Trump: I could declassify documents by thinking about it

[Cardinal]

A jury would need to find that the potus does not have the authority to change the classification of information at will.

A jury would first need to be told that he did declassify the documents, which would then be perjury.

 

[trouble13]

A jury would first need to be told that he did declassify the documents, which would then be perjury.

You are making the false assumption that it's perjury to claim he declassified the documents in question.

 

[Cardinal]

You are making the false assumption that it's perjury to claim he declassified the documents in question.

Then why won't they make that claim in court?

It's a question that answers itself: they won't make that claim because it's perjury.

This will always be the reaction to a direct demand for evidence that he declassified the documents...in court...

 

[Michael Cole]

You are making the false assumption that it's perjury to claim he declassified the documents in question.

Making a claim without evidence may not be perjury, but it can easily lead to perjury.

These throwaway attorneys may be incompetent and dangerous to their own health, but they're not suicidal. If Trump opens up a claim he declassified documents, he has to provide evidence. If the only evidence he has is his word, then he needs to take the stand and testify to such. Do you really think Trump would survive cross without committing perjury?

Then it would become he said/DoJ said. Trump's word against the mountains of evidence provided by the DoJ doesn't stand a chance in a court of law.

 

[vanceen]

OK, so your position is that to show private citizen Trump could not legally possess documents marked classified, the government must prove the negative, that Trump never declassified them IN HIS MIND while POTUS? The SM and the 11th circuit didn't buy that, but If that's your position, then all I can say is I wish Trump the best of luck should he try that, in court. Who he'll have to convince is the DoJ first, then if they indict, possibly the judge who would have to allow that "evidence" then the jury. I'd pay to see it.

But the idea that POTUS has this kind of power, to think something, therefore it's done, is about the dumbest notion I've ever heard. Yes, he CAN declassify anything, and there's no procedure he must follow, but he has to have some EVIDENCE of it happening if he wants to show, 20 months after he left office, that he did this act.

Again, it's not just "government property" but sensitive national security information that is the issue, NDI, secrets that he had no right to possess and store like he did old news clippings, secrets that if disclosed definitely warrant indictment and conviction of the Espionage Act. It's not just about the PRA, but much more.

And to me it's a dangerous road when we assign these almost magical, supernatural powers to POTUS, that mere "thought" is to do something, and he can 20 months later just declare he thought about something and we are supposed to treat that assertion with more than LMMFAO responses.

My position is what I said, which is that it's not obvious that Trump has to provide evidence of declassification for it to have been done. Naturally the court would ask for evidence (and it did). It isn't obvious that if he can't provide evidence it amounts to proof that nothing was declassified.

I don't mind saying when I don't know something, and I can be a little stubborn about accepting weak evidence when someone says that I should know whether something is so or not. That is as much of a "position" as I'm taking.

 

[Michael Cole]

My position is what I said, which is that it's not obvious that Trump has to provide evidence of declassification for it to have been done. Naturally the court would ask for evidence (and it did). It isn't obvious that if he can't provide evidence it amounts to proof that nothing was declassified.

Sure, but this has value only as a logical point of debate. It doesn't work in a court of law.

It's absurd to think that a process, declassification, can be achieved with the mind. Minds are faulty. For all Trump knows, he reclassified all of the documents in his mind but forgot he did. The mind control argument is just batshit crazy.

I don't mind saying when I don't know something, and I can be a little stubborn about accepting weak evidence when someone says that I should know whether something is so or not. That is as much of a "position" as I'm taking.

 

[Cardinal]

My position is what I said, which is that it's not obvious that Trump has to provide evidence of declassification for it to have been done.

Then he's going to have to argue that the conclusions of the Special Master that he demanded are null and void. Good luck with that.

Naturally the court would ask for evidence (and it did). It isn't obvious that if he can't provide evidence it amounts to proof that nothing was declassified.

I don't mind saying when I don't know something, and I can be a little stubborn about accepting weak evidence when someone says that I should know whether something is so or not. That is as much of a "position" as I'm taking.

 

[pamak]

My position is what I said, which is that it's not obvious that Trump has to provide evidence of declassification for it to have been done. Naturally the court would ask for evidence (and it did). It isn't obvious that if he can't provide evidence it amounts to proof that nothing was declassified.

I don't mind saying when I don't know something, and I can be a little stubborn about accepting weak evidence when someone says that I should know whether something is so or not. That is as much of a "position" as I'm taking.

Your position contradicts current court decisions

https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/18-2112/18-2112-2020-07-09.pdf?ts=1594303207

Page 27 28

Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures. 76


76 As explained above, Executive order 13,526 established the detailed process through which secret information can be appropriately declassified.

The above case was ruled when Trump was in power and in the absence of evidence that specific procedures were followed to declassify information, the courts took the position that documents had remained classified DESPITE the president's public statement that he declassified them.

 

[Galactic Spin]

My position is what I said, which is that it's not obvious that Trump has to provide evidence of declassification for it to have been done

The special master thinks it is obvious.

And so do I. Because all of the evidence shows he declassified nothing. And there is zero evidence he did declassify anything.

No, the burden of proof does NOT lie on the prosecutionto prove he didn't declassify anything. That much has become clear, during the master process.

 

[Cardinal]

The special master thinks it is obvious.

And so do I. Because all of the evidence shows he declassified nothing. And there is zero evidence he did declassify anything.

No, the burden of proof does NOT lie on the prosecutionto prove he didn't declassify anything. That much has become clear, during the master process.

To be nitpicky, the burden is on the plaintiff, which is Trump. The trap that Trump set for himself is that it will now be a matter of court record that the documents are classified.

 

[Tbird19482]

The special master thinks it is obvious.

And so do I. Because all of the evidence shows he declassified nothing. And there is zero evidence he did declassify anything.

No, the burden of proof does NOT lie on the prosecutionto prove he didn't declassify anything. That much has become clear, during the master process.

there are thousands of documents that were at MAL IF Trump gets on the stand and is asked did he declassify this document or that document he is going to have some type of proof and seeing it is all in his head there is no documented proof
as I have been asking people who are backing Trump if there is NOBODY that heard him say it was declassified or any documented proof that it was just HOW is Trump going to prove it?
Trump is a known LIAR and being a known LIAR he is going to need real proof for people to believe him.
Have a nice day

 

[WorldWatcher]

as I have been asking people who are backing Trump if there is NOBODY that heard him say it was declassified or any documented proof that it was just HOW is Trump going to prove it?

By using a otoscope.

WW

 

[Lursa]

I would like to suggest that on election day, Trump supporters simply “think” their votes in.

Don’t even need to leave their house.


Just please, only think you vote in once, and let try to avoid the hanging-chad thoughts shall we?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

No.

Unfortunately, for the consideration and respect which I am going to give to your "response", I rather suspect that I have considerably more training, experience, and success in legal and constitutional drafting and interpretation than you do.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Trump admitted that he knowingly sent the boxes to Mar-a-Lago.

There goes the "I didn't know they were there" defense.

He also claims he declassified the documents, yet his lawyers refuse to say that -- again, good reason, perjury's a thing. The lawyers get that, Trump does not.

His lawyers aren't even prepared to sign a document which says

[1] "I, _____, counsel for Donald John Trump, hereby certify that I am instructed that all of the documents which were at Mar-a-Lago have been declassified.​

​

[2] Further, I am instructed to waive "Solicitor-Client Priviledge" ONLY with respect to the actual document containing those instructions, and SPECIFICALLY to any other documents, recordings, or conversations respecting the exhibits attached hereto.​

​

[3] Attached and marked as Exhibit 1 to this certification is a true copy of the document whereby I received those instructions.​

The attachment would, of course, be something like

​

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

By using a otoscope.

WW

Don't you mean a proctoscope?

BTW, do you know the "Doctor Joke" that starts out "What is a proctoscope?"

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

It's simply wrong to say a POTUS is bound by any XO by FPOTUS.. executive orders can bind subordiant executive branch materials -but one POTUS can never bond the next ,because the next POTUS has his own plenary power as theExecutive branch powers are invested in the president him/herself

And there is no question a POTUS can declassify at will -so they arent bound by any bureaucratic markings etc.

Where i do agree with you ,and the SM and 11th have all said TRUMP can't say "well i ordered them declassified en toto"
without some kind of memorializing ..So I dont think Trump did meet that standard and declassify

PRA"violations" aren't criminal (they are administrative) so if that's all this is..OK

And I've gone over the Espionage act in depth - unless Trump had intent to "harm or advantage" the USA or another country
it aint Espionage.. the exception is "gross negligence" (subsection f) that Comey didnot charge Hillary with because even though no "intent" is in that subsection..well you know the rest

Did you know that there is a difference between "releasing information contained in a classified document" and "declassifying a document"?

There is no doubt that the President has the authority to release the information contained in a classified document, but that is NOT the same thing as "declassifying the document".

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Common sense is not the legal standard. There is no written requirement for what a potus must go through to declassify something. It becomes a matter of his word. If he said he did it then he did because there is no way to prove otherwise.

If that were to be the case, then it would be a matter of credibility and the determination of a witness' credibility is up to the trier of fact.

If the matter were to go to trial, and if Mr. Trump were to testify (and he would have to actually go on the witness stand and do so under oath) that "I did declassify all of the documents found." then the trier of fact would then have to determine whether or not his evidence was believable or not. If the trier of fact determined that Mr. Trump's evidence was not credible (and they would make that determination in the light of MANY incidents in which Mr. Trump said one thing [when the opposite of it was true] and in the light of MANY incidents in which Mr. Trump said "A" and then later said "notA" and then later said "A" depending on which position was - at that moment - the most favorable one for him to adopt.

I don't think that Mr. Trump's current lawyers are dumb enough to risk the entire outcome of a trial on whether or not Mr. Trump is determined to be a credible witness or not.

 

[vanceen]

Your position contradicts current court decisions

https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/18-2112/18-2112-2020-07-09.pdf?ts=1594303207

Page 27 28

Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures. 76


76 As explained above, Executive order 13,526 established the detailed process through which secret information can be appropriately declassified.

The above case was ruled when Trump was in power and in the absence of evidence that specific procedures were followed to declassify information, the courts took the position that documents had remained classified DESPITE the president's public statement that he declassified them.

I've seen those links. They did not deal with declassification by the President or other empowered authority. They were about "de-facto" de-classification of material that had been leaked.

EO 13,526 I've already discussed on this thread.

My position is that neither of those links makes it obvious that a sitting President cannot de-classify material without an evidentiary trail.

In case it's not obvious, I don't think this would be good law. And I certainly would be sorry to see Trump benefit in any way from a quirk or ambiguity in the law. All I'm saying is that no one has yet shown me evidence that he couldn't declassify material without an evidentiary trail or a formal procedure.

I'll be happy to be convinced that's not the case, if anyone can show evidence of it. I think the best thing for the country at this point would be for Trump to be convicted of this or of any of the other charges against him.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I understanding how frustrating it is but the fact remains that he has the authority to reclassify anything he wants, for any reason he wants, at anytime he wants,

Not quite true. The President (and Mr. Trump is NOT "The President") does have the authority to direct that documents be reclassified. Once that direction has been issued it is up to the bureaucracy to carry out that reclassification. The reclassification is NOT complete until the bureaucratic process has been completed.

That, however, is not to say that "The President" does NOT have the authority to release the information contained in classified documents as "The President" sees fit (assuming that that determination is made in accord with the President's Oath of Office).

The part in parentheses is a necessary codicil because, otherwise "The President" would be totally free to release ALL classified information to the governments of hostile powers and there would be no legal consequences arising from them doing so.

and he is not required to notify anyone.

See above.

If he is claiming he did that I don't know how you can prove that he didn't.

The Prosecution will not have to prove that he didn't "declassify' the documents, Mr. Trump would have to prove that he did (and that is because "The documents were not 'classified'." is a defence [and I shouldn't have to tell you that the Prosecution is NOT required to prove a defence]).

 

[vanceen]

To be nitpicky, the burden is on the plaintiff, which is Trump. The trap that Trump set for himself is that it will now be a matter of court record that the documents are classified.

That is a very good point.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The lack of declassifying info is one thing, but sort of a distraction. Bigger question - unless I missed something - is why did he take the stuff and why didn’t he return it, even after a subpoena?

Because he is Donald John Trump and he is the **R*E*A*L** "President of the United States of America" (and, besides, he could ship truckloads of secret government documents to Russia and China and it wouldn't cost him a single vote)?

 

[multivita-man]

What's comical about the whole thing is that Trump probably could have put up a reasonably good defense even with this latest round of documents. He is literally talking himself into an indictment, if not a conviction.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

A jury would need to find that the potus does not have the authority to change the classification of information at will.

The jury would have to make the distinction between

[1] the authority to order the change in classification of information at will​

​

and​

​

[2] the magical ability to instantly change the classification of information without telling anyone else in the known universe about it.​

I don't think that that distinction is too subtle for the average juror to comprehend (even though the devout worshipers at "Claque Failed Casino Operator" don't appear to be able to).

 

[Cardinal]

What's comical about the whole thing is that Trump probably could have put up a reasonably good defense even with this latest round of documents. He is literally talking himself into an indictment, if not a conviction.

I think it was a pretty good theory that all the Feds wanted was their documents back. Once Trump turned it into a public spat, the road to his indictment was set.