January 6th hearings

[Jayro]

yes, actually? can you name a single thing that trump did that objectively made your life worse? i know one of your guys attacked the speakers husband with a hammer, not exactly a shining moment, but we dont talk about that anymore.

Not our guy, your guy. We have no need to attack our own.

 

[Foxi4]

Can you show in the law where it says the president IS the ultimate declass authority?

A sitting president has a constitutional grant to classify and declassify any documents, particularly ones concerning national security. Those powers are vested upon the president by the virtue of being commander-in-chief. This power exists outside of any congressional grant and the only exceptions from the rule are those imposed by separation of powers, as per Navy v. Egan.

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...resident-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/

There is an on-going EO which formalises the procedure and offers guidance, but as chief executive the sitting president can override any prior executive order, or amend existing ones. As it stands, unless the document happens to fulfil the requirements of an exception, the president can in fact declassify anything without any process and without guidance or approval. If a president says a document is declassified, 99 times out of a 100 it is the moment they said so.

That’s not in question here - the big caveat is whether Trump did declassify them or not - his claim is that he had a “standing order”, which is the part that’s being questioned. He can’t just say that a document is “declassified” because he got caught with it, that’s not how it works. While he can “declassify” documents with, quite literally, a thought, he’d have to do it *while he was a sitting president*. Since there’s no paper trail here, there’s no evidence to suggest that the documents were declassified. On the flip side, that doesn’t invalidate Trump’s claim either since, again, he is not required to consult anyone - it’s simply prudent to do so in the event that you end up with a couple of boxes of documents that, until that moment, nobody expected you to have.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

A sitting president has a constitutional grant to classify and declassify any documents, particularly ones concerning national security. Those powers are vested upon the president by the virtue of being commander-in-chief. This power exists outside of any congressional grant and the only exceptions from the rule are those imposed by separation of powers, as per Navy v. Egan.

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...resident-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/

There is an on-going EO which formalises the procedure and offers guidance, but as chief executive the sitting president can override any prior executive order, or amend existing ones. As it stands, unless the document happens to fulfil the requirements of an exception, the president can in fact declassify anything without any process and without guidance or approval. If a president says a document is declassified, 99 times out of a 100 it is the moment they said so.

That’s not in question here - the big caveat is whether Trump did declassify them or not - his claim is that he had a “standing order”, which is the part that’s being questioned. He can’t just say that a document is “declassified” because he got caught with it, that’s not how it works. While he can “declassify” documents with, quite literally, a thought, he’d have to do it *while he was a sitting president*. Since there’s no paper trail here, there’s no evidence to suggest that the documents were declassified. On the flip side, that doesn’t invalidate Trump’s claim either since, again, he is not required to consult anyone - it’s simply prudent to do so in the event that you end up with a couple of boxes of documents that, until that moment, nobody expected you to have.

As thr other source I posted says, this power needs to be exercised through a formal and complete process, which didn't happen. If it did, the lawyers would have said so.

 

[lolcatzuru]

Not our guy, your guy. We have no need to attack our own.

how is he our guy? his wife confirmed he's a liberal much like her.

See this is the problem with delusion, even when its easily disproven, you still cling to it.

 

[Foxi4]

As thr other source I posted says, this power needs to be exercised through a formal and complete process, which didn't happen. If it did, the lawyers would have said so.

It really doesn’t. That’s a suggested route, not a prerequisite. We’re talking about the chief executive here. You are welcome to follow the link provided, and the myriad of sources within.

 

[lolcatzuru]

It really doesn’t. That’s a suggested route, not a prerequisite. We’re talking about the chief executive here.

ahh well there you have it, nothing to be done.

 

[Foxi4]

ahh well there you have it, nothing to be done.

There’s plenty to investigate here, but precious little material to build an indictment around because, again, Trump was chief executive at the time he obtained the documents, so there’s reasonable doubt in regards to whether he intended to declassify the documents or just said that he did. If I recall correctly, some of the documents were concerning nuclear secrets in which case they might fall under an exemption, however I doubt anyone would use that as a “hook”. If anything, the Presidential Records Act is better grounds since he retained paperwork from his office when it was supposed to be archived, but even that is a minor infraction.

 

[RedColoredStars]

in the event that you end up with a couple of boxes of documents that, until that moment, nobody expected you to have.

Except that's not at all what took place. They didn't just decide out of the blue one day that he might have documents that don't belong to him, then go raid his place later that afternoon.. You're presenting a very much manipulated narrative.

 

[lolcatzuru]

There’s plenty to investigate here, but precious little material to build an indictment around because, again, Trump was chief executive at the time he obtained the documents, so there’s reasonable doubt in regards to whether he intended to declassify the documents or just said that he did. If I recall correctly, some of the documents were concerning nuclear secrets in which case they might fall under an exemption, however I doubt anyone would use that as a “hook”. If anything, the Presidential Records Act is better grounds since he retained paperwork from his office when it was supposed to be archived, but even that is a minor infraction.

oh you mean those documents that they then revealed never existed? but you didnt hear! someone had a cocktail near one! guilty!

 

[Foxi4]

Except that's not at all what took place. They didn't just decide out of the blue one day that he might have documents that don't belong to him, then go raid his place later that afternoon.. You're presenting a very much manipulated narrative.

What’s manipulated about it? The documents were confiscated because they were part of the Presidential record, they were supposed to be transported to the national archive as per the act. What’s your issue, exactly? They knew he had the documents, if that’s what you’re on about - he probably signed off a release. The point that flew over your head is that nobody expected him to retain them.

oh you mean those documents that they then revealed never existed? but you didnt hear! someone had a cocktail near one! guilty!

I don’t know what point you’re making either - he did retain some documents, and those documents were removed. As far as classification authority is concerned, I quote:

The President, after all, is the "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States." U.S. Const., Art. II, 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant. See Cafeteria Workers v. McElroy, 367 U.S. 886, 890 (1961). This Court has recognized the Government's "compelling interest" in withholding national security information from unauthorized persons in the course of executive business. Snepp v. United States, 444 U.S. 507, 509 , n. 3 (1980). See also United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258, 267 (1967); United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1, 10 (1953); Totten v. United States, 92 U.S. 105, 106 (1876). The authority to protect such information falls on the President as head of the Executive Branch and as Commander in Chief.

Tl;dr this is well-within the President’s competence, and while Congress has a vested interest, ultimately they can only inquire, rather than limit the power vested in the President unless other limiting circumstances already exist.

 

[lolcatzuru]

What’s manipulated about it? The documents were confiscated because they were part of the Presidential record, they were supposed to be transported to the national archive as per the act. What’s your issue, exactly? They knew he had the documents, if that’s what you’re on about - he probably signed off a release. The point that flew over your head is that nobody expected him to retain them.

I don’t know what point you’re making either - he did retain some documents, and those documents were removed. As far as classification authority is concerned, I quote:

Tl;dr this is well-within the President’s competence, and while Congress has a vested interest, ultimately they can only inquire, rather than limit the power vested in the President unless other limiting circumstances already exist.

i mean the nuclear docs that were gonna do him in, that it turned out he didnt have

 

[Foxi4]

i mean the nuclear docs that were gonna do him in, that it turned out he didnt have

I don’t really follow this story that closely because there’s nothing to follow - we’ve known from day 1 that the president had effectively absolute classification authority. There was no point (and there isn’t any point) in keeping tabs on it as it’s a non-story. If the nuclear documents *weren’t* among the ones found then that’s news to me and it makes the whole matter even more irrelevant, turning it into a minor infraction that was quickly corrected.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Denying the election results is an attack on democracy and thus, an attack on everybody's constitutional rights.

Democrats been denying election results for decades. So what?

Plenty of others have just embarrassed you with your ridiculous "der president can do what he wants to docs" claims, so as a reminder..

https://www.americanbar.org/news/ab...es/2022/10/fact-check-presidential-authority/

Key concept; formal procedure required and completed.

Guess they should go after all the ex-presidents too. They didn't then. That's called setting precedent. But the left is scared of Trumpo and are trying to do anything to keep him out of office. It won't work, but it's fun watching them try and fail every step of the way.

 

[Foxi4]

Guess they should go after all the ex-presidents too. They didn't then. That's called setting precedent. But the left is scared of Trumpo and are trying to do anything to keep him out of office. It won't work, but it's fun watching them try and fail every step of the way.

As the new ABA Legal Fact Check notes, the extent of a president’s legal authority to unilaterally declassify materials — without following formal procedures — has yet to be challenged in court.

Literally from the article linked. The chief executive stands above the process so long as there is no ruling that says otherwise. No legal authority in the land sits higher than the SCOTUS, and the SCOTUS maintains that the office of the presidency holds near-absolute and unilateral power to declassify.

 

[tabzer]

lol yet it was less then two years ago, that YOU SO defensive about not understanding American colloquialisms, as the Thread took its time to explain and not chastise you.
but sure.. ME ENGLISH BAD.= ME POINT INVALID
...please go on==

What are you saying? Please take a similar amount of effort that you make in color-coding and bolding your posts into proof-reading what you post. It reads like gibberish. You might have a point that you want to make, but the failure is in the delivery.

 

[djpannda]

What are you saying? Please take a similar amount of effort that you make in color-coding and bolding your posts into proof-reading what you post. It reads like gibberish. You might have a point that you want to make, but the failure is in the delivery.

Cool Story.

 

[Deleted member 578956]

lol cool Xenopbobic joke..

How the hell is it Xenophobic? please explain.

 

[djpannda]

How the hell is it Xenophobic? please explain.

"the xenophobic undertones to downplay or dismiss an argument"

 

[mrdude]

How the hell is it Xenophobic? please explain.

It's not, lefties call everyone Nazi's and Xenophobic that they disagree with, it's the only words they know and they don't even know the proper meaning of those. It's pointless to argue with them as well as their tiny brains can't comprehend what you're saying if you use more than 3 words in a sentence.

 

[djpannda]

"the xenophobic undertones to downplay or dismiss an argument"

example

It's not, lefties call everyone Nazi's and Xenophobic that they disagree with, it's the only words they know and they don't even know the proper meaning of those. It's pointless to argue with them as well as their tiny brains can't comprehend what you're saying if you use more than 3 words in a sentence.