Reply to Lock him up indictment FL

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Lock him up indictment FL"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I really think many of you are [b]missing[/b] the obstruction. He had ample opportunity to work with NARA to return everything. He purposely mislead everyone. It never had to end this way had he returned everything.[/quote]

[img]https://media.tenor.com/y994phul8ZUAAAAM/office-space-missing.gif[/img]

Joking aside, they aren't [i]missing[/i] the obstruction. They are choosing to willfully ignore it. The truth is that the security powers that be are willing to work with you if you honestly screw up and come to them with a mea culpa. Not only was Trump taking the documents not a screw up, but intentional, he then chose to lie, have others lie on his behalf, and hide them.

People like to point at the Reality Winner case. She's not in jail because she accidentally took a document out of the building that got mixed in her personal stuff. She's in jail because she removed it intentionally.

[/quote]

Reality Winner had no ability to declassify documents. Trump did and no, he doesn’t have to ask permission of anyone to do so.[/quote]

You people have some weird mythology in your heads about "the President can declassify." There's a process for declassifying documents, even for the President.  The process is NOT the President waving his hands and gesturing broadly, saying "I declassify this stuff' or simply willing it to be declassified with his mind.  And if the process isn't followed, there is no way of knowing what is or isn't declassified and it would be chaos.  If the downgrading and declassification process isn't followed  or there is no evidence it was followed then it remains classified.[/quote]

You are incorrect.[/quote]

Nope. There is a legal process for declassification. Please provide a link that shows a president can think it or will it, and it becomes so.[/quote]

Per Constitutional lawyers:

A former president has the legal right to access any and all of the documents created during his presidency, classified or otherwise. The second before a President leaves office, by his very actions alone in taking documents he can be said to have declassified them.

[i]“Therefore, the former president cannot be charged under the Espionage Act of 1917 for this reason and more,” said Levin, who served as chief of state to Attorney General Edwin Meese during the Reagan administration.”[/i]

In addition, Trumps’ lawyers had been in active negotiations regarding the documents, starting only a year after Trump left office. Like with Obama, this kind of back-and-forth is the norm and can go on for years.  And the National Archives is already in possession of the vast majority of documents created during the Trump administration, and the ones at issue are a very relative few, so yes, he has cooperated. Under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, the president is “the executive branch and he’s the commander in chief.”  So Trump is not guilty of violating the Espionage Act, which was invoked in the affidavit to obtain a search warrant. In addition, there are no criminal penalties associated with the Presidential Records Act; that has been cited by the FBI.

Now let’s talk Espionage Act and Clinton: Clinton had classified documents on an unsecured email server at her home in Chappaqua, New York/. Clinton wasn’t president, so she didn’t even have the protections presidents do.

[i]“That violates the Espionage Act,” Levin said of failing to properly secure the documents, some highly classified, from foreign adversaries”. [/i]

[/quote]

Mark Levin is the source of this take? You may as well quote Stephen Miller or Steve Bannon.[/quote]

Can you please tell me what disqualifies Levin in your mind? Not educated enough? Not enough experience? [/quote]

He is misrepresenting the law, as he has done many times before. [/quote]

A tweet from the vaunted Politifact:

[img]https://ibb.co/ry1V3JJ[/img][/quote]

Of course it didn't work. This is DCUM after all.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1667725962778382336

[twitter]https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1667725962778382336[/twitter]

[/quote]

Politifact is quoting what a republican senator said. What is true is that the senator said it. What is also true is that has nothing to do with Trump's indictment, which has nothing to do with the Presidential Records Act.[/quote]

Nice try  :mrgreen: [/quote]

Then please point out what was false.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics