Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

Cannon will be the conservatives next SCOTUS pick.

Did you mean to respond to a different post? This is a bit of a non sequitur.

No and it is not a non sequitur.

The quality of the 11th Circuit’s written work has nothing to do with a district court judge’s future career. But I get it, you’re out of your depth and flailing for something to contribute to the discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

It’s fun to frame it that way, but what the 11th Circuit did was judicially prudent because it insulates the ultimate result against an argument by Trump later that DOJ actually did show callous disregard. If your decision can be supported on four grounds, it’s much better to articulate all four so SCOTUS can’t just reverse and remand on one.

But I think there likely is also an element of the 11th Circuit wanting to fully lay out the correct analysis to avoid further gamesmanship by Cannon that forces the appellate court to take it up again when DOJ appeals an obviously wrong decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

The judicial equivalent of dragging the impudent child behind the woodshed.

Anonymous wrote:Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

Cannon will be the conservatives next SCOTUS pick.

Did you mean to respond to a different post? This is a bit of a non sequitur.

No and it is not a non sequitur.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

Cannon will be the conservatives next SCOTUS pick.

Did you mean to respond to a different post? This is a bit of a non sequitur.

Anonymous wrote:Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

Cannon will be the conservatives next SCOTUS pick.

Coming back to last night’s 11th circuit decision, for anyone who’s been kind of following this but is feeling a little lost about exactly what has happened or what the law is here, the decision is worth a reason. It gives a very good summary of the factual and procedural history of this past of the case, and the legal analysis is very clear and well-written. Setting aside the merits themselves, this is exactly how you want a judicial decision to be written, giving enough context to fully understand the issues but cleat and concise about the holdings.

And yes, it’s 29 pages, but those are judicial publication pages so they’re really short.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000

Old enough to remember when Trump “declassified” and and all documents, without redaction, relating to the “Russia Hoax” and the investigation of her emails.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Certifiably insane. He can declassify documents by just thinking about them.

TBH, I think he's right that the president can do that. But he clearly didn't do that while he was president. There's a reason his lawyers have never asserted that in court - they aren't willing to straight-up lie.

You aren't seriously arguing he can say he declassified something because he just thought about it? I mean, come on. The 11th Circuit made it clear today that it's his burden (and anyone else that seeks to say a govt doc was declassified) to prove it. "I thought about it on April 9th" isn't going to cut it.

Anyway, the reason that Presidents have that authority is because we historically haven't elected insane, narcissistic traitors to the office. Now that we have it's time for Congress to step in and impose a process required by law.

If Trump could declassify things silently with his mind while president, then Biden could silently reclassify them with his mind while Trump was licking his wounds at Mar-a-Lago after losing the election.

Trump is the embodiment of narcissism. He has bragged time after time that he has the power to declassify sua sponte. So why should we naively think that he has not exercised this power — at least in his own mind — through the mere the act of removing them to MAL, as he has said repeatedly? Kash Patel likewise has said as much. Trump keeps repeating this because like any narcissist he can’t help himself and doesn’t believe he did anything wrong by sharing the informatuon once the materials were “declassified.” Just as with his sharing a photo of the Iranian launch site. It’s the ultimate tell. There’s no need to “declassify” something unless you plan to use it for some purpose.

Trump is nothing if not transactional. He only does something if it benefits him in some way? Well, it’s not too hard to envision a number of ways the magicsl power to declassify could be used for his benefit. He didn’t want to relinquish control over these materials even after DOJ came to get them pursuant to a grand jury subpoena and allowed one or more of his lawyers to provide a false certification in violation of 18 USC s. 1001.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Certifiably insane. He can declassify documents by just thinking about them.

TBH, I think he's right that the president can do that. But he clearly didn't do that while he was president. There's a reason his lawyers have never asserted that in court - they aren't willing to straight-up lie.

You aren't seriously arguing he can say he declassified something because he just thought about it? I mean, come on. The 11th Circuit made it clear today that it's his burden (and anyone else that seeks to say a govt doc was declassified) to prove it. "I thought about it on April 9th" isn't going to cut it.

Anyway, the reason that Presidents have that authority is because we historically haven't elected insane, narcissistic traitors to the office. Now that we have it's time for Congress to step in and impose a process required by law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that he has blond/yellow hair here. He had tastefully gone silver by the end of his presidency. A stately look. Now he's back to coloring his hair again?

Did he forget that he had gone gray?

He had also gotten a toupee recently, but doesn't seem to be wearing it anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Certifiably insane. He can declassify documents by just thinking about them.

TBH, I think he's right that the president can do that. But he clearly didn't do that while he was president. There's a reason his lawyers have never asserted that in court - they aren't willing to straight-up lie.

That makes no sense. You can’t have the equivalent of double secret declassification. The intelligence community needs to know if a case agent and/or HCS/asset has been compromised. Same for an entire program. Otherwise you would be open to a massive failure of counterintelligence. Not to mention the lives potentially put at risk. Then you have the added wrinkle if the declassification related to an intelligence operation of an ally, or even the nuclear capabilities of an ally. It would be madness. You would have case officers and assets around the world wondering if the mad king burned them.

The president doesn't have unlimited powers but where he does have power, there aren't many checks upon it. The president can declassify documents. He should do it through a formal (or informal) process. But he can show a classified document in a tweet or on tv, if he thinks that's the right thing to do. The idea is that our presidents are men of integrity and perspicacity, so we trust them to do the right thing. Probably he can just decide to declassify a document.

But it's clear that he hasn't done that here because his lawyers have scrupulously avoided saying anything like that to the court. They aren't going to lie about that. And the 11th circuit pointed out that, for the purposes of the warrant, classification or declassification is irrelevant because they're all government documents and do not belong at MAL.

My fear is that the reality is much more serious. It is after all Trump. We are dealing with Trump so we need to contemplate the most batsh1t possibility. Trump believes that he has the unilateral right to declassify — and he may very well, subject to impeachment or the limitation of doing so for a corrupt purpose — as evidenced by the spy satellite photo that he tweeted previously thereby revealing US intelligence capabilities theretofore unknown. So imagine a scenario where Trump, sitting with his dutiful advisor Kash Patel, decides that he’s going to declassify some documents and share them with a foreign leader or, for sh1ts and giggles, someone visiting MAL who happens to be a foreign asset.

Do Trump’s lawyers want to open himself up to a potential espionage charge under Section 794 by opening the door to the world of potential hurt that is magical declassification. As the 11th Circuit notes, DOJ developed evidence that Trump remained in possession of classified documents after (1) Trump turned over the 15 boxes in April and (2) after he turned over the 23 classified documents in the taped Redweld on June 3. Was this evidence derived from an intelligence source as a result of Trump sharing information? Do Trump’s lawyers want to put themselves in the potential position of urging that source at risk? Something scared the sh!t out of the NSD folks at DOJ for them to come at Trump with a warrant following on the heels of a subpoena. Particularly when combined with a pattern of obstruction. DOJ then followed up with two subpoenas for surveillance footage. Was someone of specific interest visiting MAR during these periods? Trump repeatedly lied about the classified documents for a reason while keeping them close at hand in his office and desk drawer.

Anonymous wrote:If he declassified the document, couldn't they be subject to foia?

Not for 6 years.