Mar-a-Lago raided
-
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Did Ms. Clinton have the right to declassify and destroy sensitive documents, either paper or in digital form?
Her email server was a private server intended for non-governmental information transmission. The destruction of a hard drive would be appropriate. What was shown to have happened is that that some sensitive governmental communications were sent to her private gmail account. This kind of thing happens - actually happened to me as well. Some folks go to type a note to Kluursatgmail instead of klurrs atbusiness.com
In Clinton's case, nearly all of the mistakes made were initiated by staff sending to the wrong Clinton account as opposed to Hillary herself. The FBI determined that one email string contained classified information - and the classified information was in the middle of the string of non-classified information. It was designated by a "c" indicating classified material. It should have been noted at the time - but wasn't. Hillary said there was nothing classified in her emails.
Because of the amount of crap being thrown at the screen, it is hard to determine 1) if there's anything that President Trump retained that should not have been retained and 2) whether there was any crime was committed and by whom.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 02:16 last edited by Copper@kluurs said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Her email server was a private server intended for non-governmental information transmission.
Correct, except for the classified government documents.
The CIA explained this.
The FBI, James Comey, explained a little differently, he said that she was "extremely careless".
And by destroying the data she violated federal law.
Why do you guys bother lying about this? It is well documented, everyone here is familiar with it.
-
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Simply looking at what the rights of the accused are
As much as it sickens me to say so, I agree his rights must be safeguarded. But his rights as important as they are, are not as vital as the main thing: namely, those documents. They cannot be left out of federal custody, especially when their contents are not known.
Knowing Trump, they could be anything. It would not be surprising if they turned out to be of no importance. Boy, what fodder that would be for Trump, eh?
Why in hell did he even take them with him, anyway? Could it be for the purpose of embarrassing the feds and feeding his base's frenzy? At no cost to him?
The President can declassify whatever he wishes.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 02:45 last edited by@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President can declassify whatever he wishes.
Yes, however there's a process he has to follow. He can't just announce it.
I'd bet money on the fact that he didn't follow the process.
-
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 05:58 last edited by Catseye3
Excerpts from NBC News:
"Richard Immerman, a historian and an assistant deputy director of national intelligence in the Obama administration, said that, while the president has the authority to declassify documents, there’s a formal process for doing so, and there's no indication Trump used it.
"I’ve seen thousands of declassified documents. They’re all marked ‘declassified’ with the date they were declassified,” Immerman said.
That does not appear to have been the case with some of the documents that were returned to the National Archives from Mar-a-Lago this year. Archivist David S. Ferriero, an Obama appointee, said in a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform in February that his agency had "identified items marked as classified national security information within the boxes” from Mar-a-Lago.
"A source who had discussed the matter with Trump but was not authorized to reveal those conversations said the former president wasn't concerned with formal protocol.
"We’ve told him there’s a process and not following it could be a problem but he didn’t care because he thinks this stuff is dumb,” the source said. “His attitude is that he is the president. He is in charge of the country and therefore national security. So he decides.”
Bradley Moss, a lawyer who specializes in national security issues, said, "That's not how it works."
"Trump could say we're declassifying this until he's blue in the face, but no one is allowed to touch those records until the markings are addressed," said Moss, a frequent Trump critic on Twitter.
"In the current dispute, the apparent lack of a paper trail showing that Trump declassified the documents before he left office could be a problem for the former president, said Stephen Vladeck, a University of Texas School of Law professor who specializes in national security."
For the whole article: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-allies-say-declassified-mar-lago-documents-experts-say-unclear-w-rcna42311
-
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Simply looking at what the rights of the accused are
As much as it sickens me to say so, I agree his rights must be safeguarded. But his rights as important as they are, are not as vital as the main thing: namely, those documents. They cannot be left out of federal custody, especially when their contents are not known.
Knowing Trump, they could be anything. It would not be surprising if they turned out to be of no importance. Boy, what fodder that would be for Trump, eh?
Why in hell did he even take them with him, anyway? Could it be for the purpose of embarrassing the feds and feeding his base's frenzy? At no cost to him?
The President can declassify whatever he wishes.
As long as he the sitting President, yes, he can declassify documents. He also must make note of those docs while he is sitting POTUS and follow prescribed protocols. He cannot declassify documents that he has in his possession when he is no longer POTUS.
Trump, of course, believes that he is still President. Presumably you and one or two others here, do as well.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 12:57 last edited by@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Simply looking at what the rights of the accused are
As much as it sickens me to say so, I agree his rights must be safeguarded. But his rights as important as they are, are not as vital as the main thing: namely, those documents. They cannot be left out of federal custody, especially when their contents are not known.
Knowing Trump, they could be anything. It would not be surprising if they turned out to be of no importance. Boy, what fodder that would be for Trump, eh?
Why in hell did he even take them with him, anyway? Could it be for the purpose of embarrassing the feds and feeding his base's frenzy? At no cost to him?
The President can declassify whatever he wishes.
As long as he the sitting President, yes, he can declassify documents. He also must make note of those docs while he is sitting POTUS and follow prescribed protocols. He cannot declassify documents that he has in his possession when he is no longer POTUS.
Trump, of course, believes that he is still President. Presumably you and one or two others here, do as well.
For the President, there are no prescribed protocols.
-
@kluurs said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Her email server was a private server intended for non-governmental information transmission.
Correct, except for the classified government documents.
The CIA explained this.
The FBI, James Comey, explained a little differently, he said that she was "extremely careless".
And by destroying the data she violated federal law.
Why do you guys bother lying about this? It is well documented, everyone here is familiar with it.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 13:05 last edited by@Copper said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@kluurs said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Her email server was a private server intended for non-governmental information transmission.
Correct, except for the classified government documents.
The CIA explained this.
The FBI, James Comey, explained a little differently, he said that she was "extremely careless".
And by destroying the data she violated federal law.
Why do you guys bother lying about this? It is well documented, everyone here is familiar with it.
They're doing it, because they have to. If it can be shown that other government officials have not lived up to the letter of the law, the case against Trump looks more like persecution via selective law enforcement.
-
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Simply looking at what the rights of the accused are
As much as it sickens me to say so, I agree his rights must be safeguarded. But his rights as important as they are, are not as vital as the main thing: namely, those documents. They cannot be left out of federal custody, especially when their contents are not known.
Knowing Trump, they could be anything. It would not be surprising if they turned out to be of no importance. Boy, what fodder that would be for Trump, eh?
Why in hell did he even take them with him, anyway? Could it be for the purpose of embarrassing the feds and feeding his base's frenzy? At no cost to him?
The President can declassify whatever he wishes.
As long as he the sitting President, yes, he can declassify documents. He also must make note of those docs while he is sitting POTUS and follow prescribed protocols. He cannot declassify documents that he has in his possession when he is no longer POTUS.
Trump, of course, believes that he is still President. Presumably you and one or two others here, do as well.
For the President, there are no prescribed protocols.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 13:15 last edited by Renauda@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Simply looking at what the rights of the accused are
As much as it sickens me to say so, I agree his rights must be safeguarded. But his rights as important as they are, are not as vital as the main thing: namely, those documents. They cannot be left out of federal custody, especially when their contents are not known.
Knowing Trump, they could be anything. It would not be surprising if they turned out to be of no importance. Boy, what fodder that would be for Trump, eh?
Why in hell did he even take them with him, anyway? Could it be for the purpose of embarrassing the feds and feeding his base's frenzy? At no cost to him?
The President can declassify whatever he wishes.
As long as he the sitting President, yes, he can declassify documents. He also must make note of those docs while he is sitting POTUS and follow prescribed protocols. He cannot declassify documents that he has in his possession when he is no longer POTUS.
Trump, of course, believes that he is still President. Presumably you and one or two others here, do as well.
For the President, there are no prescribed protocols.
Rubbish.
As Phibes pointed out there is a procedure he must follow to declassify documents. In this case take your pick, call it what you will - process, procedures, protocols there are specified steps for declassification to which the POTUS must adhere.
-
@Copper said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@kluurs said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Her email server was a private server intended for non-governmental information transmission.
Correct, except for the classified government documents.
The CIA explained this.
The FBI, James Comey, explained a little differently, he said that she was "extremely careless".
And by destroying the data she violated federal law.
Why do you guys bother lying about this? It is well documented, everyone here is familiar with it.
They're doing it, because they have to. If it can be shown that other government officials have not lived up to the letter of the law, the case against Trump looks more like persecution via selective law enforcement.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 13:19 last edited by@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Copper said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@kluurs said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Her email server was a private server intended for non-governmental information transmission.
Correct, except for the classified government documents.
The CIA explained this.
The FBI, James Comey, explained a little differently, he said that she was "extremely careless".
And by destroying the data she violated federal law.
Why do you guys bother lying about this? It is well documented, everyone here is familiar with it.
They're doing it, because they have to. If it can be shown that other government officials have not lived up to the letter of the law, the case against Trump looks more like persecution via selective law enforcement.
No, he can't just claim a bunch of stuff was declassified if there's no record of him doing so. He's not President for Life, as much as you might wish it.
-
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Simply looking at what the rights of the accused are
As much as it sickens me to say so, I agree his rights must be safeguarded. But his rights as important as they are, are not as vital as the main thing: namely, those documents. They cannot be left out of federal custody, especially when their contents are not known.
Knowing Trump, they could be anything. It would not be surprising if they turned out to be of no importance. Boy, what fodder that would be for Trump, eh?
Why in hell did he even take them with him, anyway? Could it be for the purpose of embarrassing the feds and feeding his base's frenzy? At no cost to him?
The President can declassify whatever he wishes.
As long as he the sitting President, yes, he can declassify documents. He also must make note of those docs while he is sitting POTUS and follow prescribed protocols. He cannot declassify documents that he has in his possession when he is no longer POTUS.
Trump, of course, believes that he is still President. Presumably you and one or two others here, do as well.
For the President, there are no prescribed protocols.
Rubbish.
As Phibes pointed out there is a procedure he must follow to declassify documents. In this case take your pick, call it what you will - process, procedures, protocols there are specified steps for declassification to which the POTUS must adhere.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 13:25 last edited by -
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 13:27 last edited by
"It’s possible, I guess, that he was selling nuclear documents off the back of a truck to the Saudis in return for lucrative sponsorship deals at his golf courses and mega-bucks investments in Jared Kushner’s new hedge fund. But the more likely explanation is that he simply felt entitled to take it, was aggrieved when the feds asked for it back, and decided to make a whole thing out of it unnecessarily because that’s just who he is. That’d be a weird reason to risk committing a federal crime but he’s a weird guy."
-
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 13:28 last edited by
The President can make a simple statement to the Chief of Staff, "Any classified papers I take to my personal quarters shall be considered declassified".
At that point, they are.
Now, we can argue about T-crossing and I-dotting all we wish, but it really is that simple.
-
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Copies of communications devices were destroyed with hammers. With hammers.
Physical destruction of electronic data storage media to safeguard information security and data privacy is a standard practice. As long as the destruction does not happen after one has been legally ordered to preserve the data, physical destruction of electronic data storage media, be it with a hammer or other means, is neither illegal nor extraordinary.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 13:30 last edited by@Axtremus said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Copies of communications devices were destroyed with hammers. With hammers.
Physical destruction of electronic data storage media to safeguard information security and data privacy is a standard practice. As long as the destruction does not happen after one has been legally ordered to preserve the data, physical destruction of electronic data storage media, be it with a hammer or other means, is neither illegal nor extraordinary.
It is if you were not supposed to have it, or have it on that medium, in the first place.
-
The President can make a simple statement to the Chief of Staff, "Any classified papers I take to my personal quarters shall be considered declassified".
At that point, they are.
Now, we can argue about T-crossing and I-dotting all we wish, but it really is that simple.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 14:38 last edited by@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President can make a simple statement to the Chief of Staff, "Any classified papers I take to my personal quarters shall be considered declassified".
At that point, they are.
Now, we can argue about T-crossing and I-dotting all we wish, but it really is that simple.
If you'd like to read part of the SCOTUS opinion...
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/
"The President, after all, is the 'Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.' U.S. Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security...flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."
-
Excerpts from NBC News:
"Richard Immerman, a historian and an assistant deputy director of national intelligence in the Obama administration, said that, while the president has the authority to declassify documents, there’s a formal process for doing so, and there's no indication Trump used it.
"I’ve seen thousands of declassified documents. They’re all marked ‘declassified’ with the date they were declassified,” Immerman said.
That does not appear to have been the case with some of the documents that were returned to the National Archives from Mar-a-Lago this year. Archivist David S. Ferriero, an Obama appointee, said in a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform in February that his agency had "identified items marked as classified national security information within the boxes” from Mar-a-Lago.
"A source who had discussed the matter with Trump but was not authorized to reveal those conversations said the former president wasn't concerned with formal protocol.
"We’ve told him there’s a process and not following it could be a problem but he didn’t care because he thinks this stuff is dumb,” the source said. “His attitude is that he is the president. He is in charge of the country and therefore national security. So he decides.”
Bradley Moss, a lawyer who specializes in national security issues, said, "That's not how it works."
"Trump could say we're declassifying this until he's blue in the face, but no one is allowed to touch those records until the markings are addressed," said Moss, a frequent Trump critic on Twitter.
"In the current dispute, the apparent lack of a paper trail showing that Trump declassified the documents before he left office could be a problem for the former president, said Stephen Vladeck, a University of Texas School of Law professor who specializes in national security."
For the whole article: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-allies-say-declassified-mar-lago-documents-experts-say-unclear-w-rcna42311
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 15:29 last edited byLike I wrote in Post #317 of this thread:
"We’ve [unidentified source] told him there’s a process and not following it could be a problem but he didn’t care because he thinks this stuff is dumb,” the source said. “His attitude is that he is the president. He is in charge of the country and therefore national security. So he decides.”
Bradley Moss, a lawyer who specializes in national security issues, said, "That's not how it works."
"Trump could say we're declassifying this until he's blue in the face, but no one is allowed to touch those records until the markings are addressed," said Moss, a frequent Trump critic on Twitter.
"In the current dispute, the apparent lack of a paper trail showing that Trump declassified the documents before he left office could be a problem for the former president, said Stephen Vladeck, a University of Texas School of Law professor who specializes in national security." -
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President can make a simple statement to the Chief of Staff, "Any classified papers I take to my personal quarters shall be considered declassified".
At that point, they are.
Now, we can argue about T-crossing and I-dotting all we wish, but it really is that simple.
If you'd like to read part of the SCOTUS opinion...
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/
"The President, after all, is the 'Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.' U.S. Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security...flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 15:32 last edited by Renauda@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President can make a simple statement to the Chief of Staff, "Any classified papers I take to my personal quarters shall be considered declassified".
At that point, they are.
Now, we can argue about T-crossing and I-dotting all we wish, but it really is that simple.
If you'd like to read part of the SCOTUS opinion...
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/
"The President, after all, is the 'Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.' U.S. Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security...flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."
Now that doesn’t quite address the question or requirement of procedure does it?
In fact it is a distractor from the argument of procedure.
-
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 16:28 last edited by
The President may set whatever procedure he wants, if I read that correctly.
-
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 16:36 last edited by
-
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 16:53 last edited by
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President may set whatever procedure he wants, if I read that correctly.
Really now? I suggest you are not reading that ruling in its entirety to arrive at an accurate understanding. Prove me wrong.
-
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President may set whatever procedure he wants, if I read that correctly.
Really now? I suggest you are not reading that ruling in its entirety to arrive at an accurate understanding. Prove me wrong.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 17:17 last edited by@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President may set whatever procedure he wants, if I read that correctly.
Really now? I suggest you are not reading that ruling in its entirety to arrive at an accurate understanding. Prove me wrong.
Let's go back to 2009 and Obama's EO, which exempts the POTUS and VP:
-
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The President may set whatever procedure he wants, if I read that correctly.
Really now? I suggest you are not reading that ruling in its entirety to arrive at an accurate understanding. Prove me wrong.
Let's go back to 2009 and Obama's EO, which exempts the POTUS and VP:
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 17:53 last edited by RenaudaLet's go back to 2009 and Obama's EO, which exempts the POTUS and VP
Here, knock yourself out:
executive order 13526 exemption president vice president
For simplicity sake you might also want to try to prove your statement by going here:
https://www.justice.gov/oip/page/file/1324436/download
Don’t think you’ll find it
-
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 18:41 last edited by
Again, these lay out policies and procedures for people who are below the office of the Chief Executive.