Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

4) If he declassified anything while in office, there would be required to have a record of it, no record of it means it didn't ever OFFICIALLY happen.

This just needs to be the point to lean on here. Trump can say in public "I declassified it" all he wants, most likely to get the dang cultists to rise up and defend him. But I can say I declassified documents. I can say I bench-pressed the Empire State Building and cured cancer. Doesn't make it true.

Until one of two things happens:
1) The paper trail, which would have to exist, surfaces, or
2) Trump says/writes so under oath

His claims of Executive Privilege, declassifying, or PRA have no merit.

And quite frankly, we've seen this behavior from Team Trump before. Their defenses break, and they move the goalposts. They hang on to a single thread of hope, a single minutia -- and in this case, a theoretical one -- that might, somehow, make their chosen leader anything other than a lying felon.

Plus, like everyone is saying, the fact alone that Trump had them basically made him objectively guilty of having them. He was given every chance to give them back without a fight, and instead, he kept them and lied about it. The "the FBI shouldn't have seen them" is an attempt to gloss over the point "Trump had them".

Maybe privilege will arrive in the other investigations, such as the continued one into Trump creating a murderous insurrection. Maybe. Until then, "the FBI shouldn't have looked at the evidence they were there to collect" isn't just a lack of defense, it's an admission of guilt.
@tehdang has spent the last 10 days doing nothing but admitting Trump is guilty, and is already trying to defend him from more serious crimes -- not with "Trump didnt' do it" but "the FBI shouldn't know Trump did it".

And, if that's the best the rabid fanbase have left, wow. That's...sad. That's pathetic. They sold themselves out to a man they are now admitting is guilty of multiple, major, America-hating crimes. And still defend him, because they have chosen to put themselves in a place where standing by their admitted felon leader is the only choice they've allowed themselves to have. I can't imagine why anyone would put themselves into such an abusive relationship, while admitting it's abusive, and staying there on purpose.

[SoulForge]

They sold themselves out to a man they are now admitting is guilty of multiple, major, America-hating crimes. And still defend him, because they have chosen to put themselves in a place where standing by their admitted felon leader is the only choice they've allowed themselves to have. I can't imagine why anyone would put themselves into such an abusive relationship, while admitting it's abusive, and staying there on purpose.

Just had to say something here. This is the same party and people who claim that Democrats hate America. But they will defend this man who has done these actions that can in fact damage America.

[Katchii]

And, if that's the best the rabid fanbase have left, wow. That's...sad. That's pathetic. They sold themselves out to a man they are now admitting is guilty of multiple, major, America-hating crimes. And still defend him, because they have chosen to put themselves in a place where standing by their admitted felon leader is the only choice they've allowed themselves to have. I can't imagine why anyone would put themselves into such an abusive relationship, while admitting it's abusive, and staying there on purpose.

This is really where my head has been for the entirety of Trump's existence as a presidential presence of any kind. He's a well known, well documented, piece of shit human being who is also well documented to be a sorry excuse for a business man. Regardless of his status as a criminal, the fact that people have morally, politically, or any other kind of ideology...attached themselves to him and unironically support him as any kind of paragon and expect him to competently and willingly lead other people in a magnanimous or well meaning way are insane asylum levels of bonkers for their denial of reality.

I've heard people defend some of his policies. I don't care enough to engage them on that front, mainly because it doesn't MATTER if any of his policies were any good. Having a few good ideas doesn't make you a good person or leader.

[swiftowner]

@tehdang

Typically don't respond but will put it like this.

1) If it is Executive Privileged documents, then it isn't Trump's as he isn't the president and shouldn't have it. Just like if you were the manager of a company and then quit or got fired, you aren't allowed to take company information with you.

2) If it's classified documents, its not covered under Attorney Client privilege as the lawyers weren't legally allowed to be viewing it anyways and even if Trump showed it to them, that doesn't make it Trumps, just like when you managed the company in #1, if you showed your lawyer trade secrets or stuff covered by security clearance, those documents still belonged to the company and not you.

3) The claim of Executive Privilege lies completely within the hands of the sitting president, when they are gone, so does the power to claim it. Obama could have revoked it on anything Bush Jr. claimed it on, Trump could have revoked anything Obama claimed it on, Biden can revoke anything Trump claimed it on, and so on. Because those documents didn't belong to any of them but the office itself.

There is no legal defense Trump can realistically give that would hold up in any reputable court on this. Any court that rules in his favor on this legal point are the same kind of people that would acquit a murdering rapist a century ago just because the victim was black.

Edit:

4) If he declassified anything while in office, there would be required to have a record of it, no record of it means it didn't ever OFFICIALLY happen.

5) Even if he did, their standards still require them to treat any documents still labeled as classified as though they were still classified. And those still had the markings.

6) Not even the president has the authority to declassify information about our nuclear technology, so even if he tried to when he was president, he wouldn't have had the authority to do so.

Lets face it, the only defense Trump has is the same one the Afluenza teen had.


Edit again:

7) Even if he declassified the information with a record of it and even if much of it was never classified to begin with, he still would not be allowed to carry the originals of this stuff, he would have been required to turn them over to the archives and at best kept copies of it. He is legally required to turn all that stuff over to keep records and has been a federal law ever since Nixon tried to take his own recordings with him to keep them from being turned over and kept.

I think the issue stems from people not having a grasp of how these documents work, because they aren’t qualified to handle them. I too am unqualified to handle them, but will be working on getting qualified to handle controlled UNCLASSIFIED documents. Yes, even unclassified documents don’t automatically become something that anyone can read. There are still levels below classified that you can get shit on for sharing with someone not authorized to see it. There are procedures for even destroying HDD/SSDs/Printers/paper, etc. that have processed/stored/are marked as “Controlled Unclassified”. We have to go through more strict release procedures for anything we publish online, to make sure nothing was posted that is marked “Controlled Unclassified” (CUI).

So point is, no, just because it is “unclassified” does not mean you are authorized to see it, handle it. In fact, if you accidentally receive an email with it, and you aren’t authorized to have it or see it, you are supposed to report it, and likely then destroy your HDD, depending on if that email is stored locally or in the cloud.

**Still learning the rules and have not finished my training, so take that with a few grains of salt**

[Breccia]

I've heard people defend some of his policies.

Which is, of course, how he got in office. The classic Republicans held their nose and swallowed that turd because they wanted to appoint some judges and the tax cut for the rich. And even I backed his claim that he was going to tackle opioid abuse.

But any Republican could have done that. Trump is who they chose. And now they're left with "maybe the prosecutor won't see all the evidence of his treason, evidence which he stole".

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, even unclassified documents don’t automatically become something that anyone can read.

That's where FOIA comes in, right?

[swiftowner]

That's where FOIA comes in, right?

I want to say no, but I’m not sure. Generally, the stuff I’m looking to get authorized for, is “Controlled”, meaning only those with explicit authorization to see it, are allowed to, and I *think* the department that creates the document also controls who can handle it. So generally what the document holds is somewhat secret, something that shouldn’t be shared with the wrong people.

Again, take what I say with a few grains of salt, as I’ve only been introduced to it, I have not yet completed my official training on it. But as it is, there is a whole long, expensive process to get a company to even be allowed to receive those docs, then only those who have completed the training can actually deal with them.

[Breccia]

take what I say with a few grains of salt

I will, but this is still more/better information than what I had before, thanks.

[Kaleredar]

I think the fact that we are even debating the legality of it is just nuts. Who actually thinks an ex-president having such documents is ever a good idea?

Why do soccer fans root for their team’s floppers but actively boo floppers on the other team, when both instances are obvious poor sportsmanship?

To the GOP this is purely a team sport. If a GOP member can break the law and get away with it and it helps them triumph over a democrat, they’re all for it.


That’s the point I illustrated about tehdang and co; they’re so afraid of the democrats and the various boogeymen they’ve been told to fear that any republican in place of power, no matter how rankly corrupt, amoral, or incompetent (or in Trump’s case all three) is preferable to any democrat.

[Edge-]

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trum...graham-1743811

"He could kill fifty people on our side and it wouldn't matter," Graham allegedly told the authors, after noting during the conversation that Trump was a "fun guy" to hang out with.

Lindsey Graham on Trump's stranglehold on the party. Sure he lies, but he's a fun guy! And he could kill dozens of Republicans and they'd still support him!

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/phony-d...p-search-case/

When a government document mysteriously appeared earlier this week in the highest profile case in the federal court system, it had the hallmarks of another explosive storyline in the Justice Department's investigation into records with classified markings stored at former President Donald Trump's Florida estate.

The document purported to be from the U.S. Treasury Department, claimed that the agency had seized sensitive documents related to last month's search at Mar-a-Lago and included a warrant ordering CNN to preserve "leaked tax records."

The document remained late Thursday on the court docket, but it is a clear fabrication. A review of dozens of court records and interviews by The Associated Press suggest the document originated with a serial forger behind bars at a federal prison complex in North Carolina.

An odd wrinkle. Doesn't seem connected to anything in particular, guys apparently got a history of forging a lot of documents.

But it does speak to how even our courts are falling for "FAKE NEWS" and receiving/processing forged/fraudulent documents.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ves-clippings/

Months before National Archives officials found hundreds of classified documents they retrieved from former president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club, they were told that none of the material was sensitive or classified and that Trump only had 12 boxes of “news clippings,” according to people familiar with the conversations between Trump’s team and the Archives.

During a September 2021 phone call with top Archives lawyer Gary Stern, Trump lawyer Pat Philbin offered reassuring news: Philbin said he had talked with former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who made the assertion about the dozen boxes of clippings, the people familiar with the call said. Trump’s team was aware of no other materials, Philbin said, relaying information he said he got from Meadows.

The characterization made in the call vastly misrepresented the scale and variety of documents, including classified records, eventually recovered by the Archives or the FBI.

So Trump's lawyers were either lied to, or lied to the Archives last year. By Meadows and Trump. I do wonder if this is what apparently spurred Meadows to suddenly start complying with the Jan. 6 Committee recently?

[Poopymonster]

Wish granted.

Judge gives Trump special master.
Trump has to foot the bill for the special master also.

[Gorsameth]

Wish granted.

Judge gives Trump special master.
Trump has to foot the bill for the special master also.

So is the special master going to decline now? Because he knows he is not getting payed if Trump gets the bill.

[SoulForge]

I want to say no, but I’m not sure. Generally, the stuff I’m looking to get authorized for, is “Controlled”, meaning only those with explicit authorization to see it, are allowed to, and I *think* the department that creates the document also controls who can handle it. So generally what the document holds is somewhat secret, something that shouldn’t be shared with the wrong people.

Again, take what I say with a few grains of salt, as I’ve only been introduced to it, I have not yet completed my official training on it. But as it is, there is a whole long, expensive process to get a company to even be allowed to receive those docs, then only those who have completed the training can actually deal with them.

A FOIA request will not automatically get you Unclassified information. Even that can disrupt national security depending on what it is. When addressing FOIA requests they look at the impact of releasing such information. Sometimes things can be released in a redacted form and sometimes no. There are also certain things that when separate are unclassified but when put together to give a bigger picture that elevates the classification.

You can google "Security Classification Guidance" and find plenty of PDF's from .gov or .mil sites that give an overview of how it all works. People retake courses Annually on this stuff so you can never say "I didn't know".

[Edge-]

Wish granted.

Judge gives Trump special master.
Trump has to foot the bill for the special master also.

To follow up on this - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...cuments-review

US District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, in West Palm Beach, Florida, gave Dearie until Nov. 30 to complete the review of the documents for materials that potentially involve attorney-client confidentiality or the executive privilege afforded presidents.

There's a pretty tight time limit on this. It's after the midterms and all, read into that what you will, but it seems like it'll still be completed well before the next Congress is sworn in. Not that it would matter that much since this isn't a Congressional investigation into Trump. There's a few of those too, but this is the criminal investigation.

[The Stormbringer]

To follow up on this - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...cuments-review



There's a pretty tight time limit on this. It's after the midterms and all, read into that what you will, but it seems like it'll still be completed well before the next Congress is sworn in. Not that it would matter that much since this isn't a Congressional investigation into Trump. There's a few of those too, but this is the criminal investigation.

November 30th is fucking inexcusable, this so-called judge knows what she did. I would've said the end of October at the latest. There's no way it'll take that long to review those documents if the person in question is putting in at least eight hours a day.

This is a blatant ploy to stall out the investigation well over TWO MONTHS, when it should be done before one of the most important elections in US history so people know the truth.

[DarkTZeratul]

This is a blatant ploy to stall out the investigation well over TWO MONTHS, when it should be done before one of the most important elections in US history so people know the truth.

Donald Trump isn't running in the election, and the DoJ already said they weren't going to proceed until afterwards anyway.

[Edge-]

Donald Trump isn't running in the election, and the DoJ already said they weren't going to proceed until afterwards anyway.

I think the argument is more that this is pushing any law enforcement activity until after the elections, potentially influencing now people vote in the midterms. Which is a valid argument to make to a point, especially considering this isn't technically a "political" matter as Trump is not currently a political candidate and is not running for any offices in the upcoming midterms that would otherwise normally delay law enforcement activity until after the election.

[Breccia]

I think the argument is more that this is pushing any law enforcement activity until after the elections, potentially influencing now people vote in the midterms. Which is a valid argument to make to a point, especially considering this isn't technically a "political" matter as Trump is not currently a political candidate and is not running for any offices in the upcoming midterms that would otherwise normally delay law enforcement activity until after the election.

Trump is almost certainly poised to announce he's running the second he sees the flashing lights outside his house.

[Edge-]

Trump is almost certainly poised to announce he's running the second he sees the flashing lights outside his house.

Won't matter once the midterms are over, at least until we get close to the general election in 2024. Hopefully things will wrap up well before then, so let him. At least he can legally raise money for his campaign instead of just having folks send in donations to his PAC slush fund.

[Endus]

Trump is almost certainly poised to announce he's running the second he sees the flashing lights outside his house.

To repeat a point; any difference in treatment that he may earn either before or after he declares that he's running for office, is the literal definition of "corruption". If you'd delay or avoid prosecution for fear of political fallout, that's what "corruption" is. It's not "avoiding the appearance of partisanship", it's not "reducing election interference", it's just straight-up corruption.

[tehdang]

your attempts to defend him are as useless as they are pointless

Process mistakes were never major in the first place. I didn't understand all the opposition to questions that will be resolved in future court pleadings.

Only responding to the Bold bit. Because this is where you seem extremely confused.
Things that are covered by Executive Privilige and are documents?

Those aren't Trumps.

I reiterate once again that ultimate right of possession is different from what FBI investigative teams can sift through to try and indict Trump on crimes, prior to a court ruling clearing the privilege.

If they are documents and covered by executive privilige they should be in NARAs hands. Not Trumps. That's where the fucking issue starts.

Still a question on ultimate right of possession, and not a particularly interesting one at that. This is an FBI criminal investigative stage, not when the archives receives documents it is seeking.

I think @tehdang is huffing the copium really hard that what Trump did was perfectly legal.

The only people huffing around here are those that insist a ruling on process equates out to some ruling on "what Trump did" and that legality. We had a lawsuit regarding what the DoJ did and didn't do, not a criminal indictment or trial.

@tehdang

Typically don't respond

Let me know when that habit changes, because I'm going to limit my time on replies you might never see.

1) If it is Executive Privileged documents, then it isn't Trump's as he isn't the president and shouldn't have it. Just like if you were the manager of a company and then quit or got fired, you aren't allowed to take company information with you.

As I've said before, I'm speaking to sections of a lawsuit regarding process mistakes on the part of the FBI and DoJ. Eventual possession might be interesting to Trump but not me.

2) If it's classified documents, its not covered under Attorney Client privilege as the lawyers weren't legally allowed to be viewing it anyways and even if Trump showed it to them, that doesn't make it Trumps, just like when you managed the company in #1, if you showed your lawyer trade secrets or stuff covered by security clearance, those documents still belonged to the company and not you.

I never made claims regarding classified documents and attorney-client privilege.

3) The claim of Executive Privilege lies completely within the hands of the sitting president, when they are gone, so does the power to claim it. Obama could have revoked it on anything Bush Jr. claimed it on, Trump could have revoked anything Obama claimed it on, Biden can revoke anything Trump claimed it on, and so on. Because those documents didn't belong to any of them but the office itself.

Supreme Court precedent has the power of executive privilege still remaining after office. Nixon preserved some at the last visit, and it wasn't discussed as only being subject to Carter's permission. We simply don't have case precedent whether it's all passed and gone if the sitting president refuses to exert it (still the obvious danger that the president cannot receive frank advice, because if the admin loses re-election/party possession of White House changes, it's in the open and may be leaked/used/abused)

I've said it before, but I'll say it again. There could be a ruling in the vein of unitary executive theory that becomes the new precedent on the lines you suggest. Until that's in existence, the DOJ cannot review documents like executive privilege doesn't exist. All these arguments essentially manifest as "X thinks its likely that a future court ruling will determine executive privilege cannot be asserted without the sitting officeholder buying in." That's way more apparent than the more ridiculous "X thinks the DoJ doesn't have to worry about precedent as it is now, because they shouldn't have to wait for a ruling to act."

4) If he declassified anything while in office, there would be required to have a record of it, no record of it means it didn't ever OFFICIALLY happen.

5) Even if he did, their standards still require them to treat any documents still labeled as classified as though they were still classified. And those still had the markings.


6) Not even the president has the authority to declassify information about our nuclear technology, so even if he tried to when he was president, he wouldn't have had the authority to do so.

7) Even if he declassified the information with a record of it and even if much of it was never classified to begin with, he still would not be allowed to carry the originals of this stuff, he would have been required to turn them over to the archives and at best kept copies of it. He is legally required to turn all that stuff over to keep records and has been a federal law ever since Nixon tried to take his own recordings with him to keep them from being turned over and kept.

Never argued on any of these points. They might be interesting in the future if Trump is indicted on criminal charges. At present, find somebody that wishes to defend Trump's claims or conduct in this.

Nothing I actually said made comment or actually cares whether you specifically commented on those things.

You replied to me in a manner that suggests it was not a reply to the post. I'm merely pointing it out. You want to go in a different direction.

You've made multiple comments defending the legality of Trump's actions

Wrong.

dishonestly painting the FBI's attempts to retrieve classified American property as illegal/improper

Twice wrong.

And you seemed profoundly confused by the very basic concept of Executive privilege so I'm just trying to use the crayon and paper to draw a map to get you to understanding.

It's a pretty deep issue with intersecting supreme court precedent, so I don't mind helping clear up some of the confusion. I see a lot of people thinking criticism of the DoJ amounts to defense of Trump's actions. I see a lot of confusion about the legality of a search warrant mixed up with the conduct of a document review process. Some of this is expected.

And because of that it's almost 100% guaranteed those very very basic and key points undermining your rampant defense of your orange God

Never defended Trump's actions as legal, never said he was likely to beat off a criminal indictment, but always get the knee-jerk reactions in this place. You can not like the guy, but keep a level head about details in lawsuits and orders. You won't get very far with knee-jerk reactions classifying everybody in some "orange God" box.

it needed to be explained to you that regardless of any shitty defenses you've made of Trump this far, or if you specifically commented on them yet

You're coming around. Yes, I haven't made comment on things that will have to play out. No, it isn't the same thing as an actual defense of Trump.

there are numerous issues you're choosing to ignore, obfuscate, or deliberately misunderstand and misrepresent facts.


So new score 2 points for me and at this point with various penalties your score has to be negative.

I've focused in on what I've found interesting. The more partisan zealots around here will instantly demand posts-made-in-outrage or bubble over in anti-Trump rhetoric. I observe and post within that underlying reality of the forum. Just know I'm here discussing the topics, and I do hold similar opinions of you and others as you hold of me. I won't repeat them endlessly, because the left-right divide will obviously involve some basic "you're bad, I don't like you, you're lying, you're obfuscating, you're deliberately misunderstanding an misrepresenting facts." It's just the same partisan drivel on a new topic, so we can seriously skip mutual accusations of bad faith, intentional malice, fascism hatred gluttony apostasy and bad taste.

To follow up on this - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...cuments-review

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...18763.89.0.pdf

Standard progression to the special master. DOJ threatened an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit if the judge would not partially reverse her ruling. Cannon did nothing of the kind, but gave her own compromise on just the "approximately 100 documents marked classified" (ordered to prioritize their review ahead of the 11,000). Raymond Dearie will now handle an independent review. And he will consider both executive privilege and attorney client privilege in his review. DoJ might think twice on appealing the decision.