruction question open"
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/03/mueller-concludes-investigation/
What amazes me is how many people tried to hand Trump 2 terms on a silver platter with all of this silliness. He was just too inept to take them up on their offer.
I'm hopeful TDS is fatal; got burial insurance?
Steve, Mueller never said that, that's a stupid headline. Mueller certainly did show collusion - just like the Senate Intel Comm did - but collusion is not a legal term and Mueller said he couldn't prove conspiracy. If you're OK with our candidates seeking and encouraging help from Putin through Russian intelligent agents, Trump's your guy. He did that
One of the problems with conspiracy theories is that they confer abilities on others that they simply do not possess.
Donald Trump is a game show host. He did not pull of an intricate maneuver with Russians to steal a United States Presidential election. He does not have that capability.
The obvious explanation for the 2016 elections results is rooted in reality. Hillary Clinton was a horrible candidate.
The Democrats have now lost to, and then barely beaten, a game show host.
They're not understanding that message.
Incidentally, I don't think you can write off the American Bar Association so lightly.
I'm not sure you can write them off lightly enough,
Friday didn’t claim “an intricate maneuver with Russians to steal a United States Presidential election.” He claimed “Mueller certainly did show collusion - just like the Senate Intel Comm did.”
Why not argue against what Joe Friday actually said?
Apparently you don't like my definition of collusion. I like it just find. But even if you think it's not "intricate" Trump still couldn't do it. The Senate Intel Report doesn't add any more than the Mueller report on collusion -- which the American Bar Association characterizes correctly.
Incidentally,
"Senate Intelligence Committee finds no collusion between Russia, Trump campaign"
Associated Press
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-europe-russia-campaigns-senate-elections-9d80e603ac231ece201f6cef3ade1740
Eat shit and die, Asshole.
A standard legal procedure to start an investigation is to create a time line. In this case it seems to be a real problem for the libturds wanting to further the orange man bad theory.
Seems like Garland (who has to be a huge libturd) was first approached about OKing the warrant in June since the raid (or whatever the libturds are now calling it) was needed in a timely manner. But Garland took the paperwork and shoved it up his ass for six weeks or more before OKing the warrant (did I mention the reason for the warrant was to search Melina's closet quickly to find criminal activity). But what is the criminal activity shit when the national archive law is civil, not criminal.
Either there was justification for a warrant due to a search was needed in a timely manner or there was no justification for a warrant since nothing was needed to be done in a timely manner and the long dragged out lawyer fighting between Trump's lawyers and the government lawyers could continue.
There is the possibility that the reason Garland pulled the warrant application out of his ass after it being there for six weeks because of new additional information was given to him on a Friday so he OKed the warrant for Monday; but this has to be based on the fact that Trump was a lazy guy who would never do anything bad over a weekend; again making the timely manner issue a joke.
In any case the time line question that Garland has to answer is what changed six weeks after he first was approached to OK the warrant and why did he still OK the warrant on a Friday for a raid on Monday. Bottom line is the time line facts we now know really raises more questions than it answers.
It's all fruit of the tainted tree. The three statutes named in the warrant are effectively statutes to which any POTUS is absolutely immune. That makes the search illegal, and they know it.
The real purpose? Copy every document, "leak" anything they find they think might be damaging.
"On its face, Trump's handling of classified material was at least as reckless as Hillary Clinton's when she was secretary of state. Trump has long maintained that Clinton's use of an unsecured private email server when she ran the State Department was so egregious an affront to national security that she should go to prison for it."
This is a retarded analysis for a couple reasons:
First, Trump had declassification abilities Clinton never did. Whether he actually declassed or not, he has a much more viable argument to say he did than Clinton ever had.
Second, being that Clinton stored her classified documents on an email server, they were hooked up to the internet. The server was configured such that it was remotely accessible, and the server was known to hackers from 2011 until it was the feds brought it up in 2015. Several hacking attempts were discovered and the FBI said it's "possible that hostile actors gained access" to the server. By contrast with Trump, you have unhackable paper documents locked in a room at a property guarded by the Secret Service. The DOJ reviewed the storage room in June and only requested an additional lock, which the Trump organization added at their request.
"...Whether he actually declassed or not, he has a much more viable argument to say he did than Clinton ever had..."
This needs repeating:
Trump did not have to recite an incantation, he did not have to write memos, he did not have ask permission, he did not have to say "mother may I"
All that was required was for him to say 'these are declassified'. If he says he did so and someone doubts it, bring on the evidence.
every article I've read about this topic disagrees with you on the required procedure to declassify documents. I guess they are all lying and you are telling the truth?
Well, I guess your raging case of TDS sort of dictates your reading habits and your stupidity keeps you from searching out others.
Here, TDS-addled asshole.
"Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence"
[...]
"President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.
[...]
Executive Order 13526
As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries..."
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-legal-authority-declassify-intelligence/story?id=47436559
Didn't bother to read the article. Just came here to see the commenters trying to slap the TDS out of Sullum. Lol.
I thought we were boycotting sullums tds. That seemed to work for a while anyway.
The Trump Fellation Syndrome sufferers just can’t quit Sullum. They need fuel for their victimhood narrative and outrage habit.
Poor Dee thinks she’s clever.
I can be libertarian and disagree with this article. Total Bull shit. Fair and equitable treatment by a bunch of political hitmen
Oh, I didn't realize he had exercised "bad judgment."
That totally justifies a search warrant and raid unprecedented in American history. In what section of the United States Code might we find the statute criminalizing bad judgment?
As a principled libertarian, do you support FBI raids for bad judgment on anyone's home or just Trump's?
Don't bother, sullum is Trump deranged cuck.
Odd. Sullum’s writing on the topic is matter of fact, filled with source references, and unemotional.
Yet he is supposedly the one with a derangement syndrome.
Nobody has charged Trump with anything. At least not yet.
They just came and got the documents which were not being returned voluntarily. No other President took boxes of classified documents with them, so that is also unprecedented.
Actually, I'm pretty sure all the Presidents have taken reams of documents, and, again, the President is the ultimate arbiter of what is "classified" or not. Do you think if we looked carefully at the 30 million documents in Obama's possession (the ones he's supposed to digitize, but still hasn't digitized a single one in six years) that you wouldn't find anything with classification markings.
You can't get a search warrant without showing a judge probable cause that it will produce evidence of a crime. Are you suggesting the Justice Department is being disingenuous? Otherwise, you get a subpoena, not a search warrant.
The documents in Chicago aren’t directly in Obama’s possession. They are managed by NARA. That is normal and legal.
And they were removed from the White House by .... who?
For reals bro. The crime of Bad Judgment. Arrest him!
Very libertarian.
so many republican tears. Glorious. Clinton and Trump should both go to jail and share the same cell.
Such a pile of TDS-brain-damaged assholes.
It’s refreshing how you jump to the defense of the Republican Party any time anyone says something remotely critical of anyone in it. Most people couch their loyalties in attempts to make a logical argument, and that’s just tedious.
It's regrettably pathetic how you show up to display your TDS-addled brain-death on a regular basis.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
If the DOJ was actually trying to prosecute both of them simultaneously, I'd at least take the argument that this is "just about the rule of law" more seriously.
While “Fact-checkers” Play Defense For Obama… Here’s The Truth About 30 Million Pages of His Regime’s Records that Were “Trucked to Chicago”
The Nixon Library did not release all his secret tapes until 2013 – 39 years after Nixon left office. Similarly, the Lyndon B. Johnson Library delayed the release of his secret tapes until 2016, which was 47 years after he left office.
The Obama administration didn’t do things any differently, delaying the release of thousands of pages of records from Bill Clinton’s presidency. Barack Obama also had 30 million pages of records from his administration transported to Chicago, where he promised he would digitize them and put them online.
The Obama Foundation estimates that 95% of Obama administration records were “born digital,” meaning they could very easily be released online. And, in 2017, the Obama Foundation announced it would fund the digitization of the records that were not already digital. However, over five years after his presidency ended, the National Archives webpage shows that no pages have been digitized or disclosed yet.
The Obama Foundation estimates that 95% of Obama administration records were “born digital,” meaning they could very easily be released online. And, in 2017, the Obama Foundation announced it would fund the digitization of the records that were not already digital. However, over five years after his presidency ended, the National Archives webpage shows that no pages have been digitized or disclosed yet.
While Americans are mostly prohibited from seeing official records from Obama’s presidency, Barack and Michelle Obama were advanced $65 million for their memoirs.
In 2011, Obama’s Justice Department proposed that federal agencies should be able to falsely claim that FOIA-requested documents didn’t exist. This recommendation was criticized as a law that would “permit federal law enforcement agencies to actively lie to the American people.”
So, while Obama touted his administration as “the most transparent” in history, it was really no more open than the Nixon administration in terms of government secrecy.
Also, the truth is that the documents in Chicago are managed by NARA, not in Obama’s garage or something.
There's really no reason to give the FBI or DOJ any benefit of the doubt. They were already caught lying to put surveillance on Carter Page. They tried to entrap Flynn on a logan act violation after having listened on his conversation. Just last month or so the laughable J6 committee entertained a movie plot about Trump putting on a power move on a driver and throwing ketchup on the wall.
Yes, we know that the government lies. But now they're hyper politicized and selective on enforcing the law. Notice how they brand angry parents in a school meeting as potential domestic extremists but remained muted after the assassination attempt on Kavanaugh and attack on Rushdie.
Compare and contrast how Reason covered the Beronna Taylor incident and the persecution of Trump - especially on their tone and the way they provide context. It's night and day. It's night and day. Even David French noted the hypocrisy of the FBI sparing Clinton for doing almost exactly what Trump is accused of. Reason barely acknowledges this and even argues that what Trump did was worse.
The government is using its power to coming after a political figure they despise. It's that simple. Even if Trump took classified docs, there was no need for a raid. They didn't DO THAT on Clinton. You cannot simply wish away these realities because you don't like Trump. Guy like Chemjeff is playing the role of a conservative who says "Yeah the government is immoral but that guy is real immoral and shifty"
"The top-secret documents included some that were labeled "SCI," or "sensitive compartmented information," an especially restricted category."
Fortunately, the government installed a "Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility" inside Mar-A-Lago early in the Trump presidency.
The DNC very much wants to imply that somehow Trump personally carried out classified information that he was not entitled to see, and has it casually sitting in piles in public areas of MAL. They don't want to explicitly make such claims, as they can be readily disproved.
The reality is that the GSA provides former presidents with office space in the place of their choosing, then furnishes, equips, and staffs those facilities.
Most of the news reports seem to be aimed at influencing people who do not understand how classified documents are handled, or the laws regarding them.
Neither of the scenarios you describe is what happened, or what anyone has said happened.
The common claim in news reports is that the documents were in a storeroom and a safe at Mar-a-Lago, but neither was NARA provided or supervised.
"...The DNC very much wants to imply that somehow Trump personally carried out classified information that he was not entitled to see, and has it casually sitting in piles in public areas of MAL. They don't want to explicitly make such claims, as they can be readily disproved..."
They enlisted the FBI who, by all indications, is now left wondering what to do with the mess they signed on to do; hey the DNC said it was just fine!
IDK, but it would come as no surprise that, after the continuing silence from the FBI, that Trump's legal staff is advising him to shut up and let the FBI make some attempt at justifying the witch hunt, and assuring Trump that he can offer a cloth to the FBI to wipe the egg off their face.
If he wants to...
This is just about the most pathetic thing I have ever read here. We have zero facts, but damning conclusions. Currying favor with Pelosi? This sounds like Schiff.
Funny, I don’t see where Sullum assumes anything.
The "donald" is an arogant person. He is number one. If you want to work for him you sign a loyalty oath and a NDA . If he says that a document is trivial, then it is so. All hail his majasty.
I'm Just Say'n is a fucking brain-dead, TDS-addled asshole, totally lacking in intelligence, who manages to prove it in two lines.
Eat shit and die, shit-pile.
If Trump declassified a bunch of documents for some legitimate reason, why didn't he go through the normal national security process to determine whether doing so would cause harm to American interests?
Why didn't he tell anyone about it?
The argument being whored out here fresh from whatever Russian propaganda mill whence it came is that Trump's innocent because he waved a magic wand over some documents.
But if he didn't go through the process and didn't tell the American people whose interest he would in theory be working for, his reasons must be purely selfish.
Nothing to see here, of course. Trump could push you people's mother in front of a train and you'd find a way to defend him for it. That's what being in a cult is. That's what brainwashing is.
Also, it's not just documents that are classified, it's the programs, sources, and methods they discuss. Did he disclose a bunch of that for our sake except forget to tell us he was doing it, and is that OK too?
At some point it will become easier to cut your sunk cost losses than it is to keep believing that Trump is Jesus. Maybe it will take losing a war or seeing your child drink poisoned kool-aid. Depends on how stupid you are, really.
Rarely waste my time on TDS-addled piles of lefty shit like this, but even the 'housekeeping' of business is done tonight and we may as well lend some logic to the claims of shitbag Tony:
"If Trump declassified a bunch of documents for some legitimate reason, why didn't he go through the normal national security process to determine whether doing so would cause harm to American interests?"
This should not have to be repeated, but we have many fucking ignoramuses here on this issue: Trump did not have to recite an incantation, he did not have to write memos, he did not have ask permission, he did not have to say "mother may I"
All that was required was for him to say 'these are declassified'. If he says he did so and someone doubts it, bring on the evidence.
------------------------------------------
"Why didn't he tell anyone about it?"
See above, shit-bag.
------------------------------------------
The argument being whored out here fresh from whatever Russian propaganda mill whence it came is that Trump's innocent because he waved a magic wand over some documents.
So fucking idiotic as to be beneath an adult's response; shitbag's working on the bottom of the bottle.
------------------------------------------
"But if he didn't go through the process and didn't tell the American people whose interest he would in theory be working for, his reasons must be purely selfish."
So fucking idiotic as to be beneath an adult's response; shitbag's working on the bottom of the bottle.
-------------------------------------------
"Nothing to see here, of course. Trump could push you people's mother in front of a train and you'd find a way to defend him for it. That's what being in a cult is. That's what brainwashing is."
So fucking idiotic as to be beneath an adult's response; shitbag's working on the bottom of the bottle.
---------------------------------------------
"Also, it's not just documents that are classified, it's the programs, sources, and methods they discuss. Did he disclose a bunch of that for our sake except forget to tell us he was doing it, and is that OK too?"
Does an editor of "Dog Walkers' Weekly" in "Whispering Oaks" gated community expect us to believe that this shitbag has any idea of what's there? Why, yes, the lefty ignoramus does! Fail, shitbag.
---------------------------------------
"At some point it will become easier to cut your sunk cost losses than it is to keep believing that Trump is Jesus. Maybe it will take losing a war or seeing your child drink poisoned kool-aid. Depends on how stupid you are, really."
After nearly six years of informing us that Trump will never serve out his term, that he will be in jail 'soon', that (in spite of the near total investigations with zero result) he's both the most criminal and corrupt POTUS ever, shit bag offers this to those who point out that Trump was a very good POTUS and Tony is:
Full.
Of.
Shit.
You can't get more disconnected from reality than that.
Shit bag, do the world a favor: Fuck off and die. Do the neighbors of your resting place; don't mark it. They do not want huge crowds standing in line to piss on it.
Sorry for the left-off quotation marks on shtibag's third offering of bullshit, and let's leave this here (AGAIN!) for the TDS-addled shitpiles who say "Nu uhn":
"Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence"
[...]
"President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.
[...]
Executive Order 13526
As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries..."
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-legal-authority-declassify-intelligence/story?id=47436559
Further:
Trump did not have to recite an incantation, he did not have to write memos, he did not have ask permission, he did not have to say "mother may I"
All that was required was for him to say 'these are declassified'. If he says he did so and someone doubts it, bring on the evidence.
Anybody willing to put this into single syllable form to satisfy the mouth-breathing, IQ challenged shits like the shitbag Tony?
Sorry, done with wasting time dealing with ignoramuses tonight.
A waste of time is right.
Why don't you listen? Trump is not being investigation for holding classified material. He's being investigated for holding material that could compromise national security under the Espionage Act.
I told you he was a traitor a long time ago, and you refused to listen. That's on you bub.
"Why don't you listen? Trump is not being investigation for holding classified material. He's being investigated for holding material that could compromise national security under the Espionage Act."
And when *that* turns out to be bullshit, he'll be investigated for a lat library book return.
Fuck off and die, you pathetic pile of TDS-addled shit.
BTW, seems no one saluted the 'he can't de-classify' lie, so now we'll run this one up the flagpole:
"...He's being investigated for holding material that could compromise national security under the Espionage Act..."
The late library book charge is later.
One guy from the Trump White House, Kash Patel, says Trump gave some kind of sweeping verbal order … and then somehow it never got written down or executed or followed up on, and nobody else seems to know about the order.
So, it was like a tree falling in the forest type deal.
Or Patel is lying or fudging about what actually happened, and Trump just made up the whole “I declassified all these documents” thing a few days ago.
Trump, Patel — this is why you bother to write things down in a government of laws, not men. We know you do know how to write things down because you managed to do it once, for a bunch of Russiagate-related documents, as ElvisIsKing keeps pointing out.
Checked names of shitbags in gray boxes; if anyone else wants to waste time pointing out what asswipes they are, why, have at it.
If Trump declassified a bunch of documents for some legitimate reason, why didn't he go through the normal national security process to determine whether doing so would cause harm to American interests?
Why didn't he tell anyone about it?
He was the President, and therefore didn't have to. The end. You're welcome.
That did not answer the question asked.
Exactly.
Democrats are sad. Seven years of frantically searching for any actual crime committed by Trump, nothing but seven years of bitter abject failure.
So sad!
"...The DNC very much wants to imply that somehow Trump personally carried out classified information that he was not entitled to see, and has it casually sitting in piles in public areas of MAL. They don't want to explicitly make such claims, as they can be readily disproved..."
They enlisted the FBI who, by all indications, is now left wondering what to do with the mess they signed on to do; hey the DNC said it was just fine!
IDK, but it would come as no surprise that, after the continuing silence from the FBI, that Trump's legal staff is advising him to shut up and let the FBI make some attempt at justifying the witch hunt, and assuring Trump that he can offer a cloth to the FBI to wipe the egg off their face.
If he wants to...
Oh, the FBI knows EXACTLY what to do. As quickly as possible, they have to copy everything and "leak" it to minions who will use illegally obtained evidence to try to further smear Trump. Their search will be ruled illegal, and they will be forced to return most of it - but some will go 'missing'.
It's the totalitarian way.
Wa Po has a sad:
"Trump’s dominance in GOP comes into focus, worrying some in the party"
[...]
"Donald Trump is securing his grip on the Republican Party less than three months before the midterms, with GOP primary voters surging to the polls in Wyoming to oust his most vocal GOP critic, scores of nominees for state and federal offices amplifying his false claims and bellicose rhetoric, and many prominent party figures echoing his evidence-free attacks about the FBI search of his home..."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-s-dominance-in-gop-comes-into-focus-worrying-some-in-the-party/ar-AA10MxkY?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2055bfa8148b4455b52971f112d5d236
"...and many prominent party figures echoing his evidence-free attacks about the FBI search of his home..."
Uh, YOU need to provide the evidence supporting the raids, not the other way round.
See the shitbag Tony's whines above. Not putting money on it yet, but perhaps there is a gain in those who see the swamp-critter attack on Trump as what it is.
these articles continue to trigger the trump suckers. nothing bad must ever be said about dear leader......
here is a summary.
no matter how much you want to claim Trump declassified those documents, the manner of it is colossally stupid. it left him with 11 boxes of documents that have nothing but his word showing they were declassified.... not a single shred of evidence can be provided showing they were.
if you could provide evidence showing they were declassified (you can't) you would be providing evidence that Trump deliberately violated the presidential records act. (if he declassified these specific documents, he knew he was holding documents that needed to be turned over.... tossing out the argument that he did not personally pack or ship them.)
while the FBI raid was overbearing and a stupid move by the FBI, the arguments of those trying to defend Trump are almost counterproductive, because they make him look worse that just "he had some documents he forgot to turn over because he does not handle all that shit personally." the attempts at defense make him look more guilty.
Thank you, TDS-addled pile of lefty shit, for making clear you have no interest in the rule of law but only your infantile dislike of a certain human.
Pretty sure this was requested earlier of the TDS-addled pile of lefty shit fooshit that you both fuck off and die, and please do not mark your grave; the neighbors do not desire huge crowds waiting to piss on it.
TDS,TDS, fuck off and die, SQUAWK!!!!
Fuck off and die, TDS-addled shitpile.
Don't you know? According to the Trumpsuckers not only did he declassify them, for he said he did, and Trump is an honourable man, but he was entitled to have them at Maga-Lago despite the prima facie violation of the records act because when the ex-president does it, it's not illegal. They believe in the Führerprinzip - but only as it applies to Trump.
Don't you know? TDS addled assholes like SRG will continue to spout bullshit in the hopes their assholery will, uh, something!
Fuck off and die, shitpile
Oh, and notice the TDS-addled pile of shit SRG addresses none of the factual issues stated above.
This is no surprise; the fucking ignoramus SRG is not capable or logical thought!
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Hilarious! You folks are suddenly acting like this question was never asked before...
Trump has exactly the same powers over secrets held by Clinton (had tapes in a sock drawer) and Obama (who took 30+ million with him). That power comes directly from the Constitution, is absolute and unlimited, and transcends any law, regulation, "Congressional oversight," or future legal charges.
Citing the President’s constitutional role as Commander-in-Chief, the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated in dicta that “[the President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”
So sad for you. The only crimes here were committed by Garland and the judge who signed the warrant, stipulating 3 Statutes which POTUS cannot possibly be convicted of due to his total immunity to the "crimes" alleged.
Obama didn’t “take 30+ million with him”. The documents are still managed by NARA, in Chicago.
Oof:
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/old-case-over-audio-tapes-bill-clintons-sock-drawer-could-impact
Oof what? You found some lame deflection on a heretofore unknown rightwing propaganda mill?
That talks about private recordings between Clinton and a historian. Not top-secret national security materials.
You can play your role in the Republican ratfucking machine, digging up every "bbut her emailz" you can find from the cesspit of the rightwing internet, but Trump can't even get a decent lawyer and he'll be going before a judge. And it won't be Janine Pirro.
So you didn’t read the article, or the links in the article.
You know no one here believes a single thing you spew from your vile dark soul, right?
Their loss.
I clearly did skim the article. Wake me when it shows up in a real newspaper, but even then, I am capable of telling the difference between a private conversation and classified nuclear secrets.
Hilarious!
You are sad, because there is still no crime committed by Trump. All POTUS's have absolute unlimited power over secrets bestowed directly from the Constitution, transcending any law or regulation or "Congressional oversight. UNLIMITED. SCOTUS has addressed this many times.
Citing the President’s constitutional role as Commander-in-Chief, the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated in dicta that “[the President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”
He's never going to fuck you. You're going to end up like all brownshirts do.
Nobody is saying Trump's alleged crime was improperly classifying documents. It's illegally stealing classified government secrets. Those can be classified or not. Classification is a joke.
Sullum: "Trump, meanwhile, insists he had no classified documents, which is even harder to believe."
Sullum better read up on the Constitution and classification law including Bush and Obama EOs on the subject, and especially the case to which you refer regarding tapes of President Clinton talking to a historian about his presidential activities while president, that Clinton kept in his sock drawer. The judge ruled any documents the president has in his personal possession, are considered personal, and not government records unless the president says so. Sullum also seems to think a president cannot classify or declassify documents at will. Further, AFAIK there's no requirement for the President to make a documented record of what he's classified as personal, or what he declassifies.
Precisely. POTUS has a UNIQUE power over secrets directly from the Constitution - which thus means his power transcends any mere legislation. Nor was Clinton the only subject of such a query into the powers of POTUS:
Citing the President’s constitutional role as Commander-in-Chief, the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated in dicta that “[the President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”
Translation: POTUS' power over secrets is absolute, transcends the power of any piece of legislation or bureaucratic "regulation," above the power of "Congressional oversight," and is IMMUNE to any charges arising from his chosen employment of said secrets.
That also means Obama's 30+ million documents are immune, as well.
So sad, still no actual crime by Trump. On the bright side, Garland and the signing judge may go to prison.
There will, of course, be endless "leaks" of the materials illegally obtained.
Trump is not President anymore.
Precisely. People are acting as if this question was never asked before. It was, and the answer was always the same:
POTUS' power over secrets is absolute, unlimited, and immune to mere laws and regulations.
funny how a link that includes the phrase "all-things-trump" is for something about Bill Clinton..... who i never said anything about.
Fuck off and die, asshole3
here is a summary.
no matter how much you want to claim Trump declassified those documents, the manner of it is colossally stupid. it left him with 11 boxes of documents that have nothing but his word showing they were declassified.... not a single shred of evidence can be provided showing they were.
Here is a summary.
No matter how much you hate Trump, he doesn't have to provide proof of innocence in a court of law, the prosecution has to show proof of guilt.
Excellent summary!
Cha-ching!
He hasn’t been charged with anything.
you chuckle-heads don't get it, do you.... the evidence that he illegally had classified material in his possession and in violation of the presidential records act already exists. the prosecution already has the ability to prove guilt. the reason you guys want to pretend he does not need to prove they were all (improperly) declassified is because no such evidence exists...... because he never actually did that.
Die ibn a fire, asswipe.
SQUAWK!!!!!!
Hilarious!
Signing even a single bureaucratic form would have entrapped Trump (or Obama, or Clinton). It would be acknowledging that they were accountable to legislators and/or bureaucrats on the issue. They are not.
POTUS' power over secrets is unique, absolute, and unlimited. It comes directly from the Constitution, so it transcends any mere legislation or puny regulation.
"Citing the President’s constitutional role as Commander-in-Chief, the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated in dicta that “[the President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”
The only crimes here are those committed by Garland (for approving the order) and the signing judge (for knowingly signing a warrant based on laws he knows POTUS is not subject to).
you should read what you are responding to before pasting your talking points. literally nothing you said had anything to do with anything i said.
Stuff your head up your ass and die, asswipe.
ooohh.... finally trying to add some variety... "stuff your head up your ass" is SOOOO clever...
dimwit
Thank you, TDS-addled pile of lefty shit, for making clear you have no interest in the rule of law but only your infantile dislike of a certain human.
Pretty sure this was requested earlier of the TDS-addled pile of lefty shit fooshit that you both fuck off and die, and please do not mark your grave; the neighbors do not desire huge crowds waiting to piss on it.
Well, bless the Reason website professionalism for allowing me to twice point out that fooasshole is full of shit
I understand your points Sevo, but IMHO you don't persuade someone to your way of thinking by insulting them. Consider the option of pointing out the flaws in the article, which then point to the author's choices of words. E.G., one can merely point out that Sullum hasn't done his research on the laws being unconstitutionally used against Trump.
As a long time Reason subscriber and donor, I find it sad that what I believe is the leading mainstream libertarian magazine (a contradiction in terms perhaps?) dumps so much on what I see as the most libertarian president in over 60 years, even more so than Reagan. But, I guess, allegedly mean tweets (not compared to Gutfeld) triggers TDS in libertarian writers, or maybe Reason staff are looking to higher paying jobs in the mainstream (i.e. politically controlled) propaganda media masquerading as news? IDK What I do know is you seldom see the libertarian position on issues in this magazine anymore. E.G., Sullum ignore the (used to be mentioned often in Reason) overclassification of government records but it can't be that because - Trump. Or what about the libertarian desire to actually see most all government records? Trump wants them released, but not Biden and the DOJ (per Dershowitz we should then believe Trump and not the DOJ because Trump wants disclosure).
"I understand your points Sevo, but IMHO you don't persuade someone to your way of thinking by insulting them..."
I really do understand and appreciate your point, and if someone presents me with an honest argument, they will get an equally honest response.
Lying piles of TDS-addled shit like foo, tony, Joe Asshole and others get exactly what they deserve; insults.
Dunno how long you've been here, but changing what passes for the minds of that lot is not possible; they are here to barf up talking points they hope the rest of us are stupid enough to buy.
Fuck the lot of them with a running, rusty chain saw.
Sevo is only here to spout hate and anger. he has zero interest in rational discussion, convincing others of his position, or trying to understand theirs. insulting others is his reason for being here.
Eat shit and die, shitpile.
eat shit and die, eat shit and die, SQUAWK!!
TDS,TDS, full of shit.... SQUAWK!
Fuck off and die, asshole.
unsubscribing. to many left wing articles. Cavalier is bleachbit, acid wash or rubbing down a server with a rag........
Bah bye
REASON's position here seems to be that any classified document deserves to be classified. That's nonsense which, alas, we're seeing far too much of these days in these pages.
Any document's classification should have to be EARNED as by proving it worthy of its classification category. What percentage of classified documents would survive such an examination, I wonder.
Really? Sullum didn’t say anything one way or another on that topic.
"Whatever threat it may have posed, the trove of government documents seized by the FBI does not reflect well on the former president's judgment."
Wow. Just wow. The degree of ignorance (or disingenuousness) is downright astounding.
Like EVERY POTUS since the signing of our Constitution, POTUS has an UNLIMITED power over secrets - they literally belong to POTUS, as SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled:
"Citing the President’s constitutional role as Commander-in-Chief, the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated in dicta that “[the President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”
That means POTUS may, without anyone's permission, without signing any bureaucratic forms, unilaterally declare materials declassified and take them with them when they leave office - just like the 30+ million documents Obama took with him. It means he is immune to any "law" or "regulation" directing the handling of said materials. His power is ABSOLUTE on this one issue.
Nor is this a "trove" - officials were 100% aware of what Trump took with him.
Nor is there any possible crime. Since POTUS' power comes directly from the Constitution, he is IMMUNE from prosecution for any legislated "crime" having to do with the handling of secrets (unless he obtains said secrets AFTER they leave power and THEN abuse them). Such laws simply cannot be applied, because his power (from the Constitution) transcends the authority of Congress.
There is no crime here, apart from Garland and the signing judge - who knowingly stipulated three statutes in the warrant which CANNOT apply to PCOTUS. They, in fact, may end up facing criminal charges.
Sullum: This shows Trump has bad judgement.
Galt: Trump didn’t do anything illegal!
He's not the fucking president dude, and even the president can't steal nuclear secrets and store them in a basement somewhere.
You should really learn to research matters rather than constantly making a public ass of yourself by slinging bullshit, TDS-addled shitpile.
Wow! Forgot how much TDS there is for those who write Reason. First, it's unclassifed. Second, it was guarded overall. A safe and a locked storage room.
What about the passports? Guess that was a national threat too.
You try and say it's equal to Hillary. Are you crazy? This is why Reason is a joke now. Hillary ran private servers which is against the law. No just classified or unclassified. Everything. I work for the government. If I did that I would be fire. Her emails were hacked, and who knows what else could be stolen from the servers. The only reason to have private servers is to get around the law.
The only reason Hillary isn't in jail is the same as Hunter. She has media types like you covering.
Republicans' screws up - that's the story
Democrat screws up - how the Republicans' react is the story
normal person: what trump did was wrong, or at least pretty dumb.
MAGA cultist: HIIILLLARRY
Eat shit and die, asshole.
eat shit and die, eat shit and die, SQUAWK!!!
Jacob, your TDS is showing. Perhaps you should get some kind of treatment for that.
Absurd comparison. As someone else said Trump had his in a safe in a locked storage room with no windows in a house monitored and patrolled by the US Secret Service isn't "cavalier" by any standard.
Hilary’s documents were on a private server in a bathroom closet in a downtown Denver loft of a mom and pop computer shop.
That’s quite a difference.