What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Guy Who Participated In Failed Russian Collusion Coup Say He Knew Nothing About FBI Raid In Trump

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
I was a Secondary Control point custodian as well as a Classified Courier for 1st MAW out of Okinawa. So, yeah keeping track of the classified material is what kept me from going to the brig. I guess in the Army you all do not really give a shit about such things. Not really a surprise.
No, sir. We had plenty of paper-pushers in the Army as well. I was one for a while. My first enlistment, I was inexperienced enough to sign up to be a seventy-one Lima, i.e. typist-filer, for 18 months. I seriously thought it would be a buncha laid-back guys watching for four-thirty, so we could head for the E Club. Nope. If I had a nickel for every time I encountered someone who talked about paperwork in that self-aggrandizing tone, I could have retired after the first two year.

Did y'all use this one: "filing is about attention to detail, because lack of attention to detail is what gets people killed in combat!"

Yes. In combat, in specific situations, like dialing in an artillery battery when bracketing enemy troops with American troops close in, attention to detail is life and death. Sometimes. Filing a document about a visit from a plumbing contractor in the "miscellaneous" file, when the filing regulation (yes, there was a filing regulation) calls for a file on building operations, doesn't get people killed in combat.

The Master Sergeant who caught PFC Plops in that grievous error was angry that I had a miscellaneous file in the first place, and he challenged me to "show me in the regulation where it says you can do that!" I showed it to him and he was angry that I knew something about filing that he did not. So he went over every document in the miscellaneous file until on the second look-through, he found that one. Then he spent almost half an hour reading the reg to find the part about a building operations file.

But, he had me! By Allah, he had me! He made sure it was prominent in his report to the Full Bird that commanded the Brigade. He literally said that I had shown a cavalier attitude by "overusing" the miscellaneous file. Lives were saved by moving that invoice to the building operations file!

You said Marines, so I won't ask if that Sarge was you.
Nobody knows if they were Declassified, no matter how many times you say they were.
If nobody knows if they were declassified, then Trump is still presumed innocent. If you refer to them as "the documents" instead of "the classified material," I'll refrain from correcting you every time.
All that security yet someone saw them and told the DOJ about it. Weird.
Really? Who saw them and told the DOJ about it? Be specific with a name, please. I hope it isn't an "anonymous source."
You choose to pretend that each time they were shown everything that was there. Again, we do not know if this is the case.
I didn't say that they looked at every single document that was their. They weren't Sergeant Gator, poring over every file. They saw how the documents were stored and they did not take them, as they could have if they were stored illegally.
What others? So far only one other has come forward. But this goes back to my initial point, if nobody knew what all was there, how can it have been declassified if nobody knew what was even there?
It was declassified before it left the White House while Trump was president and still had sole authority to do so. We know of one person who heard Trump declassify them. When they start grilling GSA employees about why the hell they packed up "classified documents" for Mar-a-lago, you can bet one of them will cough out a name of their boss who knew damn well that Trump declassified them.

That boss may throw them under the bus, by denying it, but that won't change the truth.
Unless one has the mindset of Trump and thinks all those things are his and his alone.
Presidents have taken documents and other objects from the WH ever since George Washington. The Clintons were noted for the amount of loot they hauled out, not including their juvenile staff taking every "W" from the typewriters. Maybe that is wrong. Maybe there should be a law. But starting with Trump for the first prosecution for that not-yet-existing law doesn't support the FBI's claim of being non-partisan crime fighters.
 

Golfing Gator

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
76,232
Reaction score
19,749
Points
2,220
Location
Midwest of America
No, sir. We had plenty of paper-pushers in the Army as well. I was one for a while. My first enlistment, I was inexperienced enough to sign up to be a seventy-one Lima, i.e. typist-filer, for 18 months. I seriously thought it would be a buncha laid-back guys watching for four-thirty, so we could head for the E Club. Nope. If I had a nickel for every time I encountered someone who talked about paperwork in that self-aggrandizing tone, I could have retired after the first two year.

Did y'all use this one: "filing is about attention to detail, because lack of attention to detail is what gets people killed in combat!"

Yes. In combat, in specific situations, like dialing in an artillery battery when bracketing enemy troops with American troops close in, attention to detail is life and death. Sometimes. Filing a document about a visit from a plumbing contractor in the "miscellaneous" file, when the filing regulation (yes, there was a filing regulation) calls for a file on building operations, doesn't get people killed in combat.

The Master Sergeant who caught PFC Plops in that grievous error was angry that I had a miscellaneous file in the first place, and he challenged me to "show me in the regulation where it says you can do that!" I showed it to him and he was angry that I knew something about filing that he did not. So he went over every document in the miscellaneous file until on the second look-through, he found that one. Then he spent almost half an hour reading the reg to find the part about a building operations file.

But, he had me! By Allah, he had me! He made sure it was prominent in his report to the Full Bird that commanded the Brigade. He literally said that I had shown a cavalier attitude by "overusing" the miscellaneous file. Lives were saved by moving that invoice to the building operations file!

You said Marines, so I won't ask if that Sarge was you.

If nobody knows if they were declassified, then Trump is still presumed innocent. If you refer to them as "the documents" instead of "the classified material," I'll refrain from correcting you every time.

Really? Who saw them and told the DOJ about it? Be specific with a name, please. I hope it isn't an "anonymous source."

I didn't say that they looked at every single document that was their. They weren't Sergeant Gator, poring over every file. They saw how the documents were stored and they did not take them, as they could have if they were stored illegally.

It was declassified before it left the White House while Trump was president and still had sole authority to do so. We know of one person who heard Trump declassify them. When they start grilling GSA employees about why the hell they packed up "classified documents" for Mar-a-lago, you can bet one of them will cough out a name of their boss who knew damn well that Trump declassified them.

That boss may throw them under the bus, by denying it, but that won't change the truth.

Presidents have taken documents and other objects from the WH ever since George Washington. The Clintons were noted for the amount of loot they hauled out, not including their juvenile staff taking every "W" from the typewriters. Maybe that is wrong. Maybe there should be a law. But starting with Trump for the first prosecution for that not-yet-existing law doesn't support the FBI's claim of being non-partisan crime fighters.

It is sort of cute how you think keeping track of classified materials is a joke.

Makes me think you never seen one or worn a uniform.

Have a great night
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
It's in the affidavit, dumbass. Which I bet you haven't read.

"
Boxes Containing Documents Were Transported from the White House to Mar-a-Lago
30. According to a CBS Miami article titled ''Moving Trucks Spotted At Mar-a-Lago,"
published Monday, January 18, 2021, at least two moving trucks were observed at the PREMISES

on January 18, 2021."

I'm guessing the TDS folks picture Trump driving one of the Trucks and Melania the Other.

Nope. Trump never learned how to drive a stick. Melania, being European, knew how to drive a stick in a Porsche. But she grinded the gears considerable in that semi-trailer rig. Don Junior did much better in his, having completed Truck Masters School of Truck Driving in preparation for the occasion. He kept honking at step-mom for stalling out, and she would just flip him the bird, and restart.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,556
Points
163
Because a document can be Declassified and still contain sensified information that Patel did not feel comfortable in broadcasting.

If the documents are declassified, they’re public information. Kash Patel had the opportunity to prove they’re declassified. He didn’t. Time and time again, the Trump camp has the opportunity to legitimize this claim that they declassified everything. They don’t. It’s getting beyond suspicious at this time.

Show me the document that they signed saying they complied with the subpoena. I would be very surprised if they did not put some kind of qualifier on it, or say we have returned all classified documents which would be a truthful statement. But I have an open mind so if you show me the document and it is as you say, I will acknowledge it


The subpoena is page 47. It says all documents with classification markings. The certification is page 52. It says they complied and submitted all responsive documents.

If and - it's a big if - the documents were really strewn around as the FBI depicted them in their pictures and descriptions, it is correct that Trump was careless with Declassified documents that contained sensitive information.

Sorry, I know you hate the comparison but it is perfectly valid. Compare that to the way Hillary was treated for keeping thousands of classified documents on a personally owned server that was less secure than gmail. No one will buy that the treatment was anywhere close to equal. That's all non-hyperpartisans need to know to think that this raid looks pretty damn bad.

Most intelligent people don't question that the pictures were staged. I hope you are among that group. If the pictures were staged, why should we trust the written description?

The documents were at Trump’s house. That’s the problem. It’s irrelevant how they were kept. No, they weren’t strewn about. That’s not what matters.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
If the documents are declassified, they’re public information.
You have done well in the past, but that one is lame.

I write a love letter to my wife, it's not classified, but it's not public either.

I think it was you who claimed that FOIA guarantees that any non-classified document is made available to the public, and I pointed out to you that the government has many, many other ways to claim that a document cannot be released to the public.

Yes, it was you, I'm pretty sure, but I don't remember a response.

Here's how you can prove me wrong. Trump de-classified a binder full of documents pertaining to Operation Crossfire Hurricane. Request them and present them to this board and I'll say you are right, and damn good!
Kash Patel had the opportunity to prove they’re declassified. He didn’t. Time and time again, the Trump camp has the opportunity to legitimize this claim that they declassified everything. They don’t. It’s getting beyond suspicious at this time.
When did the burden of proof shift to the guy who has been subjected to a seven year effort to find a crime to charge him with?

The subpoena is page 47. It says all documents with classification markings. The certification is page 52. It says they complied and submitted all responsive documents.
The Justice Department may go after whoever signed that certification (redacted of course, so who knows if he exists), if they can prove that the documents in the picture were found at Mar-a-Lago, and that the certification is real. Unless the name is Donald Trump, I'm not sure your point.

Don't forget that the FBI is famous for falsifying documents in their ineffectual pursuit of Trump.
The documents were at Trump’s house. That’s the problem. It’s irrelevant how they were kept. No, they weren’t strewn about. That’s not what matters.
Sounds like they have plenty enough to make and arrest, then.

I'll wait . . .

EDIT: PS, you are still doing well, you've only dodged the one question about whether you can FOIA the Crossfire Hurricane binder documents.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
It is sort of cute how you think keeping track of classified materials is a joke.

Makes me think you never seen one or worn a uniform.

Have a great night
I saw a couple of uniforms at Biden's Nuremburg Speech.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,556
Points
163
You have done well in the past, but that one is lame.

I write a love letter to my wife, it's not classified, but it's not public either.

I think it was you who claimed that FOIA guarantees that any non-classified document is made available to the public, and I pointed out to you that the government has many, many other ways to claim that a document cannot be released to the public.

Yes, it was you, I'm pretty sure, but I don't remember a response.

Here's how you can prove me wrong. Trump de-classified a binder full of documents pertaining to Operation Crossfire Hurricane. Request them and present them to this board and I'll say you are right, and damn good!

When did the burden of proof shift to the guy who has been subjected to a seven year effort to find a crime to charge him with?

The Justice Department may go after whoever signed that certification (redacted of course, so who knows if he exists), if they can prove that the documents in the picture were found at Mar-a-Lago, and that the certification is real. Unless the name is Donald Trump, I'm not sure your point.

Don't forget that the FBI is famous for falsifying documents in their ineffectual pursuit of Trump.

Sounds like they have plenty enough to make and arrest, then.

I'll wait . . .

EDIT: PS, you are still doing well, you've only dodged the one question about whether you can FOIA the Crossfire Hurricane binder documents.
Yes, you can request the Crossfire Hurricane binder.

You don’t declassify documents. You declassify information. All the information in those documents that Trump had is allegedly declassified.

But Trump hasn’t said they’re declassified in any legal sense. Social media postings and Kash Patel’s hearsay don’t change that. The way classified information works is that it’s classified until otherwise not. Until there’s any actual claim that it’s declassified, everyone’s going to continue to operate under the assumption that they’re classified because that’s the only rational way to handle it.

If you think the government can legally hide the information from hundreds upon hundreds of highly classified documents, I’d like to hear how.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
Yes, you can request the Crossfire Hurricane binder.
Sure, you can request it. You wont' get it, so it is not public information.

You don’t declassify documents. You declassify information. All the information in those documents that Trump had is allegedly declassified.
If Marener were the president, that would be the way it works. If that's how Biden approaches classification as president, that's how it works. When Trump was president, it worked the way he said it worked. You may not like that, but that's the constitution, according to the deciders of what the constitution says.

Trump declassified documents that he took from the White House. He understood that the information in the documents was still not public information so he took them to a place that was secure from any forceful or clandestine attempt to access them. As far as anone knows, no one got to them until the FBI came in with a warrant, which was honored by the law-abiding Trump team.
But Trump hasn’t said they’re declassified in any legal sense. Social media postings and Kash Patel’s hearsay don’t change that. The way classified information works is that it’s classified until otherwise not. Until there’s any actual claim that it’s declassified, everyone’s going to continue to operate under the assumption that they’re classified because that’s the only rational way to handle it.
You're making the assumption that both Trump and Kash Patel are lying when they say that Trump declassified the documents as president. If the DOJ can prove that, they have a case. If not, not.
If you think the government can legally hide the information from hundreds upon hundreds of highly classified documents, I’d like to hear how.
I think that you mean declassified documents? If it's highly classified, the government is supposed to hide the information.

If you mean declassified documents, the government is not supposed to hide that from us, but the do it all the time. The government doesn't care about the law, especially not the DOJ/FBI/DNC.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,556
Points
163
Sure, you can request it. You wont' get it, so it is not public information.


If Marener were the president, that would be the way it works. If that's how Biden approaches classification as president, that's how it works. When Trump was president, it worked the way he said it worked. You may not like that, but that's the constitution, according to the deciders of what the constitution says.

Trump declassified documents that he took from the White House. He understood that the information in the documents was still not public information so he took them to a place that was secure from any forceful or clandestine attempt to access them. As far as anone knows, no one got to them until the FBI came in with a warrant, which was honored by the law-abiding Trump team.

You're making the assumption that both Trump and Kash Patel are lying when they say that Trump declassified the documents as president. If the DOJ can prove that, they have a case. If not, not.

I think that you mean declassified documents? If it's highly classified, the government is supposed to hide the information.

If you mean declassified documents, the government is not supposed to hide that from us, but the do it all the time. The government doesn't care about the law, especially not the DOJ/FBI/DNC.
Let me know how the Judicial Watch lawsuit goes. If they win, then I’ve been proven right. So far it’s too early to tell and your claim is thus premature.

You declassify information, not documents. By declassifying “documents” he’s actually declassifying all information on the documents. That’s how executive order 13526 which governs classification works. It’s the only rational way for it to work. Your claim as to “how it works” for Trump is just something you made up and have not provided any substantiation to.

So far the only one hiding these declassified documents from us is Trump who had no business, right or need to have any of them invisible closet. So tell me who is the one who doesn’t care about the law? It appears it’s Trump by your own standard.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
Let me know how the Judicial Watch lawsuit goes. If they win, then I’ve been proven right. So far it’s too early to tell and your claim is thus premature.
If Judicial Watch wins the lawsuit, but the DOJ still refuses to release the binder, or releases a redacted version, you will not have been proven right. Either way, surely you are man enough to admit that it isn't a simple process of asking the government for a de-classified document and they turn it right over, because it is public information. You can admit that the FOIA is a hollow promise if government doesn't abide by it. Which doesn't seem to bother you, I notice?

For what it's worth, Biden could re-classify the whole Crossfire Hurricane binder and the DOJ would have no obligation to publish it. They would have failed to follow the directions of the president at the time, but I don't think that is a criminal offense. Biden doesn't do that because it would look so bad politically. That's the way the system is supposed to work, presidents don't abuse their classification/declassification authority out of fear of voters, not because they don't have the authority.
You declassify information, not documents. By declassifying “documents” he’s actually declassifying all information on the documents. That’s how executive order 13526 which governs classification works. It’s the only rational way for it to work. Your claim as to “how it works” for Trump is just something you made up and have not provided any substantiation to.
It works that way for Trump and every other sitting president. Here is the substantiation. I don't make stuff up.

The majority ignores entirely the government's argument based on the constitutional principle of separation of powers. The protection of classified information is an executive responsibility flowing from the President's constitutional mandate to provide for the national defense. U.S. Const., Art. II, § 2.



Sec. 1.3. Classification Authority.

(a) The authority to classify information originally may be exercised only by:

  • (1) the President and, in the performance of executive duties, the Vice President;
  • (2) agency heads and officials designated by the President in the Federal Register; and

  • (3) United States Government officials delegated this authority pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) Officials authorized to classify information at a specified level are also authorized to classify information at a lower level.

(c) Delegation of original classification authority.

  • (1) Delegations of original classification authority shall be limited to the minimum required to administer this order. Agency heads are responsible for ensuring that designated subordinate officials have a demonstrable and continuing need to exercise this authority.

  • (2) “Top Secret” original classification authority may be delegated only by the President; in the performance of executive duties, the Vice President; or an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

  • Secret” or “Confidential” original classification authority may be delegated only by the President; in the performance of executive duties, the Vice President; or an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section; or the senior a(3) “Segency official described in section 5.4(d) of this order, provided that official has been delegated “Top Secret” original classification authority by the agency head.

  • (4) Each delegation of original classification authority shall be in writing and the authority shall not be redelegated except as provided in this order. Each delegation shall identify the official by name or position title.

From 2017. The snarky tone is not mine, but it is understandable:

Repeat after me: The President of the United States is the classification authority in the United States of America. He can declassify information at the stroke of a pen or by speaking the word. Classification flows through the President of the United States.

THE PRESIDENT’S ROLE IN CLASSIFICATION​

When you vote in a Presidential election, you’re voting for the top of the Intelligence Community hierarchy. Before the election we discussed what kind of a security clearance the president gets. Contributor David Brown wrote:

“Presidents, by virtue of their position, are practically incapable of violating clearance law. If a president wants to declassify something, he or she can more or less declassify it by fiat.”

But if you understand classification policy (or you read the Washington Post story with some healthy skepticism), it’s clear a lot of the story is driven by a failure to understand (or perhaps come to grips with), the great national security responsibility entrusted to the president. The debate over who should hold that role was one for last year. Today’s debate would be better served by focusing on the judgment in sharing the information, not the president’s authority to do so. I’m pretty sure that’s a discussion that’s happening in the White House right now. Along with who in needs to be fired for leaking to the Post in the first place.

So far the only one hiding these declassified documents from us is Trump who had no business, right or need to have any of them invisible closet. So tell me who is the one who doesn’t care about the law? It appears it’s Trump by your own standard.
Actually, Trump could have released the de-classified parts of Crossfire Hurricane anytime if he had a copy of the binder he declassified. I have to wonder if he even had it, since he has not released it. No doubt that was what the FBI was looking for, not the nuclear football, or the formula for yellowcake uranium.

Or, Trump may have been holding it pending the required release of the binder by the DOJ, giving them a chance to do the right thing for once, with a plan to release it himself if the continued to stonewall. Now, they will never release it. They still have files on The Monkees that they won't release.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,556
Points
163
If Judicial Watch wins the lawsuit, but the DOJ still refuses to release the binder, or releases a redacted version, you will not have been proven right. Either way, surely you are man enough to admit that it isn't a simple process of asking the government for a de-classified document and they turn it right over, because it is public information. You can admit that the FOIA is a hollow promise if government doesn't abide by it. Which doesn't seem to bother you, I notice?

For what it's worth, Biden could re-classify the whole Crossfire Hurricane binder and the DOJ would have no obligation to publish it. They would have failed to follow the directions of the president at the time, but I don't think that is a criminal offense. Biden doesn't do that because it would look so bad politically. That's the way the system is supposed to work, presidents don't abuse their classification/declassification authority out of fear of voters, not because they don't have the authority.

It works that way for Trump and every other sitting president. Here is the substantiation. I don't make stuff up.







From 2017. The snarky tone is not mine, but it is understandable:




Actually, Trump could have released the de-classified parts of Crossfire Hurricane anytime if he had a copy of the binder he declassified. I have to wonder if he even had it, since he has not released it. No doubt that was what the FBI was looking for, not the nuclear football, or the formula for yellowcake uranium.

Or, Trump may have been holding it pending the required release of the binder by the DOJ, giving them a chance to do the right thing for once, with a plan to release it himself if the continued to stonewall. Now, they will never release it. They still have files on The Monkees that they won't release.
Notice how ever reference you had to declassifying material said it was the authority to declassify “information” which is exactly what I said. Not documents. Information. That’s the only logical way. There’s no counter argument.

You’re essentially trying to argue that declassification is meaningless beyond insulating Trump from consequences of taking classified documents home (which would be a massive abuse of this power). Declassification means the information is no longer protected from dissemination. That’s what it means. Any court reviewing FOIA lawsuits would have to take into consideration any declassification orders from the president. So far, Trump has not told any court that any of this info is declassified. Therefore, they’re not declassified.

The truth, whether you accept it or not, is that Trump doesn’t want to argue the information is declassified. That would open up a massive can of worms that he doesn’t want to deal with.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
Notice how ever reference you had to declassifying material said it was the authority to declassify “information” which is exactly what I said.
Yes, you have a good point, there.
Not documents. Information. That’s the only logical way. There’s no counter argument.
Now you take your good point to far. If the president has sole authority to classify/reclassify information how could anyone else be the authority to declassify documents?
You’re essentially trying to argue that declassification is meaningless beyond insulating Trump from consequences of taking classified documents home (which would be a massive abuse of this power).
Because that was the president's intent. If it was a massive abuse at his power, impeachment is the remedy, not criminal prosecution for a non crime.
Declassification means the information is no longer protected from dissemination. That’s what it means. Any court reviewing FOIA lawsuits would have to take into consideration any declassification orders from the president. So far, Trump has not told any court that any of this info is declassified. Therefore, they’re not declassified.
They were declassified the moment Trump declassified them. There's no requirement for a court to agree, or be notified.

In the incredibly unlikely event of a trial for Trump on a charge of some crime, if Trump tells the court then that he Declassified those documents, what would the prosecution's rebuttal be?

"Nuh-uh?"
The truth, whether you accept it or not, is that Trump doesn’t want to argue the information is declassified. That would open up a massive can of worms that he doesn’t want to deal with.
If What you say his true - that Trump inadvertently declassified all the information when he only meant to declassify the documents - that gives him full protection. It would protect him legally from any classified information related criminal charge.

If that was bad presidenting, copy and paste the last Two impeachments and spin the wheel again.

My advice is to tell the DNC to stop obsessing over Trump already and sell the voters on its own vision for America since making it great again is an anathema to them.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,556
Points
163
Yes, you have a good point, there.

Now you take your good point to far. If the president has sole authority to classify/reclassify information how could anyone else be the authority to declassify documents?

Because that was the president's intent. If it was a massive abuse at his power, impeachment is the remedy, not criminal prosecution for a non crime.

They were declassified the moment Trump declassified them. There's no requirement for a court to agree, or be notified.

In the incredibly unlikely event of a trial for Trump on a charge of some crime, if Trump tells the court then that he Declassified those documents, what would the prosecution's rebuttal be?

"Nuh-uh?"

If What you say his true - that Trump inadvertently declassified all the information when he only meant to declassify the documents - that gives him full protection. It would protect him legally from any classified information related criminal charge.

If that was bad presidenting, copy and paste the last Two impeachments and spin the wheel again.

My advice is to tell the DNC to stop obsessing over Trump already and sell the voters on its own vision for America since making it great again is an anathema to them.
To start, the president's "intent" is irrelevant. If he has no legal basis for his actions, his intent is meaningless.

Hypothetically let's say Trump declassified these documents but decided not to tell anyone. To everyone who isn't living inside Trump's head, there are still hundreds of highly classified documents in his house and there are consequences to this. The DoJ and FBI are tasked with protection national security, so Trump shouldn't be surprised that they come looking for them, including serving a search warrant. Of course, Trump has the ability to defuse the situation at any time by telling the FBI that they're declassified and it becomes increasingly perplexing why he isn't doing so.

The entire concept that Trump declassified them without telling anyone defies logic. It's not compatible with what classification even means.

If it ever goes to trial, the DoJ would present his failure to notify anyone that they're declassified as evidence that they aren't declassified. A jury would have to judge whether Trump actually declassified them based on the available evidence.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
To start, the president's "intent" is irrelevant. If he has no legal basis for his actions, his intent is meaningless.
You're forgetting the Clinton Doctrine.


Hypothetically let's say Trump declassified these documents but decided not to tell anyone. To everyone who isn't living inside Trump's head, there are still hundreds of highly classified documents in his house and there are consequences to this. The DoJ and FBI are tasked with protection national security, so Trump shouldn't be surprised that they come looking for them, including serving a search warrant. Of course, Trump has the ability to defuse the situation at any time by telling the FBI that they're declassified and it becomes increasingly perplexing why he isn't doing so.

The entire concept that Trump declassified them without telling anyone defies logic. It's not compatible with what classification even means.
Who said that he didn't tell anyone? We already have one person who has come forward and said that Trump told him the documents were declassified. If nothing happens to him, likely others will come forward also.
If it ever goes to trial,
It won't.
the DoJ would present his failure to notify anyone that they're declassified as evidence that they aren't declassified. A jury would have to judge whether Trump actually declassified them based on the available evidence.
In that trial that will never happen, the "failure" to notify anyone won't be brought up since he did notify at least one person. He must have notified the GSA for them to have moved the documents to Mar-a-Lago. Do you think that they will incriminate themselves by swearing in court that they moved classified documents to a private residence and that no one had declassified them?

If they take the fifth in front of the jury, the DOJ's case is over. If Kash Patel hangs himself in his cell, or shoots himself in the head and then throws the gun away, the government would still be left to prove that Trump did not declassify them. Proving a negative is logically impossible, but that's why prosecutors don't typically hand their hat on being able to do so.

I get that you like to imagine Trump on trial instead of Trump on the ballot. The ballot is the place to beat him. Trump can afford way better lawyers than the DOJ has, and an unsuccessful indictment will only make his ballot victory a sure thing.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,556
Points
163
You're forgetting the Clinton Doctrine.



Who said that he didn't tell anyone? We already have one person who has come forward and said that Trump told him the documents were declassified. If nothing happens to him, likely others will come forward also.

It won't.

In that trial that will never happen, the "failure" to notify anyone won't be brought up since he did notify at least one person. He must have notified the GSA for them to have moved the documents to Mar-a-Lago. Do you think that they will incriminate themselves by swearing in court that they moved classified documents to a private residence and that no one had declassified them?

If they take the fifth in front of the jury, the DOJ's case is over. If Kash Patel hangs himself in his cell, or shoots himself in the head and then throws the gun away, the government would still be left to prove that Trump did not declassify them. Proving a negative is logically impossible, but that's why prosecutors don't typically hand their hat on being able to do so.

I get that you like to imagine Trump on trial instead of Trump on the ballot. The ballot is the place to beat him. Trump can afford way better lawyers than the DOJ has, and an unsuccessful indictment will only make his ballot victory a sure thing.
We don’t know if he told anyone. Kash Patel making this claim on some right wing interview is meaningless. There’s no obligation for him to be truthful. These are out of court statements. Hearsay. Hearsay within hearsay technically. If Kash Patel were to claim this under oath, then maybe we’d be getting somewhere but he hasn’t. Just as Trump hasn’t claimed he declassified anything in court.

If it comes to trial, and they all take the 5th, no one is going to testify they’re declassified. I imagine the issue will get sorted in some lawsuit at some point in time.

As for the “Clinton Doctrine”, this is what Comey said:
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

We do see these things in Trump’s case. Clearly intentional mishandling. Vast quantities of material. Efforts to obstruct justice. We see evidence of these things. These are big problems for Trump.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
We don’t know if he told anyone. Kash Patel making this claim on some right wing interview is meaningless. There’s no obligation for him to be truthful. These are out of court statements. Hearsay. Hearsay within hearsay technically. If Kash Patel were to claim this under oath, then maybe we’d be getting somewhere but he hasn’t. Just as Trump hasn’t claimed he declassified anything in court.
I think you've said that before about the 'hearsay." You are misusing the term. If Kash Patel heard Trump declassify the documents and tells us that he heard Trump say that, it is not hearsay in the legal sense. Because Trump saying "these documents are declassified," while he was president is the the action that exonerates him. It's not like Patel heard Trump say after the fact, "I declassified all those documents when I was president." That second example would be hearsay.

If you say, "Trump didn't declassify those documents because nobody heard him say that." and Patel says, "I heard him say that," and you say, "That doesn't count because it's hearsay," you have created a situation where Trump cannot defend himself. I know that's the plan, but it won't hold water in court.
If it comes to trial, and they all take the 5th, no one is going to testify they’re declassified. I imagine the issue will get sorted in some lawsuit at some point in time.
But the DOJ will have to drop its case, or offer immunity to the GSA personnel, thus letting off the ones who actually moved the documents, as a reward for testifying against Trump.
As for the “Clinton Doctrine”, this is what Comey said:
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

We do see these things in Trump’s case. Clearly intentional mishandling. Vast quantities of material. Efforts to obstruct justice. We see evidence of these things. These are big problems for Trump.
You can't logically say that keeping thousands of highly classified documents on a home server, and then refusing to turn the entire server over to the State Department to retrieve the documents is not intentional mishandling.
 

Marener

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,556
Points
163
I think you've said that before about the 'hearsay." You are misusing the term. If Kash Patel heard Trump declassify the documents and tells us that he heard Trump say that, it is not hearsay in the legal sense. Because Trump saying "these documents are declassified," while he was president is the the action that exonerates him. It's not like Patel heard Trump say after the fact, "I declassified all those documents when I was president." That second example would be hearsay.

If you say, "Trump didn't declassify those documents because nobody heard him say that." and Patel says, "I heard him say that," and you say, "That doesn't count because it's hearsay," you have created a situation where Trump cannot defend himself. I know that's the plan, but it won't hold water in court.

But the DOJ will have to drop its case, or offer immunity to the GSA personnel, thus letting off the ones who actually moved the documents, as a reward for testifying against Trump.

You can't logically say that keeping thousands of highly classified documents on a home server, and then refusing to turn the entire server over to the State Department to retrieve the documents is not intentional mishandling.
Kash Patel’s statement is hearsay. It’s double hearsay. It’s an out of court statement used to prove a fact of a matter. That’s the definition of hearsay. Trump telling Kash Patel they’re declassified is already hearsay. The fact that Kash Patel made the claim (which is hearsay) while out of court (one Breitbart or whatever) is what makes it double hearsay. If Kash Patel says it under oath before a jury, that might be different, but I doubt he’d do it. It opens him up to further questioning.

The DoJ wouldn’t have to drop anything. If no one actually claims that they’re declassified, then the documents are classified.

I have no idea why you’re bringing up your GSA. Their involvement is completely speculative by people who aren’t particularly unbiased. Unless you have evidence the GSA is involved, I wouldn’t bring it up again.

We don’t need to relitigate the Clinton server affair. Suffice to say that your beliefs about whether she intentionally mishandled classified documents are mistaken because or many critical details that you’re leaving out.
 

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
4,469
Reaction score
3,277
Points
1,918
Location
Texas
Kash Patel’s statement is hearsay. It’s double hearsay. It’s an out of court statement used to prove a fact of a matter. That’s the definition of hearsay.
Not when the fact you are attempting to prove is that the person said a specific thing. If a bank teller testifies that the defendant said, "Give me all the money,J" while pointing a gun at her, that isn't hearsay. The fact that he said it proves the crime. In Trump's case if it can be proved that he said that the documents are declassified, it disproves any classification-related crime.
Trump telling Kash Patel they’re declassified is already hearsay. The fact that Kash Patel made the claim (which is hearsay) while out of court (one Breitbart or whatever) is what makes it double hearsay. If Kash Patel says it under oath before a jury, that might be different, but I doubt he’d do it. It opens him up to further questioning.
Making a statement out of court doesn't mean that the statement is hearsay. When Tara Reade said, "Senator Biden raped me," she wasn't under oath, but it wasn't hearsay. "Hearsay," is not a synonym for "I don't believe it."
The DoJ wouldn’t have to drop anything. If no one actually claims that they’re declassified, then the documents are classified.
People have already claimed that they are hearsay. You want to hear it in court, they will have to indict Trump and go to trial. The first is unlikely, the second is nearly impossible.
I have no idea why you’re bringing up your GSA. Their involvement is completely speculative by people who aren’t particularly unbiased. Unless you have evidence the GSA is involved, I wouldn’t bring it up again.
You believed my parody about Melania and Trump junior driving the moving trucks full of documents? The GSA is who moves things from the White House.
We don’t need to relitigate the Clinton server affair. Suffice to say that your beliefs about whether she intentionally mishandled classified documents are mistaken because or many critical details that you’re leaving out.
If you don't want to defend it, then my statement that she intentionally mishandled classified documents is fully supported even by James Comey's bizarre presser.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$55.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top