Trump files, jury sees classified files or Trump wins

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The documents can be described and summarized without revealing the classified information.

Are you under some impression that juries are to decide if classified documents are actually classified?

He is agreeing with Cannon's bizarre jury instructions. He just can't spit it out.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The documents can be described and summarized without revealing the classified information.

Are you under some impression that juries are to decide if classified documents are actually classified?

Who would describe and summarize them? The same DOJ/FBI who has been stonewalling the Congress of the United States.

What makes you think they will be more honest with the Judicial branch than they are with the legislative?

Again, I'll ask: do you have any case law regarding this idea that "the jury doesn't need to actually see the evidence, you know?"

Why are the prosecutors and forum members pretending that getting security clearance for twelve jurors and a couple of alternates is an impossible task? If they are on juries, they are supposed to be voting citizens, so clearing them shouldn't be such a stretch.

 

[Delldude]

The documents can be described and summarized without revealing the classified information.

I agree. They could appoint someone with proper clearances, who would be mutually agreed upon by Judge Cannon, Smith and Trump's defense to give a briefing on the contents. They do this in congress all the time.

Are you under some impression that juries are to decide if classified documents are actually classified?

Yes. The claim is they were declassified. That is also a major component of the case.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The claim is they were declassified.

And once again, they don't need to read the contents to address that point.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I agree. They could appoint someone with proper clearances, who would be mutually agreed upon by Judge Cannon, Smith and Trump's defense to give a briefing on the contents. They do this in congress all the time.

Yes. The claim is they were declassified. That is also a major component of the case.

That sounds very reasonable, once you make up your mind that 1) Trump has to be tried for charges related to classified documents, no matter what, and 2) The jury cannot be shown the classified documents, no matter what. If you believe that both 1) and 2) are necessarily true, then going about it that way seems a good way to meet those non-negotiable requirements.

My question would be is there a law or a precedent that says that this is the way to do it? The whole idea of "don't show the jury the evidence" seems counter to everything we as Americans are supposed to believe about criminal trials. No matter how reasonable doing it some other way besides the way prescribed by law may sound, there has to be some law allowing it.

I don't believe that either 1) or 2) are necessarily true. The Federal government exercised prosecutorial discretion when Hillary Clinton stole classifed information from her job at the State Department, refused to return it when issued a supbpoena, and destroyed it with software and hammers. There are plenty of charges against Trump, Smith can afford to forget about some if it would truly endanger national security.


Or . . . twelve people and some alternates can get security clearances. It's not privilege only for a select few, hundreds of thousands of people have clearances.

This seems like a charade, a stall so that the prosecutor's case in chief does not start until after the election. Because when it starts, Smith is sure to look more and more foolish every day.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The claim is they were declassified. That is also a major component of the case.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/united-states-v-trump/

.
.
So far it's not. The link above is to all the court filings in the case. FPOTUS#45 (through his lawyers) has not made a claim before the court that he declassified the documents.

It can't be a "major component of the case" if the defense doesn't claim it as an affirmative defense. If they do, that is going to open up whole new avenues for the prosecution to impeach the claim. Dates, times, locations, context, verbal or written, witnesses documents, etc.

For the uninitiated, see below for why secret and mental declassification doesn't cut it.

WW
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
See this is what people that don't understand what "classified" shows. Documents are not "declassified" it is the information in the document that is declassified. The document is a piece of paper, it is the information that is important.

For example let’s say that there are 6 copies of a specific document containing specific classified information. One located in the White House, 5 located amongst various agencies which also need the document. In addition there are subordinate documents that contain (either in part of in whole some of the same classified information).

Under a normal process when the information contained in a highly classified documents is declassified (or downgraded) that impacts all copies of the document (its information, and subordinate documents containing the same information in whole or portions of a subordinate document).

So If the FPOTUS "declassified" a document, he is really declassifying the information in that document. If the FPOTUS, while acting as POTUS, "declassified" the information without telling anyone (either directly or in writing) for that specific document, you end up with:

• One copy of the information located at the White House (or one of his Country Clubs) being "declassified", and
• Five copies of the information located at the responsible agencies still being classified as the responsible agencies will not know the information was declassified because the FPOTUS (while POTUS) just mentally declassified the information in his head.

The result is someone could be prosecuted for improper handling of classified material for actions related to the 5 responsible agency documents, but not for improper handling of the exact same document if the source of the document was the White House. But they contain the same information! By this we are talking about the information in the document and subordinate information which sourced the document which can have even wider reaching impacts.

The national security infrastructure cannot function in a reasonable way if the same information is both classified and declassified at the same time simply because the POTUS chooses not to tell anyone.

Kind of a Schrodinger's Classified document where the same information is both classified and declassified at the same time until someone asks the FPOTUS to find out if he mentally and secretly declassified it without telling anyone while still POTUS. Normal people wouldn't know just by looking at the document.

 

[WorldWatcher]

My question would be is there a law or a precedent that says that this is the way to do it?

Yes.

It's called the "Classified Information Procedures Act" and was passed by Congress in 1980 and is both law and the basis for precedent in every case involving the prosecution of classified documents for the last 40 years.

This isn't the first rodeo where someone has been charged with crimes related to classified documents.

WW

 

[Delldude]

And once again, they don't need to read the contents to address that point.

Never said they did.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Never said they did.

Right, that was a different guy arguing the jury needs to see the contents. Okay.

 

[Delldude]

This isn't the first rodeo where someone has been charged with crimes related to classified documents.

And most have gotten off rather lightly.........................BUT TRUMP.

 

[Delldude]

Right, that was a different guy arguing the jury needs to see the contents. Okay.

Post it then.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Post it then.

 

[rippy38]

I wouldn't find that hard to believe.

Remember, they went NUTS when Trump started asking perfectly valid questions about Ukraine. The entire deep state lost its collective mind over that.

Yup.

They impeached him for it even.

 

[Delldude]

Thanks for admitting you can't.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Thanks for admitting you can't.

Oh my, someone needs to update his troll playbook.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yup.

They impeached him for it even.

Lie.

They impeached him for extorting a foreign leader, using congressional approved aid, for personal gain.

 

[Delldude]

Oh my, someone needs to update his troll playbook.

Post it then or STFU.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Post it then or STFU.

No, I think I will do neither and let everyone decide for themselves.

 

[rippy38]

Lie.

They impeached him for extorting a foreign leader, using congressional approved aid, for personal gain.

Uh... that was Joe Bidumb.

 

[Delldude]

No, I think I will do neither and let everyone decide for themselves.

Ha ha ha......yall done f**ked up.