FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

The criminal act is possessing classified documents. That occured after Trump was president-there is no immunity issue there.

One of the defenses is that the documents were declassified while he was President. I agree with your take on the fact that he clearly did not declassify them while President, but that is an issue based on the classification statutes. Immunity should have nothing to do with the Florida case.

---

Too bad Trump isn't too old and feeble minded to be prosecuted so that "the possession is the crime" wouldn't apply...

---

Trump wouldn't have been prosecuted either if he just gave the documents back.

---

We both know that's not true. The alleged crime was possession, not failing to return borrowed documents, right?

---

Possession for a brief second is a crime for the rest of us, so you are correct. Obviously any President would be given grace and time to return documents, but also obviously there has to be a limit. Subjective, yes totally.

---

It's a crime for a senator and vice president, too, no matter how quickly he gives them back.

---

True, but that doesn't change the Trump situation. I am sure if Trump wins, Biden and company will have the full weight of DOJ investigating them...

---

No, but it does shine a light on all the people acting like this makes Trump a criminal while ignoring the fact that, if correct, then this makes Biden an even more obvious criminal guilty of a worse crime but given a lesser penalty. That brings us back to not needing to care about all the handwringing over Trump.

whiterock said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Clinton Sock Drawer case said that the determination of personal vs official is an exclusive, unreviewable power of POTUS.

Docs case likely done…..

---

That is not what the Sock Drawer Case said!

Clinton was about tapes he did with a Historian that Judicial Watch wanted. The case was whether a PRIVATE entity can have the archivist challenge that position. Trumps was about US National Security documents he possessed, and NARA should have had. These are not the same thing. If Trump wants his pants that were in the box marked as personal than the socks drawer case may apply!

Classified documents can't be personal.

---

Nope. POTUS is the grand poohbah of classified information, the controlling legal authority on such questions, not reviewable. Same for questions about personal vs official documents.

Directly from the case: "...the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: '[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President's disposal decision...."

Plaintiff asserted tapes contained classified information. Judge ruled it was irrelevant, because the determination about what was personal vs official was a unreviewable power of POTUS. And, more to the point, the question was argued in CIVIL court, which is how the Trump documents case should have been handled.

Again, the outrage was to bypass the obvious civil questions at hand and proceed directly to criminal prosecution. The civil issues would then become affirmative defense questions in a criminal trial, rather than jsut a civil trial itself (which Dems thought would benefit them politically). You have to let loose of the faulty premise that the classification questions radically changes the situation. It doesn't.

As it turned out, it hurt the Dems a lot more than helped them. The American people do not like authoritarian bullies, as Democrats have become.

---

So the solution is to give the most powerful man in the world care blanche to do what he wishes?

You are 100% wrong about this dispute hurting Democrats. People will hate this decision. If the Democrats had an energetic candidate he or she would shove this opinion up Trump's arse.

---

Unserious response.

The American people are already saying, by super-majority numbers, that they see the prosecutions of Trump as blatantly political. Dems could have avoided that by doing what every other admin, of both parties, has done when there is a dispute over the limits of Presidential power - file a civil lawsuit in federal court to obtain a court order for compliance. By choosing to prosecute Trump as a criminal under the Espionage Act, they have thrown out centuries of tradition.

Facts are facts, no matter how hard one works not to see them (as FL earnestly refuses to do on this particular case). The President IS the originating authority on classified information. All classification powers are vested in that office. Every single classified document is created, controlled, used, declassified under Executive Orders written by him. There is no higher power to which he must answer on those questions. If he decides in a meeting with (another head of state, diplomat, businessman, even you) that it is in the national interest to reveal classified information, he has absolute power to do so. The only "check" on that power is impeachment or the ballot box. IF he were to reveal such information that resulted in the destruction of our Pacific Fleet, then either Congress or the people would vote him out. Every other officer, of any rank, in the USG or military must abide by controls on classified information. When POTUS deviates from those rules, it is deemed a change in the rules for that specific time and place. A LOT of years of precedent on that. You cannot write up a POTUS for a "security violation" (the inside baseball phrase to describe non-compliant handling of classified information.)

It really is that simple. No one else in the USA can stick a classified document in their pocket and take it home to read without violating law. But the POTUS can. It is his prerogative to dispose of classified documents as he sees fit. Fact. I once held power to originate classified documents, and did so the thousands (20 or so a day for 10 years), so I know a bit about the subject.

In that context a prosecution is outlandish. They chose to prosecute a man who had the power to do what he did rather than seek a civil court order to return the documents. Why is that? Most obvious answer is, they perceived political benefits to doing so. Less obvious but pertinent? Perhaps they knew the civil route would likely fail as well. A POTUS, you see, has unreviewable powers over determinations on what is private and what is official, to include classified information, and there is a recent federal district court ruling upholding that principle.

---

You are a school of red herrings. The case is over Trump having classified info while he was President, it is about him having it after he was President. If he declassified them then he whens. But the idea that "he declassified them in his head" is just pure BS.

And "gee they should have sued him in civil court" is just as stupid. They tried for two years to get the documents politely. If any other American had ignored the requests for six weeks they would have been charged. Trump got two years.

The irony of all of this is that for eight years we heard Barack Obama wanted to be a dictator. And now you celebrate that Donald Trump-a long time grifter of the highest order-is above the law.

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Clinton Sock Drawer case said that the determination of personal vs official is an exclusive, unreviewable power of POTUS.

Docs case likely done…..

---

That is not what the Sock Drawer Case said!

Clinton was about tapes he did with a Historian that Judicial Watch wanted. The case was whether a PRIVATE entity can have the archivist challenge that position. Trumps was about US National Security documents he possessed, and NARA should have had. These are not the same thing. If Trump wants his pants that were in the box marked as personal than the socks drawer case may apply!

Classified documents can't be personal.

---

Nope. POTUS is the grand poohbah of classified information, the controlling legal authority on such questions, not reviewable. Same for questions about personal vs official documents.

Directly from the case: "...the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: '[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President's disposal decision...."

Plaintiff asserted tapes contained classified information. Judge ruled it was irrelevant, because the determination about what was personal vs official was a unreviewable power of POTUS. And, more to the point, the question was argued in CIVIL court, which is how the Trump documents case should have been handled.

Again, the outrage was to bypass the obvious civil questions at hand and proceed directly to criminal prosecution. The civil issues would then become affirmative defense questions in a criminal trial, rather than jsut a civil trial itself (which Dems thought would benefit them politically). You have to let loose of the faulty premise that the classification questions radically changes the situation. It doesn't.

As it turned out, it hurt the Dems a lot more than helped them. The American people do not like authoritarian bullies, as Democrats have become.

---

So the solution is to give the most powerful man in the world care blanche to do what he wishes?

You are 100% wrong about this dispute hurting Democrats. People will hate this decision. If the Democrats had an energetic candidate he or she would shove this opinion up Trump's arse.

---

Unserious response.

The American people are already saying, by super-majority numbers, that they see the prosecutions of Trump as blatantly political. Dems could have avoided that by doing what every other admin, of both parties, has done when there is a dispute over the limits of Presidential power - file a civil lawsuit in federal court to obtain a court order for compliance. By choosing to prosecute Trump as a criminal under the Espionage Act, they have thrown out centuries of tradition.

Facts are facts, no matter how hard one works not to see them (as FL earnestly refuses to do on this particular case). The President IS the originating authority on classified information. All classification powers are vested in that office. Every single classified document is created, controlled, used, declassified under Executive Orders written by him. There is no higher power to which he must answer on those questions. If he decides in a meeting with (another head of state, diplomat, businessman, even you) that it is in the national interest to reveal classified information, he has absolute power to do so. The only "check" on that power is impeachment or the ballot box. IF he were to reveal such information that resulted in the destruction of our Pacific Fleet, then either Congress or the people would vote him out. Every other officer, of any rank, in the USG or military must abide by controls on classified information. When POTUS deviates from those rules, it is deemed a change in the rules for that specific time and place. A LOT of years of precedent on that. You cannot write up a POTUS for a "security violation" (the inside baseball phrase to describe non-compliant handling of classified information.)

It really is that simple. No one else in the USA can stick a classified document in their pocket and take it home to read without violating law. But the POTUS can. It is his prerogative to dispose of classified documents as he sees fit. Fact. I once held power to originate classified documents, and did so the thousands (20 or so a day for 10 years), so I know a bit about the subject.

In that context a prosecution is outlandish. They chose to prosecute a man who had the power to do what he did rather than seek a civil court order to return the documents. Why is that? Most obvious answer is, they perceived political benefits to doing so. Less obvious but pertinent? Perhaps they knew the civil route would likely fail as well. A POTUS, you see, has unreviewable powers over determinations on what is private and what is official, to include classified information, and there is a recent federal district court ruling upholding that principle.

---

You are a school of red herrings. The case is over Trump having classified info while he was President, it is about him having it after he was President. If he declassified them then he whens. But the idea that "he declassified them in his head" is just pure BS.

And "gee they should have sued him in civil court" is just as stupid. They tried for two years to get the documents politely. If any other American had ignored the requests for six weeks they would have been charged. Trump got two years.

The irony of all of this is that for eight years we heard Barack Obama wanted to be a dictator. And now you celebrate that Donald Trump-a long time grifter of the highest order-is above the law.

---

Biden's crime of stealing classified documents he never had the clearance to possess is worse.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

The criminal act is possessing classified documents. That occured after Trump was president-there is no immunity issue there.

One of the defenses is that the documents were declassified while he was President. I agree with your take on the fact that he clearly did not declassify them while President, but that is an issue based on the classification statutes. Immunity should have nothing to do with the Florida case.

---

Too bad Trump isn't too old and feeble minded to be prosecuted so that "the possession is the crime" wouldn't apply...

---

Trump wouldn't have been prosecuted either if he just gave the documents back.

---

We both know that's not true. The alleged crime was possession, not failing to return borrowed documents, right?

---

Possession for a brief second is a crime for the rest of us, so you are correct. Obviously any President would be given grace and time to return documents, but also obviously there has to be a limit. Subjective, yes totally.

---

It's a crime for a senator and vice president, too, no matter how quickly he gives them back.

---

True, but that doesn't change the Trump situation. I am sure if Trump wins, Biden and company will have the full weight of DOJ investigating them...

---

No, but it does shine a light on all the people acting like this makes Trump a criminal while ignoring the fact that, if correct, then this makes Biden an even more obvious criminal guilty of a worse crime but given a lesser penalty. That brings us back to not needing to care about all the handwringing over Trump.

---

Nobody is shining lights, neither side wants that!

This all goes back to Obama - "Elections have consequences"

Trump needs to bring the hammer down on Biden, only way it stops.

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Clinton Sock Drawer case said that the determination of personal vs official is an exclusive, unreviewable power of POTUS.

Docs case likely done…..

---

That is not what the Sock Drawer Case said!

Clinton was about tapes he did with a Historian that Judicial Watch wanted. The case was whether a PRIVATE entity can have the archivist challenge that position. Trumps was about US National Security documents he possessed, and NARA should have had. These are not the same thing. If Trump wants his pants that were in the box marked as personal than the socks drawer case may apply!

Classified documents can't be personal.

---

Nope. POTUS is the grand poohbah of classified information, the controlling legal authority on such questions, not reviewable. Same for questions about personal vs official documents.

Directly from the case: "...the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: '[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President's disposal decision...."

Plaintiff asserted tapes contained classified information. Judge ruled it was irrelevant, because the determination about what was personal vs official was a unreviewable power of POTUS. And, more to the point, the question was argued in CIVIL court, which is how the Trump documents case should have been handled.

Again, the outrage was to bypass the obvious civil questions at hand and proceed directly to criminal prosecution. The civil issues would then become affirmative defense questions in a criminal trial, rather than jsut a civil trial itself (which Dems thought would benefit them politically). You have to let loose of the faulty premise that the classification questions radically changes the situation. It doesn't.

As it turned out, it hurt the Dems a lot more than helped them. The American people do not like authoritarian bullies, as Democrats have become.

---

So the solution is to give the most powerful man in the world care blanche to do what he wishes?

You are 100% wrong about this dispute hurting Democrats. People will hate this decision. If the Democrats had an energetic candidate he or she would shove this opinion up Trump's arse.

---

Unserious response.

The American people are already saying, by super-majority numbers, that they see the prosecutions of Trump as blatantly political. Dems could have avoided that by doing what every other admin, of both parties, has done when there is a dispute over the limits of Presidential power - file a civil lawsuit in federal court to obtain a court order for compliance. By choosing to prosecute Trump as a criminal under the Espionage Act, they have thrown out centuries of tradition.

Facts are facts, no matter how hard one works not to see them (as FL earnestly refuses to do on this particular case). The President IS the originating authority on classified information. All classification powers are vested in that office. Every single classified document is created, controlled, used, declassified under Executive Orders written by him. There is no higher power to which he must answer on those questions. If he decides in a meeting with (another head of state, diplomat, businessman, even you) that it is in the national interest to reveal classified information, he has absolute power to do so. The only "check" on that power is impeachment or the ballot box. IF he were to reveal such information that resulted in the destruction of our Pacific Fleet, then either Congress or the people would vote him out. Every other officer, of any rank, in the USG or military must abide by controls on classified information. When POTUS deviates from those rules, it is deemed a change in the rules for that specific time and place. A LOT of years of precedent on that. You cannot write up a POTUS for a "security violation" (the inside baseball phrase to describe non-compliant handling of classified information.)

It really is that simple. No one else in the USA can stick a classified document in their pocket and take it home to read without violating law. But the POTUS can. It is his prerogative to dispose of classified documents as he sees fit. Fact. I once held power to originate classified documents, and did so the thousands (20 or so a day for 10 years), so I know a bit about the subject.

In that context a prosecution is outlandish. They chose to prosecute a man who had the power to do what he did rather than seek a civil court order to return the documents. Why is that? Most obvious answer is, they perceived political benefits to doing so. Less obvious but pertinent? Perhaps they knew the civil route would likely fail as well. A POTUS, you see, has unreviewable powers over determinations on what is private and what is official, to include classified information, and there is a recent federal district court ruling upholding that principle.

---

You are a school of red herrings. The case is over Trump having classified info while he was President, it is about him having it after he was President. If he declassified them then he whens. But the idea that "he declassified them in his head" is just pure BS.

And "gee they should have sued him in civil court" is just as stupid. They tried for two years to get the documents politely. If any other American had ignored the requests for six weeks they would have been charged. Trump got two years.

The irony of all of this is that for eight years we heard Barack Obama wanted to be a dictator. And now you celebrate that Donald Trump-a long time grifter of the highest order-is above the law.

---

Biden's crime of stealing classified documents he never had the clearance to possess is worse.

---

It is only a felony if there is willful retention. The prosecutor said there was no willful retention; Trump's retention was prima facie willful. That difference is why Icontinue to make the point that Trump could have avoided this by just returning the documents. So from a criminal responsibility standpoint you are wrong.

But Biden was negligent and should have known better. He kept documents longer and although Mar-A Lago is not Fort Knox, the documents were likely less secure with Biden than with Trump. I do not know who Trump showed or discussed the documents with and Biden supposedly discussed them with a journalist. So from a security standpoint I would agree with you.

What of it?

---

The point is to reveal how little credibility the people who don't care that Biden's crime was possessing them at all have, regardless of how quickly Biden returned them once he was caught. Pointing out the disparities in everything from media outrage to legal repercussions is a way to show that the outrage over Trump's handling of classified documents is fake. Manufactured for political purposes. Not to be taken seriously. Once one realizes that, the responses here are more accurately understood.

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Clinton Sock Drawer case said that the determination of personal vs official is an exclusive, unreviewable power of POTUS.

Docs case likely done…..

---

That is not what the Sock Drawer Case said!

Clinton was about tapes he did with a Historian that Judicial Watch wanted. The case was whether a PRIVATE entity can have the archivist challenge that position. Trumps was about US National Security documents he possessed, and NARA should have had. These are not the same thing. If Trump wants his pants that were in the box marked as personal than the socks drawer case may apply!

Classified documents can't be personal.

---

Nope. POTUS is the grand poohbah of classified information, the controlling legal authority on such questions, not reviewable. Same for questions about personal vs official documents.

Directly from the case: "...the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: '[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President's disposal decision...."

Plaintiff asserted tapes contained classified information. Judge ruled it was irrelevant, because the determination about what was personal vs official was a unreviewable power of POTUS. And, more to the point, the question was argued in CIVIL court, which is how the Trump documents case should have been handled.

Again, the outrage was to bypass the obvious civil questions at hand and proceed directly to criminal prosecution. The civil issues would then become affirmative defense questions in a criminal trial, rather than jsut a civil trial itself (which Dems thought would benefit them politically). You have to let loose of the faulty premise that the classification questions radically changes the situation. It doesn't.

As it turned out, it hurt the Dems a lot more than helped them. The American people do not like authoritarian bullies, as Democrats have become.

---

So the solution is to give the most powerful man in the world care blanche to do what he wishes?

You are 100% wrong about this dispute hurting Democrats. People will hate this decision. If the Democrats had an energetic candidate he or she would shove this opinion up Trump's arse.

---

Unserious response.

The American people are already saying, by super-majority numbers, that they see the prosecutions of Trump as blatantly political. Dems could have avoided that by doing what every other admin, of both parties, has done when there is a dispute over the limits of Presidential power - file a civil lawsuit in federal court to obtain a court order for compliance. By choosing to prosecute Trump as a criminal under the Espionage Act, they have thrown out centuries of tradition.

Facts are facts, no matter how hard one works not to see them (as FL earnestly refuses to do on this particular case). The President IS the originating authority on classified information. All classification powers are vested in that office. Every single classified document is created, controlled, used, declassified under Executive Orders written by him. There is no higher power to which he must answer on those questions. If he decides in a meeting with (another head of state, diplomat, businessman, even you) that it is in the national interest to reveal classified information, he has absolute power to do so. The only "check" on that power is impeachment or the ballot box. IF he were to reveal such information that resulted in the destruction of our Pacific Fleet, then either Congress or the people would vote him out. Every other officer, of any rank, in the USG or military must abide by controls on classified information. When POTUS deviates from those rules, it is deemed a change in the rules for that specific time and place. A LOT of years of precedent on that. You cannot write up a POTUS for a "security violation" (the inside baseball phrase to describe non-compliant handling of classified information.)

It really is that simple. No one else in the USA can stick a classified document in their pocket and take it home to read without violating law. But the POTUS can. It is his prerogative to dispose of classified documents as he sees fit. Fact. I once held power to originate classified documents, and did so the thousands (20 or so a day for 10 years), so I know a bit about the subject.

In that context a prosecution is outlandish. They chose to prosecute a man who had the power to do what he did rather than seek a civil court order to return the documents. Why is that? Most obvious answer is, they perceived political benefits to doing so. Less obvious but pertinent? Perhaps they knew the civil route would likely fail as well. A POTUS, you see, has unreviewable powers over determinations on what is private and what is official, to include classified information, and there is a recent federal district court ruling upholding that principle.

---

You are a school of red herrings. The case is over Trump having classified info while he was President, it is about him having it after he was President. If he declassified them then he whens. But the idea that "he declassified them in his head" is just pure BS.

And "gee they should have sued him in civil court" is just as stupid. They tried for two years to get the documents politely. If any other American had ignored the requests for six weeks they would have been charged. Trump got two years.

The irony of all of this is that for eight years we heard Barack Obama wanted to be a dictator. And now you celebrate that Donald Trump-a long time grifter of the highest order-is above the law.

---

You are both correct and hysterical in your other responses. The document issue is about his treatment post office. The evidence hinges on what he actually did in an official role (did he actually declassify when having authority?) and what shenanigans he pulled after. I'm in the school of he played fast and loose and got caught, ie broke the law.

But despite your hysterical concerns otherwise, this does draw the effective line of official vs non official act. The other extreme scenarios such as sending in a Seal team to execute a political opponent is guard railed not by immunity, but by the actual enumerated authority and delegated powers. Further more you'd have a serious high crimes and misdemeanor charge for impeachment under such actions. Joe Biden can't have Jill murdered in their bedroom and be immune under an official act interpretation.

But make no mistake. Democrats jumped the shark with Trump when they tried to frame an insurrection, went hard and broad against any one associated, and aggressively pursued malfeasance on a multitude of levels. Democrats forced this clarification into existence.

🚨

Bragg's case against Trump now crumbling:

Manhattan Prosecutors Agree to Delay Trump’s Sentencing

"Although the Manhattan case does not center on Mr. Trump’s presidency or official acts — but rather personal activity during his campaign — his lawyers argued on Monday that…

— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) July 2, 2024

ATL Bear said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Clinton Sock Drawer case said that the determination of personal vs official is an exclusive, unreviewable power of POTUS.

Docs case likely done…..

---

That is not what the Sock Drawer Case said!

Clinton was about tapes he did with a Historian that Judicial Watch wanted. The case was whether a PRIVATE entity can have the archivist challenge that position. Trumps was about US National Security documents he possessed, and NARA should have had. These are not the same thing. If Trump wants his pants that were in the box marked as personal than the socks drawer case may apply!

Classified documents can't be personal.

---

Nope. POTUS is the grand poohbah of classified information, the controlling legal authority on such questions, not reviewable. Same for questions about personal vs official documents.

Directly from the case: "...the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: '[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President's disposal decision...."

Plaintiff asserted tapes contained classified information. Judge ruled it was irrelevant, because the determination about what was personal vs official was a unreviewable power of POTUS. And, more to the point, the question was argued in CIVIL court, which is how the Trump documents case should have been handled.

Again, the outrage was to bypass the obvious civil questions at hand and proceed directly to criminal prosecution. The civil issues would then become affirmative defense questions in a criminal trial, rather than jsut a civil trial itself (which Dems thought would benefit them politically). You have to let loose of the faulty premise that the classification questions radically changes the situation. It doesn't.

As it turned out, it hurt the Dems a lot more than helped them. The American people do not like authoritarian bullies, as Democrats have become.

---

So the solution is to give the most powerful man in the world care blanche to do what he wishes?

You are 100% wrong about this dispute hurting Democrats. People will hate this decision. If the Democrats had an energetic candidate he or she would shove this opinion up Trump's arse.

---

Unserious response.

The American people are already saying, by super-majority numbers, that they see the prosecutions of Trump as blatantly political. Dems could have avoided that by doing what every other admin, of both parties, has done when there is a dispute over the limits of Presidential power - file a civil lawsuit in federal court to obtain a court order for compliance. By choosing to prosecute Trump as a criminal under the Espionage Act, they have thrown out centuries of tradition.

Facts are facts, no matter how hard one works not to see them (as FL earnestly refuses to do on this particular case). The President IS the originating authority on classified information. All classification powers are vested in that office. Every single classified document is created, controlled, used, declassified under Executive Orders written by him. There is no higher power to which he must answer on those questions. If he decides in a meeting with (another head of state, diplomat, businessman, even you) that it is in the national interest to reveal classified information, he has absolute power to do so. The only "check" on that power is impeachment or the ballot box. IF he were to reveal such information that resulted in the destruction of our Pacific Fleet, then either Congress or the people would vote him out. Every other officer, of any rank, in the USG or military must abide by controls on classified information. When POTUS deviates from those rules, it is deemed a change in the rules for that specific time and place. A LOT of years of precedent on that. You cannot write up a POTUS for a "security violation" (the inside baseball phrase to describe non-compliant handling of classified information.)

It really is that simple. No one else in the USA can stick a classified document in their pocket and take it home to read without violating law. But the POTUS can. It is his prerogative to dispose of classified documents as he sees fit. Fact. I once held power to originate classified documents, and did so the thousands (20 or so a day for 10 years), so I know a bit about the subject.

In that context a prosecution is outlandish. They chose to prosecute a man who had the power to do what he did rather than seek a civil court order to return the documents. Why is that? Most obvious answer is, they perceived political benefits to doing so. Less obvious but pertinent? Perhaps they knew the civil route would likely fail as well. A POTUS, you see, has unreviewable powers over determinations on what is private and what is official, to include classified information, and there is a recent federal district court ruling upholding that principle.

---

You are a school of red herrings. The case is over Trump having classified info while he was President, it is about him having it after he was President. If he declassified them then he whens. But the idea that "he declassified them in his head" is just pure BS.

And "gee they should have sued him in civil court" is just as stupid. They tried for two years to get the documents politely. If any other American had ignored the requests for six weeks they would have been charged. Trump got two years.

The irony of all of this is that for eight years we heard Barack Obama wanted to be a dictator. And now you celebrate that Donald Trump-a long time grifter of the highest order-is above the law.

---

You are both correct and hysterical in your other responses. The document issue is about his treatment post office. The evidence hinges on what he actually did in an official role (did he actually declassify when having authority?) and what shenanigans he pulled after. I'm in the school of he played fast and loose and got caught, ie broke the law.

But despite your hysterical concerns otherwise, this does draw the effective line of official vs non official act. The other extreme scenarios such as sending in a Seal team to execute a political opponent is guard railed not by immunity, but by the actual enumerated authority and delegated powers. Further more you'd have a serious high crimes and misdemeanor charge for impeachment under such actions. Joe Biden can't have Jill murdered in their bedroom and be immune under an official act interpretation.

But make no mistake. Democrats jumped the shark with Trump when they tried to frame an insurrection, went hard and broad against any one associated, and aggressively pursued malfeasance on a multitude of levels. Democrats forced this clarification into existence.

---

They are conducting a Riechstag Fire Hoax.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

The criminal act is possessing classified documents. That occured after Trump was president-there is no immunity issue there.

One of the defenses is that the documents were declassified while he was President. I agree with your take on the fact that he clearly did not declassify them while President, but that is an issue based on the classification statutes. Immunity should have nothing to do with the Florida case.

---

Too bad Trump isn't too old and feeble minded to be prosecuted so that "the possession is the crime" wouldn't apply...

---

Trump wouldn't have been prosecuted either if he just gave the documents back.

---

We both know that's not true. The alleged crime was possession, not failing to return borrowed documents, right?

---

Possession for a brief second is a crime for the rest of us, so you are correct. Obviously any President would be given grace and time to return documents, but also obviously there has to be a limit. Subjective, yes totally.

---

It's a crime for a senator and vice president, too, no matter how quickly he gives them back.

---

True, but that doesn't change the Trump situation. I am sure if Trump wins, Biden and company will have the full weight of DOJ investigating them...

---

The probably should

Whiskey Pete said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

The criminal act is possessing classified documents. That occured after Trump was president-there is no immunity issue there.

One of the defenses is that the documents were declassified while he was President. I agree with your take on the fact that he clearly did not declassify them while President, but that is an issue based on the classification statutes. Immunity should have nothing to do with the Florida case.

---

Too bad Trump isn't too old and feeble minded to be prosecuted so that "the possession is the crime" wouldn't apply...

---

Trump wouldn't have been prosecuted either if he just gave the documents back.

---

We both know that's not true. The alleged crime was possession, not failing to return borrowed documents, right?

---

Possession for a brief second is a crime for the rest of us, so you are correct. Obviously any President would be given grace and time to return documents, but also obviously there has to be a limit. Subjective, yes totally.

---

It's a crime for a senator and vice president, too, no matter how quickly he gives them back.

---

True, but that doesn't change the Trump situation. I am sure if Trump wins, Biden and company will have the full weight of DOJ investigating them...

---

Why should they not.
How do we prevent this from happening again if there are no perp walks?
It's not like we're going to have to contrive law to find law breaking, either. These guys are waaaay out beyond the pale.

Deterrence.
Public officials should have an ever-present fear of consequences of violations of law or procedure.
I did. I knew my career was over if I got arrested and sent home PNG. I also knew my career would be over if something I did ended up on the front page of the WAPO, or caused a Division Chief to get an ass-chewing from a Congressional committee. Man, I walked the line. I mean, I didn't put a shadow on the line.

And then we watch this fudge show going on with all the Trump prosecutions....Russiagate. It's incredible how far gone the system is.

---

As much as I hate to say this, the ONLY way this stops is IF Trump wins and does go after Biden.

So far, the Dems have had their way with no repercussions. The GOP has not followed through. Trump let Hillary walk. He fired Comey, but never went after for wrong doing. MAD only works if the other side will pull the trigger. Checks and Balances is similar, if the GOP doesn't hit the Dems, Dems will keep going.

Sorry, he has to bring charges at least to Grand Jury or Special Counsel

---

Trump did a ****ty job of "draining the swamp". Hardball is the only way to even begin to clean up the gutter that is DC

---

There is no cleaning the swamp. That is a pipe dream. Anyone that enters Congress is corrupted and part of the swamp. The BEST we can hope for is that while they are making their millions they actually give a **** about doing a good job.

Even good ones like Bob Dole made a fortune through investments that his wife held. It is inevitable.

#FreeDonny

- KKM

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

The criminal act is possessing classified documents. That occured after Trump was president-there is no immunity issue there.

One of the defenses is that the documents were declassified while he was President. I agree with your take on the fact that he clearly did not declassify them while President, but that is an issue based on the classification statutes. Immunity should have nothing to do with the Florida case.

---

Too bad Trump isn't too old and feeble minded to be prosecuted so that "the possession is the crime" wouldn't apply...

---

Trump wouldn't have been prosecuted either if he just gave the documents back.

---

We both know that's not true. The alleged crime was possession, not failing to return borrowed documents, right?

---

Possession for a brief second is a crime for the rest of us, so you are correct. Obviously any President would be given grace and time to return documents, but also obviously there has to be a limit. Subjective, yes totally.

---

It's a crime for a senator and vice president, too, no matter how quickly he gives them back.

---

True, but that doesn't change the Trump situation. I am sure if Trump wins, Biden and company will have the full weight of DOJ investigating them...

---

Like all those legal cases against Hillary after Trump won in 2016?

Oh wait -

---

He has to this time, if the GOP doesn't the Dems will never stop. There has to be some cost, it won't be because they see the light.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

The criminal act is possessing classified documents. That occured after Trump was president-there is no immunity issue there.

One of the defenses is that the documents were declassified while he was President. I agree with your take on the fact that he clearly did not declassify them while President, but that is an issue based on the classification statutes. Immunity should have nothing to do with the Florida case.

---

Too bad Trump isn't too old and feeble minded to be prosecuted so that "the possession is the crime" wouldn't apply...

---

Trump wouldn't have been prosecuted either if he just gave the documents back.

---

We both know that's not true. The alleged crime was possession, not failing to return borrowed documents, right?

---

Possession for a brief second is a crime for the rest of us, so you are correct. Obviously any President would be given grace and time to return documents, but also obviously there has to be a limit. Subjective, yes totally.

---

It's a crime for a senator and vice president, too, no matter how quickly he gives them back.

---

True, but that doesn't change the Trump situation. I am sure if Trump wins, Biden and company will have the full weight of DOJ investigating them...

---

Like all those legal cases against Hillary after Trump won in 2016?

Oh wait -

---

He has to this time, if the GOP doesn't the Dems will never stop. There has to be some cost, it won't be because they see the light.

---

1. If it happens, it won't be something Trump publicly pushes.

2. Any action would start with a Republican Congress launching 'investigations', as a signal that they are more open and clear than Biden's pack of law-jackals.

3. Anything done will, of course, be excoriated by CNN and MSNBC as some variant of 'New Fascism'.

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

The criminal act is possessing classified documents. That occured after Trump was president-there is no immunity issue there.

One of the defenses is that the documents were declassified while he was President. I agree with your take on the fact that he clearly did not declassify them while President, but that is an issue based on the classification statutes. Immunity should have nothing to do with the Florida case.

---

Too bad Trump isn't too old and feeble minded to be prosecuted so that "the possession is the crime" wouldn't apply...

---

Trump wouldn't have been prosecuted either if he just gave the documents back.

---

We both know that's not true. The alleged crime was possession, not failing to return borrowed documents, right?

---

Possession for a brief second is a crime for the rest of us, so you are correct. Obviously any President would be given grace and time to return documents, but also obviously there has to be a limit. Subjective, yes totally.

---

It's a crime for a senator and vice president, too, no matter how quickly he gives them back.

---

True, but that doesn't change the Trump situation. I am sure if Trump wins, Biden and company will have the full weight of DOJ investigating them...

---

Like all those legal cases against Hillary after Trump won in 2016?

Oh wait -

---

He has to this time, if the GOP doesn't the Dems will never stop. There has to be some cost, it won't be because they see the light.

---

1. If it happens, it won't be something Trump publicly pushes.

2. Any action would start with a Republican Congress launching 'investigations', as a signal that they are more open and clear than Biden's pack of law-jackals.

3. Anything done will, of course, be excoriated by CNN and MSNBC as some variant of 'New Fascism'.

---

You know as well as I do there has to be a threat that what they do to the GOP, will come back on them when the GOP gets in power. As Obama said, Elections have consequences.

fubar said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

Well, he's on tape showing a reporter a document that he said was classified; that he could've declassified it; but that he didn't.

Beyond that, there is a process for declassifying documents.

But none of this matters to the True Believers.

---

there is no beyond that.. he said he didnt so he didnt. When he says it is, it is.. the only hang up is NDI which most isnt

fubar said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

Well, he's on tape showing a reporter a document that he said was classified; that he could've declassified it; but that he didn't.

Beyond that, there is a process for declassifying documents.

But none of this matters to the True Believers.

---

I agree. The military and national security take Document MGT seriously.

4th and Inches said:

---

fubar said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

Well, he's on tape showing a reporter a document that he said was classified; that he could've declassified it; but that he didn't.

Beyond that, there is a process for declassifying documents.

But none of this matters to the True Believers.

---

there is no beyond that.. he said he didnt so he didnt. When he says it is, it is.. the only hang up is NDI which most isnt

---

Really, so there are Docs that we are treating as Classified, possibly prosecuting people for sharing, that are really not Classified because Trump took them to the ****ter? There is no record, no Doc Mgt, no chain of custody, for the action but because POTUS had to take a **** they are now declassified? They have to be, because he has them in Mar Lago.

That really sounds Constitutional?

FLBear5630 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

fubar said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

Well, he's on tape showing a reporter a document that he said was classified; that he could've declassified it; but that he didn't.

Beyond that, there is a process for declassifying documents.

But none of this matters to the True Believers.

---

there is no beyond that.. he said he didnt so he didnt. When he says it is, it is.. the only hang up is NDI which most isnt

---

Really, so there are Docs that we are treating as Classified, possibly prosecuting people for sharing, that are really not Classified because Trump took them to the ****ter? There is no record, no Doc Mgt, no chain of custody, for the action but because POTUS had to take a **** they are now declassified? They have to be, because he has them in Mar Lago.

That really sounds Constitutional?

---

Yes. POTUS is not bound by any of that, given that he wrote the Executive Order which delegates HIS authority on Doc Mgmt (which varies widely between agencies), on chain of custody (which varies widely among agencies), and all other questions to others. If he chooses to take a document to the ****ter, or to hand it to someone who is not cleared, or to walk out onto the stage in a Press Conference and hold it up for the world to see, he has the explicit statutory power to do so without any prior action or approval. HE IS THE ORIGINATING AUTHORITY on all matters. Such has always been so. He DELEGATES that power to others, with terms and conditions with apply to them but not him. It's silly to suggest that he must amend an XO before he taking an action. Making a spur of the moment judgement call is clearly within his powers. Who would he be subordinate to....himself?

There are two checks and balances on that broad power: Impeachment, and elections.

Dude. POTUS is not a staff sgt. at brigade HQS. Or a case officer in a station in some dusty distant land. Those folks are bound by procedures set forth in XO. The guy who wrote the XO is not.

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

fubar said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

Well, he's on tape showing a reporter a document that he said was classified; that he could've declassified it; but that he didn't.

Beyond that, there is a process for declassifying documents.

But none of this matters to the True Believers.

---

there is no beyond that.. he said he didnt so he didnt. When he says it is, it is.. the only hang up is NDI which most isnt

---

Really, so there are Docs that we are treating as Classified, possibly prosecuting people for sharing, that are really not Classified because Trump took them to the ****ter? There is no record, no Doc Mgt, no chain of custody, for the action but because POTUS had to take a **** they are now declassified? They have to be, because he has them in Mar Lago.

That really sounds Constitutional?

---

Yes. POTUS is not bound by any of that, given that he wrote the Executive Order which delegates HIS authority on Doc Mgmt (which varies widely between agencies), on chain of custody (which varies widely among agencies), and all other questions to others. If he chooses to take a document to the ****ter, or to hand it to someone who is not cleared, or to walk out onto the stage in a Press Conference and hold it up for the world to see, he has the explicit statutory power to do so without any prior action or approval. HE IS THE ORIGINATING AUTHORITY on all matters. Such has always been so. He DELEGATES that power to others, with terms and conditions with apply to them but not him. It's silly to suggest that he must amend an XO before he taking an action. Making a spur of the moment judgement call is clearly within his powers. Who would he be subordinate to....himself?

There are two checks and balances on that broad power: Impeachment, and elections.

Dude. POTUS is not a staff sgt. at brigade HQS. Or a case officer in a station in some dusty distant land. Those folks are bound by procedures set forth in XO. The guy who wrote the XO is not.

---

I agree, he has the ability to class and declass, no one is questioning that ability. What everyone is questioning is whether he ACTUALLY DID IT.

There is no record, no chain to follow, nothing but Classified Docs in Mar Lago bathroom. POTUS or not, he still has to actually perform the act. He has to say this is declassified and then it has to go downstream. OR, you have no idea what is classified and what is not. Either a document is classified or it is not. Even if it is only declassified at the POTUS level, once he leaves the White House he is no longer POTUS and he can't have it.

Which is it? No one is questioning his ability as POTUS to class or declass. But there has to be some record, he can't be the only one that knows. Hell, you got a whole intel mechanism thinking Docs are classified when they really are not because Trump Declassified them and took him to FLA.

What you are saying makes no sense and does not fit with the way National Security docs are maintained. Maybe CIA has classified docs all over and no one is sure what is classified or not. But, I know for a fact that is not how it works in other Agencies. Where is the Doc Mgt and Chain showing he declassified Docs? You can't validate parking in DC without it being documented. But Trump can Declass Nuclear information and no one has a record! You are really gulping the kool aid.

Trump is going to win, he is the best choice we have right now. That does not make him right on how the Docs were handled. Take a fine and be done with it.

FLBear5630 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

fubar said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

Well, he's on tape showing a reporter a document that he said was classified; that he could've declassified it; but that he didn't.

Beyond that, there is a process for declassifying documents.

But none of this matters to the True Believers.

---

there is no beyond that.. he said he didnt so he didnt. When he says it is, it is.. the only hang up is NDI which most isnt

---

Really, so there are Docs that we are treating as Classified, possibly prosecuting people for sharing, that are really not Classified because Trump took them to the ****ter? There is no record, no Doc Mgt, no chain of custody, for the action but because POTUS had to take a **** they are now declassified? They have to be, because he has them in Mar Lago.

That really sounds Constitutional?

---

wow, you have some therapy sessions in your future.. you made up alot of stuff i didnt say and mixed in some stuff that didnt happen

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Yeah it's the Democrats who are authoritarian. Let's just ignore the fact that the GOP nominees to SCOTUS just made up presidential immunity to protect their own.

One of the key aspects and enabling factors for facists is the idea that the law does not apply to them. Your party just did that.

---

you just formed a circular alimentary canal. SCOTUS did not rule on presidential immunity to protect Trump. They did it to protect Biden. (and every future POTUS).


You have become the monster Nietzsche warned us about.

---

Believe whatever you want despite all evidence and common sense. The point is that neither Biden, Trump or any future president deserves that protection. And the Constitution doesn't give it to them. Judicial fiat plain and simple.

You are a skilled debater because you always avoid the actual issue with decent sounding word salad. But I won't let it go because it is so simple. The point is that this SCOTUS placed the President-whoever he or she is-above the law. You can't get more authoritarian than that.

---

tell me you dont understand the ruling without telling me

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

fubar said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

I'm not sure this ruling says anything.

President has immunity for official acts. (Assumed)
No immunity for unofficial acts (also assumed)

Now we argue what is and didn't official and unofficial.

---

Have you been taking speech lessons from Kamala? That was one fine word salad. A little Bleu Cheese please!

---

I assume college grads can read and comprehend.

---

So you don't consider a President declassifying documents an official act? If not, why not? Seems pretty clear to me.

---

If he did, you are correct. The question becomes how does he declassify? Just thinking it is declassified, no document management? I could even go as far IF he had a written policy that anytime he takes it to the residence it is declassified, at least there is some type of thought and control. But, after the fact in Mar Lago bathroom? Not so much.

---

Well, he's on tape showing a reporter a document that he said was classified; that he could've declassified it; but that he didn't.

Beyond that, there is a process for declassifying documents.

But none of this matters to the True Believers.

---

there is no beyond that.. he said he didnt so he didnt. When he says it is, it is.. the only hang up is NDI which most isnt

---

Really, so there are Docs that we are treating as Classified, possibly prosecuting people for sharing, that are really not Classified because Trump took them to the ****ter? There is no record, no Doc Mgt, no chain of custody, for the action but because POTUS had to take a **** they are now declassified? They have to be, because he has them in Mar Lago.

That really sounds Constitutional?

---

Yes. POTUS is not bound by any of that, given that he wrote the Executive Order which delegates HIS authority on Doc Mgmt (which varies widely between agencies), on chain of custody (which varies widely among agencies), and all other questions to others. If he chooses to take a document to the ****ter, or to hand it to someone who is not cleared, or to walk out onto the stage in a Press Conference and hold it up for the world to see, he has the explicit statutory power to do so without any prior action or approval. HE IS THE ORIGINATING AUTHORITY on all matters. Such has always been so. He DELEGATES that power to others, with terms and conditions with apply to them but not him. It's silly to suggest that he must amend an XO before he taking an action. Making a spur of the moment judgement call is clearly within his powers. Who would he be subordinate to....himself?

There are two checks and balances on that broad power: Impeachment, and elections.

Dude. POTUS is not a staff sgt. at brigade HQS. Or a case officer in a station in some dusty distant land. Those folks are bound by procedures set forth in XO. The guy who wrote the XO is not.

---

I agree, he has the ability to class and declass, no one is questioning that ability. What everyone is questioning is whether he ACTUALLY DID IT.

There is no record, no chain to follow, nothing but Classified Docs in Mar Lago bathroom.
He is not bound by the requirements he levied on you and me.

POTUS or not, he still has to actually perform the act. He has to say this is declassified and then it has to go downstream.
Not so. He can decide in mid-sentence to share classified information and do so, and is not bound by any requirement to document it.

OR, you have no idea what is classified and what is not. Either a document is classified or it is not. Even if it is only declassified at the POTUS level, once he leaves the White House he is no longer POTUS and he can't have it.
Again, the circular problem = you are subordinating his powers to his powers. If he declassifies it, it is declassified, end of story. Stepping out of office does not "reclassify" the document. And that's before we get to what the courts have recently affirmed about broad, unreviewable power to determine what are personal records and what are official records. The ruling was broad, and concerned classified materials.

Which is it? No one is questioning his ability as POTUS to class or declass. But there has to be some record, he can't be the only one that knows.
Nope. There is no statutory requirement to perfect a declassification. All such questions are HIS. He breaks no law If he forgets to tell the aid to document the declass. Forgetting to tell the aid to document the declass does not undo the declassification (with respect to him).

Hell, you got a whole intel mechanism thinking Docs are classified when they really are not because Trump Declassified them and took him to FLA.
Were you not taught all this stuff about executive power? I was. Each and every person and office in that "mechanism" is acting with powers delegated by him. If they see him acting in deviance to guidance, it means he is exercising inherent powers to deviate from standing guidance at that particular place & time & purpose.

What you are saying makes no sense and does not fit with the way National Security docs are maintained.
National Security documents are maintained under procedures set forth in a Presidential Executive Order (which does not bind the POTUS).

Maybe CIA has classified docs all over and no one is sure what is classified or not.
Well, yes, in a sense, since every office at CIA HQS has vaulted doors, so one does leave classified docs out unsupervised at night. (That's one of the luxuries of working at Hqs - no need to spin up to four combination locks to get to your stuff.) But one thing everyone at Hqs understands is that they have no business scolding a POTUS for his/her handling of classified materials.

But, I know for a fact that is not how it works in other Agencies. Where is the Doc Mgt and Chain showing he declassified Docs?
There is no such process at CIA Hqs for Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret documents. There are some compartmentation categories within the Secret or Top Secret levels, though, but that's for a tiny percentage of the flow. Your penetration of the Chinese Foreign MInistry? Restricted Handling, with all the stuff you're talking about. But a report from a Nigerian Military officer about his conversation with a Chinese General over bi-lateral military ties? Just another secret classified document in a six-inch stack on top of the desk in a vaulted space.
\
You can't validate parking in DC without it being documented. But Trump can Declass Nuclear information and no one has a record! You are really gulping the kool aid.
No, I'm citing the broad scope of Presidential powers on classification, which you keep ignoring. The POTUS is not bound by procedures you and I operated under (which were wildly different, a point I'll elaborate on below)

Trump is going to win, he is the best choice we have right now. That does not make him right on how the Docs were handled. Take a fine and be done with it.

---

Classified documents are rare things in the military. Not so in the intel community. EVERYTHING is classified. The chains of custody & such you talk about above? I never saw one. Not one document in a slip. I chose the classified documents I got to keep in my 1" file folder for reference. Did not need any approval to put them there, or to use them, or to shred them. As long as they were in the safe, in that vault, in that station which had a vaulted door.....I was good to go. Now, if I left one out on the desk, or it fell behind the desk or safe.....big deal. But "controls" over the documents themselves? In ten years, three stations and four different offices at HQS....never saw that a single time.

Why is that?

Because the President delegates broad powers to Agency heads, who then delegate further to Security and CI staffs, who actually write the rules for each agency. You were not bound by the rules I operated under. And the same in reverse. Because the two missions were so totally different (and I could go on quite a bit about all how that affected wildly different procedures). So which sets of rules, DOD vs CIA, are we to apply to POTUS? Does POTUS have to comply with ALL sets of agency rules (formed under powers delegated by him?

No. that is pretzel logic. POTUS is not bound by the rules you operated under. Or the rules I operated under. He can do whatever the hell he wants to do with classified information. He is accountable to voters and to impeachment if he goes hog wild. And having a couple dozen classified documents in folders with personal presidential records is, in the overall scope of things, the furthest thing from hog wild....so many "outs" to justify their presence and their retention.

Apparently you were not taught this in OCS. I was in CT Program.

4th and Inches said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Yeah it's the Democrats who are authoritarian. Let's just ignore the fact that the GOP nominees to SCOTUS just made up presidential immunity to protect their own.

One of the key aspects and enabling factors for facists is the idea that the law does not apply to them. Your party just did that.

---

you just formed a circular alimentary canal. SCOTUS did not rule on presidential immunity to protect Trump. They did it to protect Biden. (and every future POTUS).


You have become the monster Nietzsche warned us about.

---

Believe whatever you want despite all evidence and common sense. The point is that neither Biden, Trump or any future president deserves that protection. And the Constitution doesn't give it to them. Judicial fiat plain and simple.

You are a skilled debater because you always avoid the actual issue with decent sounding word salad. But I won't let it go because it is so simple. The point is that this SCOTUS placed the President-whoever he or she is-above the law. You can't get more authoritarian than that.

---

tell me you dont understand the ruling without telling me

---

bbbbut, but, but...... it makes them feel so good to call the people who disagree with them authoritarians. The actual actions don't matter. Just get in the way of them indulging in their feelings and you become a horrible person deserving of ostracism and worse.