FBI raid on Trump's home

https://www.vice.com/en/article/j599...th-three-aides

"Exclusive: Hillary Clinton exchanged top secret emails on her private server with three aides"

https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/polit...email-timeline

"July 31, 2016 – Clinton defends her use of a private email server in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” Clinton states: “[FBI Director James Comey] said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.” The Washington Post Fact Checkers give her their lowest rating, four Pinocchios, for this statement."

TREASON! Right?

It's been PROVEN Hillary actually did what they're now accusing Trump of... and as of right now - everything that you read in the news regarding Trump is CONJECTURE.

The talking heads just say whatever random shit they want - no solid proof to this point - and the masses all start jerking themselves off thinking this is really going to be the time they get the bad orange man.

Morons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

https://www.vice.com/en/article/j599...th-three-aides

"Exclusive: Hillary Clinton exchanged top secret emails on her private server with three aides"

https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/polit...email-timeline

"July 31, 2016 – Clinton defends her use of a private email server in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” Clinton states: “[FBI Director James Comey] said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.” The Washington Post Fact Checkers give her their lowest rating, four Pinocchios, for this statement."

TREASON! Right?

It's been PROVEN Hillary actually did what they're now accusing Trump of... and as of right now - everything that you read in the news regarding Trump is CONJECTURE.

The talking heads just say whatever random shit they want - no solid proof to this point - and the masses all start jerking themselves off thinking this is really going to be the time they get the bad orange man.

Morons.

---

No, it wouldn't be treason. People throw that word around too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

There are no penalties associated with the Presidential Records Act, so violation or not, it means nothing.

---

It's not even the presidential records act. It's the espionage act that hes under investigation for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alfster

It's not even the presidential records act. It's the espionage act that hes under investigation for.

---

I wish people read the context of things before they decided to comment, T4F said he was in violations of the Presidential Records Act, which he probably is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sighisoara

I didn’t read that EO the same way (that there’s a procedure for the President). The procedures are for the various agencies, hence the appeal procedure with the President as the final arbiter. This doesn’t limit a President’s ability to classify or declassify.

---

Actually, after looking over things again (and not after a 13 hour work day)- I'd say you're correct here. Generally in the EO, the role of POTUS (or Director of Information Security Oversight) is to instruct agencies to classify/declassify records, which means generally it's not simply the decision itself by POTUS that renders something classified/declassified. Trump himself made that clear when he went to Twitter to declassify all records related to the Russia investigation, only to turn around to his staff immediately and inform them that him tweeting that didn't actually declassify anything.

I read that as making the process of classification/declassification a necessary step in all instances. But re-reading this, there are one or two situations where a President's decision about something explicitly *does* render it classified/declassified according to the EO. That gives more weight to your argument.

Having said that, the question of classification is actually a moot one it would seem, given the statutes in question don't differentiate between classified and unclassified material (as they were written before our current system of classification). There's also a larger issue here of whether a President privately deciding something is, or isn't, declassified actually makes it declassified. Ad hoc classification/declassification is very much treated as a performative act throughout the EO. In every single situation, ad hoc declassification involves a communicated decision. It's not a quiet exercise in self-reflection. After all, if you don't tell anyone then the information is still effectively classified.

Ultimately, the DoJ will have to make a decision on whether the EO supports a former President retroactively claiming that they declassified information without telling anyone (Section 6.1[b]). Even if classification were a more relevant issue here, I wouldn't bet on it. Especially not a former President who waited 15 months, until served with a warrant and an FBI raid, to tell anyone about this supposed declassification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

There are no penalties associated with the Presidential Records Act, so violation or not, it means nothing.

---

That's not entirely true. Just because you can't be put in jail for violating that Act directly doesn't mean that the law isn't functional or is somehow not in effect. It also doesn't mean the act of defying it doesn't trigger violations of other statutes. (Which is absolutely what happened here)

Legally it's actually a really important law in this case- because it's what makes the statutes pertaining to Federal government records relevant. The Presidential Records Act is the reason why all of those boxes were the property of the Federal government in the first place and Trump had no claim on any of them.

Materially it also matters because his violation of the Presidential Records Act is what prompted the initial court ordered subpoenas to turn these records over to the Federal government. His continued refusal to fully comply is what then presumably led to the warrant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

There are no penalties associated with the Presidential Records Act, so violation or not, it means nothing.

---

BUT THIS HAS TO BE IT! TIME4FUN HEARD IT WAS ON MSNBC!

THIS TIME IT'S DIFFERENT!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by time4fun

That's not entirely true. Just because you can't be put in jail for violating that Act directly doesn't mean that the law isn't functional or is somehow not in effect. It also doesn't mean the act of defying it doesn't trigger violations of other statutes. (Which is absolutely what happened here)

Legally it's actually a really important law in this case- because it's what makes the statutes pertaining to Federal government records relevant. The Presidential Records Act is the reason why all of those boxes were the property of the Federal government in the first place and Trump had no claim on any of them.

Materially it also matters because his violation of the Presidential Records Act is what prompted the initial court ordered subpoenas to turn these records over to the Federal government. His continued refusal to fully comply is what then presumably led to the warrant.

---

The Act literally has no mechanism for enforcement, it is entirely true. It allows them to go and seize the documents, but there are absolutely 0 penalties for violating it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

https://www.vice.com/en/article/j599...th-three-aides

"Exclusive: Hillary Clinton exchanged top secret emails on her private server with three aides"

https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/polit...email-timeline

"July 31, 2016 – Clinton defends her use of a private email server in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” Clinton states: “[FBI Director James Comey] said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.” The Washington Post Fact Checkers give her their lowest rating, four Pinocchios, for this statement."

TREASON! Right?

It's been PROVEN Hillary actually did what they're now accusing Trump of... and as of right now - everything that you read in the news regarding Trump is CONJECTURE.

The talking heads just say whatever random shit they want - no solid proof to this point - and the masses all start jerking themselves off thinking this is really going to be the time they get the bad orange man.

Morons.

---

I can't believe I actually have to point out that actively stealing and hiding highly sensitive information- including about nuclear programs- from the Federal government is VERY different from having discussions between authorized government agents that were *retroactively* classified, on a private email server. Also that a former President, who had absolutely no legal right to have that information and whose responsibility as a President was to keep our country safe, should be held to a higher standard than literally everyone who isn't a current sitting President.

But more to the point Shaps, I seem to recall all of you deciding she was guilty of treason and completely unfit for office for what she did, and also that she should go to prison. And I seem to recall all of us agreeing that it was appropriate to investigate her- most of all your side.

So, care to explain why criticizing Trump for what he did is so wrong? Shouldn't he also be considered unfit for office? Shouldn't he also be investigated as seriously and thoroughly as Clinton?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

And according to Trump:

- The documents were declassified by him while he was still president.
- The FBI knew about the documents and had access to them prior to the raid and did not remove them from his house, instead they said to put another lock on the door where they were being stored and Trump did so.

Now you can be like Shaft and just automatically assume Trump is 100% lying and the FBI is 100% telling the truth because they have never lied to the American public before, but at least come out and say that. Don't just act like the only facts we have is the FBI's perspective.

---

You can't declassify material related to atomic energy or weapons. You can't declassify material related to a direct threat to national security without documented checks with the NSC. Moreover, you can't declassify documents without notifying /several/ agencies, including the Presidential Archivist who runs an ongoing log of materials going to/from the President as part of their obligation to the National Archive. Yet despite everything everyone's pointed out, you've planted your flag on the hill that somehow he made all those documents okay to keep. The FBI would not be executing a search warrant to seize missing materials if they were in fact okay to keep.

It's dismaying that while a large number of the Republican mouthpieces are backing off of the indefensible, yet you and the rest of the diehard Trump loyalists are ready to go to war to represent those lies. Most of the rest of the country has woken up to Trump's multitude of lies, crimes being investigated and his threat to the Democracy. Why haven't you?