Trump: I could declassify documents by thinking about it

[anatta]

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".

Can presidents declassify matters directly?​

Yes, because it is ultimately their constitutional authority.

Normally, presidents who want something declassified direct subordinates overseeing the department or agency with primary responsibility for the information to review the matter with an eye to making more of it public. But on rare occasions, presidents declassify something directly.

Presidential Power to Declassify Information, Explained

In an interview, Mr. Trump again insisted that “I declassified everything.” He added that as president, “you can declassify just by saying ‘it’s declassified’ — even by thinking about it.”

www.nytimes.com

 

[anatta]

Clinton was being investigated for mishandling of classified information under 18USC Section 1924. Not 793(f). How many times do you people need to be told this before it finally sinks in?

When Comey announced the decision to not bring charges against Clinton in July 2016 — shortly after Clinton had secured the Democratic nomination to run for president against Donald Trump — he said agents decided not to pursue criminal charges under the statute because they could not prove she intended to violate laws like the Espionage Act.

Early Comey draft accused Clinton of gross negligence on emails

An early draft of former FBI Director James Comey’s statement closing out the Hillary Clinton email case accused the former secretary of State of having been “grossly negligent” in handling classif…

thehill.com

 

[Atomic Kid]

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.

It IS obvious. Trump is the plaintiff here. It's up to him to provide the proof. The Special Master even reminded Trump's counsel of this obligation.

 

[mike2810]

Can presidents declassify matters directly?​

Yes, because it is ultimately their constitutional authority.

Normally, presidents who want something declassified direct subordinates overseeing the department or agency with primary responsibility for the information to review the matter with an eye to making more of it public. But on rare occasions, presidents declassify something directly.

Presidential Power to Declassify Information, Explained

In an interview, Mr. Trump again insisted that “I declassified everything.” He added that as president, “you can declassify just by saying ‘it’s declassified’ — even by thinking about it.”

www.nytimes.com

Why doesn't FPOTUS Trump tell what documents he took. He could tell at least the subject matter without giving specifics. On the other hand, if he did "declassify" the documents then why not just tell what he took.

 

[pamak]

.

I don't accept your assertion that the issue is not changed. The issue is, as I see it, clearly different. That being the case, the ruling would not be expected to contain quotes that support Trump's position, as it is irrelevant to it.

How you see things is different from how the court sees things.
So, again, feel free to point the quotes which show that the court's view of how documents are declassified are specific to that case only.

On the contrary, if you actually read the court decision, you will realize that while the NYT makes specifics arguments regarding why there is declassification of specific information as a result of the president's public comments at the time, the court counterpoints are broader and go beyond the details of that particular case.

For example, page 28 says

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

To make its declassification claim, the Times essentially recasts its “official acknowledgement” claim as one of “inferred declassification.” To prevail in any claim of declassification, inferred or otherwise, the Times’s must show: first, that President Trump’s statements are sufficiently specific; and second, that such statements subsequently triggered actual declassification. The first is easily disposed of because we have already found that the statements are insufficiently specific to quell any “lingering doubts” about what they 1 reference.

So, while the NYT makes a declassification claim based on the particulars of the case to argue that there was an "inferred declassification", the court's answers is broad and addresses ANY claim of declassification including in cases in where the claim of declassification has the form of an "official acknowledgment" and is not simply inferred by what a president has said in public. So, the court's view about the requirements of declassification is broader and includes the case we have today.

Notice also that according to the court's view ANY declassification claim based on presidential public statements must show TWO things:

1 That the statement is sufficiently specific

2 That such statement actually triggered declassification.

We have not seen anything up until now to suggest that Trump's statements triggered any declassification. Notice also that his statements are not sufficiently specific because he cannot even articulate WHICH documents he declassified!

 

[Atomic Kid]

When Comey announced the decision to not bring charges against Clinton in July 2016 — shortly after Clinton had secured the Democratic nomination to run for president against Donald Trump — he said agents decided not to pursue criminal charges under the statute because they could not prove she intended to violate laws like the Espionage Act. There is no mention of 793 (f) anywhere.

Early Comey draft accused Clinton of gross negligence on emails

An early draft of former FBI Director James Comey’s statement closing out the Hillary Clinton email case accused the former secretary of State of having been “grossly negligent” in handling classif…

thehill.com

Read it again more slowly. There's a couple of key words in there you are totally missing. And another thing is unlike Citizen Trump, Secretary of State Clinton had the proper security clearances to possess classified material.

 

[Tbird19482]

I love that right wingers want to pretend they believe “the president can do things telepathically without telling anyone and this cannot be challenged” is a reasonable thing that should hold up in court while also calling themselves a party of “small government.”

They keep crying but Clinton, Clinton, well what would they say IF Obama said I remember declassifying all those documents in my mind years ago,
IF it is good enough for Trump to do it is good enough for Obama to do and they will have to find something else to cry about,
Have a nice day

 

[Ishm]

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

How do you rate the empty folders that once contained classified documents? Isn't there going to be an argument for gross negligence if those documents have 'dissappeared'? Maybe even a reasonable suggestion of espionage if the documents can't be found in Trumps possession? Trump is definitely more a financially troubled narcissist than patriot, so it's not a crazy question.

 

[trouble13]

It doesn't matter if they are classified or not. They aren't his. End of story

Of course it matters. If Trump is correct. The government is spreading false information.

 

[pamak]

Can presidents declassify matters directly?​

Yes, because it is ultimately their constitutional authority.

Normally, presidents who want something declassified direct subordinates overseeing the department or agency with primary responsibility for the information to review the matter with an eye to making more of it public. But on rare occasions, presidents declassify something directly.

Presidential Power to Declassify Information, Explained

In an interview, Mr. Trump again insisted that “I declassified everything.” He added that as president, “you can declassify just by saying ‘it’s declassified’ — even by thinking about it.”

www.nytimes.com

Normally, subordinates are authorized to make declassification decisions but on rare occasions presidents declassify info directly. HOWEVER, in both cases it is some subordinates who execute the details that the declassification process requires. A president will not spend his time doing things like finding all the copies that have the declassified information or stamp files with the appropriate markings. In any case, a declassification decision by a president, Intelligence Director or other officials WILL trigger a process of declassification which will be carried out by lower level employees!

 

[uptower]

Normally, subordinates are authorized to make declassification decisions but on rare occasions presidents declassify info directly. HOWEVER, in both cases it is some subordinates who execute the details that the declassification process requires. A president will not spend his time doing things like finding all the copies that have the declassified information or stamp files with the appropriate markings. In any case, a declassification decision by a president, Intelligence Director or other officials WILL trigger a process of declassification which will be carried on by lower level employees!

And what we're missing is the process. All trump did is - after he got caught with the docs - claim that he declassified them back in the day. A little late for that.

 

[Michael Cole]

Of course it matters. If Trump is correct. The government is spreading false information.

Yes, and he's still POTUS. And Obama was born in Kenya. And Mexico is paying for a wall. And a big beautiful health care plan. And infrastructure week. And...

 

[uptower]

Can presidents declassify matters directly?​

Yes, because it is ultimately their constitutional authority.

Normally, presidents who want something declassified direct subordinates overseeing the department or agency with primary responsibility for the information to review the matter with an eye to making more of it public. But on rare occasions, presidents declassify something directly.

Presidential Power to Declassify Information, Explained

In an interview, Mr. Trump again insisted that “I declassified everything.” He added that as president, “you can declassify just by saying ‘it’s declassified’ — even by thinking about it.”

www.nytimes.com

They can. There is a process. Trump didn't.

 

[uptower]

 

[pamak]

And what we're missing is the process. All trump did is - after he got caught with the docs - claim that he declassified them back in the day. A little late for that.

At the end of the day, Trump's supporters try to argue that because a president is not limited by a specific procedure of issuing his declassification order, he can declassify things without any proof/record that he issued any order at all!

It does not work that way! The lack of process is proof beyond reasonable doubt that Trump never issued such a declassification order.
Even if Trump wanted to issue his declassification order written on a used piece of toilet paper, such choice would have STILL triggered a declassification process that would have ended-up with appropriately stamped declassified files!

 

[uptower]

The lack of process is the proof that an order was never issued. Even if Trump wanted to issue his declassification orders written on a used piece of toilet paper, such choice would have STILL triggered a declassification process and would have ended-up with appropriately stamped declassified files!

This.

 

[pamak]

This.

I edited the post and changed it to "proof beyond reasonable doubt."

 

[uptower]

 

[mike2810]

Of course it matters. If Trump is correct. The government is spreading false information.

and IF Trump is incorrect. Trump is spreading false information.

Let me ask you a personal opinion.
Is it good management practice to declassify material and tell no one that the material has been declassified?

Still waiting for Trump to produce one witness that will back up his claim he "declassified" all the documents at MAL that were classified.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I am not a lawyer but come from a family full of 'em. Most are civil, but one cousin's a prosecutor and have another cousin who's an adrenaline junkie and does criminal defense. She has humbled hardcore thugs by explaining in rather salty language that if they don't do it her way, they'll be incarcerated until they're a senior citizen. That usually gets their attention.

Very few criminals come from what could be loosely described as "the well educated, sophisticated, highly intelligent class" (and most of the ones who do don't get caught), so it is often necessary to 'splain thins' in a manner that they actually don't filter out as "snob noise".

As I once had to explain to one of my clients (who happened to be a rather ranking Hell's Angel) "If I hire you to ___ because I know that you are good at it and I don't know how, I don't tell you how to ___. You are hiring me to ___ because you know that I am good at it and you don't know how. Why would you think that you should tell me how to ___?". (That, of course, is a variation on the conversation that a coronet player I knew had with a "biker". My friend had just come out of the bar where his touring band had played a set for drinks and the "biker" said [something like] "Gimme your horn.". My friend replied "I don't f___ with your bike, you don't f___ with my horn." and the "biker" replied [something like] "Riiiigggghhhht." before wandering off.)

We got along famously (on a lawyer-client basis) after that.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

How do you rate the empty folders that once contained classified documents? Isn't there going to be an argument for gross negligence if those documents have 'dissappeared'? Maybe even a reasonable suggestion of espionage if the documents can't be found in Trumps possession? Trump is definitely more a financially troubled narcissist than patriot, so it's not a crazy question.

Those empty folders are sort of interesting.

If they were full when Mr. Trump appropriated them, where did the contents of the folders go?

If they were empty, what reason did Mr. Trump have for stealing US government property?

 

[trouble13]

and IF Trump is incorrect. Trump is spreading false information.

Let me ask you a personal opinion.
Is it good management practice to declassify material and tell no one that the material has been declassified?

Still waiting for Trump to produce one witness that will back up his claim he "declassified" all the documents at MAL that were classified.

What I think does not matter. What can be proved is what matters.

Personally I think both Trump and the government are both full of shit. I do not believe Trump declassified anything and I do not believe the FBI had sufficient cause to search his home.

 

[Anthony60]

I'd turn it around. If all he did was declassify the information and the document in his mind, how in the hell can that possibly DO anything legally? No one knows the content is declassified, no one changes a marking, no one behind him knows of this change, everyone in the world goes on as if nothing happened, because from everyone in the world's perspective but Trump's nothing DID happen.

I get that you don't like Trump, and don't like anything he does. That doesn't change the Constitution.

And we're now talking 20 months, at least, after the thought happened, and Trump is NOT POTUS ANYMORE. The current executive isn't informed of this act, so they are protecting the information as the classification and the content demands. The idea that his THOUGHT on Jan 18th 2021 somehow effectively did anything that Biden must respect is just frankly absurd.

He was POTUS when the documents were moved, like every other FPOTUS.

He can declassify it in his mind....then go on Hannity and blurt it out, but that act of blurting it out on national TV is the act that declassified the info, not Trump thinking about it on the toilet as he's getting ready for the interview. If he thinks, "I declassify the name of our Putin mole!!!!" on the toilet, then never tells anyone as POTUS, then that information is now and has always been classified, NDI, and if he as not-POTUS blurts it out, he's ****ed.

If that's the way it works, you can make up any absurd scenario you want.

 

[Anthony60]

What record is there?

Can you imagine the implications of a POTUS having such unilaterally imagined non documented powers? Don't even know how to refer to the ludicrous power he thinks he has. Because it is beyond belief .

That's not relevant, sorry.

 

[Anthony60]

The law, that's what-and especially when it comes to declassifying anything related to nuclear technology secrets, Restricted Data (RD) and Formerly Restricted Data (FRD). Only trained officials of the DoE may declassify. Trump is neither trained in this nor is/was he a DoE official who must be the original classifier in order to qualify.

Sorry, laws can't supersede the Constitution.