Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

It's worth repeating again: There are some documents related to nuclear issues that the President alone cannot declassify.

It's also worth repeating again: there are some things Trump wasn't allowed to take, even if they were declassified.

Now, it turns out this morning that Trump's lawyers may need lawyers as they provided a written certification in June once the original 15 boxes were retrieved that there was no more classified or sensitive material left to take back. That is a violation of federal law.

Yeah, taking, selling, or losing government documents is a big problem. You're really not supposed to do that. Handing in a signed federal form saying "we don't have any left" when you do is probably an entirely new, separate crime. Like, perjury.

[Merkava]

As a result, the Espionage Act makes no reference to whether a document has been deemed classified. Instead, it makes it a crime to retain, without authorization, documents related to the national defense that could be used to harm the United States or aid a foreign adversary.

For what it's worth, I made the very same argument 6 years ago.

You keep referring to the fact that Hillary's emails didn't contain classified material. That's not necessary for the Espionage Act to apply. That's what I'm saying. For our discussion, the element of classified information is irrlevant.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post43152641

For the record, I think they both broke the law. (probably)
Anyway, havent posted in a long time, hope everyone is doing well.

[cubby]

I'd halfway believe that he did it simply because he was told he couldn't.

...which, of course, doesn't make it not a crime.

Good point - he could have done it for a litany of childish and/or immature reasons. Not the least of which could have been "because they are cool".

[Breccia]

Trump Lawyer Told Justice Dept. That Classified Material Had Been Returned

At least one lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump signed a written statement in June asserting that all material marked as classified and held in boxes in a storage area at Mr. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and club had been returned to the government, four people with knowledge of the document said.

The written declaration was made after a visit on June 3 to Mar-a-Lago by Jay I. Bratt, the top counterintelligence official in the Justice Department’s national security division.

The existence of the signed declaration, which has not previously been reported, is a possible indication that Mr. Trump or his team were not fully forthcoming with federal investigators about the material. And it could help explain why a potential violation of a criminal statute related to obstruction was cited by the department as one basis for seeking the search warrant used to carry out the daylong search of the former president’s home on Monday, an extraordinary step that generated political shock waves.

It also helps to further explain the sequence of events that prompted the Justice Department’s decision to conduct the search after months in which it had tried to resolve the matter through discussions with Mr. Trump and his team.

An inventory of the material taken from Mr. Trump’s home that was released on Friday showed that F.B.I. agents had seized 11 sets of documents during the search with some type of confidential or secret marking on them, including some marked as “classified/TS/SCI” — shorthand for “top secret/sensitive compartmented information.” Information categorized in that fashion is meant to be viewed only in a secure government facility.

Mar-a-Lago is not a government facility. Oh, and it's not secure, they sell tickets.

The search encompassed not just the storage area where boxes of material known to the Justice Department were being held but also Mr. Trump’s office and residence. The search warrant and inventory unsealed on Friday did not specify where in the Mar-a-Lago complex the documents marked as classified were found.

Mr. Trump said on Friday that he had declassified all the material in his possession while he was still in office. He did not provide any documentation that he had done so.

From context, I find it highly unlikely that everything was in the storage room. Yeah I know, the safe probably didn't have any, but I don't think Trump was either honest or organized enough to keep it all in the same place. He wanted some of those within arm's reach so he could show people when they askeed.

But
1) if it was, it was in a storage room behind a slightly-better padlock. I could have fucking broken into that. I mean, yeah the cameras would have spotted me, but I own bolt cutters. Many people own bolt cutters.
20 if it wasn't and I am right, then the earlier conversation with Bratt is going to get a lot more important.
"Is everything else in here?"
"Yes."
Lying to a federal agent about where the (classified) intel is stored is on at least one of the four US codes everyone is quoting, because "concealing" is on that list of things you're going to jail if you do.

In the spring, the Justice Department issued a subpoena to Mr. Trump seeking further documents believed to be in his possession. He was repeatedly urged by advisers to return what remained, despite what they described as his desire to continue to hold onto some documents.

In an effort to resolve the dispute, Mr. Bratt and other officials visited Mar-a-Lago in early June, briefly meeting Mr. Trump. Two of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb, spoke with Mr. Bratt and a handful of investigators he traveled with, people briefed on the meeting said.

Mr. Corcoran and Ms. Bobb showed Mr. Bratt and his team boxes holding material Mr. Trump had taken from the White House that were being kept in a storage area, the people said.

According to two people briefed on the visit, Mr. Bratt and his team left with additional material marked classified, and around that time also obtained the written declaration from a Trump lawyer attesting that all the material marked classified in the boxes had been turned over.

So, yeah, we are getting a clearer picture of the timeline. It wasn't necessarily that the FBI was getting worried that Trump might lose or steal it. It was they knew he was trying -- by virtue of claiming to have none when he objectively did. It also explains why Bratt didn't take anything. There was a storeroom filled with boxes, and he didn't know where it was, and was being told it didn't exist.

Over recent months, investigators were in contact with roughly a half-dozen of Mr. Trump’s current aides who had knowledge of how the documents were handled, two people briefed on the approaches said. At least one witness provided the investigators with information that led them to want to further press Mr. Trump for material, according to a person familiar with the inquiry.

Concern about Mr. Trump’s cavalier handling of classified information dates back to the early days of his administration. When Mr. Trump left office, President Biden quickly took the extraordinary step of barring him from receiving the intelligence briefings traditionally provided to former presidents, saying that Mr. Trump could not be trusted because of his “erratic behavior.”

The security of classified information at Mar-a-Lago was also a concern for government officials even while Mr. Trump was in office. During his presidency, the government built what is known as a SCIF — a sensitive compartmented information facility — for Mr. Trump’s use while he was at the club.

So, Trump said he didn't have anything, and his own people ratted him out. That, combined with his proven words and actions, made him a security risk, if not a security breach. There is only one solution to that: seal it.

Oh, and remember Option C?

On Thursday, Attorney General Merrick B. Garland made a public statement saying he had personally authorized a search warrant being executed on Mr. Trump’s property, and he indicated that the Justice Department would only have made such a move after trying less invasive measures.

Shortly before Mr. Garland made the announcement, a person close to Mr. Trump reached out to a Justice Department official to pass along a message from the former president to the attorney general. Mr. Trump wanted Mr. Garland to know he had been checking in with people around the country and found them to be enraged by the search.

“The country is on fire,” Mr. Trump said, according to a person familiar with the exchange. “What can I do to reduce the heat?”

The NYTimes doesn't have Garland's answer, so that means we know the leak is, again, in Team Trump. However, I'm fairly sure the answer was "stop pouring gasoline on it, you fat orange fuck". Trump asking what he can do to make things better behind the scenes, while publicly trying to instigate more lynch mobs (not a metaphor, see the Ohio shooter) and make things worse.

Claiming it was an overreach when it wasn't.
Claiming it was planted when it wasn't.
Claiming it was declassified when (a) it probably wasn't and (b) it probably wouldn't matter if he did.
And, of course, yelling WITCH HUNT the entire time, because he has no valid defense so he might as well start another insurrection.

Also, it's the usual from Trump claiming "everyone" feels a certain way, when of course, Trump only listens to people who say what Trump says.

Also from an earlier topic:

The Justice Department also subpoenaed surveillance footage from Mar-a-Lago, including views from outside the storage room. According to a person briefed on the matter, the footage prompted concern among investigators about the handling of the material. It is not clear what time period that footage was from.

- - - Updated - - -

For what it's worth, I made the very same argument 6 years ago.

And remind us, was Clinton investigated?

Was she cleared?

Okay then. Moving on.

[cubby]

While Trump as president did have the authority to unilaterally declassify most items, there are some major exceptions to that rule, including those related to nuclear weapons. And on Thursday evening, The Washington Post issued a bombshell report alleging that among the documents the Department of Justice sought were “classified documents relating to nuclear weapons.”

Among the dodges Trump offered up Friday is that the material recovered “was all declassified.” It’s the same argument that former Trump appointee/stooge Kash Patel used in May. He told Breitbart that classified documents then-recently recovered from Mar-a-Lago had actually already been declassified. Trump “declassified whole sets of materials” before leaving the White House,” Patel claimed, but, he said, White House counsel Pat Cipollone “failed to generate the paperwork to change the classification markings, but that doesn’t mean the information wasn’t declassified.” (Experts think that it may mean exactly that — and as NBC News reported on Friday, “the three laws cited in the search warrant do not specify that the mishandled documents had to have been classified.”)

From the WaPo and MSNBC cites

This two points are key. The classification of the document is irrelevant to the charges cited as justification for the warrant, AND, some documents cannot be declassified, even by the President, referring to the nuclear documents found at his house.

If Garland is going for Trump, like really going to seek criminal charges against Trump with the goal of going to trial, this is the cleanest and simplest way to do it. And based on a first blush of events and evidence, would work in my opinion.

[Merkava]

And remind us, was Clinton investigated?

Was she cleared?

Okay then. Moving on.

None of those questions are relevant to my point. But I'll indulge you.

Yes she was investigated.

Nobody get's "cleared." They decided not to prosecute. If the DOJ found new evidence warranted revisiting the investigation then they would.

Don't be surprised if Trump either doesn't get charged, or gets charged and gets acquitted.

Edit - And in case i didn't make my point, it's this. Both instances warrant a vigorous investigation. Thats all.

[Breccia]

And based on a first blush of events and evidence, work in my opinion.

Simply put, we need to know what Team Trump is saying under oath.

"It was all declassified" is not being said under oath.

"They planted it" is not being said under oath.

"I was working with them very peacefully" has not been said under oath.

"I was allowed to have them, they weren't that bad" has not been said under oath.

"I gave you everything" might have been said under oath. The story @MoanaLisa sent me to suggests it was.

And Trump's credibility is less than zero. Remember, he's still claiming he won the election, and promised to be faithful to all three of his wives.

Until Trump starts signing affidavits or goes under oath, everything he's saying is basically white noise. And some of it is contradictory to some of it. It's going to have to come down to that -- they're going to have to start making statements at figurative gunpoint. Meanwhile, all the objective evidence points to Trump being a criminal.

Oh, and that's all aside from Georgia, New York, and Jan 6th. Let's not forget that Trump is under investigation for lots of crimes.

- - - Updated - - -

None of those questions are relevant to my point.

Your point was irrelevant. Jumping in now to say "Both sides, But Her Emails" doesn't sound like constructive posting on-topic to me. It sounds like deflection.

[Merkava]

This two points are key. The classification of the document is irrelevant to the charges cited as justification for the warrant, AND, some documents cannot be declassified, even by the President, referring to the nuclear documents found at his house.

If Garland is going for Trump, like really going to seek criminal charges against Trump with the goal of going to trial, this is the cleanest and simplest way to do it. And based on a first blush of events and evidence, work in my opinion.

Whats up Cubby. Long time no talk!
Question for you...few weeks ago Lawrence Odonnel said that Trump could never be sent to prison because he's entitled to a 24 hour secret service detail, and you couldn't effectively sentence secret service agents to prison. Whats your opinion on that? Clearly, if found guilty, these charges almost certainly warrant prison time (in my non legal opinion)

- - - Updated - - -

Your point was irrelevant. Jumping in now to say "Both sides, But Her Emails" doesn't sound like constructive posting on-topic to me. It sounds like deflection.

1. Deflecting from what?
2. The relevancy stems from the fact that it's the same issue. The idea of the espionage act not being concerned with whether or not the material in question is classified. How is that not on topic?

[Edge-]

https://www.newsweek.com/moscow-alre...-media-1733440

Now I'm 99% sure this is just Russia trolling but...

Hosts on Russia's state-owned Russia-1 television channel said that officials in Moscow have already been "studying" top secret and other classified documents the FBI sought through a search warrant of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort home.

Again, very, very unlikely but also...there is a slim possibility that some of these documents may have found their way to Russia.

Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just sharing what state-run Russian media are saying.

[cubby]

Simply put, we need to know what Team Trump is saying under oath.

"It was all declassified" is not being said under oath.

"They planted it" is not being said under oath.

"I was working with them very peacefully" has not been said under oath.

"I was allowed to have them, they weren't that bad" has not been said under oath.

"I gave you everything" might have been said under oath. The story @MoanaLisa sent me to suggests it was.

And Trump's credibility is less than zero. Remember, he's still claiming he won the election, and promised to be faithful to all three of his wives.

Until Trump starts signing affidavits or goes under oath, everything he's saying is basically white noise. And some of it is contradictory to some of it. It's going to have to come down to that -- they're going to have to start making statements at figurative gunpoint. Meanwhile, all the objective evidence points to Trump being a criminal.

Oh, and that's all aside from Georgia, New York, and Jan 6th. Let's not forget that Trump is under investigation for lots of crimes.

Exactly - and most of what you suggest above (and that's what we've seen so far from the Trump Camp) is not a defense against the evidence the FBI found.

We should start seeing the GQP Spin Machine push out new talking points later today or tomorrow, certainly by Monday for the fresh news cycle. I'll be curious to see how this is played out (long shot bet - they go with "it was planted", which they've already hinted at).

[Gorsameth]

Whats up Cubby. Long time no talk!
Question for you...few weeks ago Lawrence Odonnel said that Trump could never be sent to prison because he's entitled to a 24 hour secret service detail, and you couldn't effectively sentence secret service agents to prison. Whats your opinion on that? Clearly, if found guilty, these charges almost certainly warrant prison time (in my non legal opinion)

House arrest exists as an alternative to jail and is what I would expect for the reasons you mention. A former President in jail would be a security nightmare.

[Edge-]

What's funny about the whole, "HE DECLASSIFIED IT WITH HIS MIND!" argument is...he still had the original documents. Even if they weren't classified, and the highest classification that exists, he's still not allowed to keep government documents at his personal residence.

Note: There's zero denial that he had documents, just denials that he had classified documents. Which like, he did according to the search warrant released so...yeah, there's that too.

[cubby]

Whats up Cubby. Long time no talk!
Question for you...few weeks ago Lawrence Odonnel said that Trump could never be sent to prison because he's entitled to a 24 hour secret service detail, and you couldn't effectively sentence secret service agents to prison. Whats your opinion on that? Clearly, if found guilty, these charges almost certainly warrant prison time (in my non legal opinion)

They would - the charges are so clean and objective, it would be hard at this point to find a scenario in which he could effectively dodge them all. The issue of prison is a difficult one. Assuming Trump is convicted of a crime that requires jail time, I see three possible scenarios:

1. Federal Minimum Security. Secret Service can be rotated in on regular shifts. Since all of this would be historically unprecedented, making these kinds of arrangements would be possible.

2. Military Prison. I am least knowledgeable about how this would work. However, the security of minimum security prisons would more than likely be "better" than federal ones, and would be easier to set up whatever the Secret Service would need. Most of this option is guesswork on my part.

3. Home incarceration. Unfortunately this is the most likely scenario. Easy, still "prison", and far more less-controversial felons have been granted this option. Stuck at Mar-a-lago with no visitors, no television, no communications.

- - - Updated - - -

Nobody get's "cleared." They decided not to prosecute.

Yes, they do get cleared. Closing an investigation clears that person. Your second sentence is how that's done. "New evidence" is a different situation, meaning not the one the person was cleared for.

And no, these situations are NOT the same. Whatsoever. Unless you want to argue that pickpocketing a tootsie roll pop is the "same situation" because both involve crimes.

- - - Updated - - -

House arrest exists as an alternative to jail and is what I would expect for the reasons you mention. A former President in jail would be a security nightmare.

I agree. Even though I laid out two other options, if someone made me bet good money on it, I would easily go with this one. For the reasons you mentioned and many others.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.newsweek.com/moscow-alre...-media-1733440

Now I'm 99% sure this is just Russia trolling but...

Hosts on Russia's state-owned Russia-1 television channel said that officials in Moscow have already been "studying" top secret and other classified documents the FBI sought through a search warrant of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort home.

Again, very, very unlikely but also...there is a slim possibility that some of these documents may have found their way to Russia.

Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just sharing what state-run Russian media are saying.

Putin has to be LOVING this, regardless of how high his involvement might be. He can basically troll the U.S. government for as long as he wants regarding the classified information he received from [doesn't matter]. The only dumb thing he could do would be to actually produce a document that was seized from Mar-a-Lago, which would seal the fate of Trump at that point.

- - - Updated - - -

What's funny about the whole, "HE DECLASSIFIED IT WITH HIS MIND!" argument is...he still had the original documents. Even if they weren't classified, and the highest classification that exists, he's still not allowed to keep government documents at his personal residence.

Note: There's zero denial that he had documents, just denials that he had classified documents. Which like, he did according to the search warrant released so...yeah, there's that too.

And, some of them, the Nuclear documents, can't be declassified, even by the President. So...wait. Doesn't that close the loop.

[Edge-]

And, some of them, the Nuclear documents, can't be declassified, even by the President. So...wait. Doesn't that close the loop.

Allegedly according to WashPo*

Which, don't get me wrong I'm inclined to believe them and all, but we don't have official confirmation from the DoJ/FBI quite yet.

[Paranoid Android]

Exclusive: Trump Raid Documents Could Reveal Informants on U.S. Payroll

Umm?

In pursuing the unprecedented search of Donald Trump's residence on Monday, the FBI was seeking to retrieve Top Secret and "compartmented" documents dealing with intelligence "sources and methods," two federal government sources tell Newsweek—documents with the potential to reveal U.S. intelligence sources, including human sources on the American government payroll.

So Trump had info on spies basically how they operated and payroll information. Thus this material could out spies. Gee wonder who would want this.

[cubby]

Allegedly according to WashPo*

Which, don't get me wrong I'm inclined to believe them and all, but we don't have official confirmation from the DoJ/FBI quite yet.

Of course, this all needs to get sorted out. Like, first they need some Nuclear Documents Cleared FBI peeps to review the documents. This whole thing is going to be yet another Wing in the Library of Insanity that Trump has brought upon us.

[Merkava]

Yes, they do get cleared. Closing an investigation clears that person. Your second sentence is how that's done. "New evidence" is a different situation, meaning not the one the person was cleared for.

And no, these situations are NOT the same. Whatsoever. Unless you want to argue that pickpocketing a tootsie roll pop is the "same situation" because both involve crimes.

Wait a sec. A decision not to prosecute is the same as "clearing a person of wrong doing"? Is that what Bob Mueller did? Law enforcement either prosecutes or it doesn't, right?

Also, the usage of the term "cleared" is merely colloquial, correct? It could mean different things to different people. And any usage of the term "cleared" has to be temporary, or indefinite at best. It implies no protection from double jeopardy. To that effect, the fact that a person can be prosecuted upon discovery of new evidence for an alleged crime that they were previously "cleared" of illustrates the flimsiness of that standard. That makes sense correct?

I could accept the statement that "The DOJ "cleared" Hillary Clinton", but I'd ask for a statement from them to that effect, particularly one that uses the term "cleared". I doubt you'd find it.

I don't intend to relitigate that entire discussion, I just wanted to point out that my interpretation of the Espionage Act, (that it doesn't require the information in question to be classified) is now being echoed by those on the left who want to (correctly) investigate DJT.

And thank you for your reply on my question regarding the logistics of sending a former POTUS to jail.

Edit - To be clear, I didn't mean to say that the two situations were the same. Far from it, I merely meant to say that the fact of the espionage act not regarding information to be classified was the same. That is all. Thanks.

[cubby]

Exclusive: Trump Raid Documents Could Reveal Informants on U.S. Payroll

Umm?

In pursuing the unprecedented search of Donald Trump's residence on Monday, the FBI was seeking to retrieve Top Secret and "compartmented" documents dealing with intelligence "sources and methods," two federal government sources tell Newsweek—documents with the potential to reveal U.S. intelligence sources, including human sources on the American government payroll.

So Trump had info on spies basically how they operated and payroll information. Thus this material could out spies. Gee wonder who would want this.

This all goes back to Putin always having had leverage over Trump, from years back, like we saw in so many pieces of evidence. We'll almost never know the full story, but all the pieces point to several things having always been correct, including (and I hate to have to bring this up) the Pee Tape.

Basically, Putin was Trump's handler. Not kidding. Totally terrifying.

[Voidism]

https://www.newsweek.com/moscow-alre...-media-1733440

Now I'm 99% sure this is just Russia trolling but...



Again, very, very unlikely but also...there is a slim possibility that some of these documents may have found their way to Russia.

Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just sharing what state-run Russian media are saying.

Eh, it's just another way to fuck with westerners minds. Putin, despite popular belief, always pays two sides to make a mess. They are playing both sides equally. Hell, he even bought his own opposition in Russia to control.

OODA-loop is when someone is too busy thinking too much that they can't act. This is what they want you to do. Even when you're aware of it. I'd not share anything they say tbh. I know we _want_ them to be in collusion with Trump but...

Push out as much info and alternative theories all the time everywhere, that's how they work. It doesn't matter. Might be they work together. Might not be. Might be that Democrats have played into his games perfectly. Might not. *shrug*

The main thing is to not give Putin any legitimacy.

[cubby]

Wait a sec. A decision not to prosecute is the same as "clearing a person of wrong doing"? Is that what Bob Mueller did? Law enforcement either prosecutes or it doesn't, right?

Also, the usage of the term "cleared" is merely colloquial, correct? It could mean different things to different people. And any usage of the term "cleared" has to be temporary, or indefinite at best. It implies no protection from double jeopardy. To that effect, the fact that a person can be prosecuted upon discovery of new evidence for an alleged crime that they were previously "cleared" of illustrates the flimsiness of that standard. That makes sense correct?

I could accept the statement that "The DOJ "cleared" Hillary Clinton", but I'd ask for a statement from them to that effect, particularly one that uses the term "cleared". I doubt you'd find it.

I don't intend to relitigate that entire discussion, I just wanted to point out that my interpretation of the Espionage Act, (that it doesn't require the information in question to be classified) is now being echoed by those on the left who want to (correctly) investigate DJT.

And thank you for your reply on my question regarding the logistics of sending a former POTUS to jail.

Edit - To be clear, I didn't mean to say that the two situations were the same. Far from it, I merely meant to say that the fact of the espionage act not regarding information to be classified was the same. That is all. Thanks.

It's not black and white, ever. Hillary was cleared. Mueller couldn't continue the prosecution because of the DoJ letter. Every single answer in the legal and law enforcement orbit is always "it depends".

You're welcome - it will [hopefully] be an interesting problem for the Federal Department of Corrections to solve. I really hope they have to.