Any documents that have been declassified will have that designation stamped on the cover. This is a desperate ad hoc attempt by Team Trump to avoid prosecution. While MSNBC and CNN are constantly hosting former CIA agents and National Security experts to debunk this nonsense, FOX News is still hosting team crazy which includes Trump's family members and attorneys.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 11:22 pmWeak as crap. Donald Trump is the Michael Scott of Presidents. One can't just scream, “I! Declare! Declassified!”.Jersey Girl wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 11:02 pmFOX is "reporting" that Trumptheasshat said he declassified all the documents before he left the Presidency. Just heard that with my own ears.
- Doc
Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
-
- God
- Posts: 1671
- Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2022 2:51 am
Re: Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal ...(there are) mentally challenged people with special needs like myself- Ajax18
- MeDotOrg
- 2nd Quorum of 70
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2020 9:55 pm
- Location: San Francisco
Re: Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
This whole process is agonizingly slow, with much heat and little light at this point. Everyone wants to know more. For example:
1 set of "top secret/SCI" documents
4 sets of "top secret" documents
3 sets of "secret" documents
3 sets of "confidential" documents
All of these numbers and classifications are basically placeholders for our imaginations at this point. We can't say what's inside each set of documents. Regardless, "top secret/SCI documents" most certainly cannot be declassified by Presidential fiat. Knowingly possessing such documents outside of a secure facility is a crime. There are a number of cases where people have received fines and jail time for possessing fewer documents of lower classification.
By the way, the postulated alibi that the General Services Administration packed the boxes in error has to be the MAGA equivalent of 'the dog ate my homework'.
1 set of "top secret/SCI" documents
4 sets of "top secret" documents
3 sets of "secret" documents
3 sets of "confidential" documents
All of these numbers and classifications are basically placeholders for our imaginations at this point. We can't say what's inside each set of documents. Regardless, "top secret/SCI documents" most certainly cannot be declassified by Presidential fiat. Knowingly possessing such documents outside of a secure facility is a crime. There are a number of cases where people have received fines and jail time for possessing fewer documents of lower classification.
By the way, the postulated alibi that the General Services Administration packed the boxes in error has to be the MAGA equivalent of 'the dog ate my homework'.
The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization.
- Will Durant
"Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist."
- Edwin Land
- Will Durant
"Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist."
- Edwin Land
- canpakes
- God
- Posts: 7389
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am
- canpakes
- God
- Posts: 7389
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am
Re: Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
If I see one, I’ll review it. Have you tried asking the other three folks who can approve posts, or are you just thrusting your sense of entitlement on me tonight? : D
Now, you did say that you were going to send me more Visa gift cards, as incentive for approvals. I’ve already used the last 10. Get cracking’.
- Dwight
- Elder
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 3:33 pm
- Location: The North
Re: Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
Trustworthy sources say that presidents can’t declassify things classified by statute. Nuclear documents are classified by statute. I saw Trump is claiming he would have given back if asked, but he as asked, he was subpoenaed, and they finally had to go and get the documents. So his case there is blown up.
I did see a theory that just might be dumb enough to be true that Trump took these as souvenirs, something he could show someone at his club as a kind of trophy. “You know my uncle was into nuclear, this is top secret stuff about our nuclear”. It is the least dangerous thing he could have done it for, and it is still highly unsettling.
I did see a theory that just might be dumb enough to be true that Trump took these as souvenirs, something he could show someone at his club as a kind of trophy. “You know my uncle was into nuclear, this is top secret stuff about our nuclear”. It is the least dangerous thing he could have done it for, and it is still highly unsettling.
- canpakes
- God
- Posts: 7389
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am
Re: Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
Can you explain why Trump went 565 days hoarding a stash of top secret documents that could endanger national security, and that no-one at Mar-a-Lago has the brain cells to explain why he took them, why he didn’t return them if it was an error, or why they were so ignorant of their existence if they claim to not have known that they were part of his stash?
Maybe start with those questions.
This doesn't even mention the fact that they could have gotten all that and more fom Hillary Clinton's server if they wanted.
No, because Hillary Clinton’s server isn’t the Mar-a-Lago.
But, you could probably dig up Podesta’s risotto recipe off of Hillary Clinton’s server, instead. Although not as deadly as a nuke strike from enemies using documents absconded by Trump, that risotto is killer.
-
- God
- Posts: 2472
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:42 am
- Location: On the imaginary axis
Re: Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
I very much doubt that an explanation of that could be given that could apply to the actions of a reasonable person with some sense of responsibility to something other than his own ego. But Trump? All bets are off.canpakes wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 6:04 amCan you explain why Trump went 565 days hoarding a stash of top secret documents that could endanger national security, and that no-one at Mar-a-Lago has the brain cells to explain why he took them, why he didn’t return them if it was an error, or why they were so ignorant of their existence if they claim to not have known that they were part of his stash?
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
- Morley
- God
- Posts: 1980
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm
- Location: 2023 National Medal of the Arts recipient, Mark Bradford's painting: Gatekeeper (2019)
Re: Mar-A-Lago Legally Searched by FBI
Nope, I don't.Binger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 1:03 amInteresting Morley.
I too want to take you at face value and consider your comments to be sincere.
But when you microscope into Ajax’s comment and scare quote “Russia collusion hoax” while overlooking Doc’s grand Atomic Espionage conspiracy, it makes it all kinda silly. Don’t ya think?
I don't read or reply to everyone. When I do post, I try to only respond to what I think might be sincere arguments (I'm admittedly not always successful).
I don't know enough about what you term "Doc's grand Atomic Espionage conspiracy" to comment on it. The news is not all in about why or what is happening with this Trump search.
I also didn't know enough about Ajax's theory to comment on it, which was why I asked for clarification and to see if he was serious. I didn't scare quote "Russia collusion hoax;" I quoted what Ajax was saying. And what I did is hardly choosing to microscope.
I didn't say that I wanted to take you at face value or that I thought your comments were always sincere. I know that doing that is not always wise, possible, or in the spirit of the board. I did say that I try treat you and your arguments with respect and asked why you were replying-- specifically to me--with a sack of merde thrown on my porch.
- Kishkumen
- God
- Posts: 7909
- Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
- Location: Cassius University
- Contact:
Re: Mar-A-Lago Raided
That is exactly the right posture to have taken at the time this post was written. Bravo.MeDotOrg wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 2:45 amAs far as I know, no one has seen the warrant that was approved by a Federal Judge, so characterizing this as politically motivated at this point is premature. This is unprecedented, but that does not necessarily mean unwarranted. We shall see what they are looking for, and we will see what they find.
- Kishkumen
- God
- Posts: 7909
- Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
- Location: Cassius University
- Contact:
Re: Mar-A-Lago Raided
By this reasoning, could Trump serve as president from a federal penitentiary?Dr Exiled wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 3:13 pmIt looks like there may be a push to use 18 U.S.C. § 2071 and its disqualification language to argue that Trump cannot run in 2024, if convicted of holding onto classified documents. The same argument was used against Clinton back in 2015 and shot down. Qualifications for president are constitutional and can't be changed by statute, only by amending the constitution. This snopes article lays out the arguments: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hilla ... qualified/