So, if Trump did have boxes and boxes of classified documents...

[j brown's body]

That's the usual Democrat allegations, on every GOP President since and including Dwight Eisenhower, maybe as far back as Hoover.

Oh sure, and if he used them to roll up and beat his dogs with them, he'd be on the hook for animal abuse.

The most corrupt president in American history really has you conned.

 

[Cardinal]

You “served” up an opinion. Where do you get the hostility? Things have been a little tense, lately. Maybe start with my first post (#15) and work from there. If it’s not written in law or the Constitution, it’s an opinion, opinions don’t bolster any position.


Oh, sorry if I hurt your feeling, Thank-you!

 

[Rexedgar]

Serves up an opinion, get’s questioned, serves up a meme, master stroke!

 

[EnigmaO01]

Is there anything that would have prevented a few of his trusted henchmen from copying the whole lot while the boxes were at MAL? Or a way that copying can be detected?

Didn't have to be any of his "trusted henchmen." Mar a logo has been approached by at least one foreign intelligence operative.

Did the Secret Service Catch a Chinese Spy in Mar-a-Lago?

Yujing Zhang was caught sneaking into the president’s club carrying four phones, a laptop, and a thumb drive full of malware.

nymag.com

 

[Jacksprat]

Who here honestly believes he wouldn't sell them to *anyone* for the right price?

The most believable outcome.

 

[KingLeo]

Or perhaps they were not for selling but contained incriminating information that Trump is holding over some of his supporters.
That would makes sense considering the response from people like McCarthy over the FBI taking the documents.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Unless the documents went through a declassification process and marked declassified, they were not declassified.

Not correct. The people who declassify documents work for the President, not the other way 'round. The President has the constitutional power to share classified document with anyone he wants to, and even have them himself, and to declare them declassified. He does not have to go to lower level bureaucrats to ask permission.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

The most believable outcome.

Is that because of the credibility all the prior allegations against Trump have earned? Yes, the DOJ, FBI etc. have earned such a high level of respect over the past 5 years, especially the parts where they lied on warrant applications and withheld important information from judges when obtaining warrants. Makes me trust that if they get a warrant, it damn well means it's valid. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a conspiracy theorist.

 

[Cardinal]

Not correct. The people who declassify documents work for the President, not the other way 'round. The President has the constitutional power to share classified document with anyone he wants to, and even have them himself, and to declare them declassified. He does not have to go to lower level bureaucrats to ask permission.

You misunderstand. That he could declassify anything isn't a point in dispute. What is in dispute is whether, in fact, he actually did declassify them. If the documents don't have the declassified markers, then all you have to go on is Trump's own word.

And would a guy who made over 30,000 false and misleading statements in just four years alone lie about something like that?

 

[Jacksprat]

Is that because of the credibility all the prior allegations against Trump have earned? Yes, the DOJ, FBI etc. have earned such a high level of respect over the past 5 years, especially the parts where they lied on warrant applications and withheld important information from judges when obtaining warrants. Makes me trust that if they get a warrant, it damn well means it's valid. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a conspiracy theorist.

Trump organized a violent coup.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

You misunderstand. That he could declassify anything isn't a point in dispute. What is in dispute is whether, in fact, he actually did declassify them. If the documents don't have the declassified markers, then all you have to go on is Trump's own word.

And would a guy who made over 30,000 false and misleading statements in just four years alone lie about something like this?

Once again, you just parrot BS from the Left. 30,000 false and misleading statements -- this is just propaganda. They measured "misleading" by just calling anything Trump said with which they disagree to be "misleading." Even technically true statements, they say are misleading because Trump doesn't include some other information. It's meaningless drivel.

They had teams of "factcheckers" whose job it was to call Trump a liar. They don't do the same to others, and there were lies after lies after lies said ABOUT Trump every day. https://taibbi.substack.com/p/aaugh-a-brief-list-of-official-russia

As for the declassification, the President has carte blanche in that area. And, even if he didn't, like Sandy Berger stuffing classified documents in his clothing to sneak them out of the white house, knowingly, and Hillary Clinton with her private server containing many many classified documents of the highest order, these issues don't result in raids on their homes. To some degree, you have to really get that. You have be able to do the "shoe on the other foot" test. If this happened to a person you liked and trusted, would you feel the same way about it, knowing what you know? If your answer is no, your answer should be the same when it's your Devil in the dock.

 

[Old 'N Chill]

Who here honestly believes he wouldn't sell them to *anyone* for the right price?

I don't think he sold them yet, likely waiting for them to 'cool off', but he would definitely sell them to someone in the future, whether they were in the US or not.

 

[Cardinal]

Sorry, but I had to snip out your ranting to get to the stuff that's material to the topic.

As for the declassification, the President has carte blanche in that area.

You're arguing against a straw man. That he can declassify anything isn't a point in dispute.

And, even if he didn't...these issues don't result in raids on their homes.

Unless he was served a warrant and didn't provide the material that was demanded of him, at which point you have to agree that a raid makes quite a bit of sense.

If this happened to a person you liked and trusted, would you feel the same way about it, knowing what you know?

Did this hypothetical person I liked and trusted illegally take classified documents? Because if he did, I'd tell that person, "Maybe you shouldn't have done that."

If your answer is no, your answer should be the same when it's your Devil in the dock.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Trump organized a violent coup.

Oh for Pete's sake. Even if that were true, which it isn't, it's irrelevant. It wouldn't justify this particular raid. They didn't get a warrant based on allegations surrounding or pertaining to 1/6/21.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

I don't think he sold them yet, likely waiting for them to 'cool off', but he would definitely sell them to someone in the future, whether they were in the US or not.

God, I hope none of you serves on a jury.

 

[Jacksprat]

Oh for Pete's sake. Even if that were true, which it isn't, it's irrelevant. It wouldn't justify this particular raid. They didn't get a warrant based on allegations surrounding or pertaining to 1/6/21.

Amazing how no one has the right to accuse Trump of wrongdoing.

 

[Jacksprat]

God, I hope none of you serves on a jury.

Trump has been a crook his entire life. Only US President to organize a violent coup. Only President impeached twice.

 

[Risky Thicket]

To what is/are the document(s) referring?

How many are there?

Are the documents classified?

We know none of the answers to the above. Apparently Trump and/or his lawyers do not want the public to know the compelling information that caused the judge to agree to the search warrant. Trump and/or his lawyers do not want the public to know what was listed in the warrant.

Most people are assuming the classified information is national or military secrets of some sort. Could be, or maybe not.

It could be not so much about particular information but rather how the information was collected (intel collection abilities). It could be that Trump has the original of the infamous pee tape. It could be a full and complete list of all the world figures who had sex with underaged girls supplied by Epstein. The possibilities are endless. Many of them, such as the ones above, could compromise Trump and the United States.

We really do not know what we do not know. It's early yet.

 

[JMB802]

What is this claim based on?

I asked the same question and suddenly @mac vacated the thread.

It appears that Obama does not have Presidential records in a personal residence that should be in the National Archives.

 

[mac]

Sorry, but you can't shift the burden of evidence to proving the negative.

I didn't.

 

[mac]

How about for those he sells them to?

There would be plenty of other reasons to go after him if he did, however, if he did, the people that bought them wouldn't be any more bothered than if they had bought a newspaper.

 

[Cardinal]

I didn't.

Then you don't know what "proving a negative" means. They can't prove that he didn't declassify them if all they have to go on is Trump's own word.

Do you take the word of a guy who made over 30,000 false and misleading statements over a four year period?

 

[mac]

I asked the same question and suddenly @mac vacated the thread.

It appears that Obama does not have Presidential records in a personal residence that should be in the National Archives.

I didn't vacate the thread, I went home. No texting while driving.

As to the question, I found an article from NYT (and a few others) that addressed it in a different light, but doesn't specifically compare it to this. In that article it was more in context of "Obama's plan to digitize his records and then release them."

article
article
article

 

[mac]

Then you don't know what "proving a negative" means. They can't prove that he didn't declassify them if all they have to go on is Trump's own word.

Do you take the word of a guy who made over 30,000 false and misleading statements over a four year period?

I do know what "proving a negative" means. I didn't change any evidence to do so. Whether you take his word or not, it would be hard to prove he didn't.

 

[mac]

Of course if that is the meat of the issue Trump will simply claim he declassified them while in office. Whether he actually did is another question.

Right.