FBI 'raided' Mar-a-Lago

[vita3]

Have to give the ringmasters credit, America is talking about this rather than "our side" Ukraine, shelling Nuclear Power Plant.

HOCUS POCUS BITCHES

 

[acptulsa]

Sounds like that process is typically followed so that Presidents have some guidance when they are declassifying, but it's all an optional step they can take to ensure the agencies have the chance to let them know if they are releasing something that could potentially be harmful, in their opinion.

So, let's declassify something and not tell anyone. Let's keep the fact that it's no longer secret a secret. I can't tell you if it's classified or not because whether it's classified is more classified than it is.

What possible purpose could that serve but entrapment? That, or getting Chinese spies off the hook. Oh, I like this spy for China, so I'll say that hasn't been secret since I was president. But that one never gave me a bribe Christmas present so the fact that the secrets they gave to China aren't secret will remain my little secret.

After all, nothing says Fiscal Responsibility like having thousands of federal employees guarding something they might as well email to Alex Jones.

It's asinine.

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

So, let's declassify something and not tell anyone. Let's keep the fact that it's no longer secret a secret. I can't tell you if it's classified or not because whether it's classified is more classified than it is.

What possible purpose could that serve but entrapment? That, or getting Chinese spies off the hook. Oh, I like this spy for China, so I'll say that hasn't been secret since I was president. But that one never gave me a bribe Christmas present so the fact that the secrets they gave to China aren't secret will remain my little secret.

After all, nothing says Fiscal Responsibility like having thousands of federal employees guarding something they might as well email to Alex Jones.

It's asinine.

At the very least the documents would then have to be stamped with "Declassified" or something similar.

 

[Mach]

The Propaganda Unit



FBI Unit Leading Mar-a-Lago Probe Earlier Ran Discredited Trump-Russia Investigation

https://www.realclearinvestigations...be_previously_led_russiagate_hoax_848582.html

Former federal prosecutor and Trump administration official Kash Patel said the FBI may have a personal interest – and a potential conflict – in seizing the records stored by Trump.

He noted that Trump in October 2020 authorized the declassification of all the investigative records generated from the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane as well as the Clinton email investigation, codenamed "Midyear Exam," and he said that the FBI may have confiscated some of those records in its raid, ensuring they won't be made public. In addition, he said, the agency may be digging for other documents to try to justify, retroactively, their questionable, politically-tinged 2016 opening of the Trump-Russia "collusion" case, which came up embarrassingly short on evidence.

"Tragically, the same FBI characters that were involved in Russiagate are the same counterintel guys running this ‘national security investigation' against Trump," said Patel, who deposed Crossfire Hurricane team members as a former House Intelligence Committee investigator.

Patel noted that the Horowitz report indicated FBI analyst Auten hid exculpatory information about Trump's adviser Page from other investigators and the FISA court, which should be more than enough to keep him at arm's length from other investigations involving Trump.

"And to top it all off, this guy admits [to Horowitz's investigators] he's unrepentant about his role in making up the biggest hoax in election history, and Wray still lets him be a supervisor at the FBI," he said. "It's just insane."

Director Testifies Before Senate Judiciary Committee (over 3 hours long, and says nothing)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPj5yPkXnc&t=9128s

 

[acptulsa]

He noted that Trump in October 2020 authorized the declassification of all the investigative records generated from the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane as well as the Clinton email investigation, codenamed "Midyear Exam," and he said that the FBI may have confiscated some of those records in its raid, ensuring they won't be made public.

That's what you get for promising to drain the swamp, and then going all swampy. He could have released stuff like that. He promised to release stuff like that. Instead, what? He wanted to set up his own blackmail network? He had his chance to cut the puppet strings and put the marionettes in jail, but instead he tried to grab the strings so they'd dance to his tune?

The untouchable Alpha Very Stable Genius overreached, and failed. Not a selling point. Someone who couldn't foresee this move isn't even a competent checkers player.

 

[dannno]

So, let's declassify something and not tell anyone. Let's keep the fact that it's no longer secret a secret. I can't tell you if it's classified or not because whether it's classified is more classified than it is.

What possible purpose could that serve but entrapment? That, or getting Chinese spies off the hook. Oh, I like this spy for China, so I'll say that hasn't been secret since I was president. But that one never gave me a bribe Christmas present so the fact that the secrets they gave to China aren't secret will remain my little secret.

After all, nothing says Fiscal Responsibility like having thousands of federal employees guarding something they might as well email to Alex Jones.

It's asinine.

If you read the article, Trump basically said anything he took to his house was de-facto declassified. So they knew.

 

[dannno]

At the very least the documents would then have to be stamped with "Declassified" or something similar.

Is that in the Constitution somewhere?

 

[Invisible Man]

Is that in the Constitution somewhere?

Don't you think you should answer that first?

Because that is what the Constitution says?

Can you quote the part you are referring to?

 

[acptulsa]

If you read the article, Trump basically said anything he took to his house was de-facto declassified. So they knew.

Oh? So every department with classified materials sent someone to help him pack?

They knew what was carted out was declassified, but they knew not what was carried out. Therefore, they didn't know any of the things I suggested they just might need to know. Einstein.

You're not even trying to think this through. You're just grasping at excuses for your golden calf.

 

[dannno]

Don't you think you should answer that first?

The Constitution gives supreme power to the President since the President is the commander in chief of the military. Classification of documents is related to national security, which is a function of the military.

The President’s authority to classify and control access to information bearing on the national security flows from the Constitution and does not depend upon a legislative grant of authority.

Although I expect to be able to provide the advance notice contemplated by section 8009 in most
situations as a matter of comity, situations may arise in which I must act promptly while protecting
certain extraordinarily sensitive national security information. In these situations, I will treat these
sections in a manner consistent with my constitutional authorities, including as Commander in
Chief.


Statement by President Donald J. Trump on Signing H.R. 244 into Law (May 5, 2017)

The Supreme Court has never directly addressed the extent to which Congress may constrain the executive branch’s power in this area. Citing the President’s constitutional role as Commanderin-Chief, the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated in dicta that “[the President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from
this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit
congressional grant.”

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/secrecy/RS21900.pdf

 

[dannno]

Oh? So every department with classified materials sent someone to help him pack?

They knew what was carted out was declassified, but they knew not what was carried out. Therefore, they didn't know any of the things I suggested they just might need to know. Einstein.

You're not even trying to think this through. You're just grasping at excuses for your golden calf.

No, I'm following the Constitution and allowing the duly elected representative of the people to decide. You are trying to insinuate that un-elected bureaucrats should have more power than an elected official, which is a deep state, leftist talking point.

 

[acptulsa]

No, I'm following the Constitution and allowing the duly elected representative of the people to decide. You are trying to insinuate that un-elected bureaucrats should have more power than an elected official, which is a deep state, leftist talking point.

No, dannno, I'm not. It's a ridiculous straw man.

I'm not questioning whether the president can declassify material, nor whether he (or she) should be able to. I'm merely asking a tree-falls-in-the-woods question. If he declassifies something and doesn't tell anyone, is it declassified?

Do you believe in the rule of law or don't you? I hope you don't go around self-identifying as a libertarian, because you love power much too much. Either everyone in government goes on treating it as secret, which is yet another terrible waste of taxpayer money, or they try to guess what he declassified and let him choose who gets prosecuted or not. Why? Because he's the only person in the world who knows what is, and what is not.

And what about historic research? Yes, you may research this history, and keep the citizenry informed. Only you can't, because no one knows that, and won't let you see it.

There is no other point I can see to secretly making something not secret but to selectively entrap people. None. So, why are you fervently defending Trump's right to engage in entrapment?

Will what you say get him off scot-free in the end? Probably. Does he deserve what he's getting in the meantime? Damned right he does. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

You keep taking contradictory positions in your zeal to defend this clown. He does something you don't like and can't defend? This isn't a one-man government. There are other people who must be considered, purely as a practical matter. He needs to be excused for acting unilaterally when that's clearly inappropriate (again, as a practical matter, because people shouldn't be put in that unjust position)? Suddenly this is a one-man government.

I can't believe you have been here fifteen years and still think we would let you get away with that. Pick a side and stick to it.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

It's unclear whether the President can unilaterally declassify material dealing with nuclear weapons:

For Restricted Data, the power of the president to declassify is even less clear. The updated version of the Atomic Energy Act that is currently on the books has detailed descriptions of how to remove information from the Restricted Data category. That process is initiated by the Department of Energy (as successor to the Atomic Energy Commission), not the president. The only explicit role the president has in this process is that if the Department of Energy and Department of Defense disagree on whether something should be declassified, the president acts as the tie-breaker. The president is given other explicit powers regarding Restricted Data, like the ability to direct the Department of Defense to share it with allied nations under certain circumstances (like planning for mutual defense, such as with NATO), but not declassification. The fact that the law does not explicitly give presidents the power to blanket declassify things, but does give them a role in declassification and other matters regarding Restricted Data, suggests that Congress’s intent was not to allow the president to declassify Restricted Data at will.

Unlike National Defense Information, the procedures for identifying and declassifying Restricted Data are defined in statute, not in executive order. Whatever assumptions one might make about whether presidents need to follow their own executive orders (or the executive orders of previous presidents) or not thus get thrown out the window here as well. That doesn’t totally resolve the constitutional situation: maybe you could try to argue that Congress doesn’t have the power to punish a president for releasing Restricted Data, because that might interfere with his operations as commander-in-chief. Or, one could argue whether the Restricted Data clause is inherently unconstitutional, which as we’ve seen is not a new argument. Either way, it is a different issue at heart with Restricted Data than it is with National Defense Information.

Of course, there may not be any Restricted Data in the documents from Mar-a-Lago. The category of “documents related to nuclear weapons” is vast, and not all such things would necessarily contain Restricted Data. For example, information about the North Korean, Iranian, or Israeli nuclear programs might be classified because of what they reveal about American intelligence sources or foreign intentions, not because they contain “nuclear secrets,” per se. And, of course, there may be no nuclear secrets of any sort in the seized documents at all: the tip might be a false one.

One interesting consequence, though, of Trump’s current defense is that if he did truly declassify these documents, then they ought to be obtainable, at least in part, under the Freedom of Information Act. Are Trump, his lawyers, and his defenders suggesting that these documents should be publishable? That documents that the military, justice, and intelligence communities appear to think are important enough to keep controlled should just be released? (There are potential work-arounds here, like applying controlled-but-unclassified categorizations to them, but that’s another can of worms.)

It does lead to the complicated question of “graymail” though: if Trump were to be prosecuted for these documents, and did claim that he had declassified them, and was successful in this claim, would this not mean the documents were truly declassified and thus could be compelled to release? Depending on the sensitivity of the documents, would that be enough to convince the government to avoid prosecution by itself? Without knowing more about the contents of the documents, this is all very idle speculation, but they do raise a lot of genuinely thorny and genuinely novel legal problems.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-trump-just-declare-nuclear-secrets-unclassified

The term "Restricted Data" refers to all data concerning the manufacture or utilization of atomic weapons, the production of fissionable material, or the use of fissionable material in the production of power. The referenced article discusses certain issues with the scope of this definition.

 

[acptulsa]

It's unclear whether the President can unilaterally declassify material dealing with nuclear weapons:


https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-trump-just-declare-nuclear-secrets-unclassified

The term "Restricted Data" refers to all data concerning the manufacture or utilization of atomic weapons, the production of fissionable material, or the use of fissionable material in the production of power. The referenced article discusses certain issues with the scope of this definition.

These apologists don't seem to care about Congress. They don't even adhere to Nixon's, "If the president does it, then it's not illegal.". They figure that does apply, but only to Republican presidents.

 

[TheTexan]

These apologists don't seem to care about Congress. They don't even adhere to Nixon's, "If the president does it, then it's not illegal.". They figure that does apply, but only to Republican presidents.

Has anyone's home ever been raided over possession of classified material? President or otherwise.

 

[Ender]

Have to give the ringmasters credit, America is talking about this rather than "our side" Ukraine, shelling Nuclear Power Plant.

HOCUS POCUS BITCHES

Yep- just more Kabuki Theatre to keep your eye off what's really going on.

 

[dannno]

I'm not questioning whether the president can declassify material, nor whether he (or she) should be able to. I'm merely asking a tree-falls-in-the-woods question. If he declassifies something and doesn't tell anyone, is it declassified?

Trump didn't do that, but yes, he could. He said anything he took to his house was de-facto declassified. So he told people. But he didn't even have to do that. He went above an beyond what was required.

Patel told Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that, as president, Trump had the power to "literally stand over a set of documents and say, 'These are now declassified,'" as can be seen in a clip shared by Mediaite.

"This is a key fact that most Americans are missing: President Trump, as a sitting president, is a unilateral authority for declassification," Patel said.

In other words, if anybody has any question as to whether something was declassified or not, one simply only needs to ask Trump himself.

 

[acptulsa]

 

[Invisible Man]

In other words, if anybody has any question as to whether something was declassified or not, one simply only needs to ask Trump himself.

Trump is no longer president, so he no longer has the authority to declassify anything. So he would have to claim that he declassified them when he was president. But he could just lie about that, unless declassifying things involves more than just some former president claiming that he declassified things back when he was president without telling anyone.

 

[acptulsa]

Yeah, good luck.

Ever see Inherit the Wind?

Matthew Harrison Brady:
I do not think about things I do not think about.

Henry Drummond:
Do you ever think about things that you do think about?