Trump: I could declassify documents by thinking about it

[Slartibartfast]

It is in a similar vane that I believe we give the potus great lattitude in the classification process. Because he holds an elected position based on a national vote. He is viewed as the most trusted official who holds our highest office. He is given the ultimate authority to determine what information is classified. We trust his opinion.

Agreed, the POTUS, should have massive latitude in this topic, but not to the level of just taking their word for it without any sort of evidence or ability independently verify their actions.

If we just trust a president to make claims and never have to back them up with evidence, then we leave them in a position to abuse the public.

In other words declassifying is fine. Weird psychic declassification leaves people in a position where nobody knows what the actual situation is while process driven declassification puts people in a position to know the situation. If the president says something like “go declassify this” or writes a simple note to some aid to the same effect and that process happens, then we’re good. If no evidence is produced then nobody knows if it’s declassified or not.

If nobody knows, then I can see where the courts will go to the last verifiable state of whatever document as the unknown state is not a legally verifiable situation.

This isn’t a complicated thing and there is a certain practical need to produce evidence for this stuff.

 

[CLAX1911]

You have no functioning brain to understand what people are telling you in this conversation,

ooh I must have struck a nerve that's kind of funny.

I don't care what ignorance is tell me they don't know anything and neither do you.

so as you suggested before, it is better if you keep your mouth shut and let others discuss the issue. When Tucker gives you the next talking points, you may want to join again the conversation. and gives us your "insight" (meaning Tucker's since you do not have a functioning brain) regarding the claim that a president can declassify documents in his head and take them secretly to his home after he leaves the WH.

like I said you have no insight you offer nothing.

I'm just watching yet another left-wing scam falls to pieces will be pretty funny to watch.

 

[snakestretcher]

None of that speaks to specific requirements on the President to go through a particular process when documents are declassified. The same applies to ClaraD's link above.

It seems to apply to what agencies have to do when they decide to de-classify information. Your excerpts are about how documents must be marked when they are classified, criteria for automatic (time-based) declassification, marking revisions for public release, and the fact that the guidelines in the EO applies to all relevant agencies.

Sorry for being pedantic, but none of this speaks to a process that the President has to go through when declassifying information. As I pointed out above, G W Bush apparently declassified some information regarding Bin Laden when he saw fit, because there was an interest in publicizing it.

It is my devout hope that Trump is convicted of something before 2024 that seriously hinders any intention he has to run for office. But so far, I haven't seen the evidence that this is it.

I posted a link yesterday which clearly states, among other things, that only the original classifier, if he/she are still in office from the time of the original classification, may declassify. Furthermore there are strict documenting protocols to be observed. There must be proof of declassification attached to the materials. If there is none the assumption is that they remain classified; not even a POTUS can arbitrarily declassify without a paper trail, and there are certain sensitive materials that not even a POTUS can declassify. These include nuclear technology secrets.
Then of course is the matter of removing those documents, whether classified or declassified, from a secure government facility to an unsecured golf resort. Absolutely forbidden; they remain the property of the government and must be stored in the National Archive.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Everything me please remember that while this thread is going down a rabbit hole of whether a president can magically declassify, the 11th circuit has already weighed in, making this whole discussion a moot point unless SCOTUS changes it.

As it stands this is like a dependent going “I didn’t rob that house” and people expecting the court to go “oh ok” and just take their word for it.

 

[snakestretcher]

ooh I must have struck a nerve that's kind of funny.

I don't care what ignorance is tell me they don't know anything and neither do you.
like I said you have no insight you offer nothing.

I'm just watching yet another left-wing scam falls to pieces will be pretty funny to watch.

Why do you believe it's a 'scam', because a well-known thief, liar and fraudster is under investigation? Shouldn't all allegations of illegality be investigated, or does Trump get a pass for some reason which you will no doubt enlighten the forum with?

 

[snakestretcher]

Everything me please remember that while this thread is going down a rabbit hole of whether a president can magically declassify, the 11th circuit has already weighed in, making this whole discussion a moot point unless SCOTUS changes it.

The bottom line; if there is no clear, officially documented evidence of declassification, the materials are assumed to remain classified. The Executive Order that Obama signed regarding these matters is still in place, slightly amended from that of the previous incumbent.

 

[Slartibartfast]

The bottom line; if there is no clear, officially documented evidence of declassification, the materials are assumed to remain classified.

Exactly. The evidence is what speaks here and even if Trump believes he declassified (and he seems able to convince himself of anything) it can’t be verified.

Trump’s team should do what defense lawyers do and focus on finding evidence to defend their client and not just throwing verbal smoke screens.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Again who had access to this documents write a list please names professions.

I would say the ability to access from people who don't have clearance hands down indicates that they're not classified. And they weren't used for espionage either so I think this whole thing about Mar alago is dead in the water.

But you guys can go on believing. This conversation is boring nobody here has anything new or insightful to say about it at all it's just to go get Trump we're going to get him he's the Boogeyman and that was funny in 2015 now it's just boring.

So not commenting on the subject anymore it's stupid you're getting nowhere and it will just have to wait and see what happens.

My money is on nothing.

Again who had access to this documents write a list please names professions.

Classic sealioning right there.

I'll give you one Christina Bobb, she had neither a security clearance nor need to know and handled classified documents at MAL. We know she handled classified documents because she is the individual that handed the Redwall of documents to the NARA and FBI representatives in June.

I would say the ability to access from people who don't have clearance hands down indicates that they're not classified. And they weren't used for espionage either so I think this whole thing about Mar alago is dead in the water.

#1 And you would be wrong, allowing unauthorized people (either individually or through failure to control) access to classified documents doesn't mean the documents were declassified. It shows that the FPOTUS team was illegally storing classified documents. The FPOTUS team themselves treated the documents as classified. If they really thought (at the time) that the document were declassified, then their response to the Grand Jury Subpoena in June would not have been to turn over classified documents, it would have been "we don't have any classified documents".

#2 USC793(e) is contingent on "willfully retained" and not distribution. (Nor does it required the NDI information to be classified.)

So not commenting on the subject anymore it's stupid you're getting nowhere and it will just have to wait and see what happens.

Oh, I agree. We will wait and see. And it will be fun to watch if this was a dramady on TV, but it's scary what the FPOTUS thinks he can do because this isn't a made up story it's real.

But I appreciate your leaving the conversation, it shows there was a hole dug from which there is no way out.

Bless your heart.

WW

 

[CLAX1911]

Why do you believe it's a 'scam',

I don't think you're really interested in that.

I don't see any value in interacting with you other than to tell you I see no value in interacting with you.

 

[CLAX1911]

View attachment 67414481



Classic sealioning right there.

I'll give you one Christina Bobb, she had neither a security clearance nor need to know and handled classified documents at MAL. We know she handled classified documents because she is the individual that handed the Redwall of documents to the NARA and FBI representatives in June.



#1 And you would be wrong, allowing unauthorized people (either individually or through failure to control) access to classified documents doesn't mean the documents were declassified. It shows that the FPOTUS team was illegally storing classified documents. The FPOTUS team themselves treated the documents as classified. If they really thought (at the time) that the document were declassified, then their response to the Grand Jury Subpoena in June would not have been to turn over classified documents, it would have been "we don't have any classified documents".

#2 USC793(e) is contingent on "willfully retained" and not distribution. (Nor does it required the NDI information to be classified.)



Oh, I agree. We will wait and see. And it will be fun to watch if this was a dramady on TV, but it's scary what the FPOTUS thinks he can do because this isn't a made up story it's real.

But I appreciate your leaving the conversation, it shows there was a hole dug from which there is no way out.

Bless your heart.

WW

That's a lot of typing to just say nobody.

 

[WorldWatcher]

By your standard what is there to stop a republican dominated congress from impeaching and removing Biden from office after they determined that he leaked classified information to the world.

Congress consists of two chambers: House and Senate. In the spring it appeared that the GOP would easily take both chambers. That is much less likley now. The majority they thought would happen in the House is probably going to be much smaller then originally thought and the DEMs have a good shot at keeping control of the Senate. Even if the GOP does take control of the Senate it will be by only 1 or 2 seats.

The House has the power to impeach with a simple majority. True.

However the Senate requires two thirds of it's member to convict on impeachment. That's 67 out of 100, meaning that conviction and removal of office for your hypothetical would not happen.
.
.
.
.
.
Secondly, remember under the Unilateral Power theory that some supporters are claiming Trump had to declassify documents secretly and mentally, then that power would also extend to Biden. Therefore Biden just secretly and mentally declassified the information just prior to the leak. That means as President he didn't leak classified information because he just declassified it prior to the leak.

WW

 

[snakestretcher]

vbg

I don't think you're really interested in that.

I don't see any value in interacting with you other than to tell you I see no value in interacting with you.

Pathetic. If you don't have an answer, just say so. All I hear is resentful sulking.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That's a lot of typing to just say nobody.

I didn't say nobody in the response, and there was other information covered.

However, I did give you a specific name not a "nobody".

Oh, I thought you were leaving the sub-conversation?

WW

 

[Michael Cole]

Everything in the EO refers directly to agencies and individuals. Nothing in the EO refers directly to the President...except the statement that the President has classification authority.

How do you think those agencies and individuals perform their legally required duties? By reading Trump's mind?

You're grasping at straws.

 

[tres borrachos]

Prove to me that I wasn't married to Charo for 2 weeks in the late 80's. (because, I honestly don't remember if I did)

Prove to me that I didn't lose my virginity to Scott Baio.

Then go on to prove to me that I'm really not Christie Brinkley.

 

[RealityNow]

Partial Image Extracted

Trying to Teach Trump to Stop "STEALING" and "STOP LYING"

View attachment 67414446

DID NOT WORK!!!!!

Now - LOCK HIM UP FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE​

​

 

[RealityNow]

View attachment 67414487

View attachment 67414488

View attachment 67414489​

​

 

[RealityNow]

View attachment 67414490​

Trump Fleecing the Poorly Educated and the Greed Driven Wealthy
​

 

[MTAtech]

Again whatever you have to believe there's no point in arguing about it what's going to happen will happen you have no insight.

I agree and it’s clear the legal system doesn’t buy the mental declassification absurdity. Even Trump’s lawyers aren’t claiming the documents were declassified. I wonder why? Oh, because officers of the court can’t lie to the court.

What the Tangerine Trickster does, just like his election was stolen lie, is make claims on TV that he doesn’t make in court. That’s for consumption by his cult, who believe anything he says without evaluation.

What is more concerning is how otherwise intelligent people will defend completely ridiculous theories and arguments, like declassification by mere thought.

 

[Michael Cole]

Since when did the accused have to probe anything. The burden is on the prosecution to probe that he did not beyond a reasonable doubt.

Classic example of the power Trump has over people's minds.

Nobody has been accused of anything. The FBI is conducting an investigation. No one else gets a special master until an indictment has been opened. This is a discovery process. Investigations don't have discovery.

Judge Cannon's incompetence looks like corruption. She put the cart before the horse.

Burden of proof relates to trials. Your post is essentially unintelligible.

 

[Airyaman]

 

[fmw]

You're not interested in the thread topic? Then why exactly are you in this thread?

Because it entertains him?

 

[Cope]

On top of that, he would have to actually tell someone because it isn't the paper that is classified, it is the information. Information that exists in multiple locations and when information is declassified it applies to all instances of that information.

The government can't operate if there are 6 copies of the same document, 1 at the White House and 5 in source agencies that need it. If the FPOTUS were to declassify the one at the WH, that would also declassify the ones at the agencies. If no one informs the agencies then you have the **SAME** information that in one place is declassified and in others still classified.

A situation which would not be functional.

WW

This is the rub, and what I have been arguing against in this and other threads.

There is no, 'on top of that', legally.

 

[BlueTex]

This is the rub, and what I have been arguing against in this and other threads.

There is no, 'on top of that', legally.

The term “national defense” includes all matters that are directly connected, or may reasonably be connected, with the defense of the United States against any of its enemies. It refers to the military and naval establishments and the related activities of national preparedness. To prove that the information or material in question related to national defense there are two things that the government must prove:

First, that the information was closely held by the government in that it had not been made public and was not available to the general public. Where the information has been made public by the United States government and is found in sources lawfully available to the general public, the information does not relate to the national defense. Similarly, where sources of information are lawfully available to the public and the United States government has made no effort to guard such information, the information itself does not relate to the national defense.

Second, that disclosure of the information would be potentially damaging to the United States or might be useful to an enemy of the United States.

 

[Cope]

The term “national defense” includes all matters that are directly connected, or may reasonably be connected, with the defense of the United States against any of its enemies. It refers to the military and naval establishments and the related activities of national preparedness. To prove that the information or material in question related to national defense there are two things that the government must prove:

First, that the information was closely held by the government in that it had not been made public and was not available to the general public. Where the information has been made public by the United States government and is found in sources lawfully available to the general public, the information does not relate to the national defense. Similarly, where sources of information are lawfully available to the public and the United States government has made no effort to guard such information, the information itself does not relate to the national defense.

Second, that disclosure of the information would be potentially damaging to the United States or might be useful to an enemy of the United States.

Like Jerry Jeff Walker sang, you are 'pissing in the wind'.

If one of these times you actually attempt to prove that the President does NOT have unilateral power to declassify what he wishes, when he wishes, I'll respond to you. Until then, god speed.