FBI 'raided' Mar-a-Lago

Here you go.

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.go...rder-classified-national-security-information

Declassifying documents involves a lot more than just somebody who has the authority to declassify them deciding to treat them like they're not classified anymore without telling anyone they're going to do that.

Unless Trump himself ever overrode this executive order. I'm pretty sure he didn't, or that fact would be an important aspect of this story. And if he chose not to, then that's on him.

For the record, this was an aside.

However, you're gonna have to do better than an Obama WH website citation to prove to me that a president cannot de facto declassify records a la carte, which frankly makes sense in your convoluted statist paradigm. Why couldn't/shouldn't a president have final authority to de/classify state secrets? One could conceive of myriad situations in which it makes sense for a head of state to declassify state secrets...
 
For the record, this was an aside.

However, you're gonna have to do better than an Obama WH website citation to prove to me that a president cannot de facto declassify records a la carte, which frankly makes sense in your convoluted statist paradigm.

Can you please quote me saying anything indicating I had a statist paradigm?

Why couldn't/shouldn't a president have final authority to de/classify state secrets? One could conceive of myriad situations in which it makes sense for a head of state to declassify state secrets...

At no point in this conversation has anybody suggested that a president doesn't have that authority. The question is whether or not it is a fact that Trump had actually declassified all of the classified documents that he had at his house. If he had not declassified them when he was president, then it's not something he would still have the authority to do at a later point when he no longer is.
 
Last edited:
And yet we again return to the unanswered question as to what differentiates HRC's crimes from DJT's. Thank you for citing chapter and verse, reverend. You still haven't answered the actual question, however.

You asked me why the two cases were treated differently, and I gave you my best answer. You didn't ask what the differences in the crimes were. To opine on that I'd need to review what HRC actually did and research the statutes that HRC allegedly violated, something I don't have time to do right now.

Please understand, I'm no fan of HRC; she's despicable.
 
Interesting case from Tucker's monologue of Douglas Mackey. Arrested for being a far-right twitter troll lol. Facing ten years in prison for a tweet
 
Last edited:
45B4C855-49B6-4BB0-A0B0-6AD4B2B6E4A3.webp
 
Yes but @Swordsmyth (even though Trump and the Clintons were life-long friends) Congress, Antifa, FBI, etc. etc. etc. "wouldn't let him". Any good Trumpsupporter knows that.
We have it well documented that his cabinet members (who had to be approved by the Senate) thwarted him at every turn on issues far less sensitive than the Clintons.
To even suggest that the "independent" DoJ would have prosecuted her on his orders is a joke.
The entire swamp has to be drained and he is making lots of progress on that already.
 
That Southern DC Senator Trump appointed as first Attorney General was a real go getter on DC Crime


Oh wait, no he wasn’t!

Hoodwinked again & again
 
Jeff Sessions!

Served 20 years as Senator before Trump hired him to clean up DC

Hoodwinked
 
"YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice #220: Robert Barnes
Michael Malice (“YOUR WELCOME”) invites constitutional and civil rights lawyer, Robert Barnes, onto the show to discuss the FBI raid at Mar-a-Lago, the “strange” names associated with the raid, and Trump’s reaction to it all. Robert also gives us his legal insight into the Alex Jones trial, and the Orwellian nature of it all.
https://odysee.com/@MichaelMalice:6/your-welcome-with-michael-malice-220:9

//
 
Maybe Trump could name Mitt Romney as his clean up the swamp Attorney General if elected again.

Not exactly the GO-GETTER PROSECUTER 20 year Senator JEff Session was, but will surely get results!!!!

:sarcasm:
 
We have it well documented that his cabinet members (who had to be approved by the Senate) thwarted him at every turn on issues far less sensitive than the Clintons.
To even suggest that the "independent" DoJ would have prosecuted her on his orders is a joke.
The entire swamp has to be drained and he is making lots of progress on that already.
Even those not requiring Senate (McConnell) consent required FBI (Swamp) consent as this comment from another site demonstrates:

There’s a great (but long) article at CTH that explains the importance to the un-elected cabal (aka invisible government) of controlling the FBI.
Other than the obvious favoritism of RATS and persecution of MAGA, the FBI is in charge of all security clearances.
This gives them the power, over time, to fully populate almost every agency with their puppets.
Many of President Trump’s nominees were blocked in this fashion; but this has been going on a long time.
The article also pinpoints a key victory of the invisible government in setting up “Intelligence agencies” as a 4th branch of government was the Patriot Act ... orchestrated largely by Dick Cheney in the aftermath of a certain VERY LARGE FALSE FLAG.
https://theconservativetreehouse.co...raid-on-trump-the-story-behind-the-documents/

The only exception is the military.
 
This sounds like one of those stories where the content 'pretty much' doesn't match the headline.

https://www.businessinsider.com/tru...eclassify-documents-is-bs-leon-panetta-2022-8

Former CIA director says Trump ally's claim that he could instantly declassify documents is 'pretty much BS'
Aug 16, 2022

The former CIA director dismissed a claim by a Donald Trump ally that the former president had the power to instantly declassify government documents, calling it "pretty much BS."


Leon Panetta, who served as the defense secretary and CIA Director under the Obama administration, told CNN's Jake Tapper on Monday that there is a process for declassifying confidential government information and requires other agencies to sign off on it.


"If presidents want to declassify, they have to follow that process which basically requires that it be referred to the agencies that are responsible for classifying that material," Panetta told CNN. "They have something to say as to whether or not that material should be declassified."


"So there is nothing that I'm aware of that indicates that a formal step was taken by this president to, in fact, declassify anything. Right now, this is pretty much BS," he added.


Panetta's comments came after Kash Patel, a former Pentagon official under Trump, claimed that Trump had declassified all the documents he took to Mar-a-Lago.

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.


FBI agents seized about 20 boxes from Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida during their raid last week, including 11 sets of marked top-secret documents that were designated to remain only in a secure government facility.


Trump previously argued that while he was president, he had a "standing order that documents removed from the Oval Office taken to the residence were deemed to be declassified," according to a statement read out on Fox News on Friday.

But there is no evidence he followed procedure to do so.


According to The New York Times, "original classification authorities" in federal departments and agencies have the power to classify and declassify information.


While presidents can declassify documents without having to go to other government authorities for approval, this is very rare, The Times reported.


Representatives for Trump did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.


"They [agencies] have something to say"

"There is a process"

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.

The Times and Panetta are trying to make people think that this procedure is required using weasel words like "pretty much" and "rarely".
 
Back
Top