The DOJ has said this investigation is in its early stages from the day of the search warrant being served but the trumpanzees having been too busy flinging poo to notice...
So….about those nuclear classified docs
- Thread starter jfegaly
- Start date
So, make up your mind. Do classified docs matter or not. Your last paragraph indicates you think they do. You previous paragraphs indicate they don’t. Pick one and stick with it, otherwise you’re just slinging mud.
Which is what they’re doing. You’re the sheep here
And just like that. The DOJ argument gets gutted. Sleep well little dickey
publicity stunt. Always has been. In other news. Biden us still sitting at 38 percent approval
Nope....you just have a comprehension problem
Classification doesn't matter for the 3 charges underlying the search warrant for Mar-A-Lago
Here's why your twitter link is completely 100% bogus
You should read the ENTIRE article but we understand that might be too much for you so I've linked the relevant section to address your confusion
https://www.lawfareblog.com/does-it-matter-what-if-anything-trump-declassified
Does It Matter What (If Anything) Trump Declassified?
By Scott R. Anderson Tuesday, August 16, 2022, 9:29 AM
Does Classification Even Matter?
All that said, there is an even more fundamental reason why Trump’s claims of declassification are likely to fall short as a legal defense. While there are criminal statutes that hinge on classification, they aren’t among the criminal offenses that the FBI included on the search warrant. To the contrary, all three of the criminal provisions that the FBI did list can be—and two routinely are—applied to misconduct that has absolutely nothing to do with classified information, making it unclear whether Trump’s claims of declassification would make any difference even if true.
The first provision listed, 18 U.S.C. § 1519, is an obstruction of justice provision that makes it a crime to knowingly alter, conceal, destroy, or falsify “any record, document, or tangible object[,]” so long as it’s done with the intent to impede or influence a federal investigation or other process. It’s unclear whether the Justice Department included § 1519 on the search warrant because it believes records held at Mar-a-Lago have been concealed or manipulated in violation of § 1519, or because members of Trump’s team may have generated false records as part of the extended negotiations over the retrieval of those records (such as the inventory that one or more of Trump’s lawyers reportedly signed in June 2022 asserting, incorrectly, that all classified documents had been turned over). Either way, whether the records held at Mar-a-Lago are classified or not is irrelevant, as the Justice Department routinely brings successful § 1519 charges in relation to records that are entirely unclassified, such as police reports and records of maritime waste disposal.
The second provision, 18 U.S.C. § 2071, similarly applies to any effort to willfully and unlawfully conceal, mutilate, or destroy “any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing” that is “filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States[.]” This language has been understood to cover efforts to conceal or destroy just about any sort of public record for well over a century. Consistent with this view, the Justice Department has described § 2071 as “a broad prohibition” covering “acts [that] involve either misappropriation of or damage to public records” without regard to whether they are classified and has successfully brought charges in relation to unclassified records ranging from Selective Service records to military flight logs.
Only the third criminal provision identified in the warrant, 18 U.S.C. § 793, is frequently associated with classified information. Enacted as part of the controversial Espionage Act, § 793 consists of several subsections that might be relevant to the materials recovered from Mar-a-Lago. The two most likely candidates—subsections (d) and (e)—prohibit individuals from unlawfully retaining or providing third parties with “any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation[.]” This universe of protected information is commonly referred to as “national defense information.”
This definition omits any discussion of classified information in part because it predates the modern classification system by several decades. That said, the mainstream view (over some dissent) is that it effectively encompasses most if not all properly classified information, as classification similarly applies to foreign relations and national security-related information that “reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security” if disclosed. Yet national defense information can include unclassified information as well. The only requirement is that it relate to the “national defense,” which the Supreme Court has described as “a generic concept of broad connotations, referring to the military and naval establishments and the related activities of national preparedness.”
This does not, however, mean that classification is entirely irrelevant to § 793 prosecutions. To secure a conviction under § 793, a prosecutor must show that a defendant deliberately disclosed or retained information relating to the national defense that they had “reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation[.]” This is relatively easy when a defendant knowingly discloses or retains classified information, as the fact that the information is labeled as classified shows that the defendant knew that it relates to national security and that U.S. officials believe its disclosure could harm the United States. In other words, § 793 is easier to apply to the mishandling of classified as opposed to unclassified information because the fact that the mishandled information is classified makes it easier to show the defendant had the requisite knowledge and intent. No doubt this is why most recent prosecutions under § 793 have involved classified information, though some have included charges relating at least in part to nonpublic unclassified national defense information as well.
This context helps to put the limited utility of Trump’s declassification defense into clearer perspective. It can be inferred that whoever was aware of the documents held at Mar-a-Lago knew that they were in possession of documents containing sensitive national security information whose disclosure might injure the United States by virtue of the fact that the documents were still labeled as classified and the FBI had told them that the federal government still considered those labels to be warranted. The fact that Trump may have reached a contrary conclusion and declassified them at some earlier point while president doesn’t render this inference invalid, especially as his views were expressly contradicted by those of the incumbent Biden administration. Even Trump himself would have had “reason to believe” that the information contained in the records at Mar-a-Lago “could be used to the injury of the United States” by virtue of the Biden administration’s stated concerns.
This is especially true in light of what Trump’s own statement says about his purported declassification order. Classified information can generally be declassified either because it is no longer eligible for classification because its disclosure no longer threatens national security or because other public interests favoring disclosure outweigh the need for secrecy. Trump’s justification for declassification—that he wanted to be able to work on the documents containing classified information from home—has absolutely nothing to do with the substance of the information itself and thus can only be understood as a generous application of the public interest standard. Indeed, Trump does not even claim to have even done any sort of assessment of the information before bringing it home, as would be necessary to determine if it were no longer eligible for classification. No one aware of this process—including Trump himself—could reasonably conclude that his declassification had any bearing on the preexisting assessment that disclosure of the information could harm national security, which is what § 793 is ultimately concerned with.
None of this means a criminal case against Trump or his associates is likely to be open and shut. If the Justice Department ever brings charges, their success will hinge on an array of specific facts relating to the underlying documents and how they were handled that are not currently known to the public. But at least under the three provisions that the FBI currently considers to be relevant to the case, the question of whether Trump declassified the documents at issue doesn’t seriously enter into the equation.
Last edited:
After reading the REAL explanation of the laws regarding the search you realize this guy is either (1) clueless (2) lying....and/or both
BTW - the Commander-in-Chief clause has nothing to do with the events @ Mar-A-Lago and the Presidential Records Act supports the DOJ/FBI actions in this case
Anybody who knows anything about the Presidential Records Act wouldn't claim what's in that guy's tweet
Last edited:
Thank God. You have finally made up ypur mind. So….just so we have a clear point to debate here. No charges or No investigation on breaking any law of having classified documents at his home. Correct?
I want to make sure we lock this in, just like we locked in our ban bet you lost.
agreed?
@BSC911 in coming in 3, 2, 1
Yes. Ray knows more than a former supreme court law clerk. Yep.
I don’t think you know how to interpret what you posted, and then what this supreme court law clerk countered with.
He literally gutted your 25 paragraph statute posting with Three simple bullet points.
Says the guy who is constantly trying to confirm what this retard says:
Pedo @RayGravesGhost eats this shit up, hook line and sinker.
Pedo ray, please shoot a 5.56 round in a .22 LR. Please report back with your ballistic testing.
Pedo ray, please shoot a 5.56 round in a .22 LR. Please report back with your ballistic testing.
@Sunburnt Indian has warned us over and over, on this board we have the dumbest trolls on the internet. 😂
What’s funny is that even politico says the espionage act charge is Bogus. Little dickey has TDS so bad, that he won’t even listen to his own liberal bretheren.
I would hope when this is all said and done, he stops posting here and apologizes… who am I kidding, shit eater provides A level comedy daily and he can’t help himself.
It's actually sad, just like our long time Soy Boy. We don't need a forum of Jerry Lewis Telethon recipients.I would hope when this is all said and done, he stops posting here and apologizes… who am I kidding, shit eater provides A level comedy daily and he can’t help himself.
Agreed on what?
You think that additional charges can't be added as the investigation continues?
You must really be dumb to think that.
Read & try to understand...
The 3 charges that supported the probable cause to search Mar-A-Lago don't involve whether or not the documents found to be classified or declassified
Has he or hasn’t he been charged?
He is literally retarded. One minute he says one thing, the next it’s another.
There is a reason he got smoked on our ban bet.
LOL...that guy is like the 40 year old virgin of law clerks
Most people are law clerks EARLY in their career...this guy came out of the "minors"
as a old man
The senior aged "clerk" is wrong 🤣
Fantastic. So, having classified docs at his home is a nothingburger or else that would have already been a charge. So, the photos they released were nothing more than a media stunt. Cool, glad we agree on that, and don’t worry, I can pull receipts up at any time.
Moving on. Your friends at Politico already dismissed the espionage act as being BS. So now, that leaves 2 items left to mop you up with.
Ready?
Yes, a liberal law blog, where lawyers have time to write blogs because they have no clients is the place to get reliable infirmation.
ummmm. Do you pay attention to what you write, or does licking windows interrupt that process?
You were the one mentioning “additional charges”.
Bill was trying to help our little bus rider
No stupid...its not a nothing burger (even though you're hoping/praying that it is)
It has nothing to do with searching Mar-A-Lago
You think if they searched Mar-A-Lago for documents and found evidence of other crimes trump wouldn't be liable for those?
Jesus you're dumb 🤣
LOL...Now Politico is your bible for the truth? 🤣
Do you truly think these allegations will be the smoking gun that finally gets Trump? Do you really believe this?
How do you see this playing out? Do you truly believe it ends with him in an orange jumpsuit?
Let’s say he doesn’t, he does no time, and gets a slap on the wrist?
Will this be the defining moment where you realize that all of your posts, fake news, mumbo jumbo was all a waste of time?
What then @RayGravesGhost
Anderson's legal career is more prestigious than the 40 year old clerk and his clerk background is too...
Anderson clerked at an appropriate age for the DC Circuit Court
(2nd highest court in the land)
Scott R. Anderson is a Visiting Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, where he was previously a David M. Rubenstein Fellow. He is also a Senior Editor and Counsel for Lawfare and a Senior Fellow with the National Security Law Program at Columbia Law School.
A former U.S. diplomat and government attorney, Mr. Anderson is an expert in foreign relations law, international law, and national security law and policy, particularly as they relate to the Middle East region. In addition to being a regular contributor to Lawfare and the Lawfare podcast, he has written on related issues for numerous publications, including Defense One, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Texas National Security Review, The Hill, and The Washington Post. He has appeared on a range of national and international television and radio broadcasts, including Al Jazeera English, BBC, CBS News, CNN, Fox News, and NPR, and his analysis and commentary have frequently been cited in the print media, including by the Associated Press, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post. He has been a policy advisor for national political campaigns and has served as a consultant and expert witness in litigation matters. In addition, he has taught at both the Georgetown University Law Center and Columbia Law School.
Mr. Anderson previously served as an attorney-adviser for the U.S. Department of State and as the legal adviser for the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq. In these capacities, he advised policymakers on domestic and international legal issues relating to U.S. foreign and national security policy, most often in relation to the Middle East and North Africa. At various times, his portfolio included bilateral relations with Iraq, counter-Islamic State efforts in Iraq and Syria, diplomatic and sovereign immunity issues, the Persian Gulf region, select matters relating to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, terrorism-related civil litigation, U.S. and international economic sanctions, and the Yemen conflict. He also helped to represent the Department in a number of litigation and international arbitration matters, including matters before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Between his government service and joining the Brookings Institution, Mr. Anderson was a law clerk for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and an International Affairs Fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations, in which capacity he was in residence at Harvard Law School and Harvard Kennedy School. He is a graduate of the University of Virginia and Yale Law School and resides with his family in Washington, D.C.
I think there's a better cases in Fulton county & Jan 6
Yes. trump has been shielded from prosecution by William Barr & his presidency
That ended and he's been up to his ass in criminal probes ever since
Then I'll say he's performed the greatest jurisprudence Whodini act ever
What if he gets indicted?
Are you still going to support him?
Would you vote for an indicted/convicted criminal?
Additionally, the President has Q level security clearance, which cover NUCLEAR SECRETS and he carries that level of clearance with him FOR LIFE.
We tried to explain all this to the sheep weeks ago. Is @RayGravesGhost still lying to himself? LOL
Well, I guess second highest court in the land is ALMOST as good as clerking for a justice who sits on the HIGHEST court in the land.
That said, you should be used to ALMOST by now. Almost got trump multiple times. Almost honored your loss to me on a permaban bet.
I guess licking donald trump's shoes interrupts your comprehension...
3 charges supported the search warrant probable cause
If evidence of other crimes come to light...he'll be charged for those
You really don't have a clue how investigations & indictments work do you
WTF is so hard to understand about that 🤣
Every few weeks an @Illegal-shift or @RayGravesGhost comes here, tells us Trump is going to jail THIS time they got him.....then when nothing happens, they drift off in silence, gently weeping in the dead of night.I would hope when this is all said and done, he stops posting here and apologizes… who am I kidding, shit eater provides A level comedy daily and he can’t help himself.
Additional charges? What was the first one? LMAO!
Wait....has the FBI and Garland been charged? Is that what @RayGravesGhost is saying???
Indicted is meaningless. Or, are you going with guilty before trial? Wouldn’t shock me with the level of knowledge you have had on everything else.
permaban boy.
BTW, who was it that's on GETTR? @DCandtheUTBand? Paul Sperry is dropping truth bombs like crazy there now.
Seems this was all a cleanup attempt by Hiden and obama to steal evidence of their ill-gotten gains.
Hey @RayGravesGhost do you remember who broke this story? The media learned about the raid via DONALD J TRUMP!
That should have been your first clue that this wasn't going to end well for your team LMAO!
Seems this was all a cleanup attempt by Hiden and obama to steal evidence of their ill-gotten gains.
Hey @RayGravesGhost do you remember who broke this story? The media learned about the raid via DONALD J TRUMP!
That should have been your first clue that this wasn't going to end well for your team LMAO!
So….you’re saying he has been charged with a crime? I swear we gotta lead you to water every cot damn time.
Last edited:
I’ll support him over any democrat ever. That party is disgusting, foul, corrupt and killing this country.
He also has this ability to trigger people like I’ve never seen. The more crying I see about Trump, the more I find him hilarious. However, his a mob boss, disgusting and in some situations, a moron.
I think republicans are sackless, titty babies who need to learn how to fight. They’re also corrupt and are also a reason why the country is coming apart at the seams.
With that said, and I’m very confident in this prediction… not a damn thing is going to happen to DJT. You won’t see him in a jump suite, you won’t see him behind bars, the worse you’ll see out of this situation is he won’t be allowed to run on a technicality. That is it!!!!
What you don’t realize is your party just set a new precedents on being able to go after former presidents and that is very dangerous because that retard pedo that is sitting in office will become the hunted once he leaves or is forced to leave office.
