Mar-a-Lago raided
-
Show us explicitly where he cannot.
No, the onus is on you to show us that he can.
But at least you now understand the question. That is a step forward.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 21:30 last edited by@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Show us explicitly where he cannot.
No, the onus is on you to show us that he can.
But at least you now understand the question. That is step forward.
I've already showed where he can. I've even offered a simple example.
If you think POTUS spends his day signing releases for documents and carefully hiding stuff in his desk, you have a different view of a working Oval Office than I do.
-
Trump’s current argument seems untenable. If no documentation were required that would give any former POTUS the ability to declassify things for the rest of his life.
Obama could publish the detailed schematics of the Virginia class nuclear fast attack submarines and say “oh, I declassified these in 2009”
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 21:31 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Trump’s current argument seems untenable. If no documentation were required that would give any former POTUS the ability to declassify things for the rest of his life.
Obama could publish the detailed schematics of the Virginia class nuclear fast attack submarines and say “oh, I declassified these in 2007”
Exactly. Show us the paper and policy. Not just your say-so.
-
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Show us explicitly where he cannot.
No, the onus is on you to show us that he can.
But at least you now understand the question. That is step forward.
I've already showed where he can. I've even offered a simple example.
If you think POTUS spends his day signing releases for documents and carefully hiding stuff in his desk, you have a different view of a working Oval Office than I do.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 21:33 last edited by@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Show us explicitly where he cannot.
No, the onus is on you to show us that he can.
But at least you now understand the question. That is step forward.
I've already showed where he can. I've even offered a simple example.
Actually you have not. Sorry.
-
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Show us explicitly where he cannot.
No, the onus is on you to show us that he can.
But at least you now understand the question. That is step forward.
I've already showed where he can. I've even offered a simple example.
Actually you have not. Sorry.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 21:39 last edited by@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Show us explicitly where he cannot.
No, the onus is on you to show us that he can.
But at least you now understand the question. That is step forward.
I've already showed where he can. I've even offered a simple example.
Actually you have not. Sorry.
I think I have. Sorry.
-
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Show us explicitly where he cannot.
No, the onus is on you to show us that he can.
But at least you now understand the question. That is step forward.
I've already showed where he can. I've even offered a simple example.
Actually you have not. Sorry.
I think I have. Sorry.
-
Well, think harder. You made up a story.
Wish I could say, sorry because I’m not in the least bit, sorry.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 21:49 last edited by@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Well, think harder. You made up a story.
Wish I could say, sorry because I’m not in the least bit, sorry.
No, I doubt you are.
Now, is this the part of the thread where I say that you're an obtuse SOB, or would you like to start the festivities?
-
@Renauda said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Well, think harder. You made up a story.
Wish I could say, sorry because I’m not in the least bit, sorry.
No, I doubt you are.
Now, is this the part of the thread where I say that you're an obtuse SOB, or would you like to start the festivities?
-
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:04 last edited by
Then, R.I.P.
-
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Trump’s current argument seems untenable. If no documentation were required that would give any former POTUS the ability to declassify things for the rest of his life.
Obama could publish the detailed schematics of the Virginia class nuclear fast attack submarines and say “oh, I declassified these in 2007”
Nope, it only gives POTUS the ability to declassify things while he is in office.
As an example...President John Doe is sitting at the Resolute Desk and a widget-expert professor without a TS clearance is brought in to brief the President. The President reaches onto the desk and hands the prof a TS document on a heretofore unknown widget created by DARPA, and asks him to comment.
By his actions, the President has just declassified that document.
I think a lot of this boils down as to when Trump did or did not declassify the documents. I also think it makes a difference what documents they are.
And just as an aside, Trump now says he thinks they took his passport. If so, that's just chickenshit, and speaks volumes.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:07 last edited by jon-nyc@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Trump’s current argument seems untenable. If no documentation were required that would give any former POTUS the ability to declassify things for the rest of his life.
Obama could publish the detailed schematics of the Virginia class nuclear fast attack submarines and say “oh, I declassified these in 2007”
Nope, it only gives POTUS the ability to declassify things while he is in office.
The point is if the decision doesn’t need to be documented there’s be nothing stopping them from doing an ex-post claim. Like Trump is probably doing.
-
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Trump’s current argument seems untenable. If no documentation were required that would give any former POTUS the ability to declassify things for the rest of his life.
Obama could publish the detailed schematics of the Virginia class nuclear fast attack submarines and say “oh, I declassified these in 2007”
Nope, it only gives POTUS the ability to declassify things while he is in office.
The point is if the decision doesn’t need to be documented there’s be nothing stopping them from doing an ex-post claim. Like Trump is probably doing.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:10 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The point is if the decision doesn’t need to be documented there’s be nothing stopping them from doing an ex-post claim. Like Trump is probably doing.
If you didn't document it, it didn't happen. You'd think Trump would have learned that after 4 years.
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
-
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The point is if the decision doesn’t need to be documented there’s be nothing stopping them from doing an ex-post claim. Like Trump is probably doing.
If you didn't document it, it didn't happen. You'd think Trump would have learned that after 4 years.
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:36 last edited by@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
If you didn't document it, it didn't happen. You'd think Trump would have learned that after 4 years.
To be fair, he probably did learn it very well in the last 50-odd years, but being POTUS isn't the same as being whatever the polite term is for somebody like Trump in the real estate business.
-
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The point is if the decision doesn’t need to be documented there’s be nothing stopping them from doing an ex-post claim. Like Trump is probably doing.
If you didn't document it, it didn't happen. You'd think Trump would have learned that after 4 years.
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:39 last edited by@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
His crack legal team?
-
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
His crack legal team?
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:46 last edited by -
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:48 last edited by
Has he joined Trump's team, now?
That's a real step up (for both groups)!
-
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
If you didn't document it, it didn't happen. You'd think Trump would have learned that after 4 years.
To be fair, he probably did learn it very well in the last 50-odd years, but being POTUS isn't the same as being whatever the polite term is for somebody like Trump in the real estate business.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 22:58 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
If you didn't document it, it didn't happen. You'd think Trump would have learned that after 4 years.
To be fair, he probably did learn it very well in the last 50-odd years, but being POTUS isn't the same as being whatever the polite term is for somebody like Trump in the real estate business.
I think the word is, tycoon. It has a somewhat more cache and chic connotation than sales weasel and not nearly as vulgar as shyster.
-
@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
The point is if the decision doesn’t need to be documented there’s be nothing stopping them from doing an ex-post claim. Like Trump is probably doing.
If you didn't document it, it didn't happen. You'd think Trump would have learned that after 4 years.
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 23:26 last edited by@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
I'd venture to say his legal team(s) have had plenty of experience in telling him things. He listens only if he perceives listening is in his own best (short term) interests. Otherwise, he walks out of the room.
-
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
And, in the same vein, you'd think that his legal team would have told him that.
I'd venture to say his legal team(s) have had plenty of experience in telling him things. He listens only if he perceives listening is in his own best (short term) interests. Otherwise, he walks out of the room.
wrote on 15 Aug 2022, 23:40 last edited by@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
I'd venture to say his legal team(s) have had plenty of experience in telling him things. He listens only if he perceives listening is in his own best (short term) interests. Otherwise, he walks out of the room.
You're Kraken me up!
-
wrote on 16 Aug 2022, 00:16 last edited by
-
wrote on 16 Aug 2022, 00:17 last edited by
Sounds like identity theft.
-
wrote on 16 Aug 2022, 00:30 last edited by
@George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
So, why were they taken? Flight risk., LOL?
And what in the hell possessed them to give them back???
