NDI is defined as information 1) the release of which would damage national security, 2) that is related to the military or national security, and 3) is closely held. Information is classified when an authorized government official determines it has the potential to cause damage to national security, and when it is classified there are controls on its disclosure. Information can be declassified when an authorized government official determines it no longer has the potential to cause damage to national security and once it is declassified the rules about disclosure go away. So if Trump as president really declassified these docs (he didn't), then he could claim they are not NDI because he, as president and an authorized government official, determined they would not harm national security and by declassifying them he removed the administrative controls on their disclosure. |
Judge Dearie's (No BS) Case Management Plan - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.106.0.pdf
Poor Donald, I think he's not going to be able to wiggle out of this one. |
Love. It. Dearie isn’t pleased with all of the yapping about. If you’re going to accuse the FBI of planting evidence perhaps have some evidence of your own before you start insinuating as much. Your statements can and will be used against you and all that! |
Ouch. That's rough. |
This is awesome. He's specifically directing Trump to submit declarations stating: 1) whether the documents were in fact seized from MAL and if they were located in a place other than where the USG says they were, and 2) whether each document is a Presidential Record (i.e. belongs to the USG) or is personal. Essentially, he has to declare in a sworn statement whether he illegally had government records at MAL. That seems bad for him. |
So can judge cannon have him taken off? |
Thank you! Yes, this. TFG divulged information damaging to the US national security to someone hostile to our interests. That had to have happened, but to whom and how to prove it? |
Yes, I understand your point, but if you can prove that, despite his declassification, the information in the documents he disclosed is actually damaging to national security, wouldn't his disclosure then be illegal? |
NP. You are Deliberately obtuse. I believe the purpose of the Political forum is intelligent discourse to which you have made no contribution. The information you demand is easily available in the Internet. |
Your Honor, I invoke my Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate myself.... |
We joke, but I think there is a very good chance he just does a peace out on the whole special master at this point. It was only good as a delay tactic, and it doesn't delay much now that DOJ is allowed to use the classified docs, which are by far the most important evidence for them. There is probably some other relevant stuff in the rest, but it's likely only tangential. And now Dearie is saying there's going to be a cost to Trump if wants to use this process. |
Is that possible? Can they just say "uh, nevermind"?
|
Sure, if he decides not to seek the return of any of the seized materials and to concede that the government properly seized them. But if he walks away from this proceeding and then tries to seek return of the materials at another time, he likely would be deemed to have waived the argument. |
It is not, because it doesn't exist. |
Your dumb defense is no defense. If Trump thinks he could mentally declassify a bunch of boxes of documents full of sensitive national security information and not notify anyone in the appropriate agencies, that would be ten times worse than just taking the boxes to MAL. |