• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump: I could declassify documents by thinking about it

Trump's declaration is so asinine that even his most loyal supporters can't think of a way to spin it in Trump's favor.

Could this finally be the bridge too far? Probably not.
Nope. Even if the bridge ended over the ocean, they would all just jump off and swim for a bit, then drown, cursing the dems the whole way down.
 
And I suspect he is waiting for someone to formally dispute his ability to declassify stuff before he proves it.

He has to make the claim in court that he has declassified everything (taken to MAL) as a matter of record before the DOJ can present evidence to the court to dispute it.

Barring that Judge Dearie and the 11th have ruled the information is still classified.

WW
 

42 U.S. Code § 2162 - Classification and declassification of Restricted Data​

First, the president will consult all departments and agencies that have an interest in a classified document. Those departments or agencies then provide their assessment as to whether the document should stay classified for national security reasons. If there is a dispute among the agencies, they debate, but the president ultimately makes the decision on declassification

 
Last edited:



🤣 And his Jerry Springer IQ followers will suck this shit down.
The orange shit gibbon is a moron.

Really quite simple (minded).

Yes, all of his little MAGAT minions will suck his shit pablum right down their gullets and praise their "stable genius" orange shit gibbon Dear Leader.
 
There doesn't have to be a law to give a President a power. If there is no law against doing something, it can legally be done.

Lol there was a time when you actually were concerned about classified national security info - under Pres Clinton.


Re: How much will you trust a Pres Hillary Clinton with classified nat'l security inf

I had to answer, 100% distrust, because I don't trust her to do ANYTHING in the public's best interest unless she sees a political or personal advantage in doing so. You know...pretty much the way Obama has done for the past 8 years.

In fact, I suppose it's possible there is a Democrat out there...somewhere...who actually cares more about our country than about themselves or their Party, but I haven't heard of him/her yet.

Maybe you should listen to yourself and start caring more about our country than a grifter from NYC - who is no better and deserves no more trust than Ms. Clinton.
 
Since the DOJ can present evidence that he documents are currently marked classified, that the documents are treated as classified by the US Government, that even the FPOTUS team has treated them as classified...

That is prima facie evidence that the documents are classified.

It would be up to the FPOTUS then, as part of an affirmative defense, that he didn't in fact declassify them through oral instructions to subordinates or written documentation. If through verbal instructions, then the DOJ will be able to interview them under oath with penalty of perjury to verify the FPOTUS claim.

I'm perfectly fine with the FPOTUS staff being brought in for questioning and possible future testimony in court under oath as the the veracity of the FPOTUS claims.

You?

WW
I'm perfectly fine with the DOJ filing charges against Trump. Of course, that means they'll have to be able to win a court case. That may be hard to do if they just rely on your opinion.
 
Everything in the EO refers directly to agencies and individuals.
This is a lie.

Did you not read the EO or are you just posting lies about it?

Everything in the EO refers to the classification (or declassification) process of a record/document. Nothing there exempts the President.
Nothing in the EO refers directly to the President.
And nothing there exempts the President.
..except the statement that the President has classification authority.
Right, so Biden now has classification authority. And the entire US government under Biden "thinks" the documents are classified. So if Trump "declassified by thinking", then Biden obviously "reclassified by thinking", which means Trump still was in possession of classified documents.

Which, still, is irrelevant to the larger point which is that Trump stole government documents and lied about it to law enforcement.
 
???

This subject has nothing to do with contracts.

It has to do with legal proceedings in government. The President cannot declassify documents without informing the government entities that control classification and dissemination of those documents.

It’s the same way you can’t make a contract with someone without telling them you did so.
 
There doesn't have to be a law to give a President a power. If there is no law against doing something, it can legally be done.

Please share a link to case law that proves what you said is true for a President.


There are laws that define what is a Presidential record and what is a personal record.
The declassified documents are still Presidential records not personal records.
Read the PRA
 
This is also important...because if Trump says documents can be declassified "with a thought", then they can also be reclassified "with a thought". And since the entire US government "thought" these records classified, they are classified.

BIden Reclassification Meme.jpg
 
Is there a law that says that must happen?

You cannot retroactively classify documents.

If Trump is asked to prove he declassified something in court, he will need evidence.
 
HAHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAH OMG me too!

"I just have to think it and everything is declassified! YEEHA!".

That was so breathtakingly ignorant that even his loyal lapdog Hannity had to put a stop to it.
But what if his mind wanders about Nukes and then he accidentally declassifies them, and I do a FOIIA for them at the same time?
I mean, that is legit, right?
 
Have you bothered to do any research regarding your question?

Why should someone do your homework for you? :giggle:

Trumpers can only argue from ignorance with dishonest questions.
 
Lol there was a time when you actually were concerned about classified national security info - under Pres Clinton.




Maybe you should listen to yourself and start caring more about our country than a grifter from NYC - who is no better and deserves no more trust than Ms. Clinton.
Yes. I certainly had that opinion about a hypothetical President Clinton.

I disagree with your contention that Trump is "no better and deserves no more trust than Ms. Clinton".
 
And I suspect he is waiting for someone to formally dispute his ability to declassify stuff before he proves it.

Nobody in the DOJ has disputed the President's ability to declassify documents.
 
If the Trump team dares present I can just "think" them declassified as proof they were indeed classified then if he is charged they can use it to present an insanity defence!!!!
 
Is he correct? If not, why not?
Surely even you are not that dense. The status of a document is a means by which people know how to handle the document. If a person cannot trust the markings on a document, the classification is meaningless. If Trump declassified a document in secret and told no one, the people who handle such a document have no choice but to handle the document according to its markings. In other words, the document for all purposes is classified according to its markings, regardless of what Trump claims he did secretly.

And remember, the appeals court stated in their opinion and ruling, "the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal."
 
I'm perfectly fine with the DOJ filing charges against Trump. Of course, that means they'll have to be able to win a court case. That may be hard to do if they just rely on your opinion.

Since Trump’s lawyers won’t make the argument that your failed fuhrer made to Sham Hammity , you don’t have a point.

Word salad and grievances on tv aren’t an argument in a court of law.

If you think your beloved fuhrer can imagine declassification and it magically happens, let him come into court and say so.

So far, he hasn’t had the stones to do that. Nor is he going to.
 
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.

I think you mean he is specified as ONE of three primary classification authorities... Since the other classification authorities are required to follow this process, why would the president be exempt? I don't see anywhere in the EO where the classification authority of the president is exempt. Is that exemption somewhere else?

Screen Shot 2022-09-22 at 9.00.00 AM.png
 
Nobody in the DOJ has disputed the President's ability to declassify documents.
They are going to have to if they bring a court case against him.
 
Not sure why anyone is arguing with Mycroft about the classification/declassification issue It is not germane to this case in any manner. It is not part of the criminal charges and at this point, it has been removed as an issue in the SM's work. It is totally irrelevant and as Judge Dearie said...a "red herring".
 
Surely even you are not that dense. The status of a document is a means by which people know how to handle the document. If a person cannot trust the markings on a document, the classification is meaningless. If Trump declassified a document in secret and told no one, the people who handle such a document have no choice but to handle the document according to its markings. In other words, the document for all purposes is classified according to its markings, regardless of what Trump claims he did secretly.

And remember, the appeals court stated in their opinion and ruling, "the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal."
That particular quote from the court doesn't apply to my question. It applies to a different question that the court was considering...which had nothing to do with the process of declassification or whether the President must comply with a process.
 
Back
Top Bottom