Trump Indicted
- Thread starter Marener
- Start date
okfine
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2021
- 10,462
- 17,535
- 2,288
Not to worry, there will be at least a couple more between now and next year. They know they cannot stop him any other way so they're betting they can chip away at his popularity enough to cause him to lose. That isn't going to work. If not, then they'll steal another one but it WILL BE THE LAST.
excalibur
Diamond Member
- Mar 19, 2015
- 28,375
- 57,364
- 2,290
Nothing in the PRA gives the DoJ authority over records held by a former President. And see:
As another court in this district has observed, “[t]he PRA incorporates an assumption made by Congress (in 1978) that subsequent Presidents and Vice Presidents would comply with the Act in good faith, and therefore Congress limited the scope of judicial review and provided little oversight authority for the President and Vice President's document preservation decisions.” CREW v. Cheney, 593 F.Supp.2d 194, 198 (D.D.C.2009).
...
To begin with, the plain language of section 2203(f) of the PRA does not say what plaintiff claims it does—that the Archivist must assume custody and control of all materials that fall within the definition of Presidential records. Tr. at 29:23–30:2. Rather, it states: “the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President.” 44 U.S.C. § 2203(f)(1) (emphasis added).
The Court construes this language as requiring the Archivist to take responsibility for records that were designated as Presidential records during the President's term. Even plaintiff tentatively agreed that the obligation to assume custody and control arises after a determination has been made that the documents are Presidential records. Tr. at 30:3–6. If certain records are not designated as Presidential records, the Archivist has no statutory obligation to take any action at all, and there is nothing to compel under the APA.
...
... the PRA does not confer any mandatory or even discretionary authority on the Archivist to classify records. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the President. 44 U.S.C. § 2203(a)- (b). While the plaintiff casts this lawsuit as a challenge to a decision made by the National Archives, the PRA makes it clear that this is not a decision the Archivist can make, and in this particular case, it is not a decision the Archivist did make because President Clinton's term ended in 2000, and the tapes were not provided to the Archives at that time. To the extent that there was a subsequent classification decision the Archivist purported to make, see supra note 2, or to be more accurate, a decision to decline to revisit the President's classification decision, any injury plaintiff claims it suffered as a result would not be redressable because there is nothing under the statute that the Court can compel the Archivist to do.
...
Ultimately, plaintiff conceded that even an order deeming the materials to be Presidential records and directing the defendant to make an effort to retrieve them would not bind the former President to produce them ...
As another court in this district has observed, “[t]he PRA incorporates an assumption made by Congress (in 1978) that subsequent Presidents and Vice Presidents would comply with the Act in good faith, and therefore Congress limited the scope of judicial review and provided little oversight authority for the President and Vice President's document preservation decisions.” CREW v. Cheney, 593 F.Supp.2d 194, 198 (D.D.C.2009).
...
To begin with, the plain language of section 2203(f) of the PRA does not say what plaintiff claims it does—that the Archivist must assume custody and control of all materials that fall within the definition of Presidential records. Tr. at 29:23–30:2. Rather, it states: “the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President.” 44 U.S.C. § 2203(f)(1) (emphasis added).
The Court construes this language as requiring the Archivist to take responsibility for records that were designated as Presidential records during the President's term. Even plaintiff tentatively agreed that the obligation to assume custody and control arises after a determination has been made that the documents are Presidential records. Tr. at 30:3–6. If certain records are not designated as Presidential records, the Archivist has no statutory obligation to take any action at all, and there is nothing to compel under the APA.
...
... the PRA does not confer any mandatory or even discretionary authority on the Archivist to classify records. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the President. 44 U.S.C. § 2203(a)- (b). While the plaintiff casts this lawsuit as a challenge to a decision made by the National Archives, the PRA makes it clear that this is not a decision the Archivist can make, and in this particular case, it is not a decision the Archivist did make because President Clinton's term ended in 2000, and the tapes were not provided to the Archives at that time. To the extent that there was a subsequent classification decision the Archivist purported to make, see supra note 2, or to be more accurate, a decision to decline to revisit the President's classification decision, any injury plaintiff claims it suffered as a result would not be redressable because there is nothing under the statute that the Court can compel the Archivist to do.
...
Ultimately, plaintiff conceded that even an order deeming the materials to be Presidential records and directing the defendant to make an effort to retrieve them would not bind the former President to produce them ...
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Nat'l Archives & Records Admin., 845 F. Supp. 2d 288 | Casetext Search + Citator
Read Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Nat'l Archives & Records Admin., 845 F. Supp. 2d 288, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
casetext.com
yidnar
Diamond Member
hey pal if Trump is prevented from running that means i'll be voting for DeSantis if he wins the nomination ! lol ! and i'm going to enjoy watching the left lose their sissy minds ! like it or not the next POTUS will be a republican and you and your leftist buddies will still be wimps .
easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,536
- 2,645
Why?
Biden is proven to have taken a $5 million dollar bribe, and Democrats do what they do best when they are caught committing crimes - they launch a huge attempted distraction, usually having something to do with Trump?
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 138,680
- 90,444
- 2,605
Exactly.
The classification of the documents doesn't even figure in the crimes Trump committed.
The documents are the property of the National Archives. Trump is not entitled to steal them or hide them or obstruct the Archives from acquiring them.
The magical mind of Trump's fake declassification is a red herring.
yidnar
Diamond Member
if Trump is prevented from running he cant run as an independent ... sheesh ! ....fags are dumb .
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 138,680
- 90,444
- 2,605
There have been only two periods where the Republic was truly in danger.
1) The Civil War
2) January 6, 2021.
Don’t forget….Why?
Biden is proven to have taken a $5 million dollar bribe, and Democrats do what they do best when they are caught committing crimes - they launch a huge attempted distraction, usually having something to do with Trump?
Look, UFOs!
the other mike
Diamond Member
In the Clinton's case ..... I believe they're deep into the whole Epstein CIA blackmail ring. Maybe Bush's too.
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 138,680
- 90,444
- 2,605
Name one other President besides Trump who deliberately hid their records from NARA.
BackAgain
Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Nah. You simply lack the slightest ability to support your claim. As usual.
yidnar
Diamond Member
marxism 101 ..
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 55,527
- 16,970
- 2,250
Laughing....as demonstrated by 41 state and federal indictments, huh?
Keep those eyes screwed shut.
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 55,527
- 16,970
- 2,250
Or....you've overdosed on butt hurt and sour grapes.
Lol the denial on this board is palpable. Secretly, we know you’re extremely butthurt. Just let it all out. This is a safe space.
BackAgain
Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Ok. You’re a hopeless homo. We get it. We honestly don’t care.
Unlike you, I’m married to a person of the opposite sex and we have adult children.
Tell your boyfriend that you wish to confirm that you’re gay enough.
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 55,527
- 16,970
- 2,250
Or.....Trump is being given due process for criminal charges backed by sufficient evidence to convince a grand jury.
Twice.
The Duke
Diamond Member
- Jul 30, 2022
- 42,692
- 55,499
- 3,488
Why are you laughing about America becoming a Banana Republic with tinges of Stalinism and Nazism?
Do you not know 20th Century history?
Similar threads
