Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

ScruffyD said:

---

just love some of these hot takes. you all realize it is standard procedure to take photos of evidence? And that you include that in filings? And that the most recent filing would not have happened if Trump: 1. Had not put himself in this position to begin with and 2. Not made it even worse by asking for a special master.

what's more, IF he is charged/indicted, it will be for the same things that snowden and assange were charged with. And Trump said they should be executed.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

---

I think that may be a little rough. I am just sick of personalities poisoning the process. If Trump is involved, it is negative. No matter if it is a vaccine for a shot to help people, it is bad. Period. You cannot run an organization with that polarizing of a person. He already said if he wins the Presidency again he is going to fire several thousand Federal workers. Come on. This has reached the point where it is personal and he is going just as vindictive as the Dems. Need new people all the way around.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

I guarantee if Desantis was elected, they would be using the exact same rhetoric against him as they use against Trump.

---

HuMcK said:

---

In late 2021 CIA sent out an agency wide letter about the inordinate amount of assets getting killed. So at the same time as Trump was mishandling all this top secret stuff, including human asset source intelligence, a bunch of spies mysteriously got found and killed.

Just thought I'd throw that out there if we're making tenuous connections.

---

HuMcK said:

---

In late 2021 CIA sent out an agency wide letter about the inordinate amount of assets getting killed. So at the same time as Trump was mishandling all this top secret stuff, including human asset source intelligence, a bunch of spies mysteriously got found and killed.

Just thought I'd throw that out there if we're making tenuous connections.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

In late 2021 CIA sent out an agency wide letter about the inordinate amount of assets getting killed. So at the same time as Trump was mishandling all this top secret stuff, including human asset source intelligence, a bunch of spies mysteriously got found and killed.

Just thought I'd throw that out there if we're making tenuous connections.

---

Trump had hard copies, not digital. Also, these documents are damning evidence against the crossfire hurricane failed coup, not data that can get spies killed.

---

Dnicknames said:

---

There isn't a single person anywhere that implied the documents were laying out on the floor as shown. That's a straw man distraction.

And we see the picture because the DOJ filed a response to Trump's special master request. If Trump doesn't make the request (two weeks late), you never see the picture. More self inflicted mistakes by an inept legal team.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

I guarantee if Desantis was elected, they would be using the exact same rhetoric against him as they use against Trump.

---

I don't want any of those things. I'm for accountability and one standard for both sides.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

---

I think that may be a little rough. I am just sick of personalities poisoning the process. If Trump is involved, it is negative. No matter if it is a vaccine for a shot to help people, it is bad. Period. You cannot run an organization with that polarizing of a person. He already said if he wins the Presidency again he is going to fire several thousand Federal workers. Come on. This has reached the point where it is personal and he is going just as vindictive as the Dems. Need new people all the way around.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

I guarantee if Desantis was elected, they would be using the exact same rhetoric against him as they use against Trump.

---

I don't want any of those things. I'm for accountability and one standard for both sides.

---

Then why aren't you calling for Biden to be impeached over his business dealing with his son that he lied about? Why aren't you calling for the FBI to be held accountable for meddling in the 2018 and 2020 elections by falsifying evidence and simultaneously suppressing legit evidence?

If Desantis is POTUS, the Feds will attempt the same bs and you'll believe them 100%.

You're not conceding how ****ed up and politically weaponized the Feds are.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

---

I think that may be a little rough. I am just sick of personalities poisoning the process. If Trump is involved, it is negative. No matter if it is a vaccine for a shot to help people, it is bad. Period. You cannot run an organization with that polarizing of a person. He already said if he wins the Presidency again he is going to fire several thousand Federal workers. Come on. This has reached the point where it is personal and he is going just as vindictive as the Dems. Need new people all the way around.

---

If a president is looking for accountability, it doesn't matter who he is, the media will make him appear just as polarizing.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

I guarantee if Desantis was elected, they would be using the exact same rhetoric against him as they use against Trump.

---

I don't want any of those things. I'm for accountability and one standard for both sides.

---

Then why aren't you calling for Biden to be impeached over his business dealing with his son that he lied about? Why aren't you calling for the FBI to be held accountable for meddling in the 2018 and 2020 elections by falsifying evidence and simultaneously suppressing legit evidence?

If Desantis is POTUS, the Feds will attempt the same bs and you'll believe them 100%.

You're not conceding how ****ed up and politically weaponized the Feds are.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

I guarantee if Desantis was elected, they would be using the exact same rhetoric against him as they use against Trump.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

ScruffyD said:

---

This has become an amazing fantasy land for many of you. Trump is admitting to things in his filings that many of you are over here still saying he has or has not done. Amazing.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Crossfire hurricane created a media storm against Trump and GOP and gave the 2018 midterms to dems.

The DOJ/FBI lying and claiming Hunter's laptop was bogus gave the 2020 election to Biden.

The system didn't work at all. Rogue federal agents and top brass successfully altered elections and NOBODY has been held accountable.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Crossfire hurricane created a media storm against Trump and GOP and gave the 2018 midterms to dems.

The DOJ/FBI lying and claiming Hunter's laptop was bogus gave the 2020 election to Biden.

The system didn't work at all. Rogue federal agents and top brass successfully altered elections and NOBODY has been held accountable.

---

I think there's a stronger argument that the FBI gave the 2016 election to Trump. And it's not surprising for the opposition party to gain in the midterms. As for the laptop, I think it was less of a bombshell to the general public than it was in the conservative camp. It didn't incriminate Joe, and its reliability remains suspect even now. The drive is replete with evidence of tampering both before and after the story broke. Considering the tale of its origin as well, which is fishy to say the least, they were probably right to urge caution.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Crossfire hurricane created a media storm against Trump and GOP and gave the 2018 midterms to dems.

The DOJ/FBI lying and claiming Hunter's laptop was bogus gave the 2020 election to Biden.

The system didn't work at all. Rogue federal agents and top brass successfully altered elections and NOBODY has been held accountable.

---

I think there's a stronger argument that the FBI gave the 2016 election to Trump. And it's not surprising for the opposition party to gain in the midterms. As for the laptop, I think it was less of a bombshell to the general public than it was in the conservative camp. It didn't incriminate Joe, and its reliability remains suspect even now. The drive is replete with evidence of tampering both before and after the story broke. Considering the tale of its origin as well, which is fishy to say the least, they were probably right to urge caution.

---

Gave the election to Trump? Wow, guy can't catch a break. Even when he wins, it is the FBI. He loses, he is an ******* and deserves it.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Crossfire hurricane created a media storm against Trump and GOP and gave the 2018 midterms to dems.

The DOJ/FBI lying and claiming Hunter's laptop was bogus gave the 2020 election to Biden.

The system didn't work at all. Rogue federal agents and top brass successfully altered elections and NOBODY has been held accountable.

---

I think there's a stronger argument that the FBI gave the 2016 election to Trump. And it's not surprising for the opposition party to gain in the midterms. As for the laptop, I think it was less of a bombshell to the general public than it was in the conservative camp. It didn't incriminate Joe, and its reliability remains suspect even now. The drive is replete with evidence of tampering both before and after the story broke. Considering the tale of its origin as well, which is fishy to say the least, they were probably right to urge caution.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

authorized, Biden removed trumps authorozation..

---

"Appropriate." Neither the manner nor the location are appropriate.

---

when you are no longer authorized, its not appropriate..

---

The PRA authorizes a former president to access his own records. So the issue wasn't with Trump, it was with the way the documents were handled and stored.

---

Our entire spy network in China was obliterated at the same time Hillary's private server was hacked by foreign intel services, Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver and Eric Swallwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy.

The FBI turned a blind eye.

When they charge Trump, will you be able to explain why they get a pass and he doesn't?

---

Mere coincidence!

---

Never Trumpers hate us and they wish Trump was dead.

They want a big bloated government that's weaponized against all calls for reform and accountability.

Honestly they don't give a rats ass how grift is destroying this country as long as legacy media tells them everything's fine.

I guarantee if Desantis was elected, they would be using the exact same rhetoric against him as they use against Trump.

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Crossfire hurricane created a media storm against Trump and GOP and gave the 2018 midterms to dems.

The DOJ/FBI lying and claiming Hunter's laptop was bogus gave the 2020 election to Biden.

The system didn't work at all. Rogue federal agents and top brass successfully altered elections and NOBODY has been held accountable.

---

I think there's a stronger argument that the FBI gave the 2016 election to Trump. And it's not surprising for the opposition party to gain in the midterms. As for the laptop, I think it was less of a bombshell to the general public than it was in the conservative camp. It didn't incriminate Joe, and its reliability remains suspect even now. The drive is replete with evidence of tampering both before and after the story broke. Considering the tale of its origin as well, which is fishy to say the least, they were probably right to urge caution.

---

Somebody forgot to read their polling, it clearly shows that it made an impact and people would not have voted for Biden if they had known about it. This was not the only thing that was suppressed by the media that when polled, the polling shows people would've voted for Trump instead if they had known about it.

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Fed court unsealing some more stuff in an effort to decide if a special master is necessary.. slowly we march forward

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. (HINT: this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms.

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents.

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. (A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. MAL is also a personal residence and office. USSS was/is deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. Access does not happen without their approval. That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc….exceedingly well defended. Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc….

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad.

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things.

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. Why? Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. Same for Carter's residence. Reagan's ranch. Bush 41's Houston home. Bush 43's ranch in Crawford.

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. %A0 %A0After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. %A0That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. %A0 Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. %A0 That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. %A0 (HINT: %A0this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) %A0So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms. %A0

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents. %A0

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. %A0 Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. %A0(A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial %A0tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. %A0 MAL is also a personal residence and office. %A0 %A0USSS was/is %A0deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. %A0 Access does not happen without their approval. %A0 %A0That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc%85.exceedingly well defended. %A0 Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc%85.

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad. %A0

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things. %A0 %A0

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. %A0Elaborate.

---

You've talked at great length about safeguards in embassies and document storage facilities, safeguards on which your career depended. Now you're telling us none of that matters as long as a few Secret Service agents are around. Do you think SS is scouring rooms and looking behind filing cabinets for stray documents? Obviously not, if the FBI found loose documents in desk drawers as has been reported. Shouldn't be a surprise because it isn't their job.

Other ex-presidential homes don't have a steady stream of visitors like MAL does. Not just members, but guests of members, and people sponsored by members. The real point isn't that MAL is uniquely bad (even though it is, by all reports). The point is that it's not expected to have appropriate security for top secret material because former presidents aren't expected to take top secret material home with them. And no other president has, despite the lies still lingering in the air from Sen. Cruz.

---

Ok, Skippy. %A0 I also worked at Langley, behind armed guards, badge-key entry barriers, and combination locked doors securing entire office suites, and at other secure facilities in the No. Virginia area. %A0Also trained in secure locations across the USA, to include facilities controlled by other govt agencies.

But here's the real hole in your argument: %A0 Camp David has max level physical and document security protocols. %A0Why? %A0Because Presidents occasionally handle matters of state there. %A0 %A0When LBJ was alive, his ranch had all that. Why? %A0Because he occasionally handled matters of state there. %A0 Same for Carter's residence. %A0Reagan's ranch. %A0Bush 41's Houston home. %A0Bush 43's ranch in Crawford. %A0

Need I go on?

in 2016, MAL was, like every other personal residence/retreat of a newly elected POTUS, retro-fitted with all necessary upgrades to make secure the sitting President of the United States and any official functions he performed there. %A0 Those remain in place after that POTUS leave office, with amendments to reflect reduced communication needs, USSS staffing, etc....

Don't be a doofus. %A0 The argument "MAL is insecure" is quite possibly the weakest argument you could make. %A0You literally do not know enough to realize how much you do not know.

---

You sure do know a lot. Even more than the DOJ lawyers running the investigation, apparently. Here's what they said, as quoted in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

As I previously indicated to you, Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information. As such, it appears that since the time classified documents were removed from the secure facilities at the White House and moved to Mar-a-Lago on or around January 20, 2021, they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.

---

You also told me that no access to MAL happens without Secret Service approval. I guess you didn't tell those doofuses in the Secret Service:

Quote:

---

The Secret Service said when Trump was president that it does not determine who is granted access to the club, but does do physical screenings to make sure no one brings in prohibited items, and further screening for guests in proximity to the president and other protectees.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-mar-a-lago-security-nightmare-that-housed-classified-documents-2022-08-13/

---

Reminds me of that Navy v. Egan case we were talking about earlier, where the court said Congress could limit the president's classification power. Turns out the court was wrong because...well, because you said so! And to think of all the time I wasted in school, when I could have been here, studying at your feet.

---

well done on the selective and misleading explanation of Egan.

And equally selective and misleading on the explanation of security at MAL. %A0Secret Service does not protect the club. %A0It protects the residence, which was a secure facility 18 months ago. %A0 No one ever expressed outrage that Presidential business was transacted there during Trump's term. %A0 Did they? %A0Did we miss it somehow? %A0 So tell us what changed. %A0 Be specific. %A0Prove your work.

---