Trump Had More Than 300 Classified Documents at Mar-a-Lago

Wow
How can someone think they are so right and be so wrong. Did you miss, or are you deliberately dismissing the part that Mueller's take on the law is that a sitting President
can't be charged with a crime.
"Sitting presidents are generally protected from criminal charges on grounds it would undermine their ability to perform the office's constitutional duties. The Justice Department, like Mueller, "took as a given that the Constitution would bar the prosecution of a sitting President," the appeals court wrote, which meant the decision that Trump wouldn't be charged had already been made and couldn't be shielded from public release."
THAT'S WHY!!
That quote is from the article I linked to you which you obviously didn't look at.....why? It also goes to your off the wall analogy of Biden shooting his wife.....really? That's what you came up with? It also addresses Trump's "I could shoot someone on 5th Ave and not be charged (sic)"
Oh, by the way, there were 34 indictments with guilty pleas from the Mueller investigation. Trump was clearly shielded by Barr.

 

Trump already has had and has representation. You do realize he has a number of court cases, currently they are civil charges. The insurrectionists of 1/6 are still being sought, charged and tried, one by one.

 

So you agree he hasn't been charged with any crime.

 

Not a criminal charge yet, but I sure as heck wouldn't bet against it.

 

First there is no constitutional restriction on charging a President with a crime and prosecuting. That was a court opinion in the Nixon that going to trial could hamper him carrying out his duty but no ruling that prohibits. But then when Paula Jones sued Bill Clinton the courts said no a President is not above the law, as you are trying to place them, and she had the right to her day in court not be delayed.

DID YOU MISS THE CLINTON IMPEACHMENT?????????????????????

He was impeached for charges of 11 felonies.............. I repeat 11 FELONIES. The Starr investigation found 11 felonies and those were referred to the Congress asking for impeachment and removal. Had Mueller found crimes then the process is he refers those crimes to the AG who request the Congress for impeachment and removal so he can be prosecuted. Should the Congress decide not to remove then the prosecution can wait until he leaves office in Clinton's case he plea bargained the charges awaiting from the impeachment.

BTW the 34 indictments were either dropped or were for issues not to do with Trump and Russian collusion.

AGAIN if Biden murdered his wife tonight would he get off with because he is a sitting President yes or no?

 

2016 - yet
2017 - yet
2018 - yet
2019 - yet
2020 - yet
2021 - yet
2022 - yet

And you're still betting? Don't you know when to cut your losses?

 

And certainly they could be stored, while still "owned" by the NARA, at Mir-a-Lago. They don't have to stay in Washington DC.

 

Presidents go through them and decide what is personal and what is not, somethings get disputed and those are negotiated. He helps decide what he would like in the library and what can go to the archives. Reagans were shipped to CA, Carter's to Atlanta, Obama's to Chicago where their librariers were planned. I don't think Trump has announced where his will be but I have no reason to believe it will not be near his home in Florida. The presidential records remained the property of the NARA but some around here seem to believe that Presidents are somehow prohibited from them and can't be around them or have them in their possession even if not ownership.

 

LOL, trump didn't do it. Did you miss his presidency and his nominations?

 

LOL. Anti trump has nothing to do with future votes. Unless one is speculating. Hell, 25% of republicans will not vote for trump.
The OP is about taking documents that should never be taken from the WH. Not who one will vote for in the future.

Are you ok with folks who don't care if trump shoots someone in the middle of 5th ave and will still support him?
Are you one of them?

 

Then got impeached not once, but TWICE. And then lost as an incumbent. Very hard to do. What a worthless career liar we had for president. Not doing NOTHING for TAXPAYING citizens of this country.
But he did divide the country almost as bad as it was just before the CIVIL WAR.

 

Did you bother to read my post?
I didn’t say POTUS would be bound by anything. I said the rest of the federal bureaucracy would be required to follow the procedures to implement his order.
And yes, there are rules for how to implement the declassification.

 

Did NARA take possession of the documents and choose to store them at MaL?

No. Because he never relinquished possession or control of the documents.

You’re just making up theories to try to let him off the hook. And this is one of the silliest theories yet.

 

But 75% will !!
I wonder how many Democrats will vote for Biden ? 45% ? 48% ?

 

The exact answer I expected from you after seeing what you post here.

 

Awesome that you are using my words!! That tells me you have nothing to defend the worthless idiot politicians currently in office.

President Trump divided the country?

Please, we had 4 good years despite republicans not siding with President Trump and democrats screaming over and over again " he's trying to ruin the country!!"

Only now that a familiar career politician is back as commander in chief, the country once again headed down.

And I'm sure your comeback will be it's President Trump's fault.

 

Presidential Papers do not belong to the president, they belong to the 'people'. It will be sent to the NARA, and they will put the papers in the appropriate place, some of which will go to the Presidential library.

I don't agree at all. You can't put everyone else on the same level is the president, Why? There is only one president, so there are unique circumstance pertaining to the president and do not occur with anyone else. It's not about 'rights'. The president has no inherent right to the presidential papers. To say others don't have the right is specious. Why? They are not president. If they were, they would be subject to the same treatment. All presidents are subject to the same treatment, and that is the correct way to look at it.

The presidential papers belong to history, and history belongs to the people, and that's that.

You need to get over this issue you have, it's really not an issue.

 

Oh, I see, so that's a cute way to say "I choose to ignore what is in front of me".

You can ignore the fact that the Espionage act does not depend on classification, if you want.

I know that ignorance is bliss, but for those who care to know, ignorance is piss.

Not the point. The point is that which you ignored, above.

 

First, let me address the elephant in the room: Yes, no one has raised a legal objection yet to the 1978 law, much less have such an objection before either a regional or a supreme court. So we would be discussing on a theoretical level, and technically without anyone presiding no one could truly say whether you or I are right.

That said your gist of the argument sides strongly with declaring the President as a separate entity from Person Joe Biden, and as there is only one 'President', the rules governing over the President's actions(or inactions) can be separate from the rights and protections that we as people share under the jursidiction of the US.

More to the point, you claim that the Presidential Papers belong to history, and history belongs to the people. I will note for simplicity sakes, that we both agree that the nuclear secrets are persona non-grata for the purposes of the argument.


To me, there is a substantial difference in those documents, and other documents which may bare a President's name. Subject to clearance, we can presume the vast majority of documents are of a written kind. The Kim Jong letter, the French letter are among examples that we could typically expect to find in previous libraries I imagine.

If my presumption is a healthy one, then I also think my comparison for example to Roosevelt's Fireside chats is an apt comparison. Those would be radio recordings, are we going to claim that they are the 'property' of the government? I disagree. Roosevelt was his own person, the recordings if they are the property of anyone would technically belong to CBS Radio, etc.

To simplify, I do not treat Person Joe Biden any differently from President Joe Biden. I don't think there's a legal basis for the claim that the President is separate from the individual. If there were a legal basis, then quite disturbingly for example Trump could argue that his actions as President could not be charged to civilian Donald Trump, and one would have to concur given the consistent chain in logic.

 

That's not how it works. Every day whitehouse personal decides and files something as Personal or PRA. NARA stores them throughout the presidency. Once he leaves office, the GSA packs, logs and securely ships the items deemed Personal. The President is in charge of the designation, the President is responsible. This isn't sneaking boxes out in the middle of the night lol. Obviously, the document fight is the Government saying the Trump team deemed somethings personal that were actually designated Top Secret. And although he can possess them, they wanted them back in Washington. We'll see where it ends up. Now the question is, did the DOJ use this excuse to raid and fish for evidence of other crimes because the document game isn't playing well. They've floated, top secret and nuclear to change the overreach narrative, they better come through with charges or the left will have hell to pay politically. We're not china or russia and we don't use law enforcement to go after political opponents.

 

So, if Trump actually did possess documents he shouldn't have, and lied about it, and............, but the DOJ got back all the documents they wanted to control and decide they don't want to drag it through the courts with charges and don't charge Trump, you'll be disappointed?
Interesting.
Aren't you setting yourself up for disappointment no matter what?
Charge him: Dems using law enforcement to go after political opponents.
Don't charge him: Proof that Dems are going after political opponents.
Why even throw the condition out there? You have set a scenario for yourself that no matter what they do, it's wrong.
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say you don't think they should have retrieved the documents at all?
And if that's the case, wouldn't they be then either
A) Showing bias because it's Trump, or
B) A dereliction of duty to not protect the country
I honestly don't understand the logic being used by some people.
I try to look at things in a little more disconnected way. Example: It's no secret that I don't like Trump, but, when a situation occurs, I try to put that aside and view it in a simpler way, is it right or wrong. Not always successful, but it helps to filter out the bs. I do it to in an attempt to keep my sanity. Using emotion in a decision making process usually screws it up.

 

No, it's real simple for me, he committed a crime like trying to sell or profit off government secrets charge him fry him! If we're having an argument over if these personal letters from the Prime Minister discussing how pushing the EU to spend more on defense, then take the documents and move on but someone damn sure has to answer for the raid. If Garland used the document excuse to get the raid to go fishing for other crimes, fry garlands ass. It's not hard and what I would also say if it were you that was raided.

 

We're getting deep into the weeds here, but sometimes weeds, like details, are important. The Constitution says, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury......" A prosecutor has the discretion to present to a grand jury for an indictment, although as the Constitution says he must use a grand jury for some "infamous" (whatever that means) crimes. Some crimes he can refer directly to a court to get an indictment. In any case AFAIK technically the grand jury also must recommend an indictment to a court, although judges seldom turn down a request for an indictment from a grand jury, though I believe they can. Going back to my opinion regarding Trump, any charge against an ex-president would most certainly be considered infamous by any court and require a grand jury. However a prosecutor can still file a charge directly with a court even if knowing the court would most certainly reject it because it is not from a grand jury. On the other hand, as they say, any half-way decent prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, so that might not be much of a road block. Even so a US attorney filing a charge with either route -- or even just calling a grand jury -- would make the media go bonkers and that is what the Trump opposition wants before 2024 if not the mid term elections. IMO the court would look very much askant at the charge from either a grand jury or an attorney, so I think an indictment is highly unlikely. But I think a filed charge is highly likely because that can be done and it would give them most of what they want

 

Possession is an illusive word. I think most assuredly there are tons of classified documents in the 20 truck loads, but who has possession is a debatable point. NARA likes to claim they have possession and full control, but does that mean Obama has no access? I think definitely not. Technically Obama is responsible for deciding what documents to declassify and, with NARA's advice decide what classified documents ought to remain physically with NARA (although I think that has already been agreed to by Obama as soon as he is done with them.) For instance if there is any classified top secret documents NARA might not be permitted to even see them (though I don't know exactly how that works.)

 

Now you are laughably making stuff up, and it doesn’t even respond to my post.