# Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it



## Golfing Gator

Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
					

Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...




					www.yahoo.com
				




“There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”

So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


----------



## Mac1958

Golfing Gator said:


> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Prosecutors across the country are just hoping he keeps talking.


----------



## rightwinger

It amazes me how Trump views classification as an annoyance.

Not as a way to ensure damaging information is not released, but as an annoying requirement that he has to keep these documents safe and secure.

So what does he do?
He issues a blanket declassification on every document he possesses.  Even Top Secret.

No concern that the information contained in those documents is now compromised


----------



## 1srelluc

LOL.....That's right, keep all your focus on Trump. That's the plan.


----------



## pknopp

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?



 He is going with the defense Skyler used on the IRS agent in Breaking Bad.


----------



## TNHarley

According to this, it isnt so black and white.








						Yes, the president can declassify documents, but there isn’t a set protocol they have to follow
					

Former President Trump claimed documents found at Mar-a-Lago were “all declassified.” We explain why sitting presidents can declassify documents and how it works.




					www.verifythis.com
				



He can basically do whatever he wants with declassification. There are informal protocols, but nothing set in stone. EXCEPT nuclear documents. Those are protected under the Atomic Energy Act.
Apparently, just because they are declassified, doesnt mean they can just take those documents with them when they leave the WH either.


----------



## Golfing Gator

TNHarley said:


> According to this, it isnt so black and white.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the president can declassify documents, but there isn’t a set protocol they have to follow
> 
> 
> Former President Trump claimed documents found at Mar-a-Lago were “all declassified.” We explain why sitting presidents can declassify documents and how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.verifythis.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He can basically do whatever he wants with declassification. There are informal protocols, but nothing set in stone. EXCEPT nuclear documents. Those are protected under the Atomic Energy Act.
> Apparently, just because they are declassified, doesnt mean they can just take those documents with them when they leave the WH either.



So, do you agree all the POTUS needs to do is think about it and POOF things are declassified?


----------



## Golfing Gator

1srelluc said:


> LOL.....That's right, keep all your focus on Trump. That's the plan.



Oddly, you did not answer the question.

Why is that?


----------



## citygator

Since he can’t prove he declassified he has to go with the think declassification method. Worked for the music man.


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> Oddly, you did not answer the question.
> 
> Why is that?


You didn’t answer the question either.


----------



## TNHarley

Golfing Gator said:


> So, do you agree all the POTUS needs to do is think about it and POOF things are declassified?


I think there needs to be at least some sort of verbal communication. But im no expert. 
I guess its possible.
SC basically said they can do what they want with it.


----------



## johngaltshrugged

Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.

Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
Did that hurt?


----------



## Golfing Gator

johngaltshrugged said:


> Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
> At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.
> 
> Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
> He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
> Did that hurt?



Just the opposite, though I did spit out a bit of coffee while laughing at loud at your post.


----------



## candycorn

So...one president can literally wipe out all of the state secrets if she or he wanted to do it...without any check or balance?

Is that what the right wing is now asking us to believe?  

Wow.


----------



## TNHarley

johngaltshrugged said:


> Did that hurt?


 gotta remember that one


----------



## TNHarley

candycorn said:


> one president can literally wipe out all of the state secrets if she or he wanted to do it


indeed


----------



## johngaltshrugged

candycorn said:


> So...one president can literally wipe out all of the state secrets if she or he wanted to do it...without any check or balance?
> 
> Is that what the right wing is now asking us to believe?
> 
> Wow.


I'm sorry, are you actually comparing taking home the docs that prove the DNC, HRC, Obama & his WH & fed law enforcement illegally targeted DT & committed felony sedition in the act is the same as declassifying every single document in the US?
Nice strawman you got going there but it's losing it's stuffing


----------



## iceberg

candycorn said:


> So...one president can literally wipe out all of the state secrets if she or he wanted to do it...without any check or balance?
> 
> Is that what the right wing is now asking us to believe?
> 
> Wow.


Biden is costing us billions in executive orders. 

But you don't care about that.


----------



## Golfing Gator

johngaltshrugged said:


> I'm sorry, are you actually comparing taking home the docs that prove the DNC, HRC, Obama & his WH & fed law enforcement illegally targeted DT & committed felony sedition in the act is the same as declassifying every single document in the US?



How do you know that is what Trump had in his home?

And if those are what Trump had in his home, why did he not make them public so we all could see them and know the truth?


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Biden is costing us billions in executive orders.
> 
> But you don't care about that.



Would you mind staying on topic just this once? 

Do you have an opinion to offer on what Trump said?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


No I don't think it should be that easy. 

But if what he, had was raid worthy, why did they leave in June without taking any?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Would you mind staying on topic just this once?
> 
> Do you have an opinion to offer on what Trump said?


Read on whiner boy.


----------



## TNHarley

Golfing Gator said:


> How do you know that is what Trump had in his home?
> 
> And if those are what Trump had in his home, why did he not make them public so we all could see them and know the truth?


Good question.
I know he requested all the documents and he never got them. He is the president. He can get what he wants.
Of course, you cant believe a word he says so he might not have even requested them.


----------



## Marener

iceberg said:


> But if what he, had was raid worthy, why did they leave in June without taking any?


That wasn’t an option. The DoJ lawyers weren’t allowed to search for more documents and they had no legal right to force Trump’s attorneys on the issue.


----------



## Golfing Gator

TNHarley said:


> He is the president. He can get what he wants.



This actually bothers me, not in regards to Trump specifically, but to the idea that the POTUS is almost some sort of demi-god that has unlimited power and gets whatever they want.

This is not the way it is supposed to be.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> This actually bothers me, not in regards to Trump specifically, but to the idea that the POTUS is almost some sort of demi-god that has unlimited power and gets whatever they want.
> 
> This is not the way it is supposed to be.


Of that we both agree. While I agree he can declassify documents, a process needs to be in place to do it and followed.


----------



## TNHarley

Golfing Gator said:


> This actually bothers me, not in regards to Trump specifically, but to the idea that the POTUS is almost some sort of demi-god that has unlimited power and gets whatever they want.
> 
> This is not the way it is supposed to be.


Oh no, I get that. And they damn sure shouldnt. But it is classified info and he is the CiC. I dont understand why he shouldnt be allowed to any document he wants.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> This actually bothers me, not in regards to Trump specifically, but to the idea that the POTUS is almost some sort of demi-god that has unlimited power and gets whatever they want.
> 
> This is not the way it is supposed to be.


How many executive orders has Biden issued?


----------



## TNHarley

Blaster said:


> How many executive orders has Biden issued?


Anyone that does not simply direct a govt agency is one too many.
Every President abuses their power with this EO shit. Every one of them should be impeached and removed from office when they do that.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> How many executive orders has Biden issued?



Too many, as did his predecessors.   Not that you could actually say that about your god Trump


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Too many, as did his predecessors.   Not that you could actually say that about your god Trump


And here you come assigning emotional tags and telling other people how they feel. 

Your hate of Trump is obvious as is your desire to trash anyone who doesn't share it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> And here you come assigning emotional tags and telling other people how they feel.
> 
> Your hate of Trump is obvious as is your desire to trash anyone who doesn't share it.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


>


But I am not wrong. 

Where are your critical of Biden posts? I seem to miss those.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


>


And funny that I answer your question directly. No games no diversion. I ask why they didn't remove docs in June, you Casper out n run away.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Too many, as did his predecessors.   Not that you could actually say that about your god Trump


You consider Trump a God?  You need help.


----------



## iceberg

Blaster said:


> You consider Trump a God?  You need help.


Because he will quickly make the problem about people he hates then accuse you of worship crap if you don't agree.


----------



## Magnus

TNHarley said:


> According to this, it isnt so black and white.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the president can declassify documents, but there isn’t a set protocol they have to follow
> 
> 
> Former President Trump claimed documents found at Mar-a-Lago were “all declassified.” We explain why sitting presidents can declassify documents and how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.verifythis.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He can basically do whatever he wants with declassification. There are informal protocols, but nothing set in stone. EXCEPT nuclear documents. Those are protected under the Atomic Energy Act.
> Apparently, just because they are declassified, doesnt mean they can just take those documents with them when they leave the WH either.


Key points in your link:_ A *sitting* U.S. president has wide-ranging authority to classify and declassify certain documents, *but former presidents do not* have authority over classification and declassification.  _

Sure, Rump could have declassified the documents he had in his possession when he was president. Problem is, no one has come forward with proof that he did. 

Rump and his idiot friends talk a big talk outside the courtroom but once inside, they become as quiet as church mice.


----------



## rightwinger

TNHarley said:


> I think there needs to be at least some sort of verbal communication. But im no expert.
> I guess its possible.
> SC basically said they can do what they want with it.


If he never mentions it to anyone, how the hell can they be declassified?


----------



## dudmuck

johngaltshrugged said:


> I'm sorry, are you actually comparing taking home the docs that prove the DNC, HRC, Obama & his WH & fed law enforcement illegally targeted DT & committed felony sedition in the act is the same as declassifying every single document in the US?
> Nice strawman you got going there but it's losing it's stuffing
> 
> View attachment 699760






if Trump was illegally targeted, then Barr would have addressed it.


----------



## TNHarley

rightwinger said:


> If he never mentions it to anyone, how the hell can they be declassified?


IDK. If this goes to the courts, we will find out.
Of course, there could be witnesses and they just havent come forward. Then again, if there was, big mouth would have said so.


----------



## 1srelluc

Golfing Gator said:


> Oddly, you did not answer the question.
> 
> Why is that?


Because I really don't care.....Clear enough for you now Skippy? Trump is old news, I have bigger fish to fry. 

Your ilk had better move on or you people are going to get your ass flamed.....Never-mind, just keep keeping on. TDSland is just _exactly_ where we want you and your ilk to remain.


----------



## rightwinger

TNHarley said:


> IDK. If this goes to the courts, we will find out.
> Of course, there could be witnesses and they just havent come forward. Then again, if there was, big mouth would have said so.



Trump will need someone to come forward and say……Trump told me to declassify all those documents and I didn’t do it


----------



## iceberg

1srelluc said:


> Because I really don't care.....Clear enough for you now Skippy? Trump is old news, I have bigger fish to fry.
> 
> Your ilk had better move on or you people are going to get your ass flamed.....Never-mind, just keep keeping on. TDSland is just _exactly_ where we want you and your ilk to remain.


he's got TDS it would seem but he will deny it and tell you he rags on both sides all the time.

yet, i never see threads about the stupid shit biden says. about yet ANOTHER executive order. when i bring those up, he quickly waters it down with "all presidents do it too much".

and yes, they do; but that wasn't my question. my question is directly the impact of executive orders becoming more and more a way of government and laws OF WHICH the president is not supposed to be doing. biden has taken this power to yet another level up and if not stopped, the next president will simply carry on that tradition.

so, for GG to be all up in arms about the stupid shit trump says (of which there is yes, a lot) and not care about "both sides equally" then he becomes the one sided mindset he openly bitches at on a daily basis. tell him this and he starts telling you how you feel about things and why you are so stupid for feeling that way. the way you never said you felt. simply disagreeing with gator seems to upset him.

i also answered his question directly. NO - a president should not be able to do this and YES, if trump said this as yahoo is saying then it is completely stupid. however, if the docs were dangerous for him to have, why did they leave them there?

POOF. he's gone. he demands you reply to him directly but will seldom if ever do the same for you.

annoying as fuck.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

“We got him now case # 1,763. The Blob in New York’s case is # 1,764.


----------



## Wballz49

rightwinger said:


> It amazes me how Trump views classification as an annoyance.
> 
> Not as a way to ensure damaging information is not released, but as an annoying requirement that he has to keep these documents safe and secure.
> 
> So what does he do?
> He issues a blanket declassification on every document he possesses.  Even Top Secret.
> 
> No concern that the information contained in those documents is now compromised


He uses the “Force” to declassify


----------



## rightwinger

What I don’t understand is how Trump can declassify all those documents without saying what the documents were and why the information was no longer secret.

You would think that if Trump would declassify TOP SECRET information to no longer classified, that he would have a damned good reason


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

rightwinger said:


> Trump will need someone to come forward and say……Trump told me to declassify all those documents and I didn’t do it



Trump will need to sit back and laugh as yet another “GOTCHA!” From you TDS morons blows up in your face.


----------



## skews13

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?



Telepathic declassification.

That actually adds up to a Trumphumper


----------



## playtime

ummmm,,,, it really doesn't matter whether donny declassified anything -
the crux of this whole crime is those files/docs didn't  belong to him; he had no 'right' to take them.

they are the property of the US citizens.  donny stole them & the reasons will become known sooner or later.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> What I don’t understand is how Trump can declassify all those documents without saying what the documents were and why the information was no longer secret.
> 
> You would think that if Trump would declassify TOP SECRET information to no longer classified, that he would have a damned good reason


oh be real.

there's a hell of a lot more you don't understand.


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> oh be real.
> 
> there's a hell of a lot more you don't understand.



Such as?

Seems to be a lot that Trump does not understand about Classified documents


----------



## Wballz49

Magnus said:


> Key points in your link:_ A *sitting* U.S. president has wide-ranging authority to classify and declassify certain documents, *but former presidents do not* have authority over classification and declassification.  _
> 
> Sure, Rump could have declassified the documents he had in his possession when he was president. Problem is, no one has come forward with proof that he did.
> 
> Rump and his idiot friends talk a big talk outside the courtroom but once inside, they become as quiet as church mice.


🤦‍♂️They keep missing the point.  He took them home after he was fired.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> Such as?
> 
> Seems to be a lot that Trump does not understand about Classified documents


no one alive has that kind of time. you're a monolithic troll who never contributes to conversations, just attacks.


----------



## playtime

rightwinger said:


> *What I don’t understand is how Trump can declassify all those documents* without saying what the documents were and why the information was no longer secret.
> 
> You would think that if Trump would declassify TOP SECRET information to no longer classified, that he would have a damned good reason



_*the documents that the FBI planted....*_


----------



## playtime




----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> no one alive has that kind of time. you're a monolithic troll who never contributes to conversations, just attacks.


You need to do a better job at reading. Start with this one.

“What I don’t understand is how Trump can declassify all those documents without saying what the documents were and why the information was no longer secret.

You would think that if Trump would declassify TOP SECRET information to no longer classified, that he would have a damned good reason.”


Why can’t you reply?


----------



## iceberg

playtime said:


> View attachment 699799


MAGA IS EVIL BECAUSE I SAID SO.

yawn.


----------



## playtime

iceberg said:


> MAGA IS EVIL BECAUSE I SAID SO.
> 
> yawn.


----------



## insolent imp

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


he's a dope.


----------



## airplanemechanic

Hey if you can attack and sue Trump because you "think" he did something wrong, then he can declassify documents by "thinking" about it.


----------



## iceberg

playtime said:


> View attachment 699803


while you wait for your side to tell you what to believe.

we can do this shit all day long.


----------



## bodecea

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


I love how he is digging his hole deeper and deeper.


----------



## Magnus

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


----------



## bodecea

1srelluc said:


> LOL.....That's right, keep all your focus on Trump. That's the plan.


That's the best you've got?


----------



## Godboy

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Is he wrong? Post the rule that says he cant, word for word.


----------



## bodecea

TNHarley said:


> According to this, it isnt so black and white.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the president can declassify documents, but there isn’t a set protocol they have to follow
> 
> 
> Former President Trump claimed documents found at Mar-a-Lago were “all declassified.” We explain why sitting presidents can declassify documents and how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.verifythis.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He can basically do whatever he wants with declassification. There are informal protocols, but nothing set in stone. EXCEPT nuclear documents. Those are protected under the Atomic Energy Act.
> Apparently, just because they are declassified, doesnt mean they can just take those documents with them when they leave the WH either.


"He can basically do whatever he wants with declassification"...........................not without documentation, he can't.  But thanks for showing us you believe your orange god is above the law.


----------



## bodecea

johngaltshrugged said:


> Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
> At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.
> 
> Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
> He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
> Did that hurt?


Way to ignore the mounting evidence on all fronts.   It must be comforting to be so willingly blind to reality., eh?


----------



## bodecea

TNHarley said:


> indeed


Well, isn't THAT telling.    So deeply trapped in the cult to actually believe such a ridiculous thing.


----------



## Wballz49

Declassification 101

1. President or Congress ordering all JFK records declassified.  Memorandum sent to all Agencies with those records to start declassification process(blacking shit out).  Records released on websites and foia requests.

2.President in National Security Scif briefing on North Korea they need somebody to get inside.  President calls Dennis Rodman in to help.  Rodman has no Security Clearance, President tells staff to let Rodman seeTop Secret  documents about what issue is.  President has declassified documents for Rodman to read while in this meeting.

Truman didn’t have Atomic Bomb papers at his house

Kennedy did not have Castro assassination papers at his house.

Clintons boy Burger stuffed classified documents in his pants while reviewing in National Archives Scif.  He gets caught and convicted of Felony.  Pardoned bu Bush🤦‍♂️


Trumps issue is he took them home.  Its a closed and shut case.


----------



## insolent imp

Godboy said:


> Is he wrong? Post the rule that says he cant, word for word.


*Part 1. Original Classification

Sec. 1.1.* Classification Standards.

(a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met:


(1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;


(2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government;


(3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and


(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
(b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.

(c) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.

Executive Order 12958 was amended on March 25, 2003, by Executive Order 13292,


----------



## Esdraelon

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


As Chief Executive, he ARGUABLY has that power.  There is literally *nothing* that limits his power to classify or declassify information.  This trial, and yes there will be one, will make its way up to SCOTUS and we'll likely get the issue made more clear.  AS IT IS, there is no LAW that sets limits on the Executive Branch authority to execute its powers.


----------



## bodecea

Esdraelon said:


> As Chief Executive, he ARGUABLY has that power.  There is literally *nothing* that limits his power to classify or declassify information.  This trial, and yes there will be one, will make its way up to SCOTUS and we'll likely get the issue made more clear.  AS IT IS, there is no LAW that sets limits on the Executive Branch authority to execute its powers.


And where's the declassification documentation?


----------



## citygator

Can pardons be thought up too?  Opens up a whole new opportunity for Trump.


----------



## TNHarley

bodecea said:


> "He can basically do whatever he wants with declassification"...........................not without documentation, he can't.  But thanks for showing us you believe your orange god is above the law.


The link I posted said there wasnt any actual policy on that.
Its not my fault you are illiterate.


----------



## insolent imp

Esdraelon said:


> As Chief Executive, he ARGUABLY has that power.  There is literally *nothing* that limits his power to classify or declassify information.  This trial, and yes there will be one, will make its way up to SCOTUS and we'll likely get the issue made more clear.  AS IT IS, there is no LAW that sets limits on the Executive Branch authority to execute its powers.


Executive Order 13292, to read as follows:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to further amend Executive Order 12958, as amended, it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12958 is amended to read as follows:

This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation's progress depends on the free flow of information. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation's security remains a priority.


----------



## TNHarley

bodecea said:


> Well, isn't THAT telling.    So deeply trapped in the cult to actually believe such a ridiculous thing.


I have a supreme court ruling on my side. All you have is disingenuous outrage and hatred.


----------



## TNHarley

insolent imp said:


> Executive Order 13292, to read as follows:
> 
> By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to further amend Executive Order 12958, as amended, it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12958 is amended to read as follows:
> 
> This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation's progress depends on the free flow of information. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation's security remains a priority.


That order is null and void. Obama replaced it.


----------



## candycorn

iceberg said:


> Biden is costing us billions in executive orders.
> 
> But you don't care about that.


Its a bit off topic; this thread is about your blob declassifying things; not your obsession with the guy who kicked his mara-lard-ass out of the White House...but you don't care about that.


----------



## TNHarley

citygator said:


> Can pardons be thought up too?  Opens up a whole new opportunity for Trump.


There is a process for that.


----------



## insolent imp

TNHarley said:


> That order is null and void. Obama replaced it.


it was amended  

A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified


----------



## Godboy

insolent imp said:


> *Part 1. Original Classification
> 
> Sec. 1.1.* Classification Standards.
> 
> (a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met:
> 
> 
> (1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;
> 
> 
> (2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government;
> 
> 
> (3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and
> 
> 
> (4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
> (b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.
> 
> (c) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.
> 
> Executive Order 12958 was amended on March 25, 2003, by Executive Order 13292,


That doesnt apply to the president, retard. Not one thing in that useless post explains how a president declassifies information. Not once did it even use the word "president".


----------



## Wballz49

Here’s how I see the outcome.  Trump will be indicted and convicted.  He will be pardoned by Biden.  Bidens team feels he will lose election because of this.  War is started with Russia, Iran,NK, or China.  Patriotic support during wartime helps Biden secure 2024.  I have seen this movie before like anybody else born before 1990


----------



## bravoactual

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of s





Golfing Gator said:


> omething being declassified enough to make it so?





iceberg said:


> No I don't think it should be that easy.
> 
> But if what he, had was raid worthy, why did they leave in June without taking any?



ROTFLMAO!!!!!!

First off, the Traitor does not have the capacity to think.  He has no rational thought process.  He is a pathological liar.  Maybe he believes  that with his Narcisisstic Personalty Disorder he can do that, but no.

He cannot wave his tiny baby hands of classified documents and declassify, nor can pull off some Mandrake the Magnificent Mind Game (the Traitor lacks the necessary qualifications to be called an intelligence life form).

The Traitor is making matters worse for his latest brand of Joe Isuzu shysters.  As I stated yesterday, the burden of proof that the Traitor had power to declasify those documents on him, he has prove he had the power to declassify and saying can do by just thinking (oh please) is ridiculous in the extreme.


----------



## bravoactual

Wballz49 said:


> He will be pardoned by Biden.



No, President Biden will NOT pardon him.


----------



## insolent imp

Godboy said:


> That doesnt apply to the president, retard. Not one thing in that useless post explains how a president declassifies information. Not once did it even use the word "president".


with stupidity as strong as yours it's no wonder you like trump. two peas in a pod.


----------



## Delldude

Golfing Gator said:


> So, do you agree all the POTUS needs to do is think about it and POOF things are declassified?


Sure he can think, but then He has to tell an aide to get it.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

Leftists claim to be legal experts on anything Trump related. How’s that working out for you so far?


----------



## Godboy

insolent imp said:


> with stupidity as strong as yours it's no wonder you like trump. two peas in a pod.


Well now that we finally have someone smart like you here, you can post the exact requirements for a president declassifying documents and prove all of us dummies wrong.


----------



## insolent imp

Godboy said:


> Oh, well now that we finally have someone smart like you here, you can post the exact requirements for a president declassifying documents and prove us dummies wrong.


(d) Original classification authorities must receive training in original classification as provided in this order and its implementing directives. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and of the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be brought against an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure


----------



## Delldude

bravoactual said:


> No, President Biden will NOT pardon him.


Never get to that point.

I see the DNC has activated the Trump app, living rent free in your ....and many others, heads here........


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

playtime said:


> View attachment 699803



Uhhhh…..once again that doesn’t work here. You leftist really suck at the whole meme thingy.


----------



## Godboy

insolent imp said:


> (d) Original classification authorities must receive training in original classification as provided in this order and its implementing directives. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and of the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be brought against an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure


....and AGAIN you idiots provide NOTHING that details the PRESIDENT'S procedure for declassifying documents. The president isnt part of the "authorities" category you stupid asshole.


----------



## bdtex

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


All those documents marked "Classified" that were seized with the warrant at MaL should be subject to FOIA requests then. Surely someone has done that by now.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

insolent imp said:


> (d) Original classification authorities must receive training in original classification as provided in this order and its implementing directives. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and of the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be brought against an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure



You really think you’re on to something don’t you?


----------



## Godboy

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Uhhhh…..once again that doesn’t work here. You leftist really suck at the whole meme thingy.


Yep, not an ounce of crearivity or humor in their memes.


----------



## insolent imp

Godboy said:


> ....and AGAIN you idiots provide NOTHING that details the PRESIDENT'S procedure for declassifying documents. The president isnt part of the "authorities" category you stupid asshole.


ain't laws a motherfucker?

(c) Classified information shall remain under the control of the originating agency or its successor in function. An agency shall not disclose information originally classified by another agency without its authorization. An official or employee leaving agency service may not remove classified information from the agency's control.

(d) Classified information may not be removed from official premises without proper authorization.


----------



## insolent imp

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> You really think you’re on to something don’t you?


I didn't write the law 
But I can read them


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

insolent imp said:


> I didn't write the law
> But I can read them



Comprehension issue then?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Yet another example of why Trump is unfit to be president.


----------



## rightwinger

airplanemechanic said:


> Hey if you can attack and sue Trump because you "think" he did something wrong, then he can declassify documents by "thinking" about it.



Over a hundred Classified Documents were found improperly stored 

Nothing to “think”
it is a fact


----------



## insolent imp

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Comprehension issue then?


that would fall on you and the fat fuck trump 

(a)
Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


There was an attorney on FOX last week that has assisted Presidents from both parties on how to declassify documents they would like to keep and how to work with the archives dept.... he said a president has sole authority to declassify and he doesn't have to tell anyone... there is no set process he must follow... if the Archives dept. wants to go through those documents they can but not at the point of an FBI rifle.....


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> Over a hundred Classified Documents were found improperly stored
> 
> Nothing to “think”
> it is a fact


Liar.... that's not true and you keep telling the same lie....


----------



## insolent imp

Rambunctious said:


> There was an attorney on FOX last week that has assisted Presidents from both parties on how to declassify documents they would like to keep and how to work with the archives dept.... he said a president has sole authority to declassify and he doesn't have to tell anyone... there is no set process he must follow... if the Archives dept. wants to go through those documents they can but not at the point of an FBI rifle.....


there is a direct process for removing secure documents and their storage.


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> Liar.... that's not true and you keep telling the same lie....



As you go full Conservatard

Just deny any information you find uncomfortable


----------



## Rambunctious

insolent imp said:


> there is a direct process for removing secure documents and their storage.


Then tell us what it is because no one has yet... not here not on TV and not in the press... they all say there is but can't site it....


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> As you go full Conservatard
> 
> Just deny any information you find uncomfortable


Dude you keep lying... and I'm going to call you on it every time I see it.... If you have to lie... maybe you are wrong....


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> Dude you keep lying... and I'm going to call you on it every time I see it.... If you have to lie... maybe you are wrong....



Show the lie Skippy

I will wait…….


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> Show the lie Skippy
> 
> I will wait…….


I already did dummy....


----------



## iceberg

Rambunctious said:


> There was an attorney on FOX last week that has assisted Presidents from both parties on how to declassify documents they would like to keep and how to work with the archives dept.... he said a president has sole authority to declassify and he doesn't have to tell anyone... there is no set process he must follow... if the Archives dept. wants to go through those documents they can but not at the point of an FBI rifle.....


While I personally think there should be a process, this is simply my own view. If there is no process then is what Trump said wrong? 

No.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

1srelluc said:


> LOL.....That's right, keep all your focus on Trump. That's the plan.


I agree..question is..whose plan...LOL!

Trump is a sinking ship...amusing that Putin is also circling the drain. Fitting that both should be linked in failure.


----------



## Rambunctious

iceberg said:


> While I personally think there should be a process, this is simply my own view. If there is no process then is what Trump said wrong?
> 
> No.


Trump is not an attorney that is why he has a whole stable of them... Trump never packed one single box himself... so its reasonable to expect he would declassify anything taken to or left at his private home... then the process of Archiving documents begins....
Biden and Garland thought that would be a good time to go full attack mode on a former president and possibly the next GOP presidential candidate....
There was a day when a sitting president would be impeached for ordering such a raid..... and heads would roll for carrying out that order at the DOJ and FBI... but we have weak leadership in the GOP and always have.... That's why we are two clicks away from living in a tyrannical nation... no one is fighting for the constitution... but Trump...


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

johngaltshrugged said:


> Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
> At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.
> 
> Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
> He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
> Did that hurt?


Perhaps there is an argument..for a sitting President..perhaps. But Trump is just a citizen now..and has no special powers. His actions do not  last past his term..and Biden removed all his clearances the very first day of his Presidency~


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> I already did dummy....


As usual……You FAILED


----------



## iceberg

Rambunctious said:


> Trump is not an attorney that is why he has a whole stable of them... Trump never packed one single box himself... so its reasonable to expect he would declassify anything taken to or left at his private home... then the process of Archiving documents begins....
> Biden and Garland thought that would be a good time to go full attack mode on a former president and possibly the next GOP presidential candidate....
> There was a day when a sitting president would be impeached for ordering such a raid..... and heads would roll for carrying out that order at the DOJ and FBI... but we have weak leadership in the GOP and always have.... That's why we are two clicks away from living in a tyrannical nation... no one is fighting for the constitution... but Trump...


And that is the strange part to me.

The left screams SHOW ME WHERE HE DID THIS and at first glance I agree. Where did he do this. 

However, if there is no process, while odd, then he can do whatever he wants and this is something to correct / adjust moving forward.


----------



## insolent imp

Rambunctious said:


> Then tell us what it is because no one has yet... not here not on TV and not in the press... they all say there is but can't site it....


(1) There is established an Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel ("Panel"). The Secretaries of State and Defense, the Attorney General, the Director of Central Intelligence, the Archivist of the United States, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs shall each appoint a senior level representative to serve as a member of the Panel. The President shall select the Chair of the Panel from among the Panel members.



* * * * *
(b) Functions. The Panel shall:

(1) decide on appeals by persons who have filed classification challenges under section 1.9 of this order;

(2) approve, deny or amend agency exemptions from automatic declassification as provided in section 3.4 of this order; and

(3) decide on appeals by persons or entities who have filed requests for mandatory declassification review under section 3.6 of this order.



* * * * *
*Sec. 5.5.* _Information Security Policy Advisory Council._

(a) Establishment. There is established an Information Security Policy Advisory Council ("Council"). The Council shall be composed of seven members appointed by the President for staggered terms not to exceed 4 years, from among persons who have demonstrated interest and expertise in an area related to the subject matter of this order and are not otherwise employees of the Federal Government.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

insolent imp said:


> (1) There is established an Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel ("Panel"). The Secretaries of State and Defense, the Attorney General, the Director of Central Intelligence, the Archivist of the United States, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs shall each appoint a senior level representative to serve as a member of the Panel. The President shall select the Chair of the Panel from among the Panel members.
> 
> 
> 
> * * * * *
> (b) Functions. The Panel shall:
> 
> (1) decide on appeals by persons who have filed classification challenges under section 1.9 of this order;
> 
> (2) approve, deny or amend agency exemptions from automatic declassification as provided in section 3.4 of this order; and
> 
> (3) decide on appeals by persons or entities who have filed requests for mandatory declassification review under section 3.6 of this order.
> 
> 
> 
> * * * * *
> *Sec. 5.5.* _Information Security Policy Advisory Council._
> 
> (a) Establishment. There is established an Information Security Policy Advisory Council ("Council"). The Council shall be composed of seven members appointed by the President for staggered terms not to exceed 4 years, from among persons who have demonstrated interest and expertise in an area related to the subject matter of this order and are not otherwise employees of the Federal Government.


Yeah..but Trumpy-bear needs just think all them away...and like magic..all is good across the land.


----------



## MagicMike

1srelluc said:


> LOL.....That's right, keep all your focus on Trump. That's the plan.


Amazing that you don't think holding Trump accountable so this shit NEVER happens again is important.

Why do you hate your country so much?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

In Hannity interview, Trump claims he can declassify documents 'even by thinking about it'
		


From the link:

_*Trump's comments came before the ruling from the appeals court authorizing the Department of Justice to review the 100 classified documents he took. The court said that although the former president has said he declassified the documents before he left office, there are no records of it.     
*_
*"In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal," the court said. *


----------



## Lastamender

Mac1958 said:


> Prosecutors across the country are just hoping he keeps talking.


He has never stopped talking and prosecutors have nothing but their usual 0.


----------



## insolent imp

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Yeah..but Trumpy-bear needs just think all them away...and like magic..all is good across the land.


it's like trumps political aspirations.  I think I can.. I think I can.


----------



## Lastamender

MagicMike said:


> Amazing that you don't think holding Trump accountable so this shit NEVER happens again is important.
> 
> Why do you hate your country so much?


You do not hold Comey and others accountable, why Trump?


----------



## Lastamender

insolent imp said:


> it's like trumps political aspirations.  I think I can.. I think I can.


Remember that little engine did.


----------



## Rambunctious

Lets say if Trump didn't declassify correctly and he had these documents in a locked room in a locked safe guarded by secret service agents...
What in hell must you libtards think he was doing with them?... selling them?... can you be that out of touch?.... this is BS... and it must stop....


----------



## insolent imp

Lastamender said:


> Remember that little engine did.


trump would stroke halfway up the hill.


----------



## rightwinger

Lastamender said:


> He has never stopped talking and prosecutors have nothing but their usual 0.


Actually they have boxes of classified documents 

Hardly a 0


----------



## Rambunctious

This raid is blatant harassment of Biden's next opponent and if you ask me Biden should be impeached for ordering it....


----------



## Lastamender

insolent imp said:


> trump would stroke halfway up the hill.


He has not yet after 7 years. You had to defraud him.


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> Actually they have boxes of classified documents
> 
> Hardly a 0


Not if they were .......................................DECLASSIFIED.....


----------



## Lastamender

rightwinger said:


> Actually they have boxes of classified documents
> 
> Hardly a 0


Declassified documents. Also where are the charges? Can't our FBI read?

You know when I wake up I shit. What does shit like you do in the morning?


----------



## iceberg

insolent imp said:


> it's like trumps political aspirations.  I think I can.. I think I can.


Then what exactly is the process he should have followed?


----------



## Rambunctious

iceberg said:


> Then what exactly is the process he should have followed?


They never tell us that... not here or on TV or anywhere....


----------



## rightwinger

Lastamender said:


> Declassified documents. Also where are the charges? Can't our FBI read?
> 
> You know when I wake up I shit. What does shit like you do in the morning?



They were declassified?

Then why doesn’t Trump just show us the documentation where he declassified them?

We can just end this whole thing


----------



## Lastamender

rightwinger said:


> They were declassified?
> 
> Then why doesn’t Trump just show us the documentation where he declassified them?
> 
> We can just end this whole thing


Whatever, what does shit like you do in the morning? Reproduce?


----------



## rightwinger

Lastamender said:


> Whatever, what does shit like you do in the morning? Reproduce?



Is that what passes as a rebuttal among illiterate Conservatives?


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> They were declassified?
> 
> Then why doesn’t Trump just show us the documentation where he declassified them?
> 
> We can just end this whole thing


Trump's team is stalling just like any good legal team would do in this instance with the history Trump has endured....


----------



## insolent imp

iceberg said:


> Then what exactly is the process he should have followed?


I've already posted them previously in this thread.


----------



## bravoactual

*IF* the Traitor can declassify highly classified documents (which he cannot), then by the same measure President Biden can just by thinking, reclassify the same documents.

Little known (at least by the resident Traitor Lovers) fact, President Biden, by virtue of his Office can reclassify the same documents by the Powers of his Office.  He does have the power to do that.  Either way the Traitor is truly and royally fucked.  As it stands, he can be charged under The Espionage Act.  

The Eleventh Circuit Court shit all over the previous Traitor Appointed, unqualified lacky's order.

The burden of proof as to the power to declassify those highly classified documents in on the Traitor and Looney Tunes Lawyers, as it stands he has not done so.  Failure to provide such proof, as Judge Dearie said previously means the Judge Dearie will rule for DOJ.  It is as simple as that.


----------



## Lastamender

rightwinger said:


> Is that what passes as a rebuttal among illiterate Conservatives?


What passes is something just like you. Shit.


----------



## bravoactual

Rambunctious said:


> Trump's team is stalling just like any good legal team would do in this instance with the history Trump has endured....



No, the Traitor has painted himself into a corner.  The Traitor either does or does not proof he classified the documents.  He either puts that proof before the Judge Dearie or the Special Master will rule for the DOJ.


----------



## Rambunctious

bravoactual said:


> *IF* the Traitor


What traitor?... Joe biden?....


----------



## Moonglow

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


They actually gave him a magic wand to declassify with.


----------



## Rambunctious

bravoactual said:


> No, the Traitor has painted himself into a corner.  The Traitor either does or does not proof he classified the documents.  He either puts that proof forward or the Judge will rule against him.


You wanna bet?.... How many times must you watch your dreams collapse... Buuuaaahahahaha stupid is what stupid does....


----------



## rightwinger

bravoactual said:


> No, the Traitor has painted himself into a corner.  The Traitor either does or does not proof he classified the documents.  He either puts that proof forward or the Judge will rule against him.



Trump has no idea what documents he even has
How can he know what he declassified?

As usual, Trump creates a lie when caught doing something.

But he will only tell the lie to his gullible followers…..not a court of law

Just like he did with his stolen election lies


----------



## rightwinger

Moonglow said:


> They actually gave him a magic wand to declassify with.



He doesn’t need a wand, he just thinks it and it is done


----------



## MagicMike

Lastamender said:


> You do not hold Comey and others accountable, why Trump?


Because unlike others, Trump is a serious threat to our Republic.


----------



## Moonglow

rightwinger said:


> He doesn’t need a wand, he just thinks it and it is done


He also thought being orange was a good look.


----------



## rightwinger

Moonglow said:


> He also thought being orange was a good look.


Nobody dares to tell him otherwise


----------



## Lastamender

MagicMike said:


> Because unlike others, Trump is a serious threat to our Republic.


I see, lying to Congress is not a threat. Trump has not lied to Congress.


----------



## Lastamender

rightwinger said:


> Nobody dares to tell him otherwise


No one dares to admit Trump was defrauded. You peons are scared shitless. Well, not you. You will always be full of shit.


----------



## basquebromance

well duh


----------



## Rogue AI

insolent imp said:


> (1) There is established an Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel ("Panel"). The Secretaries of State and Defense, the Attorney General, the Director of Central Intelligence, the Archivist of the United States, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs shall each appoint a senior level representative to serve as a member of the Panel. The President shall select the Chair of the Panel from among the Panel members.
> 
> 
> 
> * * * * *
> (b) Functions. The Panel shall:
> 
> (1) decide on appeals by persons who have filed classification challenges under section 1.9 of this order;
> 
> (2) approve, deny or amend agency exemptions from automatic declassification as provided in section 3.4 of this order; and
> 
> (3) decide on appeals by persons or entities who have filed requests for mandatory declassification review under section 3.6 of this order.
> 
> 
> 
> * * * * *
> *Sec. 5.5.* _Information Security Policy Advisory Council._
> 
> (a) Establishment. There is established an Information Security Policy Advisory Council ("Council"). The Council shall be composed of seven members appointed by the President for staggered terms not to exceed 4 years, from among persons who have demonstrated interest and expertise in an area related to the subject matter of this order and are not otherwise employees of the Federal Government.


The presidency isn't an agency. You folks need to start from the beginning.  What's the Constitution say about classified documents and the presidency?


----------



## 1srelluc

MagicMike said:


> Amazing that you don't think holding Trump accountable so this shit NEVER happens again is important.
> 
> Why do you hate your country so much?


LOL.....Dems talking about accountability.....That's more than a bit rich coming from you people don't you think?


----------



## 1srelluc

bodecea said:


> That's the best you've got?


That's all we need.....And you people are falling for it big time.


----------



## rightwinger

Rogue AI said:


> What's the Constitution say about classified documents and the presidency?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

Lastamender said:


> I see, lying to Congress is not a threat. Trump has not lied to Congress.


Oh..I'm pretty sure he has~









						Donald Trump’s Impeachment Lies to Congress
					

The big reveal from Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony and the Jan. 6 hearings that nobody’s talking about.




					www.lawfareblog.com


----------



## MagicMike

1srelluc said:


> LOL.....Dems talking about accountability.....That's more than a bit rich coming from you people don't you think?


Do you have anything relevant and/or meaningful to say other than Democrats bad?


----------



## 1srelluc

iceberg said:


> he's got TDS it would seem but he will deny it and tell you he rags on both sides all the time.
> 
> yet, i never see threads about the stupid shit biden says. about yet ANOTHER executive order. when i bring those up, he quickly waters it down with "all presidents do it too much".
> 
> and yes, they do; but that wasn't my question. my question is directly the impact of executive orders becoming more and more a way of government and laws OF WHICH the president is not supposed to be doing. biden has taken this power to yet another level up and if not stopped, the next president will simply carry on that tradition.
> 
> so, for GG to be all up in arms about the stupid shit trump says (of which there is yes, a lot) and not care about "both sides equally" then he becomes the one sided mindset he openly bitches at on a daily basis. tell him this and he starts telling you how you feel about things and why you are so stupid for feeling that way. the way you never said you felt. simply disagreeing with gator seems to upset him.
> 
> i also answered his question directly. NO - a president should not be able to do this and YES, if trump said this as yahoo is saying then it is completely stupid. however, if the docs were dangerous for him to have, why did they leave them there?
> 
> POOF. he's gone. he demands you reply to him directly but will seldom if ever do the same for you.
> 
> annoying as fuck.


Typical dem, it's all about the feels with them, they never apply thought to _anything_.....Except it's going to work against them bigly as we can do a pivot to DeSantis in a heartbeat and they have nothing to counter/answer with.....They are so fucked.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> They were declassified?
> 
> Then why doesn’t Trump just show us the documentation where he declassified them?
> 
> We can just end this whole thing


Show me the documented process 5o declassify something.


----------



## iceberg

insolent imp said:


> I've already posted them previously in this thread.


Then it should be easy to repost


----------



## Golfing Gator

Godboy said:


> Is he wrong? Post the rule that says he cant, word for word.



I just adore you Trump worshipers.  you are so much fun


----------



## surada

Indeependent said:


> You didn’t answer the question either.











						Russia 'Absolutely' Tried to Infiltrate Mar-a-Lago: Former FBI Official
					

Peter Strzok said Sunday that any "competent foreign intelligence" including China's, Russia's, and Iran's would want to gain access to Trump's Florida home.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Indeependent

surada said:


> Russia 'Absolutely' Tried to Infiltrate Mar-a-Lago: Former FBI Official
> 
> 
> Peter Strzok said Sunday that any "competent foreign intelligence" including China's, Russia's, and Iran's would want to gain access to Trump's Florida home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


O my!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rogue AI said:


> What's the Constitution say about classified documents and the presidency?



Not a damn fucking thing.

What's next?


----------



## MagicMike

1srelluc said:


> Typical dem, it's all about the feels with them, they never apply thought to _anything_.....Except it's going to work against them bigly as we can do a pivot to DeSantis in a heartbeat and they have nothing to counter/answer with.....They are so fucked.


You mean the human trafficker/kidnapper?
His resume is now fucked.


----------



## Indeependent

MagicMike said:


> You mean the human trafficker/kidnapper?
> His resume is now fucked.


You’re not going to vote for him?!


----------



## Godboy

Golfing Gator said:


> I just adore you Trump worshipers.  you are so much fun


I guess this ^ post is a lot easier than actually proving that your position is valid. I will assume that you couldnt find said proof, so this is the best you can do.


----------



## 1srelluc

MagicMike said:


> You mean the human trafficker/kidnapper?
> His resume is now fucked.


----------



## bravoactual

rightwinger said:


> Trump has no idea what documents he even has
> How can he know what he declassified?
> 
> As usual, Trump creates a lie when caught doing something.
> 
> But he will only tell the lie to his gullible followers…..not a court of law
> 
> Just like he did with his stolen election lies



The only thing the Traitor really knows how to do is lie.   Just ask New York State Attorney General Letitia James.  Her filings yesterday are based on the lies of the Traitor.


----------



## bravoactual

Rambunctious said:


> You wanna bet?.... How many times must you watch your dreams collapse... Buuuaaahahahaha stupid is what stupid does....



The Special Master, Judge Dearie was very clear.  The Traitor has to provide his proof, if he does not Judge Dearie will rule for the DOJ.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Godboy said:


> I guess this ^ post is a lot easier than actually proving that your position is valid. I will assume that you couldnt find said proof, so this is the best you can do.



The very fact that you think I need to prove something cannot be declassified with a thought is the most enjoyable post of the day.   

Next I guess you will want me to prove the moon is not made out of green cheese.


----------



## Rambunctious

bravoactual said:


> The Special Master, Judge Dearie was very clear.  The Traitor has to provide his proof, if he does not Judge Dearie will rule for the DOJ.


He gave them *what* to come up with the documentation?... answer... time.... time is on Trump's side....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> He gave them *what* to come up with the documentation?... answer... time.... time is on Trump's side....



No, it really is not.  Even if the Repubs take back the House they can do nothing to help Trump.  Even if they take back the Senate, they can do nothing to help Trump.


----------



## Ralph Norton

MagicMike said:


> You mean the human trafficker/kidnapper?
> His resume is now fucked.


Human trafficking: "the unlawful act of transporting or coercing people in order to benefit from their work or service, typically in the form of forced labor or sexual exploitation:"

Kidnapping: "the action of abducting someone and holding them captive."

Please tell us when & how DeSantis did either of these things and provide evidence.
Your credibility is now fucked.
Dumb ass


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> No, it really is not.  Even if the Repubs take back the House they can do nothing to help Trump.  Even if they take back the Senate, they can do nothing to help Trump.


That's wrong they can stall and defund... The End....
Power of the purse....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> That's wrong they can stall and defund... The End....
> Power of the purse....



They are going to defund the DOJ?


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> That's wrong they can stall and defund... The End....
> Power of the purse....


Trump HAS been stalling

He no longer has the shield of Executive Privilege


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> They are going to defund the DOJ?


It wouldn't be the first time in history... they can stall Garland cut funding for 1-6 committee and deter any further investigation into Trump by our justice agency....
Then all you will have left is a NY AG lawsuit... Buuuuaaahahahaha


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> Trump HAS been stalling
> 
> He no longer has the shield of Executive Privilege


He doesn't need EP.....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> It wouldn't be the first time in history... they can stall Garland cut funding for 1-6 committee and deter any further investigation into Trump by our justice agency....
> Then all you will have left is a NY AG lawsuit... Buuuuaaahahahaha



They have no power over what the justice agency investigates, if you are pinning your hopes and dreams on that....well I have some nice ocean front property right in front of Hill City Kansas for sell, really cheap just for you.


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> It wouldn't be the first time in history... they can stall Garland cut funding for 1-6 committee and deter any further investigation into Trump by our justice agency....
> Then all you will have left is a NY AG lawsuit... Buuuuaaahahahaha



The Jan 6 Committee will wrap up before the end of this session 

Congress has no control over Justice Department investigations, or NY State investigations, or Georgia Investigations ……


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> They have no power over what the justice agency investigates, if you are pinning your hopes and dreams on that....well I have some nice ocean front property right in front of Hill City Kansas for sell, really cheap just for you.


Yes they do... they hand out money to the DOJ and can direct where its to be spent... If the GOP wins the house this 7 year witch hunt would be effectively dead....


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> The Jan 6 Committee will wrap up before the end of this session
> 
> Congress has no control over Justice Department investigations, or NY State investigations, or Georgia Investigations ……


Then why won't they set a hearing date before the midterms?.... they haven't as of yet....


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> Then why won't they set a hearing date before the midterms?.... they haven't as of yet....


End of this month sometime
That is before midterms

They will have the report out before the election


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> End of this month sometime
> That is before midterms
> 
> They will have the report out before the election


I'll bet they don't until after the midterms.... the 1-6 stuff isn't working its backfiring on them.... Liz will be gone Adam will be gone... the whole thing will be gone.... LMAO what a waste of time and money....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> Yes they do... they hand out money to the DOJ and can direct where its to be spent...



No they cannot not, all they can do is give them money or not give the money.  They do not have the power to pick and choose what investigations the DOJ is allowed to spend it on


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> No they cannot not, all they can do is give them money or not give the money.  They do not have the power to pick and choose what investigations the DOJ is allowed to spend it on


Can Congress restrict an agency's funding?


(Article I, Section 8, Clause 18) supplements Congress's spending authority, allowing Congress to restrict how federal funds are used. Congress can also place requirements on the recipients of federal funds to regulate their conduct in exchange for federal funding.

Bingo!... you lose again....


----------



## Billo_Really

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


That's what I've always said, if nothing else, Trump makes for good TV!  This dude is so dumb...


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

insolent imp said:


> that would fall on you and the fat fuck trump
> 
> (a)
> Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.



Who has ultimate authority to classify or declassify documents?


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> I'll bet they don't until after the midterms.... the 1-6 stuff isn't working its backfiring on them.... Liz will be gone Adam will be gone... the whole thing will be gone.... LMAO what a waste of time and money....


They will drop the report right before the election
Most of it is already written


----------



## Rambunctious

Billo_Really said:


> That's what I've always said, if nothing else, Trump makes for good TV!  This dude is so dumb...


Smarter than Biden and better at running a nation than Biden.... so if you voted for Joe what does that say about you?.... ooops!


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> They will drop the report right before the election
> Most of it is already written


Everyone knows what will be in the report and it hasn't moved the needle one bit.....


----------



## rightwinger

Rambunctious said:


> Everyone knows what will be in the report and it hasn't moved the needle one bit.....


We shall see
MAGA doesn’t care

Independents?


----------



## Billo_Really

Rambunctious said:


> Smarter than Biden and better at running a nation than Biden.... so if you voted for Joe what does that say about you?.... ooops!


Trump is mentally incapable of being anywhere near a public office!


----------



## Rambunctious

rightwinger said:


> We shall see
> MAGA doesn’t care
> 
> Independents?


The dems are losing independents because of this over the top bull shit.... regular folks don't hate Trump like you... Liz... Adam and Pelosi does...


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

Billo_Really said:


> Trump is mentally incapable of being anywhere near a public office!



Happy Birthday NaNa *Joe is mentally incapable of leaving a room without direction.

Your post is just an opinion. 
My post is fact with lots of verifiable video proof.


----------



## Billo_Really

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Happy Birthday NaNa *Joe is mentally incapable of leaving a room without direction.
> 
> Yours post is just an opinion.
> My post is fact with lots of verifiable video proof.


Well, kowabunga to you!


----------



## Rogue AI

rightwinger said:


>


The emoji argument? Indeed, the ultimate form of surrender due to lack of an actual rebuttal.


----------



## Captain Caveman

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


What's the Presidential procedure for declassifying documents


----------



## bravoactual

Rambunctious said:


> He gave them *what* to come up with the documentation?... answer... time.... time is on Trump's side....



No, wrong yet again.  The burden of proof is on the Compainant - the Traitor.

Judge Dearie stated that the Traitor has to come forward with the proof he declassified the Shit-A-Lago documents, if the Traitor fails to do so the Judge will rule for the DOJ...and no thinking declassified does not count.  

Also, in case you did not know or for that mattter care.  President Biden has the power reclassify the Shit-A-Lago Docs....


----------



## surada

Ralph Norton said:


> Human trafficking: "the unlawful act of transporting or coercing people in order to benefit from their work or service, typically in the form of forced labor or sexual exploitation:"
> 
> Kidnapping: "the action of abducting someone and holding them captive."
> 
> Please tell us when & how DeSantis did either of these things and provide evidence.
> Your credibility is now fucked.
> Dumb ass



Desantis decieved them by promising jobs and cash.


----------



## surada

Captain Caveman said:


> What's the Presidential procedure for declassifying documents



You put your left foot in and you do the hokey pokey.


----------



## Rogue AI

Golfing Gator said:


> Not a damn fucking thing.
> 
> What's next?


Then it falls to the discretion of the president,  as all the laws are agency based, not directed to the President themselves. Too bad for you folks, this Supreme Court appears to respect the the Constitution, not wipe their asses with it.


----------



## surada

Rambunctious said:


> The dems are losing independents because of this over the top bull shit.... regular folks don't hate Trump like you... Liz... Adam and Pelosi does...



Nope. Only 34% of Republicans are still dazzled by Trump.


----------



## Captain Caveman

surada said:


> You put your left foot in and you do the hokey pokey.


But it raises an important question, if the President wishes to declassify something, who does he/she tell for authorisation?


----------



## Godboy

Golfing Gator said:


> The very fact that you think I need to prove something cannot be declassified with a thought is the most enjoyable post of the day.
> 
> Next I guess you will want me to prove the moon is not made out of green cheese.


Still cant find a single thing that says Trump cant do that?


----------



## Blaster

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Who has ultimate authority to classify or declassify documents?


The President.


----------



## Blaster

Captain Caveman said:


> But it raises an important question, if the President wishes to declassify something, who does he/she tell for authorisation?


He doesn't need authorization.


----------



## surada

Captain Caveman said:


> But it raises an important question, if the President wishes to declassify something, who does he/she tell for authorisation?



His staff. The documents or secrets that are declassified have to be studied and cross referenced so as not to harm our allies or intelligence assets.  Trump is dumb as shit.


----------



## surada

Blaster said:


> The President.



With reservations.


----------



## Captain Caveman

surada said:


> His staff. The documents or secrets that are declassified have to be studied and cross referenced so as not to harm our allies or intelligence assets.  Trump is dumb as shit.


So your President needs authorisation to do things?


----------



## Blaster

surada said:


> His staff. The documents or secrets that are declassified have to be studied and cross referenced so as not to harm our allies or intelligence assets.  Trump is dumb as shit.


Bullshit.


----------



## Ralph Norton

surada said:


> Desantis decieved them by promising jobs and cash.


And would that be human trafficking or kidnapping?


----------



## surada

Captain Caveman said:


> So your President needs authorisation to do things?



Yes. Trump has claimed all sorts of power. He's never read the constitution.. Said it was too hard like a foreign language. The whole concept of the presidency is over his head. He thinks he's king rather than servant.


----------



## surada

Ralph Norton said:


> And would that be human trafficking or kidnapping?



Miami, Atlanta, Houston, Chicago have had horrible underage girl trafficking for decades. Desantis is full of crap.


----------



## johngaltshrugged

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Perhaps there is an argument..for a sitting President..perhaps. But Trump is just a citizen now..and has no special powers. His actions do not  last past his term..and Biden removed all his clearances the very first day of his Presidency~


So what? They were already declassified, making them open to public records anyway.
DT has copies of public records.

Are you saying Pedo Joe took public records & re-classified them after the fact?
That would be really, really stupid but I could see him doing that. 
Still wouldn't matter though.
DT had them either legally or in the same manner but better secured than Barry had his millions of docs in Shitown & HRC had on an illegal server designed to circumvent FOIA requests on her activities.
Unless you are willing to drag the Obama's & Clintons into court & make them face the exact same charges, I could care less about your feelings on the matter


----------



## surada

johngaltshrugged said:


> So what? They were already declassified, making them open to public records anyway.
> DT has copies of public records.
> 
> Are you saying Pedo Joe took public records & re-classified them after the fact?
> That would be really, really stupid but I could see him doing that.
> Still wouldn't matter though.
> DT had them either legally or in the same manner but better secured than Barry had his millions of docs in Shitown & HRC had on an illegal server designed to circumvent FOIA requests on her activities.
> Unless you are willing to drag the Obama's & Clintons into court & make them face the exact same charges, I could care less about your feelings on the matter



Trump already said that he took the documents because he was afraid Biden would destroy them.


----------



## Blaster

surada said:


> Yes. Trump has claimed all sorts of power. He's never read the constitution.


I doubt you ever read it.


----------



## bravoactual

surada said:


> Desantis decieved them by promising jobs and cash.



You mean a Republican LIED!!!!.

Must be a day that ends in "*Y*".


Godboy said:


> Still cant find a single thing that says Trump cant do that?



President Biden has to power to reclassify the Shit-A-Lago Docs, ain't shit the Traitor can do about it.


----------



## surada

Blaster said:


> I doubt you ever read it.



Oh yeah. I've read it more than once.


----------



## Rogue AI

rightwinger said:


> End of this month sometime
> That is before midterms
> 
> They will have the report out before the election


And oh how Republicans will quake, with laughter.


----------



## bravoactual

Captain Caveman said:


> So your President needs authorisation to do things?



President Biden has the authorization to reclassify the Shit-A-Lago docs.


----------



## Whodatsaywhodat.

Golfing Gator said:


> So, do you agree all the POTUS needs to do is think about it and POOF things are declassified?


Only if your Obama or Clinton.


----------



## airplanemechanic

rightwinger said:


> Over a hundred Classified Documents were found improperly stored
> 
> Nothing to “think”
> it is a fact



They were marked that way, but were they, really? We already found out they marked documents regarding the Steele Dossier as "top secret" yet those documents were nothing but lies. You can't classify lies. 

The left already said their were "nuclear documents." That turned out to be a lie. What other lies is the left lining up to hurt Trump?


----------



## Rogue AI

Captain Caveman said:


> So your President needs authorisation to do things?


No, the guy who can order a military strike anywhere in the world at a moment's notice, does not need permission to declassify anything. These folks are feeding you fantasies.


----------



## Indeependent

surada said:


> Yes. Trump has claimed all sorts of power. He's never read the constitution.. Said it was too hard like a foreign language. The whole concept of the presidency is over his head. He thinks he's king rather than servant.


We sure are glad you read it and all the case law.


----------



## xyz

rightwinger said:


> Over a hundred Classified Documents were found improperly stored
> 
> Nothing to “think”
> it is a fact


Not only improperly stored as in random people could find them, but some were in his office. One of his lawyers, who no doubt does not have security clearance, said she saw them. So they could have been shown to unauthorized people, and maybe even duplicated.


----------



## rightwinger

xyz said:


> Not only improperly stored as in random people could find them, but some were in his office. One of his lawyers, who no doubt does not have security clearance, said she saw them. So they could have been shown to unauthorized people, and maybe even duplicated.


All kinds of uncleared staff had access to those documents. 
They are compromised


----------



## tahuyaman

rightwinger said:


> It amazes me how Trump views classification as an annoyance.
> 
> Not as a way to ensure damaging information is not released, but as an annoying requirement that he has to keep these documents safe and secure.
> 
> So what does he do?
> He issues a blanket declassification on every document he possesses.  Even Top Secret.
> 
> No concern that the information contained in those documents is now compromised


Liberals love secrecy in government when Democrats are in charge. In that case they oppose transparency.


----------



## rightwinger

tahuyaman said:


> Liberals love secrecy in government when Democrats are in charge. In that case they oppose transparency.



WTF are you babbling about?


----------



## theHawk

candycorn said:


> So...one president can literally wipe out all of the state secrets if she or he wanted to do it...without any check or balance?
> 
> Is that what the right wing is now asking us to believe?
> 
> Wow.


Well duh.  How do you think the Clintons got rich? They gave/sold secrets to China.


----------



## rightwinger

theHawk said:


> Well duh.  How do you think the Clintons got rich? They gave/sold secrets to China.


I thought you guys said the Clintons got rich by running child prostitution rings out of Pizza Parlors?


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

rightwinger said:


> I thought you guys said the Clintons got rich by running child prostitution rings out of Pizza Parlors?


Huh? I thought it was the assassins guild they started!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Godboy said:


> Still cant find a single thing that says Trump cant do that?



Find me something that says he can.  Then we can talk


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rogue AI said:


> No, the guy who can order a military strike anywhere in the world at a moment's notice, does not need permission to declassify anything. These folks are feeding you fantasies.



But can he order a military strike anywhere in the world at a moment's notice with just a thought?


----------



## Godboy

Golfing Gator said:


> Find me something that says he can.  Then we can talk


That isnt how the law works. Unless there is a rule against it, its legal. For example, its perfectly legal to drink water, yet there is no law that says you have the right to drink water or even the right to look at water.


----------



## Blaster

surada said:


> Oh yeah. I've read it more than once.


Liar.


----------



## insolent imp

Rambunctious said:


> They never tell us that... not here or on





Rogue AI said:


> The presidency isn't an agency. You folks need to start from the beginning.  What's the Constitution say about classified documents and the presidency?


Executive Office of the President of the *United States*

*Agency overview*Flag of *the Executive Office*FormedJuly 1, 1939JurisdictionU.S. Federal GovernmentHeadquartersWhite House, Washington, D.C.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


I agree that there isnt a process (which is insane) but you cant just think it unless that thought leads to the President stating it.


----------



## theHawk

rightwinger said:


> I thought you guys said the Clintons got rich by running child prostitution rings out of Pizza Parlors?


No, that’s what they spend their money on.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Godboy said:


> That isnt how the law works. Unless there is a rule against it, its legal. For example, its perfectly legal to drink water, yet there is no law that says you have the right to drink water or even the right to look at water.



There are also laws that give the process for declassifying materials in the US.  The POTUS is not above those laws.


----------



## Couchpotato

candycorn said:


> So...one president can literally wipe out all of the state secrets if she or he wanted to do it...without any check or balance?
> 
> Is that what the right wing is now asking us to believe?
> 
> Wow.


That's not a right-wing conspiracy it's the actual truth.  Right wrong or indifferent.    If it isnt please feel free to post a link that shows the process for the Checks and Balances to it.    There has to be an ultimate arbiter and in this case that is the POTUS.    That might be a horrible way of doing it but it is in fact the way we currently do it.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


It’s a misleading question. 

Just picture this. The President (any President) is seeking advice from some expert in a particular field, like troubles with a certain foreign power in a certain region and it’s complicated by other weighty considerations like energy, the prospect of military action and the feelings of other neighboring nations. 

To get the advice he needs, the expert needs to be “in the know” about some presently classified material. So, without much ado, the President hands the expert (who has never received clearance for this level of classification) a top secret intel report. 

Has the President thereby divulged a state secret?  Or, as I maintain, has he effectively (and without a fucking word being uttered) declassified that too secret document for the expert?


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> There are also laws that give the process for declassifying materials in the US.  The POTUS is not above those laws.


But as the top of the classification hierarchy the POTUS is the ultimate arbiter of what is or isnt classified and therefore can with a word classify or declassify basically anything.    If Im wrong feel free to link something that proves it.


----------



## Couchpotato

BackAgain said:


> It’s a misleading question.
> 
> Just picture this. The President (any President) is seeking advice from some expert in a particular field, like troubles with a certain foreign power in a certain region and it’s complicated by other weighty considerations like energy, the prospect of military action and the feelings of other neighboring nations.
> 
> To get the advice he needs, the expert needs to be “in the know” about some presently classified material. So, without much ado, the President hands the expert (who has never received clearance for this level of classification) a top secret intel report.
> 
> Has the President thereby divulged a state secret?  Or, as I maintain, has he effectively (and without a fucking word being uttered) declassified that too secret document for the expert?


That's a fair point


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> There are also laws that give the process for declassifying materials in the US.  The POTUS is not above those laws.


Says you. But you’re wrong. He *is* the Executive Branch. If he chooses to declassify a document, his own words and deeds suffice to make it so.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> If he chooses to declassify a document, his own words and deeds suffice to make it so.



But not his own thoughts, there needs to be words and deeds.  

Glad we agree on this.


----------



## insolent imp

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Who has ultimate authority to classify or declassify documents?


the agency


iceberg said:


> Then it should be easy to repost


www.google.com
Information appraised as having permanent historical value is automatically declassified *once it reaches 25 years of age unless an agency head has determined that it falls within a narrow exemption that permits continued classification and it has been appropriately approved*.Nov 6, 2020


----------



## insolent imp

BackAgain said:


> Says you. But you’re wrong. He *is* the Executive Branch. If he chooses to declassify a document, his own words and deeds suffice to make it so.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> But not his own thoughts, there needs to be words and deeds.
> 
> Glad we agree on this.


His own though sufficed, in my illustration. His deed merely confirmed it. Glad you agree.


----------



## Godboy

Golfing Gator said:


> There are also laws that give the process for declassifying materials in the US.  The POTUS is not above those laws.


Oh? Lets see these laws you speak of. As far as i can tell, there is NO documented procedure for which a president can declassify documents. There is NO bureaucrat (who would work at the behest of the president in the first place), who needs to oversee it. If you have information to the contrary, i would love to see it, but im doubtful that you do. Im doubtful that anyone does. Again, as far as i can tell, there is NO documented procedure written ANYWHERE for a president declassifying materials.


----------



## BackAgain

insolent imp said:


> View attachment 699949


Does that have any meaning?


----------



## insolent imp

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Who has ultimate authority to classify or declassify documents?


the


BackAgain said:


> Does that have any meaning?


the word agency comes to mind


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> His own though sufficed, in my illustration. His deed merely confirmed it. Glad you agree.



Did it?  There was a deed/action in your illustration, was there not?

And also, was the document declassified or was the person given the temp clearance to look at it?


----------



## Indeependent

How does the President get these documents in hand?
Who allows the President to walk away with them?


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> There are also laws that give the process for declassifying materials in the US.  The POTUS is not above those laws.


The President can declassify documents.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> The President can declassify documents.



Yes they can, but not with just a mere thought


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> To get the advice he needs, the expert needs to be “in the know” about some presently classified material. So, without much ado, the President hands the expert (who has never received clearance for this level of classification) a top secret intel report.
> 
> Has the President thereby divulged a state secret? Or, as I maintain, has he effectively (and without a fucking word being uttered) declassified that too secret document for the expert?



Is the expert now free to share said document with others since it is no longer classified?   Is the expert now allowed to tell everyone about said document since it is no longer classified?


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes they can, but not with just a mere thought


Maybe he's psychic.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Is the expert now free to share said document with others since it is no longer classified?   Is the expert now allowed to tell everyone about said document since it is no longer classified?


I don't know but it seems you have all the answers.


----------



## cnm

TNHarley said:


> But it is classified info and he is the CiC.


No, they're government documents and he's a civilian.


----------



## dblack

Liberals really don't see what's going on here. Trump wasn't selling secrets, and he wasn't keeping the documents for any nefarious purposes. He was merely fucking with the Justice Department. They asked him for the documents and deliberately held some back, goading them into raiding Mar-a-lago to get them. I suspect he even instructed whoever informed on him to do so.

That's right, the whole thing is just trolling. He loves the negative attention and so does his troll army. It keeps his name in the news, keeps liberals enraged and his followers jerking off in front of the television.


----------



## cnm

iceberg said:


> MAGA IS EVIL BECAUSE I SAID SO.
> 
> yawn.


----------



## cnm

airplanemechanic said:


> Hey if you can attack and sue Trump because you "think" he did something wrong, then he can declassify documents by "thinking" about it.


And Biden can reclassify them by thinking about it. And when Biden heard Trump had documents with classification markings, he would have thought they were classified.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> Maybe he's psychic.



Maybe he's psychotic


----------



## Rogue AI

insolent imp said:


> Executive Office of the President of the *United States*
> 
> *Agency overview*Flag of *the Executive Office*FormedJuly 1, 1939JurisdictionU.S. Federal GovernmentHeadquartersWhite House, Washington, D.C.


That's an agency formed in 1939, totally separate issue.


----------



## dblack

Blaster said:


> Maybe he's psychic.


Speaking of that, did you read the headline about the dwarf psychic who escaped from prison?  Small Medium at Large!


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

‘Several GOP senators raised new concerns Thursday about former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents, rejecting his claim that he could simply declassify the secret records by “thinking about it.”

In interviews with CNN, the senators broke from Trump’s claim that everything was handled appropriately, diverging from many in the party who have sidestepped questions about the matter or have vigorously defended the former President.

Asked about Trump’s claim on Fox News that he could simply declassify documents by thinking about it and there’s no process for him to follow to do that, Senate GOP Whip John Thune told CNN there’s a process for declassifying documents.’









						Top GOP senators reject Trump's declassification comments and call for proper storage of secret records
					

Several GOP senators raised new concerns Thursday about former President Donald Trump's handling of classified documents, rejecting his claim that he could simply declassify the secret records by "thinking about it."




					www.cnn.com
				




All ‘RINOs,’ no doubt.


----------



## BackAgain

insolent imp said:


> the
> 
> the word agency comes to mind


I doubt very much comes to your mind.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Did it?  There was a deed/action in your illustration, was there not?


Yep. The thought preceded it. Ergo, the action was lawful. 


Golfing Gator said:


> And also, was the document declassified or was the person given the temp clearance to look at it?


Doesn’t matter. It amounts to the same thing. Just like the President can declassify, so to he can give another person clearance.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Is the expert now free to share said document with others since it is no longer classified?   Is the expert now allowed to tell everyone about said document since it is no longer classified?


It depends on whether it was declassified for all purposes or just for that purpose.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


So, what's the code, statute, law, legislation, rule, etc that spells out, exactly, the process a president is required to utilize to declassify documents; oh, and post the government forms required to document those declassifications.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

BackAgain said:


> It’s a misleading question.
> 
> Just picture this. The President (any President) is seeking advice from some expert in a particular field, like troubles with a certain foreign power in a certain region and it’s complicated by other weighty considerations like energy, the prospect of military action and the feelings of other neighboring nations.
> 
> To get the advice he needs, the expert needs to be “in the know” about some presently classified material. So, without much ado, the President hands the expert (who has never received clearance for this level of classification) a top secret intel report.
> 
> Has the President thereby divulged a state secret?  Or, as I maintain, has he effectively (and without a fucking word being uttered) declassified that too secret document for the expert?


In your example the President is not declassifying the document. He's granting access by a previously unauthorized person, which he totally can do. But he did not change the document's security designation. If someone else were to publish the info..they would be guilty of a crime.

Now that he's a private citizen, divulging any classified info would be a crime, not that I think he has. I do think that people are losing sight of the real issue here, which is not whether the documents were or were not classified..but his possession of them illegally. the security level is moot..if the documents were not legally in his possession.


----------



## BackAgain

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> In your example the President is not declassifying the document. He's granting access by a previously unauthorized person, which he totally can do. But he did not change the document's security designation. If someone else were to publish the info..they would be guilty of a crime.
> 
> Now that he's a private citizen, divulging any classified info would be a crime, not that I think he has. I do think that people are losing sight of the real issue here, which is not whether the documents were or were not classified..but his possession of them illegally. the security level is moot..if the documents were not legally in his possession.


Maybe. Maybe not. 

Maybe he did declassify it. That was my example. And either way, he has a unique right to make the determination — either one of them — unilaterally.


----------



## insolent imp

dblack said:


> Speaking of that, did you read the headline about the dwarf psychic who escaped from prison?  Small Medium at Large!


I hear the lawfirm of Boyd,Dewey, Cheetum,  and Howe was in hot pursuit.


----------



## insolent imp

here is the bottom line. unless you fuck up bad billionaires don't do prison time.


----------



## Golfing Gator

When I started this thread I thought I might get a couple diehards in here defending Trump's power to telepathically declassify documents,  but it turned out even better than I expected.


----------



## dblack

Golfing Gator said:


> When I started this thread I thought I might get a couple diehards in here defending Trump's power to telepathically declassify documents,  but it turned out even better than I expected.


Fishing is like that.


----------



## candycorn

BackAgain said:


> It’s a misleading question.
> 
> Just picture this. The President (any President) is seeking advice from some expert in a particular field, like troubles with a certain foreign power in a certain region and it’s complicated by other weighty considerations like energy, the prospect of military action and the feelings of other neighboring nations.
> 
> To get the advice he needs, the expert needs to be “in the know” about some presently classified material. So, without much ado, the President hands the expert (who has never received clearance for this level of classification) a top secret intel report.
> 
> Has the President thereby divulged a state secret?  Or, as I maintain, has he effectively (and without a fucking word being uttered) declassified that too secret document for the expert?



And when that "president" lives in Florida and still has these secrets?


----------



## Indeependent

Once again, *how exactly did Trump get the Classified Documents without someone recording the transaction*?


----------



## Golfing Gator

dblack said:


> Fishing is like that.



Hard to call this fishing, more like shooting fish in a barrel.   

I am a tad surprised people are so willing to cede this sort of power to Biden.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Indeependent said:


> Once again, *how exactly did Trump get the Classified Documents without someone recording the transaction*?



He is a god, he gets what he wants and then takes it home with him.


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> He is a god, he gets what he wants and then takes it home with him.


An ad hominem...how immature!


----------



## BackAgain

candycorn said:


> And when that "president" lives in Florida and still has these secrets?


The ones he previously declassified?  So what?


----------



## Indeependent

BackAgain said:


> The ones he previously declassified?  So what?


Do you know how Trump initially came to possess these documents?
Do you know if the transaction is recorded?
If it is recorded, why did no one state that Trump never returned them if he was required to return them?


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

surada said:


> With reservations.



You keep hanging in there little guy!


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Hard to call this fishing, more like shooting fish in a barrel.
> 
> I am a tad surprised people are so willing to cede this sort of power to Biden.


You are more of a jackass in the barrel. Nobody is ceding any authority or power to Brandon. Dude. He is the President. He already has the authority and power.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

bravoactual said:


> You mean a Republican LIED!!!!.
> 
> Must be a day that ends in "*Y*".
> 
> 
> President Biden has to power to reclassify the Shit-A-Lago Docs, ain't shit the Traitor can do about it.



There’s not a single shred of evidence he lied. You’re being duped for the 100 time and enjoy every minute of your gullibility.


----------



## Rambunctious

Mike Davis: The Presidential Records Act Declassified Trump’s Documents Stolen at Mar-a-Lago
					

Mike Davis of the Article III Project talks to host Steve Bannon about the latest Appeals Court ruling that will




					warroom.org


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

BackAgain said:


> You are more of a jackass in the barrel. Nobody is ceding any authority or power to Brandon. Dude. He is the President. He already has the authority and power.





BackAgain said:


> You are more of a jackass in the barrel. Nobody is ceding any authority or power to Brandon. Dude. He is the President. He already has the authority and power.



He does have the power. Now if can muster the power to find his way out of a room without help that would be great.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

bravoactual said:


> President Biden has the authorization to reclassify the Shit-A-Lago docs.



Fail. Shit-A-Lago doesn’t work. The place is a palace.
You leftists really suck at this stuff.


----------



## candycorn

BackAgain said:


> The ones he previously declassified?  So what?


Is there a record of the documents he declassified?


----------



## Indeependent

candycorn said:


> Is there a record of the documents he declassified?


I appreciate you repeating my question!


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

insolent imp said:


> Executive Office of the President of the *United States*
> 
> *Agency overview*Flag of *the Executive Office*FormedJuly 1, 1939JurisdictionU.S. Federal GovernmentHeadquartersWhite House, Washington, D.C.



I thought skews was the dumbest poster on this forum then you came along.
Congratulations Skews on you small upgrade!


----------



## BackAgain

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> He does have the power. Now if can muster the power to find his way out of a room without help that would be great.


True dat. 

Someone apparently told him that if he wants to cue the need to go to the bathroom, he should leave the lectern and just shake anyone’s hand. 

Who knew the name of Brandon’s imaginary invisible childhood friend was “Anyone?”


----------



## BackAgain

candycorn said:


> Is there a record of the documents he declassified?


I don’t know. My hunch is, “no.”  That’s part of the problem. But assuming no follow up paperwork was ever completed, that’s not the point.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

candycorn said:


> Is there a record of the documents he declassified?


You and your leftist masters are welcome to prove that every document that’s been classified has a record of it. Let’s take it easy on you and go back only 10 years.


----------



## Indeependent

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> I thought skews was the dumbest poster on this forum then you came along.
> Congratulations Skews on you small upgrade!


There are tons of Soft Minded *LibTards* here.


----------



## cnm

Indeependent said:


> Once again, *how exactly did Trump get the Classified Documents without someone recording the transaction*?


It's their fault he wouldn't return stolen property?


----------



## Indeependent

cnm said:


> It's their fault he wouldn't return stolen property?


How did Trump get the documents?
We have a place with classified documents that has no security?!
REALLY?!


----------



## cnm

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Fail. Shit-A-Lago doesn’t work. The place is a palace.


Moron-A-Lardo then, if you're going to be picky.


----------



## cnm

Indeependent said:


> How did Trump get the documents?


It's their fault Trump won't return government documents, some of which have classification markings?


----------



## BackAgain

insolent imp said:


> the
> 
> the word agency comes to mind


About what?  I referenced the Executive BRANCH.

Do you grasp that a *Branch* of our government is not the same thing as an Agency?


----------



## Indeependent

cnm said:


> It's their fault Trump won't return government documents, some of which have classification markings?


How did Trump get his hands on the documents?
How did that authority not make sure Trump didn't take them home?
Someone fucked up and it wasn't Trump.

If that happened anywhere else, that person would be fired.


----------



## BackAgain

cnm said:


> It's their fault he wouldn't return stolen property?


You don’t know what “stolen” even means.


----------



## Couchpotato

Indeependent said:


> Do you know how Trump initially came to possess these documents?
> Do you know if the transaction is recorded?
> If it is recorded, why did no one state that Trump never returned them if he was required to return them?


You know that there isn’t some vault you sign classified documents out of right?


----------



## Indeependent

Couchpotato said:


> You know that there isn’t some vault you sign classified documents out of right?


I appreciate your post.
Can you post exactly how it would happen?
Where would the document be?
Where would 11K documents be that Trump would just walk away with 1 or more at a time?


----------



## Couchpotato

Indeependent said:


> I appreciate your post.
> Can you post exactly how it would happen?
> Where would the document be?
> Where would 11K documents be that Trump would just walk away with 1 or more at a time?


On a classified computer system.   Anyone with the appropriate clearance and accesses would have access to it and could print it if they wanted.


----------



## Indeependent

Couchpotato said:


> On a classified computer system.   Anyone with the appropriate clearance and accesses would have access to it and could print it if they wanted.


And the print key would trigger the code that would audit the action and the user.
I know because I'm a software developer.
As a note, the Alt Print key combination would also be disabled.
This is standard procedure.


----------



## MagicMike

Rogue AI said:


> Then it falls to the discretion of the president,  as all the laws are agency based, not directed to the President themselves. Too bad for you folks, this Supreme Court appears to respect the the Constitution, not wipe their asses with it.


Try to keep up here OK Skippy.
Not even Trump's own attorneys were willing to perjure themselves and swear under oath that Trump ever declassified anything.
Trump's own self-appointed Special Master backed them into a corner on that claim....and when they couldn't (or wouldn't) answer definitively one way or another he shot the entire argument down.
The subject of whether or not any of the dicunents in question were classified is no longer even relevant.
If it ever even was to begin with.

So...moving along.

The three judge (two appointed by Trump) Federal Appeals court that shot down (Trump appointed) Justice Aileen Cannon's previous ruling delt a severe blow to Trump's plan to stall the FBI investigation until after the mid-term election.

The whole "uh-huh....Trump had the authority to declassify at will" argument was stupid to begin with.

But niw it is completely moot and irrelevant.









						Why an appeals court says Trump's claims he declassified the Mar-a-Lago documents are a 'red herring' | CNN Politics
					

Former President Donald Trump's vague claims that he may have declassified documents taken to Mar-a-Lago are running into a brick wall in the way the litigation over the search is playing out in court.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Couchpotato

Indeependent said:


> And the print key would trigger the code that would audit the action and the user.
> I know because I'm a software developer.
> As a note, the Alt Print key combination would also be disabled.
> This is standard procedure.


Anyone could print it.    Do you really think Trump or any President for that matter sits on a computer browsing intelligence products or other classified documents?    They are handed hard copy documents to read.


----------



## Indeependent

Couchpotato said:


> Anyone could print it.    Do you really think Trump or any President for that matter sits on a computer browsing intelligence products or other classified documents?    They are handed hard copy documents to read.


Back to my original question which seems to have no answer…
How did Trump get one or more documents and  if no one keeps a track why did they raid his house?


----------



## insolent imp

BackAgain said:


> About what?  I referenced the Executive BRANCH.
> 
> Do you grasp that a *Branch* of our government is not the same thing as an Agency?


because the executive branch  is an agency of government.


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS

cnm said:


> Moron-A-Lardo then, if you're going to be picky.



Still kinda lame. You’ll get there little one.


----------



## BackAgain

insolent imp said:


> because the executive branch  is an agency of government.


No. I thought you had your head up your ass on that one. 

Our Constitution sets out only 3 Branches. The Executive Branch is one of those. 

Departments, bureaus, services and agencies are all parts of that *Branch*.


----------



## BackAgain

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Still kinda lame. You’ll get there little one.


No. He won’t.


----------



## cnm

Indeependent said:


> Someone fucked up and it wasn't Trump.


He didn't return them when requested. He fucked up bigly.

Sad.


----------



## Lastamender

cnm said:


> He didn't return them when requested. He fucked up bigly.
> 
> Sad.


He was in negotiations . Try the truth.


----------



## Indeependent

cnm said:


> He didn't return them when requested. He fucked up bigly.
> 
> Sad.


Was he told why he had to return them?


----------



## candycorn

BackAgain said:


> I don’t know. My hunch is, “no.”  That’s part of the problem. But assuming no follow up paperwork was ever completed, that’s not the point.


So your "hunch" is that there is no list of what is classified and what is declassified?

And your blob didn't fix this "problem"?  

Wow.


----------



## BackAgain

Lastamender said:


> He was in negotiations . Try the truth.


little cnm doesn’t wanna try the truth.

“It burns! It burns!”


----------



## basquebromance




----------



## BackAgain

candycorn said:


> So your "hunch" is that there is no list of what is classified and what is declassified?
> 
> And your blob didn't fix this "problem"?
> 
> Wow.


My hunch is either right or wrong. If I’m right, then no record. But that doesn’t mean he had “no” list. It may mean the list was left unfinished.  I don’t know. Do you?

And I don’t have a blob. Honest. I have  been losing weight.

I know that you’re a pinhead, so it’s clear you’re just being your unoriginal self and referring to President Trump as “blob.”

And no. It doesn’t sound like he got the job completed prior to your demented hair sniffing racist Alzheimer Victim in Chief becoming (God help America) our President.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Yes, because the president has the sole constitutional authority to determine classification.

The mistake your sister Trump bashers make is to believe that their is some oversight of the president's authority by some agency, some law, or some official and that there is a process required by that agency, or that law, or that official for the president to follow when exercising his powers, else it "doesn't count."

In fact, there is no such oversight, no such law, no such policy, no such agency, and no such process.  The only reason to believe that their is is the feeling that "there must be, right?"

There isn't.

Maybe there should be.  Maybe that power concentrated in the hands of one person is a  bad thing.  Maybe that is too much power for one man.

I myself don't like the fact that President Biden has the power right now to declare all documents found in Trump's home that bore their former classification markings are now classified at the level indicated on them.  He can classify all the cover sheets that they FBI raiders scattered on the floor at the level that they indicate even though cover sheets say, "(This Cover Sheet is Unclassified)," because Joe Biden is the president and he has sole authority, not whoever designed and published the cover sheets.

You have to stop being so caught up in the latest "We've got him now, for sure this time!" and remember that classification power is not found in nature,* nor is it a sacred tradition in our democratic republic.  The power of government to forbid citizens from knowing information about government activities and to forbid them from knowing why it is forbidden is one we should look askance at.  We shouldn't be acting as if they government has a sacred "right" to classify that Trump somehow usurped. 

Classification, much more so than declassification, is a power that would be very tempting in the hands of a corrupt leader, or a corrupt shadow government as our "Justice System" has become.  Declassification should be applauded absent strong evidence that we would be harmed by knowing the information, or that America's security would be harmed.  Nuclear secrets and names of undercover agents should be classified, but not DOJ machinations to sway an election.

Our role as citizens is to not elect a demented pedophile because we are angry that his opponent likes to tweet mean tweets.  That's where the system broke down.

*Meaning, as the right to self-defense is found in nature, for individuals and nations.


----------



## Indeependent

candycorn said:


> So your "hunch" is that there is no list of what is classified and what is declassified?
> 
> And your blob didn't fix this "problem"?
> 
> Wow.


Obama didn't solve the problem.
GW didn't solve the problem.
Clinton, the Rapist didn't solve the problem.


----------



## candycorn

BackAgain said:


> My hunch is either right or wrong. If I’m right, then no record. But that doesn’t mean he had “no” list. It may mean the list was left unfinished.  I don’t know. Do you?
> 
> And I don’t have a blob. Honest. Be been losing weight.
> 
> I know that you’re a pinhead, so it’s clear you’re just being your unoriginal self and referring to President Trump as “blob.”
> 
> And no. It doesn’t sound like he got the job completed prior to your demented hair sniffing racist Alzheimer Victim in Chief becoming (God help America) our President.



The only reason you say you have this "hunch" is because it will allow for your blob to have the documents down in Florida.  Nobody in their right mind would think that a President could declassify every state secret we have on his or her own and there not be some sort of accounting for what was classified and what wasn't classified.

Otherwise, some file clerk in the Pentagon could walk out with our plans to invade China and when stopped by the authorities, he could just say, "The President declassified them".  Since there is no list anywhere (according to your convenient hunch), I guess he didn't commit a crime.  

Don't you ever get tired of making these ridiculous statements?  I mean...now you're actually trying to pretend there is no list of what was declassified and what wasn't.


----------



## candycorn

Indeependent said:


> Obama didn't solve the problem.
> GW didn't solve the problem.
> Clinton  didn't solve the problem.


And this excuses your blob's actions how exactly?


----------



## Indeependent

candycorn said:


> And this excuses your blob's actions how exactly?


No...It means you only criticize the Blob and worship the others because you're obviously an idiot.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> I myself don't like the fact that President Biden has the power right now to declare all documents found in Trump's home that bore their former classification markings are now classified at the level indicated on them.



He does not need to declare them classified, he just needs to think it and then Trump is in possession of classified materials. 

He could be reading the sports page and think, damn that document should be classified and BOOM it is....according to you people.

He could think to himself "this USMB is classified stuff" and we could all go to jail....according to you people.

It is almost as if you all think the POTUS is some sort of deity.


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> He does not need to declare them classified, he just needs to think it and then Trump is in possession of classified materials.
> 
> He could be reading the sports page and think, damn that document should be classified and BOOM it is....according to you people.
> 
> He could think to himself "this USMB is classified stuff" and we could all go to jail....according to you people.
> 
> It is almost as if you all think the POTUS is some sort of deity.


Who handed Trump and Obama the Classified Documents and why didn't someone tell them to return them when they were no longer President?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Indeependent said:


> Who handed Trump and Obama the Classified Documents and why didn't someone tell them to return them when they were no longer President?



Obama has nothing to return, the NA has all of his documents in a warehouse. 

As for Trump, who knows.   He is the POTUS, he can say "get them for me now" and someone will do that, or so we are told.


----------



## Couchpotato

candycorn said:


> So your "hunch" is that there is no list of what is classified and what is declassified?
> 
> And your blob didn't fix this "problem"?
> 
> Wow.


There’s 100% not a list of all classified documents and information.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes, because the president has the sole constitutional authority to determine classification.
> 
> The mistake your sister Trump bashers make is to believe that their is some oversight of the president's authority by some agency, some law, or some official and that there is a process required by that agency, or that law, or that official for the president to follow when exercising his powers, else it "doesn't count."
> 
> In fact, there is no such oversight, no such law, no such policy, no such agency, and no such process.  The only reason to believe that their is is the feeling that "there must be, right?"
> 
> There isn't.
> 
> Maybe there should be.  Maybe that power concentrated in the hands of one person is a  bad thing.  Maybe that is too much power for one man.
> 
> I myself don't like the fact that President Biden has the power right now to declare all documents found in Trump's home that bore their former classification markings are now classified at the level indicated on them.  He can classify all the cover sheets that they FBI raiders scattered on the floor at the level that they indicate even though cover sheets say, "(This Cover Sheet is Unclassified)," because Joe Biden is the president and he has sole authority, not whoever designed and published the cover sheets.
> 
> You have to stop being so caught up in the latest "We've got him now, for sure this time!" and remember that classification power is not found in nature,* nor is it a sacred tradition in our democratic republic.  The power of government to forbid citizens from knowing information about government activities and to forbid them from knowing why it is forbidden is one we should look askance at.  We shouldn't be acting as if they government has a sacred "right" to classify that Trump somehow usurped.
> 
> Classification, much more so than declassification, is a power that would be very tempting in the hands of a corrupt leader, or a corrupt shadow government as our "Justice System" has become.  Declassification should be applauded absent strong evidence that we would be harmed by knowing the information, or that America's security would be harmed.  Nuclear secrets and names of undercover agents should be classified, but not DOJ machinations to sway an election.
> 
> Our role as citizens is to not elect a demented pedophile because we are angry that his opponent likes to tweet mean tweets.  That's where the system broke down.
> 
> *Meaning, as the right to self-defense is found in nature, for individuals and nations.



Let me ask you this, would you be ok with Trump being arrested for holding classified documents if Biden were to say on national TV, I thought all those documents Trump had were classified, thus making them so.


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> Obama has nothing to return, the NA has all of his documents in a warehouse.
> 
> As for Trump, who knows.   He is the POTUS, he can say "get them for me now" and someone will do that, or so we are told.


I agree that Trump should just STFU and return the documents.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> There’s 100% not a list of all classified documents and information.



Every control point that stores classified material in it, has an inventory of everything in it


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> Every control point that stores classified material in it, has an inventory of everything in it


Yet no one seems to know where this one is and why the list wasn't checked before the documents were removed.
Someone is not doing their job.


----------



## BackAgain

candycorn said:


> The only reason you say you have this "hunch" is because it will allow for your blob to have the documents down in Florida.


No, you imbecile. He has said he declassified them and so does Kash Patel. You choose not to believe it because you’re  a totally biased hack. That’s all. 


candycorn said:


> Nobody in their right mind would think that a President could declassify every state secret we have on his or her own and there not be some sort of accounting for what was classified and what wasn't classified.


Wrong. He could. Worse yet, so can Brandon. Record keeping sure makes sense. And his Administration absolutely should document everything. But if there’s a failure in record keeping (even a total failure), guess what cupcake?  That still doesn’t invalidate the fact of declassification. 


candycorn said:


> Otherwise, some file clerk in the Pentagon could walk out with our plans to invade China and when stopped by the authorities, he could just say, "The President declassified them".  Since there is no list anywhere (according to your convenient hunch), I guess he didn't commit a crime.


Yes. There would be risks associated with any record keeping failure. Doesn’t change the analysis. 


candycorn said:


> Don't you ever get tired of making these ridiculous statements?



Your confused. It’s you who makes the ridiculous statements. Don’t hyperventilate or get overly hysterical. It’s ok. We’re all used to you being ridiculous. 


candycorn said:


> I mean...now you're actually trying to pretend there is no list of what was declassified and what wasn't.


I am not pretending anything. You’re making shit up. Otherwise quite me. But you won’t. You can’t. Because (as you often do) you’re lying.


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> Obama has nothing to return, *the NA has all of his documents in a warehouse.*
> 
> As for Trump, who knows.   He is the POTUS, he can say "get them for me now" and someone will do that, or so we are told.


Not prior to 2017.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Let me ask you this, would you be ok with Trump being arrested for holding classified documents if Biden were to say on national TV, I thought all those documents Trump had were classified, thus making them so.


Going for a little _ex post facto_ logic now, Gigi?


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Going for a little _ex post facto_ logic now, Gigi?



All it takes is a thought, this is the way you all want it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Indeependent said:


> Not prior to 2017.



He was still the POTUS till 2017, and it was all in the White House before then.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> But can he order a military strike anywhere in the world at a moment's notice with just a thought?


now that could be cool. let Disney do it and we can have a black transgender play the role.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> now that could be cool. let Disney do it and we can have a black transgender play the role.



I am sure there is some racist joke in there, but I am missing it


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> All it takes is a thought, this is the way you all want it.


Not retroactively, you imbecile. 😂

Here’s the difference. The FBI did their little search warrant raid. They took the boxes. Therefore, so far as we know, President Trump  is no longer in possession.  So a change of status now has no impact on his former possession. 

You’re very slow.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I am sure there is some racist joke in there, but I am missing it


well then you'd be putting it there cause it's more a commentary on having to redo people as minorities so we can virtue signal.

but hey - if you say i did something else then i must have. you seem to know all that.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Not retroactively, you imbecile. 😂



Then he can just say that he thought it 3 weeks before Trump's house was searched?  Thus when the search happened everything there was classified.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> well then you'd be putting it there cause it's more a commentary on having to redo people as minorities so we can virtue signal.



I really have no clue what you are talking about, but I am sure you are being very witty.


----------



## BS Filter

rightwinger said:


> It amazes me how Trump views classification as an annoyance.
> 
> Not as a way to ensure damaging information is not released, but as an annoying requirement that he has to keep these documents safe and secure.
> 
> So what does he do?
> He issues a blanket declassification on every document he possesses.  Even Top Secret.
> 
> No concern that the information contained in those documents is now compromised


You're just upset that President Trump had the same authority as every other President. You twats are so immature.


----------



## dblack




----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Then he can just say that he thought it 3 weeks before Trump's house was searched?  Thus when the search happened everything there was classified.


What?  You think Brandon would lie?  And in addition, are you suggesting our senile President’s staff is as likely as the old demented Brandon to forget to do the record keeping????


----------



## Golfing Gator

BS Filter said:


> You're just upset that President Trump had the same authority as every other President. You twats are so immature.



No other president thought they could declassify documents via telepathy


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> What?  You think Brandon would lie?  And in addition, are you suggesting our senile President’s staff is as likely as the old demented Brandon to forget to do the record keeping????



Does not matter, as soon as he thinks it BOOM they are classified.   Hell, it might have even been in a dream, but that is good enough because he is the POTUS


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Does not matter, as soon as he thinks it BOOM they are classified.   Hell, it might have even been in a dream, but that is good enough because he is the POTUS


Time frame matters. Otherwise, your hypothesis is “what if Brandon and his bench stooges” choose to just lie in order to “get” Trump. 

That is your guesswork?


----------



## rightwinger

BS Filter said:


> You're just upset that President Trump had the same authority as every other President. You twats are so immature.



 No President has had the authority to keep Top Secret Documents in his basement


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Time frame matters. Otherwise, your hypothesis is “what if Brandon and his bench stooges” choose to just lie in order to “get” Trump.
> 
> That is your guesswork?



They can choose to lie, and since a thought is all it takes there is zero ways for Trump to prove they are lying.


----------



## BS Filter

Golfing Gator said:


> No other president thought they could declassify documents via telepathy


You don't know that.  Do you have telepathy?


----------



## BS Filter

rightwinger said:


> No President has had the authority to keep Top Secret Documents in his basement


They weren't top secret if he declassified them, you ignorant cocksucker.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BS Filter said:


> They weren't top secret if he declassified them, you ignorant cocksucker.



Biden thought they were, and a thought it all it takes so Trump had top secret documents.


----------



## rightwinger

BS Filter said:


> They weren't top secret if he declassified them, you ignorant cocksucker.


He did?

Well then I guess he can show which documents he declassified and when?

If he can’t….He is Fucked


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I really have no clue what you are talking about, but I am sure you are being very witty.


well you finally got something right.

we all knew this day would come.


----------



## BS Filter

Golfing Gator said:


> Biden thought they were, and a thought it all it takes so Trump had top secret documents.


Biden doesn't have any thoughts.  His brain is atrophied.


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> He was still the POTUS till 2017, and it was all in the White House before then.


What's funny is that the proof was posted yesterday and your brain wiped it from your memory.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> They can choose to lie, and since a thought is all it takes there is zero ways for Trump to prove they are lying.


Go rush a memo to AG Meritless Garland at the Department of the Miscarriage of Justice. I think he’ll like the cut of your jib.


----------



## BS Filter

rightwinger said:


> He did?
> 
> Well then I guess he can show which documents he declassified and when?
> 
> If he can’t….He is Fucked


He declassified all of those in his possession while he was President.  You just hate the fact that President Trump had the same authority as any other President. Why don't you be a man and admit it.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Unlike Piker Joe who can't even bring his worthess " Damned "
   Catholic self to " THINK " about what he does to this Nation and
  We the People.He just up's and does it.I mean,shades of Hitler,Stalin
  and Mao.
     Trump is a plain spoken man whose Loyal to our founding.
      Conversely ... Biden in less than Half his first term is already
  considered The Worst President in American History. 
      No need for some Carny Fortune Teller with Trump.
    With Biden that " carny fortune teller " is everywhere.
   What does that signal.Um ... The End Days !


----------



## rightwinger

BS Filter said:


> He declassified all of those in his possession while he was President.  You just hate the fact that President Trump had the same authority as any other President. Why don't you be a man and admit it.



He did?
Then I am sure he can provide a record of all the documents he declassified

If he thinks he declassified something and it wasn’t done…Guess what?
It is still classified

Question for you
Why would Trump declassify a Top Secret Document down to unclassified and not have a record of it?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Foolardi said:


> Unlike Piker Joe who can't even bring his worthess " Damned "
> Catholic self to " THINK " about what he does to this Nation and
> We the People.He just up's and does it.I mean,shades of Hitler,Stalin
> and Mao.
> Trump is a plain spoken man whose Loyal to our founding.
> Conversely ... Biden in less than Half his first term is already
> considered The Worst President in American History.
> No need for some Carny Fortune Teller with Trump.
> With Biden that " carny fortune teller " is everywhere.
> What does that signal.Um ... The End Days !



you have the best drunk post!


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> He did?
> Then I am sure he can provide a record of all the documents he declassified
> 
> If he thinks he declassified something and it wasn’t done…Guess what?
> It is still classified
> 
> Question for you
> Why would Trump declassify a Top Secret Document down to unclassified and not have a record of it?


How did Trump get the Documents without it being documented?
You can't answer this.
Someone on Capitol Hill is not doing their job.


----------



## rightwinger

Indeependent said:


> How did Trump get the Documents without it being documented?
> You can't answer this.
> Someone on Capitol Hill is not doing their job.



Top Secret Documents are tracked
Each copy is recorded as to who has it and they must sign for it

I think that is why they got their warrant


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> Top Secret Documents are tracked
> Each copy is recorded as to who has it and they must sign for it
> 
> I think that is why they got their warrant


Tracked by who?
I know you can't answer that question.
It seems no one can answer that question because everyone, including you, wants to put the blame solely on Trump.


----------



## Foolardi

BS Filter said:


> He declassified all of those in his possession while he was President.  You just hate the fact that President Trump had the same authority as any other President. Why don't you be a man and admit it.


That's the thingy.Just look at who this Biden surrounds hisself.
   If not female lackey's like Susan Rice and under the radar radicals
  like Samantha Powers and of course Obama's right hand man     
    Valerie Jerrett plus Teachers Unions Radicals like pathetic Randi
    Weingarten.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Every control point that stores classified material in it, has an inventory of everything in it


No it doesn’t.  They have a list of classified items but not documents.  

do you think the NSA has a list of all the classified documents inside the building?     Really?


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> Top Secret Documents are tracked
> Each copy is recorded as to who has it and they must sign for it
> 
> I think that is why they got their warrant


The warrant is proof that you have no idea what you're talking about; it's way too general.


----------



## Couchpotato

rightwinger said:


> Top Secret Documents are tracked
> Each copy is recorded as to who has it and they must sign for it
> 
> I think that is why they got their warrant


Where do you guys get this shit?  That’s 100% not the case


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> No it doesn’t.  They have a list of classified items but not documents.
> 
> do you think the NSA has a list of all the classified documents inside the building?     Really?



Inside the building there are multiple secondary control points where things are stored when not in use.  Each of those have an inventory of what is in them.


----------



## Indeependent

Couchpotato said:


> Where do you guys get this shit?  That’s 100% not the case


RWer makes it up as he goes along.


----------



## BS Filter

rightwinger said:


> He did?
> Then I am sure he can provide a record of all the documents he declassified
> 
> If he thinks he declassified something and it wasn’t done…Guess what?
> It is still classified
> 
> Question for you
> Why would Trump declassify a Top Secret Document down to unclassified and not have a record of it?


Who the fuck are you? He doesn't have to keep records of what he declassified.  Once again you show your bias.  You want to treat Trump different from other Presidents. Why can't you be a man and admit it?


----------



## Indeependent

Golfing Gator said:


> Inside the building there are multiple secondary control points where things are stored when not in use.  Each of those have an inventory of what is in them.


And yet documents disappear when the person who has them leaves office.


----------



## Indeependent

BS Filter said:


> Who the fuck are you? He doesn't have to keep records of what he declassified.  Once again you show your bias.  You want to treat Trump different from other Presidents. Why can't you be a man and admit it?


Because he owes his pension to his Democratic Club.


----------



## BS Filter

Couchpotato said:


> Where do you guys get this shit?  That’s 100% not the case


That fruit loop is mentally ill.


----------



## Indeependent

BS Filter said:


> That fruit loop is mentally ill.


All Libs are mentally ill.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Inside the building there are multiple secondary control points where things are stored when not in use.  Each of those have an inventory of what is in them.


You know I worked in the SIGINT community for 25 years right?   You are talking out of your ass.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> Top Secret Documents are tracked
> Each copy is recorded as to who has it and they must sign for it
> 
> I think that is why they got their warrant


so, then he signed out the documents in question, didn't steal them, and the FBI has known all this time what he had and took with him, left in June saying "lock them up better" - then in a fit of knowledge they forgot they had, remembered that trump wasn't supposed to have these documents he checked out and they saw and went and raided his house.

GOD DAMN you paint yourself into some very stupid corners.


----------



## Indeependent

iceberg said:


> so, then he signed out the documents in question, didn't steal them, and the FBI has known all this time what he had and took with him, left in June saying "lock them up better" - then in a fit of knowledge they forgot they had, remembered that trump wasn't supposed to have these documents he checked out and they saw and went and raided his house.
> 
> GOD DAMN you paint yourself into some very stupid corners.


You can't make this brand of psycho up.


----------



## Foolardi

Indeependent said:


> Tracked by who?
> I know you can't answer that question.
> It seems no one can answer that question because everyone, including you, wants to put the blame solely on Trump.


It's easy breezie ... lemon squeezie.Just tune into MSNBC at
   10 pm est and watch who Little Lawrence O'Donnell { who
  confirmed 10 years ago he's a SOCIALIST } has on.
    You'll see the real rats in our Government.Not just guys like
    Adam Schiff or Eric Swalwell but the lead prosecutor in Mueller's
   Special Counsel or Andrew Weissman.


----------



## iceberg

Indeependent said:


> You can't make this brand of psycho up.


he's a special brand of stupid. im sure he uses the short keyboard.


----------



## Indeependent

Foolardi said:


> It's easy breezie ... lemon squeezie.Just tune into MSNBC at
> 10 pm est and watch who Little Lawrence O'Donnell { who
> confirmed 10 years ago he's a SOCIALIST } has on.
> You'll see the real rats in our Government.Not just guys like
> Adam Schiff or Eric Swalwell but the lead prosecutor in Mueller's
> Special Counsel or Andrew Weissman.


STOP IT!
You're hurting my stomach muscles!


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Let me ask you this, would you be ok with Trump being arrested for holding classified documents if Biden were to say on national TV, I thought all those documents Trump had were classified, thus making them so.


No, because When Trump was president and declassified them,it was perfectly legal to declassify them.

I know TDS Democrats like you hate this, but in the U.S. of A., we don't prosecute people for things that were only illegal after we made them illegal, but not when they did them.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> you have the best drunk post!


 " I wasn't like Oliver Reed.He was a competitor drinker.He would    
    say, ' I can drink you under the fucking table.' And I'd say : I'm sure
   you could,Oliver.But where's the fun in that . "
       -- John  Hurt 
I'm watching parts of - Midnight Express - { 1978 }
    Fantastic movie.


----------



## Stann

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


All I have to say is when are they going to lock this idiot up he belongs in a mental institution. One for the criminally insane.


----------



## Foolardi

Indeependent said:


> STOP IT!
> You're hurting my stomach muscles!


I'm not sure but 5 will getcha 10 that seems to be the plot.
   Of the Obama extended Biden Regime.To make We the People
  as sick as possible with this Unamericanism.


----------



## Rogue AI

Golfing Gator said:


> No other president thought they could declassify documents via telepathy


He never claimed telepathy, that's your lie. Given certain circumstances, a president might find it most beneficial to simply divulge 'classified' information to the public, in the greater interests of the nation. Ignoring all the phony protocols you folks are inventing.


----------



## Foolardi

Stann said:


> All I have to say is when are they going to lock this idiot up he belongs in a mental institution. One for the criminally insane.


Okey  Dokey ... I'm buyin.You said it and I'm willing to take you at yer
  written word.That .. . :
" All I have to say is "


----------



## bravoactual

Special Master Calls Out Lawyers On Traitor's Claim That F.B.I. "*Planted*" Shit-A-Lago Records.









						Special Master Calls Out Lawyers On Trump's Claim That FBI 'Planted' Mar-A-Lago Records
					

Raymond Dearie tells the legal team to detail what Trump claims was "planted" at his Florida resort, even though the ex-president watched the search on video.




					www.huffpost.com
				




U.S. District Judge Raymond Dearie, who is acting as a special master in the Mar-a-Lago documents case, on Thursday demanded that Donald Trump’s lawyers substantiate another one of the former president’s claims: that the FBI “*planted*” records.

Dearie ordered Trump’s legal team to submit by Sept. 30 a list of of specific items in the Justice Department’s 11-page inventory of documents taken from the Mar-a-Lago resort — including top secret files — that “*plaintiff asserts were not seized from the premises*.” They must also submit a list of any items seized that were not on the inventory, the order states.

“*This submission shall be Plaintiff’s final opportunity to raise any factual dispute as to the completeness and accuracy of the Detailed Property Inventory*,” Dearie said.

In simpler terms, the Traitor Impaired.....Put Up or Shut The Fuck Up.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> You know I worked in the SIGINT community for 25 years right?   You are talking out of your ass.



And you know I was an actual Secondary Control Point custodian while in the Marine Corps.  I was the one that kept the fucking inventory of what was in the vault.   So, kiss my ass.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> No, because When Trump was president and declassified them,it was perfectly legal to declassify them.



But on day one of his presidency Biden could have thought all those things were classified and they would be again.   Now Trump would be guilty of having classified documents in his possession, so you should be good with Biden having the same power that Trump did


----------



## WorldWatcher

BackAgain said:


> It’s a misleading question.
> 
> Just picture this. The President (any President) is seeking advice from some expert in a particular field, like troubles with a certain foreign power in a certain region and it’s complicated by other weighty considerations like energy, the prospect of military action and the feelings of other neighboring nations.
> 
> To get the advice he needs, the expert needs to be “in the know” about some presently classified material. So, without much ado, the President hands the expert (who has never received clearance for this level of classification) a top secret intel report.
> 
> Has the President thereby divulged a state secret?  Or, as I maintain, has he effectively (and without a fucking word being uttered) declassified that too secret document for the expert?



I know I'm late to the thread, but catching up over morning coffee, so my apologies in advance.

That isn't an example of the information being declassified, that is an example of the President giving the individual a Temporary Clearance.  The information would still be classified.  The individual in your case would still be subject to legal restrictions on not disseminating that information outside of his advice to the President.

WW


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> so, then he signed out the documents in question, didn't steal them, and the FBI has known all this time what he had and took with him, left in June saying "lock them up better" - then in a fit of knowledge they forgot they had, remembered that trump wasn't supposed to have these documents he checked out and they saw and went and raided his house.
> 
> GOD DAMN you paint yourself into some very stupid corners.


He was asked to return them and refused to do so. 
That is stealing

The FBI did not tell Trump to lock up TOP SECRET documents better. Trumps security of Classified Information was no where close to what is required


----------



## rightwinger

Rogue AI said:


> He never claimed telepathy, that's your lie. Given certain circumstances, a president might find it most beneficial to simply divulge 'classified' information to the public, in the greater interests of the nation. Ignoring all the phony protocols you folks are inventing.


But Trump never did that and the information remained classified


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> And you know I was an actual Secondary Control Point custodian while in the Marine Corps.  I was the one that kept the fucking inventory of what was in the vault.   So, kiss my ass.


You didnt have an inventory of every classified document in your facility.    That's not real and I dont give a shit how long you played SCIF guard as a LCpl, it doesnt make you an expert on the matter.   What you had an inventory of was classified material (key mat, gear, etc) but not every document.   Did someone come tell you every time they printed something and you added it to your inventory?  Tell me what's the serialization system the US government uses for classified documents?   What's the system called?   It must have one if it's keeping track of every one of them.   The SIGINT system alone generates probably a million classified reports every day.  

I know that all you dip shits want there to be some list of all the classified and declassified documents so that they DOJ can just check the docs that were found in Mar A Lago against it and if they are on the classified list Trump is guilty and you can all go touch each other thinking about how long he'll be in jail but that doesnt make those lists real.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> No, because When Trump was president and declassified them,it was perfectly legal to declassify them.
> 
> I know TDS Democrats like you hate this, but in the U.S. of A., we don't prosecute people for things that were only illegal after we made them illegal, but not when they did them.


If Trump declassified anything, there would be a lengthy record 
There isn’t


----------



## frigidweirdo

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?



Then Biden can classify things by just thinking about them. Which means all those documents in Mar al Lago can have been classified by Biden. Prove it's not so.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> If Trump declassified anything, there would be a lengthy record
> There isn’t


I'll ask you for the umpteenth time to show me the clause in the constitution, the court ruling, the law, or any other record of this requirement for a lengthy record - or any record at all - that a president must create for his declassification to "count."

For the umpteenth time, you will be unable to, because no such requirement exists.  You just think that it should.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> But on day one of his presidency Biden could have thought all those things were classified and they would be again.   Now Trump would be guilty of having classified documents in his possession, so you should be good with Biden having the same power that Trump did


Good.  I was hoping that someone would at least understand the point about classification and declassification authority enough to make that argument.

If Biden had thought that all the documents in Trump's possession with classification marking - are now  re-classified, they would have indeed been classified again from that moment.  Because like it or not, think it's crazy or think it's really crazy, that is the president's power.  

But that would not mean that Trump is guilty of any crime.  A crime requires intent, as James Comey so carefully explained to us, especially in the matter of mishandling classified information.  If Biden re-classified Trump's documents in his mind, that does not make Trump automatically guilty of the crime unauthorized possession of classified documents, because he does not know that they are classified, and has ever reason to believe that they are declassified.


----------



## TNHarley

cnm said:


> No, they're government documents and he's a civilian.


He did that whenb he was prez, genius


----------



## Couchpotato

frigidweirdo said:


> Then Biden can classify things by just thinking about them. Which means all those documents in Mar al Lago can have been classified by Biden. Prove it's not so.


If Trump had declassified them then Biden certainly could have made the classified again.    That's true.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> No other president thought they could declassify documents via telepathy


Look, Golfing, I get it. 

If it were Biden who was caught with classified documents post-presidency and he claimed to have mentally declassified them, I would say "yeah, right, show me where he so much as wrote that on a post-it."

But I would have researched it, same as I did for Trump.  Especially if I had a Biden supporter who kept annoyingly asking for proof that there is a requirement for a president to write it down if they declassify something.  If I could not find that requirement anywhere - and no one has - I would have to realize that Biden actually was correct in his claim that he could declassify something without writing it down.

That's the difference between really disliking a president and his policies and joining the mass derangement syndrome about a guy who "wasn't supposed to," run for president and win.  If you just dislike a president, you can still think critically about reasons to dislike him.


----------



## Seymour Flops

If there is a requirement that a president put it in writing when he declassifies something, wouldn't that requirement be in writing?

Where is it? 

Or is that requirement mental?


----------



## Couchpotato

Seymour Flops said:


> If there is a requirement that a president put it in writing when he declassifies something, wouldn't that requirement be in writing?
> 
> Where is it?
> 
> Or is that requirement mental?


Allegedly there's a list of all the declassified and classified documents....


----------



## Seymour Flops

Casino story, may be true or apocryphal, but I didn't make it up myself:

Croupier in training at the roulette wheel.  Ball lands on fourteen.  A guy who hadn't even bought chips hands the Croupier a twenty dollar bill.  "I made a mental bet on twenty-one," he says, "and I'm no welcher."

The veteran croupier chuckles and shakes his head, but the trainee doesn't see this and takes the money.  "You idiot," whispers the veteran,"  The trainee shrugs and puts the money down the slot.  

Next roll the ball drops on three.  The guy who made the mental bet the last time whoops and announces that this time his mental bet was on three.  Pit boss is called over and the trainee counts out the guy's payoff as his last act in that casino.

Moral to the story:  Precedent is important, and so are rules.  The rules in a casino are that you put your money down to bet.  The rules for making book are that you can verbally make a bet and you better hand it over if you lose.  The rules for classification and declassification are that the president makes the rules.  

Bend those rules once for momentary gain and it will haunt you in a big way.

Easy for the Dems to announce a "mental rule" that presidents must write something down when they declassify something and every president in the future will be subject to mental rule changes by the opposing party.  

Imagine Gavin Newsome trying to be president with a GOP congress, senate, and supreme court in place under those conditions.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Couchpotato said:


> Allegedly there's a list of all the declassified and classified documents....


I actually think they believe that there is such a list, maybe in a database.


----------



## MagicMike

bravoactual said:


> President Biden has the authorization to reclassify the Shit-A-Lago docs.


They were never declassified.
Just ask Trump's lawyers.


----------



## Couchpotato

Seymour Flops said:


> I actually think they believe that there is such a list, maybe in a database.


They want those lists to exist that's for certain.


----------



## Couchpotato

MagicMike said:


> They were never declassified.
> Just ask Trump's lawyers.


Why would Trumps lawyers have any idea whether a document was declassified or not?    Seriously.   What reasoning would there be for them to necessarily have that knowledge?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> How do you know that is what Trump had in his home?
> 
> And if those are what Trump had in his home, why did he not make them public so we all could see them and know the truth?


Now, that is a good question.

I think Trump let his ego get in the way.  I think that he envisioned a dramatic release of the information at a strategic time during the 2024 election cycle.  Maybe right after the sixty day mark when the DOJ would have been constrained from going after him for releasing the information.

That information in the Crossfire Hurricane binder was declassified even by the made-up standard that the president can only declassify things in writing.  The DOJ refused to release them, so Trump should have.  But by that point, the 2020 election was over, so Trump decided to keep the documents until needed - is my theory, which is what you asked for.

Don't forget that we now know that of the 10,000 approx documents the FBI took, only about a hundred were even marked classified.  That sounds like the Crossfire Hurricane binder, and nothing else.


----------



## iceberg

Correction: NARA Kept Classified Docs in a Furniture Warehouse, Not the Obama Foundation
					

After further research and a statement from NARA, PJ Media determined the story was incorrect and has since been removed. We apologize to our readers for the error....




					pjmedia.com


----------



## Seymour Flops

TNHarley said:


> IDK. If this goes to the courts, we will find out.
> Of course, there could be witnesses and they just havent come forward.


One has so far.  But  he is brown, so the Democrats have no more regard for him than the asylum seekers of Martha's Vineyard.



TNHarley said:


> Then again, if there was, big mouth would have said so.


Trump is the accused.  He doesn't have to speak until he chooses.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> You would think that if Trump would declassify TOP SECRET information to no longer classified, that he would have a damned good reason.”


Yes, "you would think that," I would think that, it makes a lot of sense, "come on, man," etc.

But in fact, there is no such requirement.  If there were, you would be showing it instead of saying "you would think . . . "


----------



## dblack

I wonder why Democrats think it's a good idea to keep Trump's name in the headlines? Clearly they enjoy their "two minute's hate", but can't they see he's just playing them?

Don't feed the troll.


----------



## Care4all

iceberg said:


> No I don't think it should be that easy.
> 
> But if what he, had was raid worthy, why did they leave in June without taking any?


In June they had a sworn affidavit from Trump's attorneys that Trump returned all classified documents.

Trump staff would not let the FBI open the govt boxes of records in the storage room, the FBI asked Trumpers to lock.

Afterwards an informant came to them, telling them they did not get all classified security risk documents and trump attorneys lied, under oath.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> You didnt have an inventory of every classified document in your facility.



Correct, I just had a inventory of every classified document stored in my vault.  Each vault kept their own inventory.  How else would one know if something had not been returned? 



Couchpotato said:


> Did someone come tell you every time they printed something and you added it to your inventory?



Nobody was printing classified documents outside of the printer in the vault.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes, "you would think that," I would think that, it makes a lot of sense, "come on, man," etc.
> 
> But in fact, there is no such requirement.  If there were, you would be showing it instead of saying "you would think . . . "


Actually, there is a requirement that you formally declassify information

Trump did not do that


----------



## rightwinger

dblack said:


> I wonder why Democrats think it's a good idea to keep Trump's name in the headlines? Clearly they enjoy their "two minute's hate", but can't they see he's just playing them?
> 
> Don't feed the troll.



Trump does a damned good job of that on his own


----------



## WorldWatcher

Couchpotato said:


> You didnt have an inventory of every classified document in your facility.    That's not real and I dont give a shit how long you played SCIF guard as a LCpl, it doesnt make you an expert on the matter.   What you had an inventory of was classified material (key mat, gear, etc) but not every document.   Did someone come tell you every time they printed something and you added it to your inventory?  Tell me what's the serialization system the US government uses for classified documents?   What's the system called?   It must have one if it's keeping track of every one of them.   The SIGINT system alone generates probably a million classified reports every day.
> 
> I know that all you dip shits want there to be some list of all the classified and declassified documents so that they DOJ can just check the docs that were found in Mar A Lago against it and if they are on the classified list Trump is guilty and you can all go touch each other thinking about how long he'll be in jail but that doesnt make those lists real.



As someone that worked in a SCIF and developed SIGINT as Navy Aircrew flying on EP-3E and ES-3 Electronic Warfare platforms,...

#1  Yes, we had an inventory of EVERY classified document in the SCIF.

#2  Yes, post mission the reports and data were classified and added to the inventory.

WW


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Look, Golfing, I get it.
> 
> If it were Biden who was caught with classified documents post-presidency and he claimed to have mentally declassified them, I would say "yeah, right, show me where he so much as wrote that on a post-it."
> 
> But I would have researched it, same as I did for Trump.  Especially if I had a Biden supporter who kept annoyingly asking for proof that there is a requirement for a president to write it down if they declassify something.  If I could not find that requirement anywhere - and no one has - I would have to realize that Biden actually was correct in his claim that he could declassify something without writing it down.
> 
> That's the difference between really disliking a president and his policies and joining the mass derangement syndrome about a guy who "wasn't supposed to," run for president and win.  If you just dislike a president, you can still think critically about reasons to dislike him.



You have this overwhelming desire to project your emotions on to me, and it just fails every time. 

If Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, or even Biden said what Trump did I would have the exact same reaction. 

The fact you all are good with classification via telepathy is just one more method of worshiping the man, because if anyone else had said it you would be standing next to me claiming it was bullshit.


----------



## Couchpotato

WorldWatcher said:


> As someone that worked in a SCIF and developed SIGINT as Navy Aircrew flying on EP-3E and ES-3 Electronic Warfare platforms,...
> 
> #1  Yes, we had an inventory of EVERY classified document in the SCIF.
> 
> #2  Yes, post mission the reports and data were classified and added to the inventory.
> 
> WW


What year was this?     Even if that's the way you did it in 1980 shit has changed.    I was working at the NSA less than 5 years ago, there 100% isnt an inventory of every hardcopy classified document in that complex.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Correct, I just had a inventory of every classified document stored in my vault.  Each vault kept their own inventory.  How else would one know if something had not been returned?
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody was printing classified documents outside of the printer in the vault.


Ok.   Well it's not 1976 anymore so either you're information is dated or you were a moron for keeping that inventory.


----------



## dblack

rightwinger said:


> Trump does a damned good job of that on his own


Dems sure are helping. They're falling for his con every bit as much as his supporters.

Don't feed the troll.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> Ok.   Well it's not 1976 anymore so either you're information is dated or you were a moron for keeping that inventory.



actually early 1990s.

I kept that inventory so that I did not go to the brig since I was responsible for every piece of classified material in my secondary control point.


----------



## iceberg

Care4all said:


> In June they had a sworn affidavit from Trump's attorneys that Trump returned all classified documents.
> 
> Trump staff would not let the FBI open the govt boxes of records in the storage room, the FBI asked Trumpers to lock.
> 
> Afterwards an informant came to them, telling them they did not get all classified security risk documents and trump attorneys lied, under oath.


Go away


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> actually early 1990s.


Ok well it isnt the early 90's is it.   We are talking 30 years since you have any relevant experience.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> You have this overwhelming desire to project your emotions on to me, and it just fails every time.
> 
> If Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, or even Biden said what Trump did I would have the exact same reaction.
> 
> The fact you all are good with classification via telepathy is just one more method of worshiping the man, because if anyone else had said it you would be standing next to me claiming it was bullshit.


Dude, you project to me all the damn time. How often do I tell you that you are assigning me emotions I don't have?

And it fails. Every single time.

Busted for hypocrisy and you LOL. that's so... You.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


/------/  BWHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

Golfing Gator said:


> But can he order a military strike anywhere in the world at a moment's notice with just a thought?


He can change the course of a hurricane with a sharpy--so why not?


----------



## Captain Caveman

Rogue AI said:


> No, the guy who can order a military strike anywhere in the world at a moment's notice, does not need permission to declassify anything. These folks are feeding you fantasies.


So anything found at Trump's property is declassified, because a president can declassify anything without authorisation.


----------



## Captain Caveman

surada said:


> Yes. Trump has claimed all sorts of power. He's never read the constitution.. Said it was too hard like a foreign language. The whole concept of the presidency is over his head. He thinks he's king rather than servant.


So if a president needs permission/authorisation to declassify something, which part of the constitution states that.


----------



## Captain Caveman

surada said:


> His staff. The documents or secrets that are declassified have to be studied and cross referenced so as not to harm our allies or intelligence assets.  Trump is dumb as shit.


Your fellow Americans disagree.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

Captain Caveman said:


> So anything found at Trump's property is declassified, because a president can declassify anything without authorisation.


Sure...not that Trump is President. He has no credibility and his word is shit..so unless he has a record there is no reason for the courts to believe him..and I suspect they don't.

Anyway..classified or no..the docs did not belong to him. His lawyers lied, under oath, and said Trump had returned all. He had not, an informant blabbed and the FBI did their job.

The Judge in the case granting a special Master, is de facto  acknowledging the classified status of the docs, while at the same time he has stated the classification is moot, to the current case in front of him.


----------



## GLASNOST

Golfing Gator said:


> .... So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Don't be too absurd. Do I think presidents can declassify *just by saying "It's declassified"*? Yes, I do believe that.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

Captain Caveman said:


> Your fellow Americans disagree.


Some of them do..but most of them are dumb as shit as well..so there you have it~


----------



## iceberg

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Some of them do..but most of them are dumb as shit as well..so there you have it~


Well stop being dumb as shit, then.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

GLASNOST said:


> Don't be too absurd. Do I think presidents can declassify *just by saying "It's declassified"*? Yes, I do believe that.


Yup. a sitting President can do that. But in this case we have no witnesses..just Trump's word. Trump cannot list which documents he declassified or when he did it.
I don't believe him--and I doubt that a court of law will either.

Of course, Trump is now a private citizen and the documents he was in possession of were not his. He was asked to return them..his lawyers lied and said all had been returned. the classification status of the docs is moot, as the judge has said.

So the Justice Dept. told the FBI to do  their job.


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle

iceberg said:


> Well stop being dumb as shit, then.


Words to live by---pity you prize faux cleverness over fact.


----------



## WorldWatcher

Couchpotato said:


> What year was this?     Even if that's the way you did it in 1980 shit has changed.    I was working at the NSA less than 5 years ago, there 100% isnt an inventory of every hardcopy classified document in that complex.



Retired in the very late '90's.

Didn't work at NSA.  

I don't believe you that the NSA doesn't track Top Secret/SCI, Top Secret/SAP, etc. documents.

WW


----------



## Captain Caveman

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Yup. a sitting President can do that. But in this case we have no witnesses..just Trump's word. Trump cannot list which documents he declassified or when he did it.
> I don't believe him--and I doubt that a court of law will either.
> 
> Of course, Trump is now a private citizen and the documents he was in possession of were not his. He was asked to return them..his lawyers lied and said all had been returned. the classification status of the docs is moot, as the judge has said.
> 
> So the Justice Dept. told the FBI to do  their job.


Where's your evidence you don't believe him? If he said he's declassified them and doesn't need to seek authorisation, then where's your evidence he didn't say to himself he declassified them? Where's the judges evidence?

You guys are in a mess.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> In June they had a sworn affidavit from Trump's attorneys that Trump returned all classified documents.
> 
> Trump staff would not let the FBI open the govt boxes of records in the storage room, the FBI asked Trumpers to lock.
> 
> Afterwards an informant came to them, telling them they did not get all classified security risk documents and trump attorneys lied, under oath.


Trump's attorney's were not under oath.  Attorneys don't swear under oath to things their client told them, that's absurd.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> Actually, there is a requirement that you formally declassify information
> 
> Trump did not do that


Show me.  From now on, that will be shortened to "SM."


----------



## Cellblock2429

rightwinger said:


> Actually, there is a requirement that you formally declassify information
> 
> Trump did not do that


/----/ And what is that requirement?  Any reason you didn't post it, or is it classified?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> You have this overwhelming desire to project your emotions on to me, and it just fails every time.
> 
> If Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, or even Biden said what Trump did I would have the exact same reaction.
> 
> The fact you all are good with classification via telepathy is just one more method of worshiping the man, because if anyone else had said it you would be standing next to me claiming it was bullshit.


Then all that is left is for you to show me that requirement for presidential declassification paperwork.  "Show me" will be shortened to "SM" to save typing the same thing over and over again.


----------



## rightwinger

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ And what is that requirement?  Any reason you didn't post it, or is it classified?



There are literally thousands of pages of classification guidelines. It shows how seriously the topic is taken.

Trump himself, signed legislation making mishandling of Classified information a felony.


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Trump's attorney's were not under oath.  Attorneys don't swear under oath to things their client told them, that's absurd.


she, and far too many, use emotional validation to substitute for truth.

annoying as fuck.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Seymour Flops said:


> Show me.  From now on, that will be shortened to "SM."


/---/ He can't, it's classified.


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Then all that is left is for you to show me that requirement for presidential declassification paperwork.  "Show me" will be shortened to "SM" to save typing the same thing over and over again.


it won't happen. with GG, he'll push you to give him direct answers then run away from your direct questions. 

he'll tell you that since you disagree with him, trump is your GOD.

he'll tell you you're angry and mad when you're really laughing at him.

but if you ever do any of those to him, whoah. the quick HAHA reaction and he goes away.

in this thread i gave him a 100% direct answer to "should he be able to do this" and when i answered it w/o games or questions, i asked him a follow up question.

he poof'd. as he always does.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Then all that is left is for you to show me that requirement for presidential declassification paperwork



There are no requirements for the paperwork a President must submit to declassify information
That is because a President must follow the same rules as everyone else to formally declassify information. 
Yes, a President can say…..I want this specific information declassified. 
But then, a formal process must be followed to complete that declassification.

Trumps frivolous claims to order vague declassification orders will not get it done.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> There are no requirements for the paperwork a President must submit to declassify information
> That is because a President must follow the same rules as everyone else to formally declassify information.
> Yes, a President can say…..I want this specific information declassified.
> But then, a formal process must be followed to complete that declassification.
> 
> Trumps frivolous claims to order vague declassification orders will not get it done.


so there are no requirements, then you go list a lot of requirements.

dude, you're such a fucking tool.


----------



## rightwinger

Cellblock2429 said:


> /---/ He can't, it's classified.
> View attachment 700347



Read your cover sheet

”Handling, Storage, Reproduction and Disposition of the attached document must be in accordance with applicable regulations”


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> so there are no requirements, then you go list a lot of requirements.
> 
> dude, you're such a fucking tool.


There are no requirements fast streaming the documentation, just because you are President.

He can order a declassification……but then the process remains the same


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> There are no requirements fast streaming the documentation, just because you are President.
> 
> He can order a declassification……but then the process remains the same


So if Obama had classified documents in say, an unsecured furniture warehouse you'd be just as angry?


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> So if Obama had classified documents in say, an unsecured furniture warehouse you'd be just as angry?



Yes, I would expect him to be treated the same as any other citizen.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> There are no requirements for the paperwork a President must submit to declassify information


Correct, thank you.


rightwinger said:


> That is because a President must follow the same rules as everyone else to formally declassify information.


No . . . a president is the only one who can classify or declassify anything.  Anyone beneath him legitimately classifying or declassifying is using the power that the president chose to delegate to him.  

Throwing the word "formally" in doesn't matter unless you have evidence that Trump used that word.


rightwinger said:


> Yes, a President can say…..I want this specific information declassified.
> But then, a formal process must be followed to complete that declassification.


SM


rightwinger said:


> Trumps frivolous claims to order vague declassification orders will not get it done.


Then why hasn't he been indicted.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> Yes, I would expect him to be treated the same as any other citizen.







__





						Loading…
					





					www.obama.org
				












						Report: Obama has 'classified' records stored in furniture warehouse
					

It looks like there could be a good number of Americans watching now for a massive armed FBI raid on at furniture warehouse in Chicago, where Barack Obama reportedly has stored "classified" government records.




					www.wnd.com
				




$5 says you don't give a shit in the end.


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> it won't happen. with GG, he'll push you to give him direct answers then run away from your direct questions.
> 
> he'll tell you that since you disagree with him, trump is your GOD.
> 
> he'll tell you you're angry and mad when you're really laughing at him.
> 
> but if you ever do any of those to him, whoah. the quick HAHA reaction and he goes away.
> 
> in this thread i gave him a 100% direct answer to "should he be able to do this" and when i answered it w/o games or questions, i asked him a follow up question.
> 
> he poof'd. as he always does.


He used to be better than that.  TDS has made some otherwise intelligent posters lose their ability to make logical arguments.


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.obama.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Report: Obama has 'classified' records stored in furniture warehouse
> 
> 
> It looks like there could be a good number of Americans watching now for a massive armed FBI raid on at furniture warehouse in Chicago, where Barack Obama reportedly has stored "classified" government records.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wnd.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $5 says you don't give a shit in the end.


Attack on your source in 3 . . . 2 . . .


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Attack on your source in 3 . . . 2 . . .


Then he will be attacking a letter from Obama.


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> He used to be better than that.  TDS has made some otherwise intelligent posters lose their ability to make logical arguments.


That's the frustrating part and the GG I liked talking to. 

Now he's just an arrogant ego feeding dick.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Correct, thank you.
> 
> No . . . a president is the only one who can classify or declassify anything.  Anyone beneath him legitimately classifying or declassifying is using the power that the president chose to delegate to him.
> 
> Throwing the word "formally" in doesn't matter unless you have evidence that Trump used that word.
> 
> SM
> 
> Then why hasn't he been indicted.


Wrong again Skippy

There is no “thought process” in Presidential declassification

Unless a formal, declassification process is followed where ALL documents containing that information is declassified, then the information is still classified.

Trump wrongly believes that he is only declassifying the documents he takes home with him. There are more far reaching implications


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> Wrong again Skippy
> 
> There is no “thought process” in Presidential declassification
> 
> Unless a formal, declassification process is followed where ALL documents containing that information is declassified, then the information is still classified.
> 
> Trump wrongly believes that he is only declassifying the documents he takes home with him. There are more far reaching implications


I missed your attacks on Obama.


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> I missed your attacks on Obama.


?


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> Wrong again Skippy
> 
> There is no “thought process” in Presidential declassification
> 
> Unless a formal, declassification process is followed where ALL documents containing that information is declassified, then the information is still classified.
> 
> Trump wrongly believes that he is only declassifying the documents he takes home with him. There are more far reaching implications


SM


----------



## rightwinger

dblack said:


> Dems sure are helping. They're falling for his con every bit as much as his supporters.
> 
> Don't feed the troll.


Trumps cons are crumbling around him with cases in NY, Georgia and DC

He doesn’t have that Executive Privilege anymore


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> That's the frustrating part and the GG I liked talking to.
> 
> Now he's just an arrogant ego feeding dick.


With Trump all but guaranteed the win in the 2024 election, it seems that TDS will only die with Trump himself, if even then.

For some of the older TDS'ers, that means they will not live to see the end of their affliction.

Sad.


----------



## WorldWatcher

Seymour Flops said:


> Trump's attorney's were not under oath.  Attorneys don't swear under oath to things their client told them, that's absurd.



Actually when attorney's file documents with the court its under a statement that what they are filing is true.

WW


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> ?


I showed you Obama has classified docs in an unsecured furniture warehouse. 

And you don't give a fuck. 

I win.


----------



## Cellblock2429

rightwinger said:


> Read your cover sheet
> 
> ”Handling, Storage, Reproduction and Disposition of the attached document must be in accordance with applicable regulations”


/------/ So what are the regulations?

BTW
*The majority ruling in the 1988 Supreme Court case Department of Navy vs. Egan — which addressed the legal recourse of a Navy employee who had been denied a security clearance — addresses this line of authority.*

*"The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’" according to Article II of the Constitution, the USSC’s majority wrote. "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."  1988 USSC Ruling.*


----------



## Cellblock2429

WorldWatcher said:


> Actually when attorney's file documents with the court its under a statement that what they are filing is true.
> 
> WW


/-----/ You mean like when Slick Willie was impeached for Obstruction and Purjury for allowing a statement he knew to be false to be entered to federal court as being true? You mean like that?
BWHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Then all that is left is for you to show me that requirement for presidential declassification paperwork.  "Show me" will be shortened to "SM" to save typing the same thing over and over again.



Did I say there had to be paperwork?  No, I did not.  

your worship of Trump gets in the way of your logic some days


----------



## WorldWatcher

Cellblock2429 said:


> /-----/ You mean like when Slick Willie was impeached for Obstruction and Purjury for allowing a statement he knew to be false to be entered to federal court as being true? You mean like that?
> BWHAHAHAHAHA



Ya, as a matter of fact.  He was charged with obstruction and perjury.  Thanks for supporting my point.

WW


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Did I say there had to be paperwork?  No, I did not.
> 
> your worship of Trump gets in the way of your logic some days


and there we go. if someone disagrees with the great gator, then said person must take the total opposite approach and love whatever you hate.

you have no middle ground, dude. you pretend that if someone doesn't hate trump like you do, the only emotion left is love.

a billion shades of gray between black and white. you should see them sometime.


----------



## rightwinger

Cellblock2429 said:


> /------/ So what are the regulations?
> 
> BTW
> *The majority ruling in the 1988 Supreme Court case Department of Navy vs. Egan — which addressed the legal recourse of a Navy employee who had been denied a security clearance — addresses this line of authority.*
> 
> *"The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’" according to Article II of the Constitution, the USSC’s majority wrote. "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."  1988 USSC Ruling.*



If you accept control of that document, you had better follow the regulations on storage, documenting the items you possess, protecting the document and not disclosing the contents


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> If you accept control of that document, you had better follow the regulations on storage, documenting the items you possess, protecting the document an$ not disclosing the contents


you mean like not putting them in an unsecured furniture warehouse? i see you ignore the shit out of obama doing this while demanding trump does.

OF WHICH trump did what he was told to do by the FBI.


----------



## bravoactual

MagicMike said:


> .They were never declassified.
> Just ask Trump's lawyers.



His Key Stone Cops brand of lawyers are now facing a show down with Judge Dearie.  He has given them until next week show clear and convincing evidence that the F.B.I. planted classified material at 
Shit-A-Lago.

The Traitor has successfully painted his shysters into a corner. 

In other Traitor Shyster News, Sidney "*The Kracken*" Powell  decided to skip out on appearing before a Grand Jury in Georgia.









						Former Trump attorney Sidney Powell a no-show for election probe grand jury
					

It is unclear if there will be legal repercussions from her failure to appear.




					www.wsbtv.com
				




Nothing like open contempt for the rule of law from assholes hired by the Traitor who have yet to be paid for their less than stellar legal skills.


----------



## bravoactual

iceberg said:


> you mean like not putting them in an unsecured furniture warehouse? i see you ignore the shit out of obama doing this while demanding trump does.
> 
> OF WHICH trump did what he was told to do by the FBI.



Believing something the Traitor said is like leaning into  a right hook.


----------



## bravoactual

iceberg said:


> Correction: NARA Kept Classified Docs in a Furniture Warehouse, Not the Obama Foundation
> 
> 
> After further research and a statement from NARA, PJ Media determined the story was incorrect and has since been removed. We apologize to our readers for the error....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pjmedia.com



Obscure Reich Wing Website, catering Reich Wing Nut Jobs.  

Find a better source.


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> you mean like not putting them in an unsecured furniture warehouse? i see you ignore the shit out of obama doing this while demanding trump does.
> 
> OF WHICH trump did what he was told to do by the FBI.


No idea what you are talking about

You been watching Fox again?


----------



## iceberg

bravoactual said:


> Obscure Reich Wing Website, catering Reich Wing Nut Jobs.
> 
> Find a better source.


i see you ignored obama's own letter, sir doosh-a-lot.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> No idea what you are talking about
> 
> You been watching Fox again?


i provided a letter from obama on where the records were kept and what they were, and a news site showing the details.

told you you don't give a fuck.


----------



## iceberg

bravoactual said:


> Believing something the Traitor said is like leaning into  a right hook.


believing anything you say simply won't happen.

and this has nothing to do with trump. it's a letter FROM OBAMA and a news story about it. trump isn't here til you drag him in to hide behind.


----------



## WorldWatcher

rightwinger said:


> No idea what you are talking about
> 
> You been watching Fox again?



Obama turned over his Presidential records about (30 million pages) to the NARA and the unclassified documents in the possession of the NARA are currently being stored at an NARA facility near Chicago.  The facility used to be a commercial warehouse.

The classified documents were turned over to the NARA are being stored at a D.C. facility (about 250,00 documents).

He's trying to claim that the classified documents are in Chicago, which the NARA has clearly said is false.

WW


----------



## iceberg

WorldWatcher said:


> Obama turned over his Presidential records about (30 million pages) to the NARA and the unclassified documents in the possession of the NARA are currently being stored at an NARA facility near Chicago.  The facility used to be a commercial warehouse.
> 
> The classified documents were turned over to the NARA are being stored at a D.C. facility (about 250,00 documents).
> 
> He's trying to claim that the classified documents are in Chicago, which the NARA has clearly said is false.
> 
> WW


great. but no one really knows what trump had yet look at all these people making assumptions that fit their emotional need for validation.

i missed your condemation of their actions.


----------



## rightwinger

WorldWatcher said:


> Obama turned over his Presidential records about (30 million pages) to the NARA and the unclassified documents in the possession of the NARA are currently being stored at an NARA facility near Chicago.  The facility used to be a commercial warehouse.
> 
> The classified documents were turned over to the NARA are being stored at a D.C. facility (about 250,00 documents).
> 
> He's trying to claim that the classified documents are in Chicago, which the NARA has clearly said is false.
> 
> WW



OMG!

You mean Obama followed the regulations on turning over official documents?


----------



## healthmyths

rightwinger said:


> It amazes me how Trump views classification as an annoyance.
> 
> Not as a way to ensure damaging information is not released, but as an annoying requirement that he has to keep these documents safe and secure.
> 
> So what does he do?
> He issues a blanket declassification on every document he possesses.  Even Top Secret.
> 
> No concern that the information contained in those documents is now compromised


So what would you call this...
Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression​








						Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression | CNN
					

President Joe Biden in an interview that aired Sunday said US military personnel would defend Taiwan if the Chinese military were to launch an invasion of the democratically ruled island, in comments that yet again appear to venture beyond the longstanding US policy on the issue.




					www.cnn.com
				



Biden TELLS China.. clearly that he will use troops against Chinese!


----------



## Woodznutz

Golfing Gator said:


> So, do you agree all the POTUS needs to do is think about it and POOF things are declassified?


When I think about doing something it's as good as done.


----------



## rightwinger

healthmyths said:


> So what would you call this...
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression | CNN
> 
> 
> President Joe Biden in an interview that aired Sunday said US military personnel would defend Taiwan if the Chinese military were to launch an invasion of the democratically ruled island, in comments that yet again appear to venture beyond the longstanding US policy on the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden TELLS China.. clearly that he will use troops against Chinese!



I applaud our President for standing up to China and making it clear how an invasion of Taiwan would be handled.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> i provided a letter from obama on where the records were kept and what they were, and a news site showing the details.
> 
> told you you don't give a fuck.



did he have them in his house?


----------



## Golfing Gator

healthmyths said:


> So what would you call this...
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression | CNN
> 
> 
> President Joe Biden in an interview that aired Sunday said US military personnel would defend Taiwan if the Chinese military were to launch an invasion of the democratically ruled island, in comments that yet again appear to venture beyond the longstanding US policy on the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden TELLS China.. clearly that he will use troops against Chinese!



He should have just thought it, as that is all that seems necessary for a presidential decree


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> I applaud our President for standing up to China and making it clear how an invasion of Taiwan would be handled.


only to have his staff walk it back and say nothing has changed.









						White House once again walks back Biden's promise to defend Taiwan, says there is no 'policy change'
					

President Biden was answering a hypothetical when he said the U.S. would deploy troops to defend Taiwan this week, the White House says, adding that U.S. policy hasn't changed.




					www.foxnews.com
				




doosh.


----------



## bravoactual

rightwinger said:


> No idea what you are talking about
> 
> You been watching Fox again?



His post was worse than word salad.  But he is after all Fucked Snooze follower and would rather listen to their drivel than the truth.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> only to have his staff walk it back and say nothing has changed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> White House once again walks back Biden's promise to defend Taiwan, says there is no 'policy change'
> 
> 
> President Biden was answering a hypothetical when he said the U.S. would deploy troops to defend Taiwan this week, the White House says, adding that U.S. policy hasn't changed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> doosh.



and nothing has changed, that has always been the US policy


----------



## bravoactual

healthmyths said:


> So what would you call this...
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression | CNN
> 
> 
> President Joe Biden in an interview that aired Sunday said US military personnel would defend Taiwan if the Chinese military were to launch an invasion of the democratically ruled island, in comments that yet again appear to venture beyond the longstanding US policy on the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden TELLS China.. clearly that he will use troops against Chinese!



Look over here, not at the lying two faced Orange Shit Gibbon.


----------



## Woodznutz

rightwinger said:


> I applaud our President for standing up to China and making it clear how an invasion of Taiwan would be handled.


Let the walkback begin.


----------



## rightwinger

Woodznutz said:


> Let the walkback begin.


 China got the message


----------



## BS Filter

Golfing Gator said:


> But on day one of his presidency Biden could have thought all those things were classified and they would be again.   Now Trump would be guilty of having classified documents in his possession, so you should be good with Biden having the same power that Trump did


"Biden could have thought"....
That's pretty funny.


----------



## otto105

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


It just proves what we know.

The former 1-term president is an idiot.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> and nothing has changed, that has always been the US policy


and? this isn't what i was referring to.

rightwingboy is saying YAY BIDEN FOR STANDING UP TO THE CHINESE while he misses the fact the WH walked back the tough words RWboy was so happy about.

please try to keep up.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BS Filter said:


> "Biden could have thought"....
> That's pretty funny.



now funnier than "I can declassify with just a mere thought'


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> and? this isn't what i was referring to.
> 
> rightwingboy is saying YAY BIDEN FOR STANDING UP TO THE CHINESE while he misses the fact the WH walked back the tough words RWboy was so happy about.
> 
> please try to keep up.



What did they walk back?  DIid they say we would not defend Taiwan?


----------



## BS Filter

Golfing Gator said:


> now funnier than "I can declassify with just a mere thought'


At least Trump can actually think.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> What did they walk back?  DIid they say we would not defend Taiwan?


i posted the article. go fucking read it and stop this shit.

and suddenly you don't give a FUCK about staying on topic.  imagine that.


----------



## basquebromance




----------



## healthmyths

bravoactual said:


> Look over here, not at the lying two faced Orange Shit Gibbon.


At least Trump could walk of the stage!  








						'Scary' video shows Biden appear confused and lost
					

Concerns surrounding whether President Joe Biden is fit enough to be the leader of the United States have been raised again after he appeared lost on stage.




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## otto105

BS Filter said:


> At least Trump can actually think.


Yeah, he really has to think about remembering the 200 words that he knows.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

playtime said:


> ummmm,,,, it really doesn't matter whether donny declassified anything -
> the crux of this whole crime is those files/docs didn't  belong to him; he had no 'right' to take them.
> 
> they are the property of the US citizens.  donny stole them & the reasons will become known sooner or later.


Correct. 

Trump is in legal jeopardy whether the documents were declassified or not.


----------



## MagicMike

healthmyths said:


> So what would you call this...
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden again says US forces would defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression | CNN
> 
> 
> President Joe Biden in an interview that aired Sunday said US military personnel would defend Taiwan if the Chinese military were to launch an invasion of the democratically ruled island, in comments that yet again appear to venture beyond the longstanding US policy on the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden TELLS China.. clearly that he will use troops against Chinese!


Good for Biden!
Standing up for Taiwan!


----------



## free radical

Golfing Gator said:


> now funnier than "I can declassify with just a mere thought'


Imagine Trump reading the CIA NOC list
And declassifying just by thinking about it.
Trump could  just think about revealing the names of all our covert operatives, 
and hocus pocus, it's declassified


----------



## Baron Von Murderpaws

*Basically, ANY document that is ALLOWED to be STORED in the White House is deemed "declassified".  *
*Any sitting president does not need special privileges or special protocols or anything like that, in order to remove documents from the White House.
*
*As long as those documents don't leave the country, there isn't anything wrong with them being stored at the sitting presidents home or private facility.

Would be nice if you retards actually did some RESEARCH on subject matter BEFORE spewing shit out of the assholes on your faces!*


----------



## free radical

Toffeenut Baconsmuggler said:


> *Basically, ANY document that is ALLOWED to be STORED in the White House is deemed "declassified".  *



Please, read up on it before you post such a ridiculous statement.
The president receives what the CIA calls the crown jewels, the presidents daily brief
in the white house.

And that is certainly not declassified,


----------



## Golfing Gator

BS Filter said:


> At least Trump can actually think.



maybe one day you will be able to also, but that would require your head being removed from Trump's ass, so I doubt it will happen any day soon


----------



## Golfing Gator

healthmyths said:


> At least Trump could walk of the stage!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Scary' video shows Biden appear confused and lost
> 
> 
> Concerns surrounding whether President Joe Biden is fit enough to be the leader of the United States have been raised again after he appeared lost on stage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skynews.com.au



and this is how low the bar now is for POTUS in the US.


----------



## free radical

Toffeenut Baconsmuggler said:


> *Any sitting president does not need special privileges or special protocols or anything like that, in order to remove documents from the White House.
> *


That again isn't true.  As the presidential briefers have said, Trump would want to
keep his briefing material (often in electronic media format) and they would have
to practically wrestle the device out of his hands.  Because they weren't going to
leave it in Trumps hands, except in their presence for the briefing.


----------



## otto105

Toffeenut Baconsmuggler said:


> *Basically, ANY document that is ALLOWED to be STORED in the White House is deemed "declassified".  *
> *Any sitting president does not need special privileges or special protocols or anything like that, in order to remove documents from the White House.*
> 
> *As long as those documents don't leave the country, there isn't anything wrong with them being stored at the sitting presidents home or private facility.
> 
> Would be nice if you retards actually did some RESEARCH on subject matter BEFORE spewing shit out of the assholes on your faces!*


Not even close to the process sycophant


----------



## free radical

otto105 said:


> Not even close to the process sycophant


I think they do it on purpose.  State something so completely ridiculous, like Trump saying he only had to think about declassification to make it happen, that people would start to accept the merely stupid.


----------



## BS Filter

Golfing Gator said:


> maybe one day you will be able to also, but that would require your head being removed from Trump's ass, so I doubt it will happen any day soon


You twats are scared to death of Trump.  You should be.


----------



## otto105

BS Filter said:


> You twats are scared to death of Trump.  You should be.


Why would we be?


----------



## free radical

otto105 said:


> Why would we be?


Trump is like the chimpanzee with a loaded gun.


----------



## BS Filter

free radical said:


> Trump is like the chimpanzee with a loaded gun.


He gets my vote.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> maybe one day you will be able to also, but that would require your head being removed from Trump's ass, so I doubt it will happen any day soon


HAHA
LOL
ROFL

what a maroon


----------



## iceberg

free radical said:


> I think they do it on purpose.  State something so completely ridiculous, like Trump saying he only had to think about declassification to make it happen, that people would start to accept the merely stupid.


given your side makes up shit other people "say" but never did (HE SAID TO DRINK BLEACH!!! - never did)

fuck off.


----------



## BS Filter

The left lies every day, then whines when we tell the truth.


----------



## bravoactual

BS Filter said:


> "Biden could have thought"....
> That's pretty funny.



It is a whole funnier that the Traitor can declassify intelligence with the power of his brain...


----------



## BS Filter

bravoactual said:


> It is a whole funnier that the Traitor can declassify intelligence with the power of his brain...


Amazing, huh. Trump is Superman.


----------



## otto105

BS Filter said:


> He gets my vote.


Not on ballot.

He's broke and in jail.


----------



## otto105

BS Filter said:


> Amazing, huh. Trump is Superman.


That should play well in court.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

That the neo-fascist right continues to support and defend Trump comes as no surprise.


----------



## BS Filter

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That the neo-fascist right continues to support and defend Trump comes as no surprise.


Maybe you should get a gun to protect yourself.


----------



## Rogue AI

Captain Caveman said:


> So anything found at Trump's property is declassified, because a president can declassify anything without authorisation.


Yup. Some goofball are grasping at straws, perhaps they enjoy endless anticipation followed by soul cryshing disappointment.


----------



## otto105

Rogue AI said:


> Yup. Some goofball are grasping at straws, perhaps they enjoy endless anticipation followed by soul cryshing disappointment.


The former 1-term president uses telepathy.

That should hold up in court.....Bah Ha HA HA HA HA.


Al you said goodbye to ron yet?


----------



## dblack

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That the neo-fascist right continues to support and defend Trump comes as no surprise.


Neither does the fact that the fumbling left continues to fall for it.


----------



## otto105

dblack said:


> Neither does the fact that the fumbling left continues to fall for it.


We're laughing at it and him.


----------



## bravoactual

BS Filter said:


> You twats are scared to death of Trump.  You should be.



No.  Yes, I also know you need to believe that but you are WRONG.

The Traitor is a coward, why would I be afraid of a coward.  

The Traitor is a bully.  Why would I be afraid of bully.

The person is afraid right now is the Traitor.  He painted himself into a corner.  His Keystone Cop Shysters have until next week to prove the F.B.I., "*Planted Classified Material*" at Shit-A-Lago, which of course they will NOT be prove.  

The Traitor also has to prove he had the authority to declassify the classified documents found at Shit-A-Lago.  And no, he cannot declassify just by thinking about.  There are policies and procedures to be followed declassify such material.  I was stationed at the U.S. Army Communications Command Pentagon TeleCommuncations Center and I know about the proper handling of classified documents, and mental abilities to do so are a farce.

Known Foreign Intelligence Agents had free and easy access to Shit-A-Lago.  Classified Documents were stored in common areas.  The Traitor openly discussed classified intelligence in the presence of guests. 

The New York is A.G. is going after him and Fani Willis is breathing down his neck.  The Traitor is shit scared.  

He should be.


----------



## bravoactual

dblack said:


> Neither does the fact that the fumbling left continues to fall for it.



You people have fallen for each and everyone of his lies.


----------



## bravoactual

Rogue AI said:


> Yup. Some goofball are grasping at straws, perhaps they enjoy endless anticipation followed by soul cryshing disappointment.



And you grasping on the Traitor's lies.  His thing about being able to declassify intelligence documents just by thinking about it is laughable.


----------



## BS Filter

bravoactual said:


> No.  Yes, I also know you need to believe that but you are WRONG.
> 
> The Traitor is a coward, why would I be afraid of a coward.
> 
> The Traitor is a bully.  Why would I be afraid of bully.
> 
> The person is afraid right now is the Traitor.  He painted himself into a corner.  His Keystone Cop Shysters have until next week to prove the F.B.I., "*Planted Classified Material*" at Shit-A-Lago, which of course they will NOT be prove.
> 
> The Traitor also has to prove he had the authority to declassify the classified documents found at Shit-A-Lago.  And no, he cannot declassify just by thinking about.  There are policies and procedures to be followed declassify such material.  I was stationed at the U.S. Army Communications Command Pentagon TeleCommuncations Center and I know about the proper handling of classified documents, and mental abilities to do so are a farce.
> 
> Known Foreign Intelligence Agents had free and easy access to Shit-A-Lago.  Classified Documents were stored in common areas.  The Traitor openly discussed classified intelligence in the presence of guests.
> 
> The New York is A.G. is going after him and Fani Willis is breathing down his neck.  The Traitor is shit scared.
> 
> He should be.


The fact that you keep hounding him and demonizing him proves you're scared to death he's gonna run for President.


----------



## bravoactual

BS Filter said:


> Amazing, huh. Trump is Superman.



More the the Shitsman.


----------



## iceberg

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That the neo-fascist right continues to support and defend Trump comes as no surprise.


That you keep accusing others of being you comes as no surprise


----------



## dblack

bravoactual said:


> You people have fallen for each and everyone of his lies.


I'm not a Trumpster.


----------



## Rogue AI

bravoactual said:


> And you grasping on the Traitor's lies.  His thing about being able to declassify intelligence documents just by thinking about it is laughable.


That's where you are wrong. If the president doesn't consider something to be classified, it isn't. The president can treat information however they choose.


----------



## bravoactual

BS Filter said:


> The fact that you keep hounding him and demonizing him proves you're scared to death he's gonna run for President.



More like holding the Traitor accountable for his actions.  If by demonizing him you calling being able just thinking he can declassifying documents...no that sounds a mental problem.  

You're right, he won't run for Prez, but not from hounded or demonized.

The moment he declares himself a candidate, he loses on all that PAC that his shit for brains followers have sending him.  All money is going in his pocket.  He has donated zero money to any ReichPublican Candidates.  Also, the ReichPublican Party will STOP paying all his legal fees, and he while he claims to be rich, his lawyers have been bleeding him dry.


----------



## bravoactual

BS Filter said:


> He gets my vote.



He ain't running, he loves his free money.


----------



## BS Filter

bravoactual said:


> More like holding the Traitor accountable for his actions.  If by demonizing him you calling being able just thinking he can declassifying documents...no that sounds a mental problem.
> 
> You're right, he won't run for Prez, but not from hounded or demonized.
> 
> The moment he declares himself a candidate, he loses on all that PAC that his shit for brains followers have sending him.  All money is going in his pocket.  He has donated zero money to any ReichPublican Candidates.  Also, the ReichPublican Party will STOP paying all his legal fees, and he while he claims to be rich, his lawyers have been bleeding him dry.


You're a fucking idiot.


----------



## BS Filter

bravoactual said:


> He ain't running, he loves his free money.


Let's make a bet on it.  If Trump announces he's running for President, you leave the forum. If he doesn't, I'll leave.


----------



## monkrules

Trump is a sick person.


----------



## BS Filter

monkrules said:


> Trump is a sick person.


Millions of Americans are sick, sick and tired of the fucking shithead democrats.


----------



## Couchpotato

WorldWatcher said:


> Retired in the very late '90's.
> 
> Didn't work at NSA.
> 
> I don't believe you that the NSA doesn't track Top Secret/SCI, Top Secret/SAP, etc. documents.
> 
> WW


What you believe is irrelevant.   Those are the facts.   Reporting is serialized and in that sense I guess it’s “tracked” in so much as they know who’s accessed what information but there isn’t a list of all the hard copy documents running around.    You can print reporting and keep it filed for forever or toss it in the burn bag 15 minutes after you read it.   There no accounting of any of that  other than the printing.   NSA isn’t tracking what every employee is doing with every classified document they access and print.    You have a TS clearance with an SSBI and take a lie detector test every couple years.   You are supposed to be trust worthy.    I have zero reason to lie about this shit it’s weird so many of you are pushing back so hard when you don’t have any experience in over 20 years and have zero experience at NSA.


----------



## otto105

BS Filter said:


> The fact that you keep hounding him and demonizing him proves you're scared to death he's gonna run for President.


I pray the shitshow runs again!

Please make that happen.


----------



## monkrules

BS Filter said:


> Millions of Americans are sick, sick and tired of the fucking shithead democrats.


I agree. I'm one of them. But I'm sick of BOTH parties.

That doesn't mean we have to act like gullible fools, supporting a weak, whiney-assed crybaby like trump.

The GOP has to grow a pair. Get rid of Trump ass-kissers, and start supporting Republicans who are intelligent, strong, and capable of thinking for themselves.

It's time to kick Trump to the curb. He cares *only* about himself. He's all ego. All trump can do is hurt the Republican party.


----------



## bravoactual

monkrules said:


> I agree. I'm one of them. But I'm sick of BOTH parties.
> 
> But, that doesn't mean we have to act like gullible fools, supporting a weak, whiney-assed crybaby like trump.
> 
> The GOP has to grow a pair. Get rid of Trump ass-kissers, and start supporting Republicans who are intelligent, strong, and capable of thinking for themselves.
> 
> It's time to kick Trump to the curb. He cares about nothing but himself. He's all ego. All trump can do is hurt the Republican party.



The problem being, the ReichPublicans have tied themselves to him.  They bought the Traitor's Brand and they are stuck with it.  He brought MAGA into their party and the very racist,xenophobic,antisemitic and violent  ideology they believe in.

The party leadership is under the sway of violent minority and they do not know how to end it.


----------



## BS Filter

monkrules said:


> I agree. I'm one of them. But I'm sick of BOTH parties.
> 
> That doesn't mean we have to act like gullible fools, supporting a weak, whiney-assed crybaby like trump.
> 
> The GOP has to grow a pair. Get rid of Trump ass-kissers, and start supporting Republicans who are intelligent, strong, and capable of thinking for themselves.
> 
> It's time to kick Trump to the curb. He cares *only* about himself. He's all ego. All trump can do is hurt the Republican party.


I disagree.  Trump taught a lot of people how to stand up to these vermin.  DeSantis is leading the charge now.


----------



## otto105

BS Filter said:


> I disagree.  Trump taught a lot of people how to stand up to these vermin.  DeSantis is leading the charge now.


Vermin?

You mean anti-democracy fascists.


----------



## monkrules

BS Filter said:


> I disagree.  Trump taught a lot of people how to stand up to these vermin.  DeSantis is leading the charge now.


Interesting exchange. But we're off topic, so let's let it go.


----------



## Seymour Flops

WorldWatcher said:


> Actually when attorney's file documents with the court its under a statement that what they are filing is true.
> 
> WW


Not a sworn statement, though.  I’m not even sure that the attorney’s vouch for the filing.  You’d have to show me that, but I know attorney’s are not allowed to vouch for their clients in court, so I don’t see how they could in filings.

Show me that statement, hereafter abbreviated to “SM.”


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Did I say there had to be paperwork?  No, I did not.
> 
> your worship of Trump gets in the way of your logic some days


Then what is your claim, then? 

Maybe if you would just show me the ruling, clause, law or regulation that you’re talking about, it would go faster.


----------



## themirrorthief

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


biden tries to shake hands with invisible people...


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> That's the frustrating part and the GG I liked talking to.
> 
> Now he's just an arrogant ego feeding dick.


Golfing Gator is still not as bad as the worst of the Dems on here.  

Now we have an easy way to tell the more reasonable Dems from the full on TDS tards.  The TDS-tards are the ones who go on the threads about the racist fascist wealthy Dems of Martha’s Vineyard and try to defend the indefensible.  We have some Democrat mods on this forum, but they are reasonable will make a real argument when one is available.  THey know one is not in the case of the MV debacle, so they stay off those threads and leave it to the bots.

I haven’t seen GG there, but they go on and on, so I may have missed it.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


So? Per the Director of the FBI you’re not guilty of a crime if you didn’t mean to violate the crime.


----------



## bravoactual

The Traitor does NOT know how to think.  He lacks the necessary qualifications to called an intelligent life form.


----------



## otto105

Rogue AI said:


> That's where you are wrong. If the president doesn't consider something to be classified, it isn't. The president can treat information however they choose.


No, no they can't.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

iceberg said:


> That you keep accusing others of being you comes as no surprise


Those on the neo-fascist right who support and defend Trump are just as wrong and reprehensible as Trump.


----------



## bravoactual

Rogue AI said:


> That's where you are wrong. If the president doesn't consider something to be classified, it isn't. The president can treat information however they choose.



No, Classified Information is exactly that, classified information.  Such infomation is classified for a reason.  Just because an idividual "*Thinks*" they can declassify documents does not mean that they legally do so.


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Golfing Gator is still not as bad as the worst of the Dems on here.
> 
> Now we have an easy way to tell the more reasonable Dems from the full on TDS tards.  The TDS-tards are the ones who go on the threads about the racist fascist wealthy Dems of Martha’s Vineyard and try to defend the indefensible.  We have some Democrat mods on this forum, but they are reasonable will make a real argument when one is available.  THey know one is not in the case of the MV debacle, so they stay off those threads and leave it to the bots.
> 
> I haven’t seen GG there, but they go on and on, so I may have missed it.


At times, sure. And yes Trump says some shit. No arguement there.

But I have NEVER seen him go after the stupid shit Biden or anyone else says.

And when you argue base rights we all share, including Trump, he goes apeshit and says Trump is your God.

Kinda fucked up.


----------



## tahuyaman

Does Biden inspire people?


----------



## Rogue AI

bravoactual said:


> No, Classified Information is exactly that, classified information.  Such infomation is classified for a reason.  Just because an idividual "*Thinks*" they can declassify documents does not mean that they legally do so.


According to what? Certainly not the Constitution.  You folks live in fantasy land.


----------



## basquebromance

It’s all there in the constitution. The separation of psychic powers.


----------



## Stann

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


The more I think about this I have to believe trump has finally gone TOTALLY INSANE.


----------



## Biff_Poindexter

tahuyaman said:


> Does Biden inspire people?


I am sure he inspires some people......

The rest of us don't need to be inspired by politicians.....just sign the bills that help people more than hurt them...

I am sure plenty of Americans were inspired when their student loan debt was wiped clean, or when there was news a computer chip factory or an auto plant was announced in their town, or when labor deals are struck and the rail service didn't come to a halt, you know, policy stuff...

But maybe you are the fragile insecure type that needs to go to rallies and be told fairy tale shit and given someone to hate to be inspired....most fascists do....


----------



## Stann

tahuyaman said:


> Does Biden inspire people?


His honesty and integrity speak for him. He doesn't tell you what you want to hear ( like trump ) he explains the reality of the situation and how we are going to address it.  He's done more great things in 1 year than trump tried to do in four.


----------



## surada

tahuyaman said:


> Liberals love secrecy in government when Democrats are in charge. In that case they oppose transparency.



How stupid.


----------



## Stann

tahuyaman said:


> Liberals love secrecy in government when Democrats are in charge. In that case they oppose transparency.


You sound as crazy as Trump is.


----------



## surada

Stann said:


> You sound as crazy as Trump is.



Trump has no regard for Intelligence or our allies. He's willing to put them at risk. He's a dangerous, reckless blabbermouth.


----------



## Stann

surada said:


> Trump has no regard for Intelligence or our allies. He's willing to put them at risk. He's a dangerous, reckless blabbermouth.


I wouldn't argue with any of that. If you had one The 20/20 election his attitude towards Russia we'd probably be in a nuclear war right now. Remember when you said he'd bomb Moscow well that would end the whole world doing something that reckless.


----------



## WorldWatcher

Seymour Flops said:


> Not a sworn statement, though.  I’m not even sure that the attorney’s vouch for the filing.  You’d have to show me that, but I know attorney’s are not allowed to vouch for their clients in court, so I don’t see how they could in filings.
> 
> Show me that statement, hereafter abbreviated to “SM.”







__





						Loading…
					





					storage.courtlistener.com
				




WW


----------



## konradv

johngaltshrugged said:


> Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
> At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.
> 
> Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
> He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
> Did that hurt?


Without documentation how do we know which documents he thought about declassifying while he was president versus those he wishes he’d declassified since?


----------



## Stann

johngaltshrugged said:


> Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
> At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.
> 
> Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
> He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
> Did that hurt?


You are just as crazy as trump is. If you cannot see the dangers of a private citizen having classified and top secret information. And it's it's already been explained declassification is a process, unless it's followed it isn't done. And under no circumstances were donald trump have a right to them even if they were  declassified.


----------



## Stann

konradv said:


> Without documentation how do we know which documents he thought about declassifying while he was president versus those he wishes he’d declassified since?


We've got to face the facts that we're dealing with an insane person. When he said, " I can just think they're declassified in their declassified. " That about says it all. He's certifiably insane.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Then what is your claim, then?
> 
> Maybe if you would just show me the ruling, clause, law or regulation that you’re talking about, it would go faster.



My claim is that it takes more than a thought for a document to be declassified.   

If you wish to sit here and argue with me about that, cool, I doubt either one of us will have their minds changed


----------



## Golfing Gator

themirrorthief said:


> biden tries to shake hands with invisible people...



yes he does.  Biden is a fucking joke of a president.  On that we agree.

So, now can we get back to declassification via telepathy?


----------



## Foolardi

bravoactual said:


> Special Master Calls Out Lawyers On Traitor's Claim That F.B.I. "*Planted*" Shit-A-Lago Records.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Special Master Calls Out Lawyers On Trump's Claim That FBI 'Planted' Mar-A-Lago Records
> 
> 
> Raymond Dearie tells the legal team to detail what Trump claims was "planted" at his Florida resort, even though the ex-president watched the search on video.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. District Judge Raymond Dearie, who is acting as a special master in the Mar-a-Lago documents case, on Thursday demanded that Donald Trump’s lawyers substantiate another one of the former president’s claims: that the FBI “*planted*” records.
> 
> Dearie ordered Trump’s legal team to submit by Sept. 30 a list of of specific items in the Justice Department’s 11-page inventory of documents taken from the Mar-a-Lago resort — including top secret files — that “*plaintiff asserts were not seized from the premises*.” They must also submit a list of any items seized that were not on the inventory, the order states.
> 
> “*This submission shall be Plaintiff’s final opportunity to raise any factual dispute as to the completeness and accuracy of the Detailed Property Inventory*,” Dearie said.
> 
> In simpler terms, the Traitor Impaired.....Put Up or Shut The Fuck Up.


  Says the Honest to a fault,upright Huffpost.
   Mise well take up huffing { like what Philip Seymour Hoffman } was
   preoccupied in - Love Liza - { 2002 }.\


----------



## Stann

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


I believe there's some kind of short circuit in Trump's thinking, like a squirrel cage it keeps spinning but it doesn't make a lot of sense. What's really scary about this. Is what if he photocopied those top secret documents and already gave them over to the Russians. I wouldn't put it past him remember he's in love with Putin
 Photocopin top secret documents has penalties severe penalties after 10 years in prison a large fine or you could get even charged with treason. If your charge was treason you can be executed. At the very least you have to do 5 years in prison a minimum of $10,000 fine and you can never hold public office again. No one in their right mind would trust him to be president again. Not after all this. Besides the man is crazy and getting crazier by the moment.


----------



## Stann

Golfing Gator said:


> yes he does.  Biden is a fucking joke of a president.  On that we agree.
> 
> So, now can we get back to declassification via telepathy?


Well that sounds the craziest of all. He's got Biden beat for crazy.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> yes he does.  Biden is a fucking joke of a president.  On that we agree.
> 
> So, now can we get back to declassification via telepathy?


A Potus is both the head of the Executive branch and therefore
  Calls the shots in their entirety as to classifications.Outweighing even
    the National Archivist.But only as Potus.Not after serving his term.
     We have a great example of a person { Sandy Berger } Clinton's acting
   National Security Advisor actually STEALING archived documents from
   the National Archives.Sticking them in his socks and who knows where
  else.Never spent a day in jail.One is not even allowed to take a pencil
  and a pad into those National Archives.
   Plus Trump is no more guilty of some Presidential, Records act than
    Biden is of spending a honeymoon in Russia.That would be Bernie.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Foolardi said:


> A Potus is both the head of the Executive branch and therefore
> Calls the shots in their entirety as to classifications.Outweighing even
> the National Archivist.But only as Potus.Not after serving his term.
> We have a great example of a person { Sandy Berger } Clinton's acting
> National Security Advisor actually STEALING archived documents from
> the National Archives.Sticking them in his socks and who knows where
> else.Never spent a day in jail.One is not even allowed to take a pencil
> and a pad into those National Archives.
> Plus Trump is no more guilty of some Presidential, Records act than
> Biden is of spending a honeymoon in Russia.That would be Bernie.



And yet he still cannot declassify something with just a thought.


----------



## Foolardi

Stann said:


> I believe there's some kind of short circuit in Trump's thinking, like a squirrel cage it keeps spinning but it doesn't make a lot of sense. What's really scary about this. Is what if he photocopied those top secret documents and already gave them over to the Russians. I wouldn't put it past him remember he's in love with Putin
> Photocopin top secret documents has penalties severe penalties after 10 years in prison a large fine or you could get even charged with treason. If your charge was treason you can be executed. At the very least you have to do 5 years in prison a minimum of $10,000 fine and you can never hold public office again. No one in their right mind would trust him to be president again. Not after all this. Besides the man is crazy and getting crazier by the moment.


Cite an example where Trump Gaslit { used the tactic of Gaslighting }
    to any audience.Joking around is not " Gaslighting ". Biden and his
  Mainstream media plus their lawyers and now Hillary virtually Live
  by Gaslighting.You are so Gaslit that you can't see the moon on a moonlit
   night w/o putting on some heavy shades { Aviator sunglasses } like
  Dr.Biden and the Girl Bombs  spinoff of : 
    - Dr.Goldfoot and the Girl Bombs - { 1966 }


----------



## The Duke

Golfing Gator said:


> And yet he still cannot declassify something with just a thought.



""The minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."

The classification buck stops at the president.









						PolitiFact - Does the president have 'the ability to declassify anything at any time'?
					

The blockbuster article in The Washington Post saying President Donald Trump had "revealed highly classified information




					www.politifact.com
				




^Thus saith the Democommies at The Poyntner Institute, AKA owners/editors of the leftist St. Pete Times. Oh whoops! "Tampa Bay Times" now.


----------



## Golfing Gator

The Duke said:


> ""The minute the *president speaks about it to someone,* he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."



Glad you agree with me.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> And yet he still cannot declassify something with just a thought.


I do declare ... Dr.Kissinger { nearing 100 yrs.old } that many a Potus
  does just that.Makes spur of the moment decisions.
    Some turn out Hairbrained.Like Truman hurriedly deciding to 
     use the A-Bomb on Hiroshima.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Foolardi said:


> Like Truman hurriedly deciding to
> use the A-Bomb on Hiroshima.



Did he tell someone to drop it, or did he just think about it and BOOM the bomb dropped itself?


----------



## Seymour Flops

WorldWatcher said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> storage.courtlistener.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WW


From your link: " the above information is correct to my knowledge."

No oath. No affirmation. Good luck getting a perjury charge out of that.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> My claim is that it takes more than a thought for a document to be declassified.
> 
> If you wish to sit here and argue with me about that, cool, I doubt either one of us will have their minds changed


No, we won't. If I'm going to use fact and logic, while you rely on your feeling that a president shouldn't be able to do that, of course we will be talking past each other. I can post the Supreme Court case that gave the president that power, but I've done that before to no effect.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Golfing Gator said:


> Biden is a fucking joke of a president.


And yet, he’s a far better president than Trump.

As to the thread topic, it’s further proof that President Biden is a far better president than Trump and that Trump was in fact unfit to be president.


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> Without documentation how do we know which documents he thought about declassifying while he was president versus those he wishes he’d declassified since?


We don't know. We can't verify his thoughts.

What happens in America when we can't know if someone is innocent or guilty?


----------



## dblack

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> And yet, he’s a far better president than Trump.
> 
> As to the thread topic, it’s further proof that President Biden is a far better president than Trump and that Trump was in fact unfit to be president.


Neither are worthy of our votes.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> yes he does.  Biden is a fucking joke of a president.  On that we agree.
> 
> So, now can we get back to declassification via telepathy?


May I use that quote as an example in a thread about TDS in people who claim not to be partisan?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> No, we won't. If I'm going to use fact and logic, while you rely on your feeling that a president shouldn't be able to do that, of course we will be talking past each other. I can post the Supreme Court case that gave the president that power, but I've done that before to no effect.



Logic is what dictates that just a thought cannot declassifying something.  But you have no logic when it comes to Trump.  You have to defend him even when it makes you look stupid, in fact you seem to enjoy it. 

But yes, please do post the  Supreme Court case that gave the president that power to declassify with just a mere thought about it.  

I will be happy to wait.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> May I use that quote as an example in a thread about TDS in people who claim not to be partisan?



You may do whatever you like, it is a free country.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Logic is what dictates that just a thought cannot declassifying something.  But you have no logic when it comes to Trump.  You have to defend him even when it makes you look stupid, in fact you seem to enjoy it.
> 
> But yes, please do post the  Supreme Court case that gave the president that power to declassify with just a mere thought about it.
> 
> I will be happy to wait.


Right.

I'll post the case that says a president has sole power to determine what is classified and you'll say "it doesnt say anything about thinking!"


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> You may do whatever you like, it is a free country.


I'll leave your name off so it won't be a call out thread.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> I'll leave your name off so it won't be a call out thread.



Makes no difference to me.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Right.
> 
> I'll post the case that says a president has sole power to determine what is classified and you'll say "it doesnt say anything about thinking!"



Correct I will say that, because it is illogical and basically a oxymoron.

I honestly feel a bit bad for you, that you have to post on here and defend the notion of declassification via thought is sad, but I realize you cannot afford to piss of the tribe, they are pretty quick to turn on a person these days.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Correct I will say that, because it is illogical and basically a oxymoron.
> 
> I honestly feel a bit bad for you, that you have to post on here and defend the notion of declassification via thought is sad, but I realize you cannot afford to piss of the tribe, they are pretty quick to turn on a person these days.


Like I said facts don't matter once TDS sets in.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Logic is what dictates that just a thought cannot declassifying something.  But you have no logic when it comes to Trump.  You have to defend him even when it makes you look stupid, in fact you seem to enjoy it.
> 
> But yes, please do post the  Supreme Court case that gave the president that power to declassify with just a mere thought about it.
> 
> I will be happy to wait.


And you have to attack him.

Even when it makes you look stupid.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Like I said facts don't matter once TDS sets in.



Facts do matter, still waiting on the ruling about declassification by mere thought.   Thought you would have it by now


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> And you have to attack him.
> 
> Even when it makes you look stupid.



He attacked ,I attacked back.  Pretty simple.  

Plus, it only makes me look stupid to people that think the POTUS can declassify by merely thinking about it...and I do not give a fuck what such people think about me. 

Though, to be honest I assume people like Seemore do not really think that is the case, but they have to defend it anyhow.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Facts do matter, still waiting on the ruling about declassification by mere thought.   Thought you would have it by now


Sole power includes the power to determine the procedure for classification.  No one can show these supposed requirements for exercising that power.

I know you're sad at the failure of another now we've got him!


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> He attacked ,I attacked back.  Pretty simple.
> 
> Plus, it only makes me look stupid to people that think the POTUS can declassify by merely thinking about it...and I do not give a fuck what such people think about me.
> 
> Though, to be honest I assume people like Seemore do not really think that is the case, but they have to defend it anyhow.


I mean trump.

Your hatred of him makes you lookole a dog chasing a parked car.

You attack Trump at every turn and opportunity. Biden does something stupid its ALWAYS a quick "yes he's a dumbass BUT TRUMP"


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Sole power includes the power to determine the procedure for classification.  No one can show these supposed requirements for exercising that power.
> 
> I know you're sad at the failure of another now we've got him!



I do not need to "get him", he does that all by himself.

I am sad about it all though, sad that you are forced to defend his words.  

Shitty way to live, but it does seem to make you all happy, so good on you!


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> I mean trump.
> 
> Your hatred of him makes you lookole a dog chasing a parked car.
> 
> You attack Trump at every turn and opportunity. Biden does something stupid its ALWAYS a quick "yes he's a dumbass BUT TRUMP"



Trump said something really fucking stupid and I pointed it out.   If you wish to call that an attack, then I am happy for you. 

I point out Biden's dumb shit as well, but since none of you disagree with me there are not 1000 post that follow with anyone trying to defend Biden.  

Just once, I would love to see one of you go "well, yeah that was a stupid thing to say/do" in regards to Trump.

But you literally cannot do it or risk the ire of your tribe.


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> And you have to attack him.
> 
> Even when it makes you look stupid.


GG is always Grumpy in the morning before his third cup of coffee. Weekends its worse because sometimes he feels bad due to something he drank.

He and I are cool.


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> We don't know. We can't verify his thoughts.
> 
> What happens in America when we can't know if someone is innocent or guilty?


His thoughts don’t count.  If document’s had really been declassified, the appropriate agencies would have been notified.  If they weren’t informed, either the people involved were derelict in their duties or Trump is lying.  Since Trump can never be wrong, I wonder who he’s going to throw under the bus.


----------



## Stann

Foolardi said:


> Cite an example where Trump Gaslit { used the tactic of Gaslighting }
> to any audience.Joking around is not " Gaslighting ". Biden and his
> Mainstream media plus their lawyers and now Hillary virtually Live
> by Gaslighting.You are so Gaslit that you can't see the moon on a moonlit
> night w/o putting on some heavy shades { Aviator sunglasses } like
> Dr.Biden and the Girl Bombs  spinoff of :
> - Dr.Goldfoot and the Girl Bombs - { 1966 }


I realize you think you know something, but actually knowing things and still l tolerating the likes of trump tells me you don't know anything.


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> His thoughts don’t count.  If document’s had really been declassified, the appropriate agencies would have been notified.  If they weren’t informed, either the people involved were derelict in their duties or Trump is lying.  Since Trump can never be wrong, I wonder who he’s going to throw under the bus.


Show me where it says the president has to do any of that. From now on I'll just day SM.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump said something really fucking stupid and I pointed it out.   If you wish to call that an attack, then I am happy for you.
> 
> I point out Biden's dumb shit as well, but since none of you disagree with me there are not 1000 post that follow with anyone trying to defend Biden.
> 
> Just once, I would love to see one of you go "well, yeah that was a stupid thing to say/do" in regards to Trump.
> 
> But you literally cannot do it or risk the ire of your tribe.


Biden says stupid shit by the hour. Where are those threads you started? 

You don't give a fuck about people saying stupid shit, only Trump doing it. Then you prance around like someone shoved a roll of quarters up your ass saying you don't have TDS. 

It's both quite humerus and pathetic. 

Good job.


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> I mean trump.
> 
> Your hatred of him makes you lookole a dog chasing a parked car.
> 
> You attack Trump at every turn and opportunity. Biden does something stupid its ALWAYS a quick "yes he's a dumbass BUT TRUMP"


Golfing Gator that's the gist of the thread that I was talking about creating. I noticed in one Thread about how Biden has factually wrecked the economy your response was a meme that said cool story bro. Your claims of nonpartisanship become less and less believable.


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> We don't know. We can't verify his thoughts.
> 
> What happens in America when we can't know if someone is innocent or guilty?


We all know when you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. Did trump pen any of these documents. He did not ( they do not allow fifth grade bully mentalities to write sensitive classified information. ). Of what personal value are they to him then. Can't be anything good. Why did he do it ? Because the man is insane and they thought he could get away with it. They've been asking him for these papers returned for months now. They finally had to go in and take them themselves after his own lawyers lied to them. No one on the Trump side of this is innocent.


----------



## dblack

Stann said:


> We all know when you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. Did trump pen any of these documents. He did not ( they do not allow fifth grade bully mentalities to write sensitive classified information. ). Of what personal value are they to him then. Can't be anything good. Why did he do it ?.


To goad the FBI into raiding his home. Duh. Chum for sharks.


----------



## Blaster

Seymour Flops said:


> Golfing Gator that's the gist of the thread that I was talking about creating. I noticed in one Thread about how Biden has factually wrecked the economy your response was a meme that said cool story bro. Your claims of nonpartisanship become less and less believable.


He is not non-partisan.


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> Show me where it says the president has to do any of that. From now on I'll just day SM.


I know that most documents are automatically declassified after 25 years, if they no longer pose a threat to national security at that time. Each document is reviewed before it is declassified. Some may never be  declassified. A president has a right to get caused by some things but he has to notify the issuing branches of government who issued the documents.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> I know that most documents are automatically declassified after 25 years, if they no longer pose a threat to national security at that time. Each document is reviewed before it is declassified. Some may never be  declassified. A president has a right to get caused by some things but he has to notify the issuing branches of government who issued the documents.


You are wrong.


----------



## Billo_Really

Declassifying documents does not change ownership.


----------



## Stann

Billo_Really said:


> Declassifying documents does not change ownership.


That's one of the bottom lines in this.


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> You are wrong.


Thanks for your opinion even though it's incorrect.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> Thanks for your opinion even though it's incorrect.


It is an opinion just like yours.   Everybody has one.


----------



## Cellblock2429

WorldWatcher said:


> Ya, as a matter of fact.  He was charged with obstruction and perjury.  Thanks for supporting my point.
> 
> WW


/——-/ You’re welcome. I took the opportunity to smack libtards up side the head.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Biden says stupid shit by the hour. Where are those threads you started?
> 
> You don't give a fuck about people saying stupid shit, only Trump doing it. Then you prance around like someone shoved a roll of quarters up your ass saying you don't have TDS.
> 
> It's both quite humerus and pathetic.
> 
> Good job.



Damn, you are just totally obsessed with me.  

Not sure if I should feel honored or freaked out.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Damn, you are just totally obsessed with me.
> 
> Not sure if I should feel honored or freaked out.


He thinks you are a dork.  After reading your posts I agree with him.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Golfing Gator that's the gist of the thread that I was talking about creating. I noticed in one Thread about how Biden has factually wrecked the economy your response was a meme that said cool story bro. Your claims of nonpartisanship become less and less believable.



Do you have a link?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> He thinks you are a dork.  After reading your posts I agree with him.



I am happy for you!  Your view of me just means to very much to me.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> I am happy for you!  Your view of me just means to very much to me.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Damn, you are just totally obsessed with me.
> 
> Not sure if I should feel honored or freaked out.


And you are not obsessed with Trump?

BTW... Nice WHATABOUTISM. 

how come it's cool when you do it?


----------



## iceberg

Blaster said:


> He thinks you are a dork.  After reading your posts I agree with him.


Mostly just intellectually dishonest. 

But dork works


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> And you are not obsessed with Trump?
> 
> BTW... Nice WHATABOUTISM.
> 
> how come it's cool when you do it?



If that makes you happy, sure.  

Seems that is all I am here for, to keep you happy.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Do you have a link?


"talking about creating," 

Need the cliff notes on what that means?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> If that makes you happy, sure.
> 
> Seems that is all I am here for, to keep you happy.


I'll be happy when you shut the fuck up. 

$5 says that ain't the reason after all


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> "talking about creating,"
> 
> Need the cliff notes on what that means?



and what does this mean to you.....*I noticed in one Thread about how Biden has factually wrecked the economy your response was a meme that said cool story bro.*


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> I'll be happy when you shut the fuck up.
> 
> $5 says that ain't the reason after all



There is a very cool function that is free of charge called "ignore".  

Feel free to use it in regards to me and my posting


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> and what does this mean to you.....*I noticed in one Thread about how Biden has factually wrecked the economy your response was a meme that said cool story bro.*


Good. So you know which one to go look for. 

Get hoppin.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> There is a very cool function that is free of charge called "ignore".
> 
> Feel free to use it in regards to me and my posting


It seems not long ago you said you'd ignore me. 

Need me to find that thread for you, too?


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Good. So you know which one to go look for.
> 
> Get hoppin.



That is not going to happen.  He made the claim, he can back it up


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> It seems not long ago you said you'd ignore me.
> 
> Need me to find that thread for you, too?



I did have you on ignore for a while, but this place was a bit boring without your constant whining.  

Thus I allowed you back into my sphere.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> That is not going to happen.  He made the claim, he can back it up


You never do. I ask you to back it up n you run away like a rabbit is chasing you out of a cave.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I did have you on ignore for a while, but this place was a bit boring without your constant whining.
> 
> Thus I allowed you back into my sphere.



Then shut the fuck up with the whining about me in your sphere.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Then shut the fuck up with the whining about me in your sphere.



would never complain about your whining, if you did not have it you would have nothing to post about ever.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> would never complain about your whining, if you did not have it you would have nothing to post about ever.


I didn't say complain. I said you are whining about my whining while pretending you are not whining after allowing me into your "sphere" cause you missed me.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> I didn't say complain. I said you are whining about my whining while pretending you are not whining after allowing me into your "sphere" cause you missed me.



I do not whine....quit projecting. 

you are getting boring again


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I do not whine....quit projecting.
> 
> you are getting boring again


Bitch, please.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I do not whine....quit projecting.
> 
> you are getting boring again


But it's cute you missed me. Should I expect Christmas cards moving forward?


----------



## Biff_Poindexter

Golfing Gator said:


> yes he does.  Biden is a fucking joke of a president.  On that we agree.
> 
> So, now can we get back to declassification via telepathy?


No, say more about how Biden is a joke of president...except slower....in a deeper voice....yea, that's it..


----------



## Biff_Poindexter

Seymour Flops said:


> No, we won't. If I'm going to use fact and logic, while you rely on your feeling that a president shouldn't be able to do that, of course we will be talking past each other. I can post the Supreme Court case that gave the president that power, but I've done that before to no effect.


Would you have kept this same energy if during your Hillary email fetish-fest; Obama simply said he mentally declassified everything?

Nope....stop being a partisan hack


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> It is an opinion just like yours.   Everybody has one.


Fortunately my opinion is based on our government's policies on declassification. Yours is a pipe dream like trump's.


----------



## Stann

Biff_Poindexter said:


> No, say more about how Biden is a joke of president...except slower....in a deeper voice....yea, that's it..
> 
> View attachment 700950


You people are just plain sick.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> Fortunately my opinion is based on our government's policies on declassification. Yours is a pipe dream like trump's.


There is no set policy on declassifying documents.


----------



## Stann

https:


Blaster said:


> There is no set policy on declassifying documents.


https://www.judtove.gov>open>Declassification-Department of Justice   The government has a policy on everything that they oversee.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> We all know when you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. Did trump pen any of these documents. He did not ( they do not allow fifth grade bully mentalities to write sensitive classified information. ). Of what personal value are they to him then. Can't be anything good. Why did he do it ? Because the man is insane and they thought he could get away with it. They've been asking him for these papers returned for months now. They finally had to go in and take them themselves after his own lawyers lied to them. No one on the Trump side of this is innocent.


The most likely explanation for the documents is that they are the crossfire hurricane binder which he Declassified in writing. The reason he needed them was to keep the doj from destroying them. But the doj found a way to thwart that intention.


----------



## Biff_Poindexter

Blaster said:


> There is no set policy on declassifying documents.


So why are Trump's lawyers so reluctant to say this in court?

The judge asked them point blank if Trump declassified the docs -- why did his lawyers refuse to answer? All they had to say is Trump mentally declassified everything...even Trump himself admits he doesn't know what documents he have....

By the way -- ALL OF THIS IS IRRELEVANT BECAUSE CIVILIANS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO KEEP CLASSIFIED DOCS -- and Trump is a civilian, I know you think he is your personal savior, but that too is irrelevant...creepy but irrelevant...


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> https:
> 
> https://www.judtove.gov>open>Declassification-Department of Justice   The government has a policy on everything that they oversee.


The sitting president is not subordinate to the Department of Justice no matter how much they wish him to be. The doj cannot make rules about how a president exercises a constitutional power.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> https:
> 
> https://www.judtove.gov>open>Declassification-Department of Justice   The government has a policy on everything that they oversee.


You are wrong again but keep on trying.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> https:
> 
> https://www.judtove.gov>open>Declassification-Department of Justice   The government has a policy on everything that they oversee.


Typo in the link in above post; U.S. Department of Justice>open>Declassification-Department of Justice


----------



## Biff_Poindexter

Seymour Flops said:


> The most likely explanation for the documents is that they are the crossfire hurricane binder which he Declassified in writing. The reason he needed them was to keep the doj from destroying them. But the doj found a way to thwart that intention.


When did you find out Santa Claus wasn't real?? Were you in your 20's, 30's?

Oh wait, you don't know yet do you?

Hate to break it to you bro, he isn't real


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> You are wrong again but keep on trying.


I corrected the address.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> I know that most documents are automatically declassified after 25 years, if they no longer pose a threat to national security at that time. Each document is reviewed before it is declassified. Some may never be  declassified. A president has a right to get caused by some things but he has to notify the issuing branches of government who issued the documents.


Show me where it says that the president has to notify the issuing branches of government? Those branches of government are subordinate to the president, not the other way around. Because the president is elected by the people, so the president is how the people keep control over agencies.

 Obviously the Department of Justice and the FBI have gone completely Rogue recently, so that part isn't working very well.


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> The most likely explanation for the documents is that they are the crossfire hurricane binder which he Declassified in writing. The reason he needed them was to keep the doj from destroying them. But the doj found a way to thwart that intention.


You can't actually believe that. Talk about twisted, convoluted logic.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Biff_Poindexter said:


> When did you find out Santa Claus wasn't real?? Were you in your 20's, 30's?
> 
> Oh wait, you don't know yet do you?
> 
> Hate to break it to you bro, he isn't real


I guess you still believe that they are the nuclear football codes or some other such nonsense.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> I corrected the address.


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> Show me where it says that the president has to notify the issuing branches of government? Those branches of government are subordinate to the president, not the other way around. Because the president is elected by the people, so the president is how the people keep control over agencies.
> 
> Obviously the Department of Justice and the FBI have gone completely Rogue recently, so that part isn't working very well.


We are talking about a president who has been a criminal his entire life and gotten away with it. And you're calling the FBI and department of Justice of going rogue. Get real we had a rogue president that almost destroyed our nation. Still recovering from the ill effects that he brought to our nation.


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> I guess you still believe that they are the nuclear football codes or some other such nonsense.


Secret and top secret documents cover a wide range of things including nuclear information. Why do you think trump needed access to such things after he was out of office. So he could sell them to the highest bidder. He's a crooked businessman after all, what else could you expect.


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


>


Does that mean you're laughing at yourself idiot. Right call.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> Does that mean you're laughing at yourself idiot. Right call.


No, it means I think you're missing a few brain cells.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> There is no set policy on declassifying documents.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> Secret and top secret documents cover a wide range of things including nuclear information. Why do you think trump needed access to such things after he was out of office. So he could sell them to the highest bidder. He's a crooked businessman after all, what else could you expect.


So you admit that you believe that Trump had nuclear information at mar-a-lago?


Biff_Poindexter said:


> Would you have kept this same energy if during your Hillary email fetish-fest; Obama simply said he mentally declassified everything?
> 
> Nope....stop being a partisan hack


Yes, I already said in another post that going after Clinton was just as silly as going after trump. I'm sure Obama did know that Hillary was keeping classified documents on her server and mentally thought that that was fine. He was the sitting president so it was fine.

 I get why that's so tough for you to understand. It doesn't seem to make sense to you. But that's the way it is. If you don't like it lobby before a constitutional amendment giving the power over classification to somebody else.

Someone has to have that power. Classification is not something found in nature, it's something we invented to allow government to keep secrets even from its own citizens. Classifying should be much more concerning than declassify information.

Classification should be for something rare like the nuclear codes or identities of spies. That's why the doj is leaking falsely that Trump had information like that at mar-a-lago. 

What Trump had was most likely information from the doj about the dojs machinations to sway the 2016 elections to Hillary clinton. Information like that should never be hidden from the American people.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> There is no set policy on declassifying documents.











						GovInfo
					

Official Publications from the U.S. Government Publishing Office.




					www.govinfo.gov


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> GovInfo
> 
> 
> Official Publications from the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.govinfo.gov


A nice try but I'll give you a participation trophy.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> A nice try but I'll give you a participation trophy.



It is so cute how you think the Govt has not policy for declassifying materials. 

The Govt has policy and procedures for everything, but you think there are none for this?

There is an old saying you should take to heart...._Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt_


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> and what does this mean to you.....*I noticed in one Thread about how Biden has factually wrecked the economy your response was a meme that said cool story bro.*







__





						Under Biden, the market collapses
					

Democrats are killing US, I am living off the market, and this clueless wingnut and those "81 million" voters   clueless morons are going to be the death of us all.



					www.usmessageboard.com
				




Post 19.


----------



## Biff_Poindexter

Seymour Flops said:


> I guess you still believe that they are the nuclear football codes or some other such nonsense.


I believe Trump sycophants are full of shit and avoid answering simple questions...

Why did his lawyers refuse to say in court that Trump declassified everything with his mind?


Why do you believe Trump did this when he himself admitted he doesn't even know what documents he has? 


Bonus question: Why are you such a cuck?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> It is so cute how you think the Govt has not policy for declassifying materials.
> 
> The Govt has policy and procedures for everything, but you think there are none for this?
> 
> There is an old saying you should take to heart...._Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt_


SM.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> It is so cute how you think the Govt has not policy for declassifying materials.
> 
> The Govt has policy and procedures for everything, but you think there are none for this?
> 
> There is an old saying you should take to heart...._Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt_


Only the President has the authority to declassify documents and nobody else.  You seem to have a difficult time understanding that.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Biff_Poindexter said:


> I believe Trump sycophants are full of shit and avoid answering simple questions...
> 
> Why did his lawyers refuse to say in court that Trump declassified everything with his mind?
> 
> 
> Why do you believe Trump did this when he himself admitted he doesn't even know what documents he has?
> 
> 
> Bonus question: Why are you such a cuck?


Lawyers do not testify in court. Lawyers file things on behalf of their clients.

Why has the Department of Justice not stated in court that the "classified documents" are not just the crossfire hurricane documents that Trump Declassified in writing?


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> No, it means I think you're missing a few brain cells.


I think the same thing of you. The government is full of regulations if you don't realize that you are an idiot or a fool or both. The government takes nothing for granted, except for people paying taxes. trump's in trouble for that too. He thought he knew better than everyone else, that's the mark of a true fool.
.


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> Only the President has the authority to declassify documents and nobody else.  You seem to have a difficult time understanding that.


That is another lie.


----------



## Blaster

Seymour Flops said:


> Lawyers do not testify in court. Lawyers file things on behalf of their clients.


Bingo!


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> I think the same thing of you. The government is full of regulations if you don't realize that you are an idiot or a fool or both. The government takes nothing for granted, except for people paying taxes. trump's in trouble for that too. He thought he knew better than everyone else, that's the mark of a true fool.
> .


Calm down.  You give the government too much credit.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Under Biden, the market collapses
> 
> 
> Democrats are killing US, I am living off the market, and this clueless wingnut and those "81 million" voters   clueless morons are going to be the death of us all.
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post 19.



Thanks.  The reply was in response to someone telling how much money they have lost.  Such stories are meaningless on the web and most often come off sounding like BS.


----------



## miketx

candycorn said:


> So...one president can literally wipe out all of the state secrets if she or he wanted to do it...without any check or balance?
> 
> Is that what the right wing is now asking us to believe?
> 
> Wow.


I heard trump can turn lead into gold and lesbians into normal women with just one grab!


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> That is another lie.


So you don't think the President has the authority to declassify documents?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> Only the President has the authority to declassify documents and nobody else.  You seem to have a difficult time understanding that.



Yes, with each post you show your stupidity.  This is so much fun. 

Actually, lots of people have the authority to declassify documents.  Some are even done so automatically after a set number of years.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> So you don't think the President has the authority to declassify documents?



He does, but he is not the only person in the entire fucking Fed Govt that has that authority


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Thanks.  Such stories are meaningless on the web and most often come off sounding like BS.


That is what I think of most of your comments but you keep me amused.


----------



## monkrules

basquebromance said:


> It’s all there in the constitution. The separation of psychic powers.


In trump's case, it's the Separation of Psycho Powers.


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> Calm down.  You give the government too much credit.


I'm not the one responding in an emotional manner trying to defend the undefendable. I cited the law and other credible sources, I'm not just saying nonsense like you are.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes, with each post you show your stupidity.  This is so much fun.
> 
> Actually, lots of people have the authority to declassify documents.  Some are even done so automatically after a set number of years.


You should quit while you are behind.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> It is so cute how you think the Govt has not policy for declassifying materials.
> 
> The Govt has policy and procedures for everything, but you think there are none for this?
> 
> There is an old saying you should take to heart...._Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt_


You know what's really cute?

You missed me.


----------



## Biff_Poindexter

Seymour Flops said:


> Lawyers do not testify in court. Lawyers file things on behalf of their clients.
> 
> Why has the Department of Justice not stated in court that the "classified documents" are not just the crossfire hurricane documents that Trump Declassified in writing?


Lawyers who file lawsuits claiming their client is allowed to keep government docs because he mentally declassified them are supposed to make that claim in court...why didn't they??









						Trump legal team unwilling to answer judge's declassification questions
					

Lawyers for Trump and for the Justice Department are to appear in federal court in Brooklyn on Tuesday before a veteran judge named last week as special master to review the roughly 11,000 documents — including about 100 marked as classified — taken during the FBI's Aug. 8 search of Mar-a-Lago.




					www.pbs.org


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> That is what I think of most of your comments but you keep me amused.



I am glad to hear it.  It is only fair.

I wonder if anyone else will agree with your statemen that ONLY the POTUS can declassify documents.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> You should quit while you are behind.



Oh hell no, watching you dig your hole is way too much fun for that.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Thanks.  The reply was in response to someone telling how much money they have lost.  Such stories are meaningless on the web and most often come off sounding like BS.


So, you believe that nobody has lost money under the Biden economy? So any such stories are bs?

 You are far too intelligent to believe that. So what you actually meant was who gives a s*** about people who work hard all their lives losing half of their retirement money that they scrimmed and saved for? After all Trump was a really really bad guy and that's the most important thing right now.

Why even comment on that topic, if you have so little interest in how the bite and economy is affecting average americans? 

Suppose that poster story was true since so many people could definitely tell that story and it'd be true. How much of a jerk does it take to ridicule someone in that kind of financial distress? Sad that worshiping Biden is so important to you, that it makes you lose your humanity.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> I'm not the one responding in an emotional manner trying to defend the undefendable. I cited the law and other credible sources, I'm not just saying nonsense like you are.


You get defensive whenever somebody debunks your point of view.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I am glad to hear it.  It is only fair.
> 
> I wonder if anyone else will agree with your statemen that ONLY the POTUS can declassify documents.


I wonder if anyone else misses me...


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Oh hell no, watching you dig your hole is way too much fun for that.


The fact is I am always firmly above ground and have fun making folks like you look foolish.


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> So you don't think the President has the authority to declassify documents?


Well most classified and top secret information folders are not declassified for at least 25 years. So if you took any recent ones he's definitely a threat to national security. There's no way they could have been declassified.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> So, you believe that nobody has lost money under the Biden economy? So any such stories are bs?



We all.  It is the "half a million dollars" that was the funny part.  

Why not say "I am down 20%" or something like that.  Why add the dollar amount to try and sound like yet one more internet forum millionaire.


----------



## healthmyths

free radical said:


> That again isn't true.  As the presidential briefers have said, Trump would want to
> keep his briefing material (often in electronic media format) and they would have
> to practically wrestle the device out of his hands.  Because they weren't going to
> leave it in Trumps hands, except in their presence for the briefing.


Where is YOUR proof, your links.. that "briefers had to practically wrestle the device out of (Trump's) hands?
Who in the hell are you ?  Were you one of those attending the briefings?  I've not found any comments made by any Trump briefers stating what you said.  Until you provide exact quotes where briefers wrestled you are a LIAR!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> The fact is I am always firmly above ground and have fun making folks like you look foolish.



Dude, you literally believe the POTUS is the only person in the entire Fed Govt that has the authority to declassify anything.  

Nothing I can ever say about you will ever make you look more stupid than that.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> Well most classified and top secret information folders are not declassified for at least 25 years. So if you took any recent ones he's definitely a threat to national security. There's no way they could have been declassified.


You have very little understanding of how government works.


----------



## Cellblock2429

rightwinger said:


> No idea what you are talking about
> 
> You been watching Fox again?


/———/* “You been watching Fox again?*”
Apparently, you’re watching Fox since you know what they broadcast. Ya see, I never watch CNN, so I have no idea what they report. 
See how that works?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> You have very little understanding of how government works.



This from the guy that thinks there is only one person in the entire Fed Govt that has the authority to declassify anything.


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> So, you believe that nobody has lost money under the Biden economy? So any such stories are bs?
> 
> You are far too intelligent to believe that. So what you actually meant was who gives a s*** about people who work hard all their lives losing half of their retirement money that they scrimmed and saved for? After all Trump was a really really bad guy and that's the most important thing right now.
> 
> Why even comment on that topic, if you have so little interest in how the bite and economy is affecting average americans?
> 
> Suppose that poster story was true since so many people could definitely tell that story and it'd be true. How much of a jerk does it take to ridicule someone in that kind of financial distress? Sad that worshiping Biden is so important to you, that it makes you lose your humanity.


I just wanted to point out it was a Washington Post article that dated Trump's election fraud falls cost the American taxpayers $519 million. And that was just one of his errors or criminal acts however you want to see it.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> Trump will need someone to come forward and say……Trump told me to declassify all those documents and I didn’t do it


If Trump says it's declassified.  It's declassified.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> I just wanted to point out it was a Washington Post article that dated Trump's election fraud falls cost the American taxpayers $519 million. And that was just one of his errors or criminal acts however you want to see it.


The Washington Post?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> If Trump says it's declassified.  It's declassified.



But if Trump thought its declassified, thought telling someone, it is not.


----------



## miketx

Stann said:


> I'm not the one responding in an emotional manner trying to defend the undefendable. I cited the law and other credible sources, I'm not just saying nonsense like you are.


All you do is spew nonsense.


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> The Washington Post?


Laugh your fool head off for all I care. Try to have a good day, I plan on it. I've wasted enough time fooling around with you.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> If Trump says it's declassified.  It's declassified.



If he says it is declassified and nobody is there to hear it

Did he declassify it???.


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> Show me where it says the president has to do any of that. From now on I'll just day SM.


It’s common sense.  Perhaps a friend or family member could lend you some?


----------



## healthmyths

Stann said:


> Well most classified and top secret information folders are not declassified for at least 25 years. So if you took any recent ones he's definitely a threat to national security. There's no way they could have been declassified.


Who in the hell are you?  What makes you an expert on "declassification"?  You work with that all the time?
Otherwise you without and substantiation or links to the  statement regarding"declassification" are a bag of wind!  A liar!  Provide Proof!


----------



## rightwinger

healthmyths said:


> Who in the hell are you?  What makes you an expert on "declassification"?  You work with that all the time?
> Otherwise you without and substantiation or links to the  statement regarding"declassification" are a bag of wind!  A liar!  Provide Proof!



How did Trump declassify documents from TOP SECRET to declassified and not tell anyone?


----------



## miketx

Stann said:


> Laugh your fool head off for all I care. Try to have a good day, I plan on it. I've wasted enough time fooling around with you.


In other words, you can't think of any more lies to spew or fake news stories to post. Got it.


----------



## Toro

Trump's lawyers have refused to say in court if he declassified documents.









						Trump legal team unwilling to answer judge's declassification questions
					

Lawyers for Trump and for the Justice Department are to appear in federal court in Brooklyn on Tuesday before a veteran judge named last week as special master to review the roughly 11,000 documents — including about 100 marked as classified — taken during the FBI's Aug. 8 search of Mar-a-Lago.




					www.pbs.org


----------



## rightwinger

Toro said:


> Trump's lawyers have refused to say in court if he declassified documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump legal team unwilling to answer judge's declassification questions
> 
> 
> Lawyers for Trump and for the Justice Department are to appear in federal court in Brooklyn on Tuesday before a veteran judge named last week as special master to review the roughly 11,000 documents — including about 100 marked as classified — taken during the FBI's Aug. 8 search of Mar-a-Lago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pbs.org



Just like Trump lawyers refuse to claim in court that the election was stolen


----------



## Batcat

Golfing Gator said:


> So, do you agree all the POTUS needs to do is think about it and POOF things are declassified?


How do YOU feel about Hillary putting highly classified email on an unauthorized and improperly secured server where it is quite likely it was hacked buy the Chinese, Russians, Iranians and North Koreans.









						CONFIRMED: Clinton Email Server Hacked
					

CONFIRMED: Clinton Email Server Hacked




					thefederalistpapers.org
				




Her misdeeds were whitewashed away. If you want to hang Trump you better first prosecute Hillary. This bullshit of having two rules of law, one for the Democrats and a much stricter one for conservatives better end soon or this nation will break apart.


----------



## konradv

rightwinger said:


> How did Trump declassify documents from TOP SECRET to declassified and not tell anyone?


Correct.  Why is he the only one that knows?  Are the rest of us supposed to be mind readers?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> If he says it is declassified and nobody is there to hear it
> 
> Did he declassify it???.


Sure.  As president, he had ultimate authority to classify, or declassify anything.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> But if Trump thought its declassified, thought telling someone, it is not.


Show us the law that supports your claim.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Sure.  As president, he had ultimate authority to classify, or declassify anything.


That is good to hear

But if you have the authority and never actually did it……It didn’t happen


----------



## Golfing Gator

Batcat said:


> How do YOU feel about Hillary putting highly classified email on an unauthorized and improperly secured server where it is quite likely it was hacked buy the Chinese, Russians, Iranians and North Koreans.



As I have said 100 times on here, she should be in jail.  If I had done what she did, I would have been in jail.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> That is good to hear
> 
> But if you have the authority and never actually did it……It didn’t happen


Says who?  You?  Some random, anonymous dude on the internet?


----------



## Leo123

konradv said:


> Correct.  Why is he the only one that knows?  Are the rest of us supposed to be mind readers?


Trump loves yanking Democrats' chains.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Batcat said:


> If you want to hang Trump you better first prosecute Hillary.



I do not want to hang Trump, I just want to laugh at his stupidity.


----------



## konradv

Batcat said:


> How do YOU feel about Hillary putting highly classified email on an unauthorized and improperly secured server where it is quite likely it was hacked buy the Chinese, Russians, Iranians and North Koreans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CONFIRMED: Clinton Email Server Hacked
> 
> 
> CONFIRMED: Clinton Email Server Hacked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thefederalistpapers.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her misdeeds were whitewashed away. If you want to hang Trump you better first prosecute Hillary. This bullshit of having two rules of law, one for the Democrats and a much stricter one for conservatives better end soon or this nation will break apart.
> 
> View attachment 701000


Hardly comparable considering emails aren’t the documents themselves and we’re talking actual alleged theft of government property by the former president, not just sloppy handling of info, as in Clinton’s case.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator 

What's funny?  You laughing at yourself?...lol


----------



## konradv

Leo123 said:


> Trump loves yanking Democrats' chains.


Seems like all he’s got these days.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Golfing Gator
> 
> What's funny?  You laughing at yourself?...lol



No, I am laughing at you morons that have to defend every stupid thing Trump says or be kicked out of your tribe.


----------



## Leo123

konradv said:


> Seems like all he’s got these days.


And all Democrat have is "Orange Man Bad!"


----------



## konradv

Leo123 said:


> And all Democrat have is "Orange Man Bad!"


Please, come up with something new. My “Orange Ball Good”, cool glasses!


----------



## Batcat

konradv said:


> Hardly comparable considering emails aren’t the documents themselves and we’re talking actual alleged theft of government property by the former president, not just sloppy handling of info, as in Clinton’s case.


Hillary’s sloppy handling of highly classified information that if hacked could have compromised classified missions and cost lives. And the chances are that server was hacked.









						Chinese Reportedly Hacked Hillary Server. During Same Time, 12 CIA Sources Reportedly Killed by China. Coincidence?
					

'The Chinese firm obtained Clinton’s emails in real time.'




					www.westernjournal.com
				












						SOURCES: China Hacked Hillary Clinton’s Private Email Server
					

A Chinese-owned company operating in near Washington, D.C. hacked former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private server and obtained nearly all her emails.




					dailycaller.com


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> No, I am laughing at you morons that have to defend every stupid thing Trump says or be kicked out of your tribe.


You're the moron that didn't pick up on Trump's hyperbole...lol

Hyperbole is an exaggeration used to make a point.

The point is, he can declassify anything he wants and there ain't a damn thing anyone can say, or do about it.


----------



## the other mike

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


We know what documents you're worried about.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> You're the moron that didn't pick up on Trump's hyperbole...lol
> 
> Hyperbole is an exaggeration used to make a point.
> 
> The point is, he can declassify anything he wants and there ain't a damn thing anyone can say, or do about it.



That is awesome, you just make me laugh out loud!   Thank you.

After 38 pages of you Trump worshiping fools saying he really could do it, now all of a sudden it is hyperbole.

I had been waiting for that, and you did not disappoint me.

Thanks


----------



## Golfing Gator

the other mike said:


> We know what documents you're worried about.



Durham...are you fucking kidding me?  That guy was a bigger bust and waste of money than Mueller!


----------



## Captain Caveman

otto105 said:


> Al you said goodbye to ron yet?


Have you guys not said this everyday for a decade?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> That is awesome, you just make me laugh out loud!   Thank you.
> 
> After 38 pages of you Trump worshiping fools saying he really could do it, now all of a sudden it is hyperbole.
> 
> I had been waiting for that, and you did not disappoint me.
> 
> Thanks


I never said any such thing.  Stop fucking lying.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> I never said any such thing.  Stop fucking lying.



All your fellow Trump worshipers have been, and you have not told any of them they are wrong.


----------



## the other mike

Golfing Gator said:


> Durham...are you fucking kidding me?  That guy was a bigger bust and waste of money than Mueller!


Mueller is a pos deep state prick who btw helped Bush's case for war in Iraq.

As for Durham..... neither you or anyone else know shit about that guy except he looks a little like Richard Dreyfuss and that he's *still on the case* and that's all you need to know.


----------



## the other mike

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> I never said any such thing.  Stop fucking lying.


It's all the losers know how to do anymore.


----------



## Golfing Gator

the other mike said:


> Mueller is a pos deep state prick who btw helped Bush's case for war in Iraq.
> 
> As for Durham..... neither you or anyone else know shit about that guy except he looks a little like Richard Dreyfuss and that he's *still on the case* and that's all you need to know.



You willing to wager on the outcome of the Durham invesigations?


----------



## the other mike

Golfing Gator said:


> You willing to wager on the outcome of the Durham invesigations?


Yes I will bet you a million dollars whatever the outcome is the mainstream media will cover it up.


----------



## schmidlap

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


I have no doubt that Trump has the power to declassify stolen documents with his mind - in his mind.




If a loser can lose an election by over 7 million votes, lose all recounts, audits, and dozens of court appeals, 
have the results certified by 50 states, Congress, and the Vice President of the United States, 
and _still_ convince slow people that he had won in a_ "Landslide!"_ and had it inexplicably_ "stolen!",_
he can undoubtedly convince himself of all sorts of 






​


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> All your fellow Trump worshipers have been, and you have not told any of them they are wrong.


That's not me, is it?  You lied on me, so you probably lied on them too.


----------



## multivita-man

Golfing Gator said:


> That is awesome, you just make me laugh out loud!   Thank you.
> 
> After 38 pages of you Trump worshiping fools saying he really could do it, now all of a sudden it is hyperbole.
> 
> I had been waiting for that, and you did not disappoint me.
> 
> Thanks



Oh yah! Hyperbole!

Too bad judges aren't buying that shit.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Says who?  You?  Some random, anonymous dude on the internet?


Says common sense

If you declassify something and never tell anyone, it is not declassified

If Trump “thunk “ it
It don’t count


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> Says common sense
> 
> If you declassify something and never tell anyone, it is not declassified
> 
> If Trump “think” it
> It don’t count


Post the law that supports your claim.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Post the law that supports your claim.







__





						Loading…
					





					www.dni.gov


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dni.gov


That's not a law.  The DNI literally works FOR the president.  The president doesn't answer to the DNI  Let's try again: post the law that supports the claim you made.


----------



## Golfing Gator

the other mike said:


> Yes I will bet you a million dollars whatever the outcome is the mainstream media will cover it up.



Deal.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> That's not me, is it?  You lied on me, so you probably lied on them too.



I did not lie, why are you lying about me?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> I did not lie, why are you lying about me?


I didn't lie about you.  Now, you're lying again...lol


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> I didn't lie about you.  Now, you're lying again...lol



Oh, now you are doing the old "i am rubber, you are glue" shtick.  

How boring


----------



## the other mike

Golfing Gator said:


> Deal.


After I win the bet I'll give you my list of offshore account numbers to send the money to.


----------



## Golfing Gator

the other mike said:


> After I win the bet I'll give you my list of offshore account numbers to send the money to.



All I need is one MSM source to cover it and BOOM I will be giving you those numbers!


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> Oh, now you are doing the old "i am rubber, you are glue" shtick.
> 
> How boring


You found that law yet?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> You found that law yet?



Nope, still have not found the law that says anything can be declassified via telepathy. 

But I am looking hard for it


----------



## Stann

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> If Trump says it's declassified.  It's declassified.


Today on his " truth social " trump said he was second only to Jesus. So with your line of thinking that makes him a god or a demigod. He Is getting more outrageous than ever, to the common person that would make him psychotic at the least. But I've been thinking about this and Trump is a true con artist. He only lets you know things about him that he wants you to know. If he wants us to all believe he's insane that probably means it's just another con to get them out of serving prison time. His lawyer is probably told him the only way out for him is to plead insanity. If that happens, we'll know it's just another con he's pulled over on the people of this country. Such a devious mind and such a coward, it's got to be the hardest thing to live with.


----------



## the other mike

Golfing Gator said:


> All I need is one MSM source to cover it and BOOM I will be giving you those numbers!


Mainstream means everywhere.
You know like the coverage given to anything bad about Trump.

And generally a cover-up can come in various scenarios which includes barely mentioning the story here and there.


----------



## Golfing Gator

the other mike said:


> Mainstream means everywhere.
> You know like the coverage given to anything bad about Trump.
> 
> And generally a cover-up can come in various scenarios which includes barely mentioning the story here and there.



Nope, if it is covered up that means nobody is talking about it.  

Too late to change definitions now


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> No, I am laughing at you morons that have to defend every stupid thing Trump says or be kicked out of your tribe.


Still miss me?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Stann said:


> Today on his " truth social " trump said he was second only to Jesus. So with your line of thinking that makes him a god or a demigod. He Is getting more outrageous than ever, to the common person that would make him psychotic at the least. But I've been thinking about this and Trump is a true con artist. He only lets you know things about him that he wants you to know. If he wants us to all believe he's insane that probably means it's just another con to get them out of serving prison time. His lawyer is probably told him the only way out for him is to plead insanity. If that happens, we'll know it's just another con he's pulled over on the people of this country. Such a devious mind and such a coward, it's got to be the hardest thing to live with.


We're all second only to Jesus.  You think Joe Biden is worth more than you are?...lol.  Sad thing is, you probably do.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> Nope, still have not found the law that says anything can be declassified via telepathy.
> 
> But I am looking hard for it


Of course you haven't, because there's no law that says what, or how the president can declassify.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> That is awesome, you just make me laugh out loud!   Thank you.
> 
> After 38 pages of you Trump worshiping fools saying he really could do it, now all of a sudden it is hyperbole.
> 
> I had been waiting for that, and you did not disappoint me.
> 
> Thanks


So since is not joining in on the bashing makes us Trump worshiping fools, then you not joining in on the Biden bashing makes you a Biden worshiping fool?

Seems thats how this works.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Oh, now you are doing the old "i am rubber, you are glue" shtick.
> 
> How boring


Maybe you should ignore him til you miss him, too.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Of course you haven't, because there's no law that says what, or how the president can declassify.



So now it is not hyperbole any longer and he really can declassify via telepathy?


----------



## the other mike

Golfing Gator said:


> Nope, if it is covered up that means nobody is talking about it.
> 
> Too late to change definitions now


It doesn't matter ....Biden's  about to start World War 3 cuz he's a dick.

We can discuss our wager in heaven if you make it


----------



## Golfing Gator

the other mike said:


> It doesn't matter ....Biden's  about to start World War 3 cuz he's a dick.
> 
> We can discuss our wager in heaven if you make it



I will give you a drop of water to help ease your suffering.


----------



## Dagosa

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Well, if Trump ever put a ligit thought in his head, that would be the first time.


----------



## Dagosa

the other mike said:


> It doesn't matter ....Biden's  about to start World War 3 cuz he's a dick.
> 
> We can discuss our wager in heaven if you make it


Sure, Trump would just just sit back and let Putin invade everyone else in Europe. There was a time when repugnants were pro democracy. Not anymore. They cheer for the fascist dictators now.m


----------



## the other mike

Dagosa said:


> Sure, Trump would just just sit back and let Putin invade everyone else in Europe. There was a time when repugnants were pro democracy. Not anymore. They cheer for the fascist dictators now.m


The Western media is lying not to mention the fact that there are no reporters in the Ukraine the secret police won't let them in

Putin did not invade Ukraine he warned NATO for years ever since 2014 when Biden McCain and his friends place a right-wing extremist dictatorship puppet government there who was committing genocide in the Donbas region ....look it up . Putin was trying to save them..... the ethnic Russians that ukrainians were killing this was not an unprovoked attack.


----------



## Stann

healthmyths said:


> Who in the hell are you?  What makes you an expert on "declassification"?  You work with that all the time?
> Otherwise you without and substantiation or links to the  statement regarding"declassification" are a bag of wind!  A liar!  Provide Proof!


I am no expert but I have common sense and I looked up the government regulations on declassification,they do exist for anyone that really wants to know about the subject.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> The Western media is lying not to mention the fact that there are no reporters in the Ukraine the secret police won't let them in
> 
> Putin did not invade Ukraine he warned NATO for years ever since 2014 when Biden McCain and his friends place a right-wing extremist dictatorship puppet government there who was committing genocide in the Donbas region ....look it up . Putin was trying to save them..... the ethnic Russians that ukrainians were killing this was not an unprovoked attack.


I guess you don't watch the news, ABC has extensive coverage all the time from Kiev and the front lines in the Ukraine. Your first statement was a lie I didn't bother to read the rest.


----------



## the other mike

Stann said:


> I guess you don't watch the news, ABC has extensive coverage all the time from Kiev and the front lines in the Ukraine. Your first statement was a lie I didn't bother to read the rest.


There's no fighting in Kiev if you're talking about the reporter at the Marriott with his bulletproof vest on
Lmao


----------



## the other mike

ABC News.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I will give you a drop of water to help ease your suffering.


This doesn't seem to be on topic.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> There's no fighting in Kiev if you're talking about the reporter at the Marriott with his bulletproof vest on
> Lmao


The point is you lied. I've seen plenty of reports from Kiev as well as the front lines by American reporters. No one is stopping the truth from coming out of the Ukraine. You can't say that about Russia. I'm surprised we heard about the uprisings in over 40 cities in Russia against putin's latest aggression towards his own people.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> The point is you lied. I've seen plenty of reports from Kiev as well as the front lines by American reporters. No one is stopping the truth from coming out of the Ukraine. You can't say that about Russia. I'm surprised we heard about the uprisings in over 40 cities in Russia against putin's latest aggression towards his own people.


By the way the Russians are the ones with the secret police, they just changed the name it's not called the KGB anymore.


----------



## the other mike

Stann said:


> The point is you lied. I've seen plenty of reports from Kiev as well as the front lines by American reporters. No one is stopping the truth from coming out of the Ukraine. You can't say that about Russia. I'm surprised we heard about the uprisings in over 40 cities in Russia against putin's latest aggression towards his own people.


Nobody is patting Putin on the back but the fact is NATO started this in 2014 and now we're at the one second Mark of the Doomsday Clock and you don't seem to act like it really matters


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> Nobody is patting Putin on the back but the fact is NATO started this in 2014 and now we're at the one second Mark of the Doomsday Clock and you don't seem to act like it really matters


You're lying again. Deranged Putin started this. The Ukraine had a military alliance with Russia. But at the same time they asserted their independence and said they will decide their future themselves. Putin doesn't think they have the right to that. Putin was a KGB thug who actually believes that Russia owns the Ukraine. The Ukrainian people have a thousand year history, much like Russia does. Up until this attack Ukrainian people thought of the Russians as their brothers. Not anymore Putin has destroyed all that trust and Goodwill. So don't go blaming it on the Ukraine or NATO. They are independent nation they can decide their own fate if they wanted to join NATO that's their right.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> You're lying again. Deranged Putin started this. The Ukraine had a military alliance with Russia. But at the same time they asserted their independence and said they will decide their future themselves. Putin doesn't think they have the right to that. Putin was a KGB thug who actually believes that Russia owns the Ukraine. The Ukrainian people have a thousand year history, much like Russia does. Up until this attack Ukrainian people thought of the Russians as their brothers. Not anymore Putin has destroyed all that trust and Goodwill. So don't go blaming it on the Ukraine or NATO. They are independent nation they can decide their own fate if they wanted to join NATO that's their right.


Maybe you don't remember when when Putin started military exorces on the Ukrainian border with belarus's assistance. He kept lying and saying they're only military exercises. Well they weren't it was an invasion.


----------



## the other mike

Stann said:


> You're lying again. Deranged Putin started this. The Ukraine had a military alliance with Russia. But at the same time they asserted their independence and said they will decide their future themselves. Putin doesn't think they have the right to that. Putin was a KGB thug who actually believes that Russia owns the Ukraine. The Ukrainian people have a thousand year history, much like Russia does. Up until this attack Ukrainian people thought of the Russians as their brothers. Not anymore Putin has destroyed all that trust and Goodwill. So don't go blaming it on the Ukraine or NATO. They are independent nation they can decide their own fate if they wanted to join NATO that's their right.


I have no reason to lie and unlike you I did my research other than hearing it from the Western press


----------



## iceberg

Stann said:


> Maybe you don't remember when when Putin started military exorces on the Ukrainian border with belarus's assistance. He kept lying and saying they're only military exercises. Well they weren't it was an invasion.


So now you argue with yourself...


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> ABC News.





the other mike said:


> I have no reason to lie and unlike you I did my research other than hearing it from the Western press


Now you're calling our press the enemy or something. Where do you live in Russia ? You can't be an American.


----------



## Dagosa

the other mike said:


> The Western media is lying not to mention the fact that there are no reporters in the Ukraine the secret police won't let them in


Congrats. You’re officially a Putin supporter. You and Tucker think alike.


----------



## Dagosa

the other mike said:


> I have no reason to lie and unlike you I did my research other than hearing it from the Western press


Your research is listening to Tucker every night.


----------



## Dagosa

the other mike said:


> The Western media is lying not to mention the fact that there are no reporters in the Ukraine the secret police won't let them in
> 
> Putin did not invade Ukraine he warned NATO for years ever since 2014 when Biden McCain and his friends place a right-wing extremist dictatorship puppet government there who was committing genocide in the Donbas region ....look it up . Putin was trying to save them..... the ethnic Russians that ukrainians were killing this was not an unprovoked attack.


You do understand that all free nations have a free press, and  Russia has a state run press. Maybe you didn’t know that….


----------



## the other mike

Dagosa said:


> You do understand that all free nations have a free press, and  Russia has a state run press. Maybe you didn’t know that….


Again no one is patting Putin on the back but they are not the USSR anymore nor are they a totalitarian people. The Russian people want to live in a Democratic Republic the same as us.....
I think the US is playing both sides here or at least the globalists who are now in charge of our country since the stolen election.


----------



## Stann

Dagosa said:


> You do understand that all free nations have a free press, and  Russia has a state run press. Maybe you didn’t know that….


Norma reports.org protein shuts down Russia's Free press for reporting accurately on Ukraine March 9th., 2022. They only had one free press in the whole country, there were others at one time. They were systematically eliminated by the government.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> Again no one is patting Putin on the back but they are not the USSR anymore nor are they a totalitarian people. The Russian people want to live in a Democratic Republic the same as us.....
> I think the US is playing both sides here or at least the globalists who are now in charge of our country since the stolen election.


Putin will be eliminated soon, hopefully another dictator will not take over the country.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> Norma reports.org protein shuts down Russia's Free press for reporting accurately on Ukraine March 9th., 2022. They only had one free press in the whole country, there were others at one time. They were systematically eliminated by the government.


I really need to proofread these things, I have crippling arthritis in my fingers so I use a voice machine doesn't always print out the correct words but you get the gist of it hopefully if you're not able to do that you probably shouldn't be on this site. The link was, niemanreports.org I want to make sure that's right at least. I can't correct everything at this stupid machine does.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> Again no one is patting Putin on the back but they are not the USSR anymore nor are they a totalitarian people. The Russian people want to live in a Democratic Republic the same as us.....
> I think the US is playing both sides here or at least the globalists who are now in charge of our country since the stolen election.


" Stolen election ", that says it all. There's no talking common sense with you. Try to have a good day. LOL.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> So now it is not hyperbole any longer and he really can declassify via telepathy?


That's not what I said.  There you go lying, again.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Stann said:


> " Stolen election ", that says it all. There's no talking common sense with you. Try to have a good day. LOL.


Was Trump the legitimately elected 45th president?


----------



## evenflow1969

TNHarley said:


> According to this, it isnt so black and white.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the president can declassify documents, but there isn’t a set protocol they have to follow
> 
> 
> Former President Trump claimed documents found at Mar-a-Lago were “all declassified.” We explain why sitting presidents can declassify documents and how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.verifythis.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He can basically do whatever he wants with declassification. There are informal protocols, but nothing set in stone. EXCEPT nuclear documents. Those are protected under the Atomic Energy Act.
> Apparently, just because they are declassified, doesnt mean they can just take those documents with them when they leave the WH either.


Lol, so Trump just thinking that a document is declassified makes it declassified makes sense to you? Is this correct?


----------



## otto105

Captain Caveman said:


> Have you guys not said this everyday for a decade?


Yeah, and it will change in 45 days.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> That's not what I said.  There you go lying, again.



Well make up your damn mind, you are all over the place.


----------



## healthmyths

rightwinger said:


> How did Trump declassify documents from TOP SECRET to declassified and not tell anyone?


And where is your PROOF Trump "declassified documents"?  Geez you make these claims but don't have any substantiation or PROOF!
How about this right-winger...... "It is been said by unidentified sources that "rightwinger" has leaked top secrets only to be read in a SCIF! "
Reliable sources say "rightwinger" is a well known white supremacist who has a male lover!  Again just a claim by an unidentified BUT reliable source!


----------



## Stann

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Of course you haven't, because there's no law that says what, or how the president can declassify.


archives.gov. Basic Laws and aAuthorities March 25th., 2003. This is a monthly read at least 25 pages, not for the light hearted. I skipped over a lot of it. Way too much information. However there is a definite process to declassify information. Presidents can do classified information and as long as the originator of the document agrees with his reasoning for declassifying it it's okay. However if there is a dispute it goes to a committee to be decided. Obviously trump never bothered to read it, or he couldn't comprehend what it was saying it.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Stann said:


> archives.gov. Basic Laws and aAuthorities March 25th., 2003. This is a monthly read at least 25 pages, not for the light hearted. I skipped over a lot of it. Way too much information. However there is a definite process to declassify information. Presidents can do classified information and as long as the originator of the document agrees with his reasoning for declassifying it it's okay. However if there is a dispute it goes to a committee to be decided. Obviously trump never bothered to read it, or he couldn't comprehend what it was saying it.


There's no one in the Executive Branch that can tell the president what he can, and can't classify, or declassify.  Everyone in the Executive Branch answers to the president, not the other way around.


----------



## Stann

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> There's no one in the Executive Branch that can tell the president what he can, and can't classify, or declassify.  Everyone in the Executive Branch answers to the president, not the other way around.


The president is just a man, he's not a god. He's only human and capable of mistakes and corruption. We have three equal branches of government the judicial the executive and the legislative each have checks to keep the other in check. Sorry but you aren't being reasonable you're some kind of fanatic. There's no sense in talking to you. You probably didn't even read the regulations regarding the classification process. I'm tired of listening to you talk out of your ass. It just plain stinks.


----------



## the other mike

God is declassifying the Democrats brains.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> God is declassifying the Democrats brains.


Actually most Democrats do believe in God. It seems like most Republicans on the other hand just believe in the devil and do his bidding.


----------



## the other mike

Stann said:


> Actually most Democrats do believe in God. It seems like most Republicans on the other hand just believe in the devil and do his bidding.


I'm not a Republican or a Democrat but as an objective Observer it looks to me like Republicans are by and large honest businessmen and Democrats are dishonest politicians


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> I'm not a Republican or a Democrat but as an objective Observer it looks to me like Republicans are by and large honest businessmen and Democrats are dishonest politicians


LOL, you picked a real doozy and in trump then. I guess you never heard the old saying, " One bad Apple destroys the whole bushel. " His corruption is so widespread and rampant in the Republican party now it is unrecognizable by the party that had integrity and goals at one time. I am not a Democrat, I am an independent I see problems with both parties but the Republican party is the greatest danger to our nation. Our system is semi-socialistic already a little more in the healthcare and advanced education arena and America will be a decent Nation for everyone to live in and attain the American dream.


----------



## the other mike

Stann said:


> LOL, you picked a real doozy and in trump then. I guess you never heard the old saying, " One bad Apple destroys the whole bushel. " His corruption is so widespread and rampant in the Republican party now it is unrecognizable by the party that had integrity and goals at one time. I am not a Democrat, I am an independent I see problems with both parties but the Republican party is the greatest danger to our nation. Our system is semi-socialistic already a little more in the healthcare and advanced education arena and America will be a decent Nation for everyone to live in and attain the American dream.


I knew that Hillary Clinton was a war criminal and that Donald Trump was a seemingly unpredictable choice for president so I voted for Jill Stein in 2016 and then after the FBI scandal started emerging in 2017 and 2018 I did become a  Trump supporter.

Not that I really feel obligated to explain it to you but there you go what do you have to say to that


----------



## the other mike

Lol


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> It’s common sense.  Perhaps a friend or family member could lend you some?


We are a nation of laws.  “Common sense” is not admissible in a criminal case.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> I knew that Hillary Clinton was a war criminal and that Donald Trump was a seemingly unpredictable choice for president so I voted for Jill Stein in 2016 and then after the FBI scandal started emerging in 2017 and 2018 I did become a  Trump supporter.
> 
> Not that I really feel obligated to explain it to you but there you go what do you have to say to that


Like I said I'm not a Democrat, political parties seem to always play games with one another. trump, already being a good con artist, has taken the game to new dangerous heights. Many would call it treason, and of course he knows how to play the victim so well his gullible followers will eat it all up. And that's exactly what he expects.


----------



## the other mike

Stann said:


> Like I said I'm not a Democrat, political parties seem to always play games with one another. trump, already being a good con artist, has taken the game to new dangerous heights. Many would call it treason, and of course he knows how to play the victim so well his gullible followers will eat it all up. And that's exactly what he expects.


We knew everything about Trump before he was elected and for four years he was as good a president as he could have possibly been even in the face of incredible adversity and a planneDemic.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> We knew everything about Trump before he was elected and for four years he was as good a president as he could have possibly been even in the face of incredible adversity and a planneDemic.


Isn't that interesting, you even try to blame a disease pandemic on the Democrats
 One which started during trump's tenure as president. I suppose the vaccines that were produced by the " warp " initiative he created are the Democrats fault too. It couldn't possibly be the mixed messages he kept sending about the virus, it's going to just go away, it's just like the flu, it's no big deal, making it a political and freedom of choice issue, all of which ended up totally mismanaging the pandemic in this country. That Insanity didn't just affect the United States, the far-right movement ended up adversely affecting the whole world's pandemic response. Really good follow through. I think I remember him quoting misinformation several times too. To show how much influenced his weak-minded followers. After he made that police statement, " accidental " poisonings went up substantially. Yep he's a real great guy. Always taking credit for everything good that happened, even think she had nothing to do with and blaming others for for things that went wrong. Just what you want out of a leader.


----------



## Seymour Flops

the other mike said:


> I knew that Hillary Clinton was a war criminal and that Donald Trump was a seemingly unpredictable choice for president so I voted for Jill Stein in 2016 and then after the FBI scandal started emerging in 2017 and 2018 I did become a  Trump supporter.
> 
> Not that I really feel obligated to explain it to you but there you go what do you have to say to that


I took a similar course in becoming a Trump supporter. 

Aside from the incredibly partisan attacks on him from the so-called “justice” department, the man got results when he was president.  Turns out putting America first really is a good idea.  No one ever improved the quality of lives for Americans by trying to do something else.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Anyone offering a wager about whether Trump gets indicted for any crime having to do with classified documents?


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> Anyone offering a wager about whether Trump gets indicted for any crime having to do with classified documents?


Not interested in making your wager. But given there are a hundred documents he actually explain why he declassified them and who we spoke with to do so. It's going to be quite interesting what stories he's going to make up now. Each violation can be up to 10 years in prison, a minimum of $10,000 fine  and losing the ability to seek any public office ever again. If these acts are determined as treason then execution is on the table. I don't believe it'll get that bad, but none of it will be any good and although he's acting crazier than ever now he can't use Insanity as a defense.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> Not interested in making your wager. But given there are a hundred documents he actually explain why he declassified them and who we spoke with to do so. It's going to be quite interesting what stories he's going to make up now. Each violation can be up to 10 years in prison, a minimum of $10,000 fine  and losing the ability to seek any public office ever again. If these acts are determined as treason then execution is on the table. I don't believe it'll get that bad, but none of it will be any good and although he's acting crazier than ever now he can't use Insanity as a defense.


I always forget to mention, even if he has documentation and did get them declassified, he still doesn't have the right to keep them. They are not his property.


----------



## Synthaholic

She's great. All her videos are her as an elementary school teacher talking to Trump like he's a first grader.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> We knew everything about Trump before he was elected and for four years he was as good a president as he could have possibly been even in the face of incredible adversity and a planneDemic.


Unfortunately my family has had dealings with trump on two different occasions, both were bad experiences. My mother's cousins ( I believe that would make them first cousins once removed for me. ) were truck farmers in Southern New Jersey. They were caught up with his Atlantic City
 scandal when he bankruptured his own casino. They never fully recovered from the financial losses and I believe it led to their premature deaths. So I knew from the good girl what a horrible person he was. No one you would want for a later, no one you can trust, no one deserving of any type of respect or loyalty. Totally corrupt with a character that is unredeemable. That's somehow he keeps getting away with it. I believe he was right you could actually kill someone in the middle of New York City and walk away from it a free man. Today on his " truth social " ( bad joke if there ever was one. ) He said he was second only to Jesus. Get ready for and even bigger con.


----------



## the other mike

Stann said:


> Unfortunately my family has had dealings with trump on two different occasions, both were bad experiences. My mother's cousins ( I believe that would make them first cousins once removed for me. ) were truck farmers in Southern New Jersey. They were caught up with his Atlantic City
> scandal when he bankruptured his own casino. They never fully recovered from the financial losses and I believe it led to their premature deaths. So I knew from the good girl what a horrible person he was. No one you would want for a later, no one you can trust, no one deserving of any type of respect or loyalty. Totally corrupt with a character that is unredeemable. That's somehow he keeps getting away with it. I believe he was right you could actually kill someone in the middle of New York City and walk away from it a free man. Today on his " truth social " ( bad joke if there ever was one. ) He said he was second only to Jesus. Get ready for and even bigger con.


This is the confusing part to me about Donald Trump is that if he really is a billionaire he should be able to pay off his debt like it's pocket change.


----------



## Indeependent

the other mike said:


> This is the confusing part to me about Donald Trump is that if he really is a billionaire he should be able to pay off his debt like it's pocket change.


Wealth is not measured solely by liquid assets.


----------



## Stann

the other mike said:


> This is the confusing part to me about Donald Trump is that if he really is a billionaire he should be able to pay off his debt like it's pocket change.


Even when you think Trump is telling the truth, even on those rare occasions, he is lying. He's not trustworthy. As many as eight women came forward and said they had abortions because he eschewed wearing condoms when they had sex. He said they didn't fit on his micropenis and even the thin ones reduced his enjoyment of sex. When asked about the abortions in 2016 interview Trump refused to answer the question. In 2019 Michael Cohen denied the existence of a trump love child even though Trump friendly American Media paid $15,000 to " catch and kill " a story about a former trump bodyguard Dino Sayjudin who mentioned the purported love child. Despite all this become the religious right to back him because he feigned concerned about abortion. He knows everybody's witnesses and knows how to use them against themselves. Religious folk seem to love and forgive total losses. Donald Trump has never been sincere about anything except taking advantage of whatever position he is in to benefit himself.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> Even when you think Trump is telling the truth, even on those rare occasions, he is lying. He's not trustworthy. As many as eight women came forward and said they had abortions because he eschewed wearing condoms when they had sex. He said they didn't fit on his micropenis and even the thin ones reduced his enjoyment of sex. When asked about the abortions in 2016 interview Trump refused to answer the question. In 2019 Michael Cohen denied the existence of a trump love child even though Trump friendly American Media paid $15,000 to " catch and kill " a story about a former trump bodyguard Dino Sayjudin who mentioned the purported love child. Despite all this become the religious right to back him because he feigned concerned about abortion. He knows everybody's witnesses and knows how to use them against themselves. Religious folk seem to love and forgive total losses. Donald Trump has never been sincere about anything except taking advantage of whatever position he is in to benefit himself.


Any wealth he has is all stolen goods robbed from countless fraud victims.


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> We are a nation of laws.  “Common sense” is not admissible in a criminal case.


He’ll still have to prove the documents belong to him.  If he can’t, that’s theft of government property.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> There's no one in the Executive Branch that can tell the president what he can, and can't classify, or declassify.  Everyone in the Executive Branch answers to the president, not the other way around.


Very true
When Trump tells them to declassify something…..they do it

In this case, nothing was done
Trump must have “Thunk “ it


----------



## beautress

Mac1958 said:


> Prosecutors across the country are just hoping he keeps talking.


If they're not agreeing with his declassification, they need to be disbarred, sent back to lawyer school, and spanked with a wet noodle for being stupid.


----------



## rightwinger

beautress said:


> If they're not agreeing with his declassification, they need to be disbarred, sent back to lawyer school, and spanked with a wet noodle for being stupid.



Trump himself, will not take that Bullshit declassification story before a Judge


----------



## WorldWatcher

WW


----------



## Dagosa

the other mike said:


> Again no one is patting Putin on the back but they are not the USSR anymore nor are they a totalitarian people. The Russian people want to live in a Democratic Republic the same as us.....
> I think the US is playing both sides here or at least the globalists who are now in charge of our country since the stolen election.


The US is playing first if all, self defense. We learned the hard way in ww2 that allowing the expansion of fascist regimes is a threat to freedom everywhere.


----------



## Dagosa

rightwinger said:


> Trump himself, will not take that Bullshit declassification story before a Judge


But he will before Hannity in order to keep his MAGA crowd riled up. They’re so gullible. They’ll defend the Trump mind game like all his other BS.


----------



## Dagosa

the other mike said:


> Again no one is patting Putin on the back but they are not the USSR anymore nor are they a totalitarian people. The Russian people want to live in a Democratic Republic the same as us.....
> I think the US is playing both sides here or at least the globalists who are now in charge of our country since the stolen election.


Next, we’ll be claiming they have free and fair elections and Putin is a benevolent wizard. What stolen election ? Seriously, you buying that shit ? Trump administration was responsible. Are you claiming they are that incompetent they couldn’t get any evidence what so ever ? Hilarious. How many immigrants are you claiming now came accross the boarder by bus  to NH to illegally vote….one million ? All 20 k busses sneaked in NH and no one noticed.This is the BS the MAGA crowd buys. Do the math…..if you can.


----------



## Dagosa

the other mike said:


> I knew that Hillary Clinton was a war criminal and that Donald Trump was a seemingly unpredictable choice for president so I voted for Jill Stein in 2016 and then after the FBI scandal started emerging in 2017 and 2018 I did become a  Trump supporter.
> 
> Not that I really feel obligated to explain it to you but there you go what do you have to say to that


Really ? You’re a Trump supporter after he won and before he lost everything. Your support isn’t that effective. Since when did the iar-lunatic  in chief deserve your vote. Must be all that exposer to Fix News.


----------



## rightwinger

Dagosa said:


> But he will before Hannity in order to keep his MAGA crowd riled up. They’re so gullible. They’ll defend the Trump mind game like all his other BS.



I can’t believe Hannity took that “I can declassify something just by thinking” comment unchallenged


----------



## Mac1958

beautress said:


> If they're not agreeing with his declassification, they need to be disbarred, sent back to lawyer school, and spanked with a wet noodle for being stupid.


So you're an experienced attorney who knows more than federal prosecutors?

What is your background for this expertise?


----------



## Dagosa

rightwinger said:


> I can’t believe Hannity took that “I can declassify something just by thinking” comment unchallenged


It’s hard to believe any walking humanoid would give Trump the time of day. He serves a purpose for Fix News.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> Very true
> When Trump tells them to declassify something…..they do it
> 
> In this case, nothing was done
> Trump must have “Thunk “ it


If he said it's declassified, then it's declassified.  That's just how it works.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> Did he tell someone to drop it, or did he just think about it and BOOM the bomb dropped itself?


Since even a well versed in Theology { a Priest,Rabbi,Reverend }
   cannot say fer sure what determines a sin.The act or
  the thought or both.Legal-wise it's much simpler.     
   If someone repeatedly wishes ill-will and bad things on 
  another w/o actually doing any of those things,than yes that
   is a serious Venial sin.
    { Instructions for the Ignorant } 
    " Question : What kind of sins are the greatest " 
       Answer : Adultery,fornication,murder,theft,swearing,lying,
        covetousness,witchcraft,sedition,heresies or any of the like. "
         -- John Bunyan {1628-1688 } English writer,allegorist 
    So yes,Al Gore sinned when he created the bigger than Big
  lie of Global Warming!


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Stann said:


> The president is just a man, he's not a god. He's only human and capable of mistakes and corruption. We have three equal branches of government the judicial the executive and the legislative each have checks to keep the other in check. Sorry but you aren't being reasonable you're some kind of fanatic. There's no sense in talking to you. You probably didn't even read the regulations regarding the classification process. I'm tired of listening to you talk out of your ass. It just plain stinks.


That's right.  He isn't a god.  He's just the president.  But, there is no law, rule, regulation, etc. that says what a president can, or can't classify, or declassify.  No one in the Executive Branch has the authority to make rules governing the conduct of the president.  They work for him, not the other way around.

We have three co-equal branches of government.  Neither the Congress, nor the court can tell the president what he can classify, or what he can't declassify.

You fuckers are acting like fanatics.  You want Trump's rights flushed down the toilet.  Y'all are fucking nutjobs


----------



## Foolardi

Dagosa said:


> It’s hard to believe any walking humanoid would give Trump the time of day. He serves a purpose for Fix News.


How { and be specific } did Trump in any way do America and
   Americans BaD.You can't answer that.because there is no answer.
   That's the Answer.Therefore the hourly Lies to make Trump out as if
  some BAd Guy.Complete and utter use of Projection combined with
    Mass Formation Hypnosis.
   Same basic technique Hitler used against Jews.Where even Good
  Germans were made to surrender their better selves.


----------



## Foolardi

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> That's right.  He isn't a god.  He's just the president.  But, there is no law, rule, regulation, etc. that says what a president can, or can't classify, or declassify.  No one in the Executive Branch has the authority to make rules governing the conduct of the president.  They work for him, not the other way around.
> 
> We have three co-equal branches of government.  Neither the Congress, nor the court can tell the president what he can classify, or what he can't declassify.
> 
> You fuckers are acting like fanatics.  You want Trump's rights flushed down the toilet.  Y'all are fucking nutjobs


  To flesh that out all is needed is good examples.Like how we are lectured
 as to how good a candidate and person Stacy Abrams is.Where she actually
   said in seriousness that a 6 week old Fetus does not have a Heartbeat.
   That is the lengths to witch we are being cast these Witchcraft spells.
   A regression to the Middle ages and stuff personified in the Movie :
      - The Devils - { 1971 } and the abominable reign of the Red Robe
   or Cardinal Richelieu.


----------



## Delldude

rightwinger said:


> Trump will need someone to come forward and say……Trump told me to declassify all those documents and I didn’t do it


You mean toss someone under the bus like Hillary does so well?


----------



## rightwinger

Delldude said:


> You mean toss someone under the bus like Hillary does so well?



<sob> But…..but…..What about Hillary?


----------



## healthmyths

rightwinger said:


> Just like Trump lawyers refuse to claim in court that the election was stolen


So Trump hires lawyers to present stolen election cases BUT explain WHY these same lawyers THE REFUSE to claim what they filed cases about?
As normal makes NO SENSE what you suggest!


----------



## Delldude

bodecea said:


> And where's the declassification documentation?


No criminal charges.......no reason to prove.


----------



## rightwinger

healthmyths said:


> So Trump hires lawyers to present stolen election cases BUT explain WHY these same lawyers THE REFUSE to claim what they filed cases about?
> As normal makes NO SENSE what you suggest!



Trump has a difficult time hiring quality attorneys

1. He ruins their careers
2. He lies to them
3. He doesn’t follow legal advice
4. He doesn’t keep his mouth shut
5. He stiffs them on the bill


----------



## Delldude

rightwinger said:


> <sob> But…..but…..What about Hillary?


That was her forte.......


----------



## rightwinger

Delldude said:


> That was her forte.......



You bragging about Tina Forte?


----------



## Delldude

rightwinger said:


> Trump has a difficult time hiring quality attorneys
> 
> 1. He ruins their careers
> 2. He lies to them
> 3. He doesn’t follow legal advice
> 4. He doesn’t keep his mouth shut
> 5. He stiffs them on the bill


Just can't get him out of your head, can you?


----------



## Delldude

rightwinger said:


> You bragging about Tina Forte?


Tiny Farts?


----------



## rightwinger

Delldude said:


> Just can't get him out of your head, can you?



Ummm…if you look at the topic
The thread is about him

Why is Hannity featuring him in an interview if he is no longer relevant


----------



## Delldude

rightwinger said:


> Ummm…if you look at the topic
> The thread is about him
> 
> Why is Hannity featuring him in an interview if he is no longer relevant



TDS started the thread.

Hannity had Him on to induce massive TDS among the left. They have to watch.


----------



## the other mike

Dagosa said:


> Really ? You’re a Trump supporter after he won and before he lost everything. Your support isn’t that effective. Since when did the iar-lunatic  in chief deserve your vote. Must be all that exposer to Fix News.


Is there some point you're trying to make here ?


----------



## Delldude

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Trump declassifying top secret documents:


----------



## Captain Caveman

otto105 said:


> Yeah, and it will change in 45 days.


You guys have also said that everyday for over a decade too


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> If he said it's declassified, then it's declassified.  That's just how it works.



Afraid it is not so
Thinking doesn’t count
Saying it where nobody hears it does not count
Following up a Presidential order with proper paperwork and notification counts


----------



## tahuyaman

Stann said:


> You sound as crazy as Trump is.


How is that crazy?  Democrats abhor transparency in government. We are supposed to accept their actions without questions.


----------



## Delldude

rightwinger said:


> Afraid it is not so
> Thinking doesn’t count
> Saying it where nobody hears it does not count
> Following up a Presidential order with proper paperwork and notification counts


That's how great Trump is......He thinks....thats why the left hates Him so much because they don't know how to think..


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> Not interested in making your wager. But given there are a hundred documents he actually explain why he declassified them and who we spoke with to do so. It's going to be quite interesting what stories he's going to make up now. Each violation can be up to 10 years in prison, a minimum of $10,000 fine  and losing the ability to seek any public office ever again. If these acts are determined as treason then execution is on the table. I don't believe it'll get that bad, but none of it will be any good and although he's acting crazier than ever now he can't use Insanity as a defense.


Kind of odd that you think execution is on the table but you don't think he'll be indicted.

Maybe one if you will get a chance to run over him with your car?

Anyone else?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> I always forget to mention, even if he has documentation and did get them declassified, he still doesn't have the right to keep them. They are not his property.


So you'll wager that he'll be indicted for theft?


----------



## rightwinger

Delldude said:


> That's how great Trump is......He thinks....thats why the left hates Him so much because they don't know how to think..



Great news for Republican voters

You don’t have to actually pull the lever this year, you can just “think”about the candidate you want


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> He’ll still have to prove the documents belong to him.  If he can’t, that’s theft of government property.


So you'll wager he'll be indicted for theft?


----------



## Delldude

rightwinger said:


> Great news for Republican voters
> 
> You don’t have to actually pull the lever this year, you can just “think”about the candidate you want


We'll be utilizing astral projection to vote and remote viewers to catch the democrats trying to steal another election.


----------



## Dagosa

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> If he said it's declassified, then it's declassified.  That's just how it works.


I believe you have to actually be president. He isn’t. When he stole the docs they were marker classified. You don’t get to be president in your mind and be treated seriously.


----------



## Dagosa

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> He's just the president.





Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> That's right.  He isn't a god.  He's just the president.  But, there is no law, rule, regulation, etc. that says what a president can, or can't classify, or declassify.  No one in the Executive Branch has the authority to make rules governing the conduct of the president.  They work for him, not the other way around.
> 
> We have three co-equal branches of government.  Neither the Congress, nor the court can tell the president what he can classify, or what he can't declassify.
> 
> You fuckers are acting like fanatics.  You want Trump's rights flushed down the toilet.  Y'all are fucking nutjobs


Hey, he isn’t president. He no longer lives in the White House. Dah.


----------



## Dagosa

Delldude said:


> TDS started the thread.
> 
> Hannity had Him on to induce massive TDS among the left. They have to watch.


Sure, acting stupid works well as a campaign strategy.


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> So you'll wager he'll be indicted for theft?


It’d be easier to prove than espionage.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Dagosa said:


> Hey, he isn’t president. He no longer lives in the White House. Dah.


Why hasn't Trump been indicted?


----------



## Dagosa

Foolardi said:


> yes,Al Gore sinned when he created the bigger than Big
> lie of Global Warming!


Really ? So every university in the  world teaches sin ? 
Al is such a savant he made everyone in climate research believe in GW. Amazing powers Al  has. Trump never convinced anyone with any brains that he was smart.


----------



## Dagosa

Seymour Flops said:


> Why hasn't Trump been indicted?


Trump pled guilt to fraud……twice.


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> Why hasn't Trump been indicted?


He delayed everything with the Special Master ploy.


----------



## Dagosa

Seymour Flops said:


> Why hasn't Trump been indicted?


Huh…wait your turn.


----------



## Dagosa

konradv said:


> He delayed everything with the Special Master ploy.


The Jedi master is moving things along faster then before.


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> He delayed everything with the Special Master ploy.


So when will he be indicted?


----------



## konradv

Dagosa said:


> The Jedi master is moving things along faster then before.


I didn’t say it was a good ploy.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Dagosa said:


> Trump pled guilt to fraud……twice.


Lie.


----------



## Delldude

Dagosa said:


> I believe you have to actually be president. He isn’t. *When he stole the docs they were marker classified*. You don’t get to be president in your mind and be treated seriously.


And you know this, how?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Trump won't be indicted for theft or mishandling declassified documents.

The Clintons took hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of furniture, china, and art and when caught just had to return most of it.

Trump says he declassified the docs and there is no way to prove that he did not. If it turns out to be the Crossfire Hurricane binder, he declassified that in writing.

You got your raid and Melania's panties, but that's all it will amount to.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Dagosa said:


> Hey, he isn’t president. He no longer lives in the White House. Dah.


I wasn't referring to Trump, specifically.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Dagosa said:


> I believe you have to actually be president. He isn’t. When he stole the docs they were marker classified. You don’t get to be president in your mind and be treated seriously.


Actually, he was still president when he kept saying hose documents.  You do understand how our system of government works.  Right?


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Trump says he declassified the docs and there is no way to prove that he did not. I



Afraid there is

A document and the information it contains is classified until it is formally declassified.

Somebody claiming it is no longer Top Secret because…..The President told me so ……is not going to get you very far.

You had better have something in writing from the President providing what specific information is now declassified.

A broad….”All those documents over there are now declassified” does not cut it


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> Afraid there is
> 
> A document and the information it contains is classified until it is formally declassified.
> 
> Somebody claiming it is no longer Top Secret because…..The President told me so ……is not going to get you very far.
> 
> You had better have something in writing from the President providing what specific information is now declassified.
> 
> A broad….”All those documents over there are now declassified” does not cut it


Who gave Trump the document without recording the transaction.
Your logic sucks for a guy who worked as an "engineer".


----------



## rightwinger

Indeependent said:


> Who gave Trump the document without recording the transaction.
> Your logic sucks for a guy who worked as an "engineer".



I am damned sure whoever had custody of that Top Secret document formally recorded the change of possession


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> I am damned sure whoever had custody of that Top Secret document formally recorded the change of possession


I am damned sure they didn't ask for it back when he left the Oval Office.


----------



## rightwinger

Indeependent said:


> I am damned sure they didn't ask for it back when he left the Oval Office.



TOP SECRET Documents are like a Hot Potato

You pass off the document and have them sign for it. 
You then record who has possession 


It is now THEIR responsibility to protect it


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> TOP SECRET Documents are like a Hot Potato
> 
> You pass off the document and have them sign for it.
> You then record who has possession
> 
> 
> It is now THEIR responsibility to protect it


That is one of your most pathetic posts ever and that’s saying a lot for a liar such as yourself.


----------



## rightwinger

Indeependent said:


> That is one of your most pathetic posts ever and that’s saying a lot for a liar such as yourself.


You obviously are clueless as to how Classified documents are handled 

But it is cute the way you pretend you do


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> Trump won't be indicted for theft or mishandling declassified documents.
> 
> The Clintons took hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of furniture, china, and art and when caught just had to return most of it.
> 
> Trump says he declassified the docs and there is no way to prove that he did not. If it turns out to be the Crossfire Hurricane binder, he declassified that in writing.
> 
> You got your raid and Melania's panties, but that's all it will amount to.


They don’t have to prove that he did not declassify them.  The documents are so marked and that’s all that matters.  He needs to prove he had the right to take the documents.


----------



## Indeependent

rightwinger said:


> You obviously are clueless as to how Classified documents are handled
> 
> But it is cute the way you pretend you do


Schmuck…
I work with Classified Documents and you’re full of shit.
They are always to be returned.


----------



## rightwinger

Indeependent said:


> Schmuck…
> I work with Classified Documents and you’re full of shit.
> They are always to be returned.



Sure you do Skippy

Are they really classified or did you just “think” them classified?

If you really had clearance, you would not make such stupid statements


----------



## rightwinger

Indeependent said:


> I work with Classified Documents and you’re full of shit.
> They are always to be returned.


No they are not
Often they are destroyed 

In Trumps case, they requested they be returned. Trump lied and said he didn’t have them.

Hence the need for a search warrant


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Well make up your damn mind, you are all over the place.


One of your assigned responses not working out for you?


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> Afraid there is
> 
> A document and the information it contains is classified until it is formally declassified.
> 
> Somebody claiming it is no longer Top Secret because…..The President told me so ……is not going to get you very far.
> 
> *You had better have something in writing from the President providing what specific information is now declassified.*
> 
> A broad….”All those documents over there are now declassified” does not cut it


SM.


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> They don’t have to prove that he did not declassify them.  The documents are so marked and that’s all that matters.  He needs to prove he had the right to take the documents.


When does he need to prove that?  What's his deadline to prove it?


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> SM.


Trump is lying
Even his attorneys are not claiming his BS

I declassified is only the lie they are telling MAGA
And of course….You


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> When does he need to prove that?  What's his deadline to prove it?


At the trial, unless he decides to cut his losses and cop a plea.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> Trump is lying
> Even his attorneys are not claiming his BS
> 
> I declassified is only the lie they are telling MAGA
> And of course….You


SM.


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> At the trial, unless he decides to cut his losses and cop a plea.


So, you actually believe that he will be indicted for mishandling classified documents?  When?


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> So, you actually believe that he will be indicted for mishandling classified documents?  When?


Not mishandling, THEFT.  When?  Soon enough, if he quits sad delaying tactics that backfire, like the Special Master fiasco.


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> Not mishandling, THEFT.  When?  Soon enough, if he quits sad delaying tactics that backfire, like the Special Master fiasco.


What does theft have to do with classified? 

Whatever . . . 

Ok, so let's wager a week off the board on it.

If no indictment in six months from now, I win.  If he is indicted for THEFT, you win.


----------



## konradv

Seymour Flops said:


> What does theft have to do with classified?
> 
> Whatever . . .
> 
> Ok, so let's wager a week off the board on it.
> 
> If no indictment in six months from now, I win.  If he is indicted for THEFT, you win.


It’s theft regardless, classified just makes it much more serious.


----------



## Care4all

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> That's right.  He isn't a god.  He's just the president.  But, there is no law, rule, regulation, etc. that says what a president can, or can't classify, or declassify.  No one in the Executive Branch has the authority to make rules governing the conduct of the president.  They work for him, not the other way around.
> 
> We have three co-equal branches of government.  Neither the Congress, nor the court can tell the president what he can classify, or what he can't declassify.
> 
> You fuckers are acting like fanatics.  You want Trump's rights flushed down the toilet.  Y'all are fucking nutjobs


Wild Bill, that is simply NOT TRUE.

THERE IS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER, that the entire executive branch follows, for classification and declassification, even the president.

Unless Trump canceled the executive order and replaced it with his new mind over matter, declassification process, then the regulations created by president Nixon, and slightly modified by other presidents, the executive order, IS THE RULE OF LAW governing classification of National Security documents, by our government.





__





						Executive Order 11652—Classification and Declassification of National Security Information and Material | The American Presidency Project
					






					www.presidency.ucsb.edu


----------



## Seymour Flops

konradv said:


> It’s theft regardless, classified just makes it much more serious.


Yes, very.

So, you're good with the wager?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Care4all said:


> Wild Bill, that is simply NOT TRUE.
> 
> THERE IS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER, that the entire executive branch follows, for classification and declassification, even the president.
> 
> Unless Trump canceled the executive order and replaced it with his new mind over matter, declassification process, then the regulations created by president Nixon, and slightly modified by other presidents, the executive order, IS THE RULE OF LAW governing classification of National Security documents, by our government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Executive Order 11652—Classification and Declassification of National Security Information and Material | The American Presidency Project
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.presidency.ucsb.edu


And who issues executive orders??

Also, show us the EO that limits a president's authority to declassify documents.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> Afraid there is
> 
> A document and the information it contains is classified until it is formally declassified.
> 
> Somebody claiming it is no longer Top Secret because…..The President told me so ……is not going to get you very far.
> 
> You had better have something in writing from the President providing what specific information is now declassified.
> 
> A broad….”All those documents over there are now declassified” does not cut it


Describe the process of "formally" declassifying materials.


----------



## konradv

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> And who issues executive orders??
> 
> Also, show us the EO that limits a president's authority to declassify documents.


Whether there is one or not is irrelevant.  If the agencies affected by the change weren’t informed, then it never happened.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Describe the process of "formally" declassifying materials.


It is a complex process

Trump thinks he is only declassifying the documents he holds. No big deal

But you don’t declassify a document, you declassify the confidential information in that document. 
So you don’t only need to notify anyone who who holds the same document, but anyone who holds a document with the same information 


It is not something you can do just by “thinking” it


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> It is a complex process
> 
> Trump thinks he is only declassifying the documents he holds. No big deal
> 
> But you don’t declassify a document, you declassify the confidential information in that document.
> So you don’t only need to notify anyone who who holds the same document, but anyone who holds a document with the same information
> 
> 
> It is not something you can do just by “thinking” it


Complex?  Ok, explain.  Post a link that spells out the legal process.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Complex?  Ok, explain.  Post a link that spells out the legal process.



Not playing
The classification and declassification process is lengthy and contains many checks and balances
You will not read it anyway


----------



## Care4all

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Complex?  Ok, explain.  Post a link that spells out the legal process.







__





						Executive Order 11652—Classification and Declassification of National Security Information and Material | The American Presidency Project
					






					www.presidency.ucsb.edu


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Care4all said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Executive Order 11652—Classification and Declassification of National Security Information and Material | The American Presidency Project
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.presidency.ucsb.edu


You're behind the times...lol









						Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information
					






					obamawhitehouse.archives.gov


----------



## Dagosa

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Actually, he was still president when he kept saying hose documents.  You do understand how our system of government works.  Right?


He stole them. He has no rights when he’s not president to be in possession of those documents out side the govt domain. You have no point, just babble. When any govt official leaves his positions, his rights to those classified documents in his previous position cease to exist. Are you too ignorant to understand that ? I guess you were never in the military or worked in any govt agency


----------



## Care4all

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> And who issues executive orders??
> 
> Also, show us the EO that limits a president's authority to declassify documents.


Who said the president could not declassify or is limited to do such.

What we are saying, is that there's an executive order process to doing such...  There is no psychic powers that can declassify....

Once Trump declassifies National Security documents or contents of a document, then any one, you, or me, or the Russians or the Chinese or the Iranians can get freedom of information act requests, (FOIA) to get copies of those national security documents.....  Which can have serious national security consequences, and get people killed, and open our security threats to a colossal level.

It is not something any president, sane or demented, has ever done alone, or even contemplated doing alone, without consultation with those who classified the information at various security levels, to make certain it does not harm us by releasing the top secret, national security information to the world of enemies that we have.... Let alone to declassify hundreds of classified documents in one magic wand sweep, 7 days before his presidency ends, and he loses all security clearance, unless granted by the sitting president.

Are you really trying to argue him doing such a thing was good for the country, or something???

And then, he wrongfully took all the government's presidential records to Mara Lago Resort, which BY LAW these records had to be transferred to the National Archives from his offices before he exited the white house...with sole access upon request of the Archives by the president for 5 years....unless needed by an investigation by congress or the DOJ, if determined justified.

What is he trying to hide from us?

And lastly, why did he take marked classified documents, hundreds of them, which were not his presidential records, but National security involved documents, created by others, with him to Mara Lago???  What in tarnation would he need that information on our National Security for as a former president....?  Seriously???  What the hell????


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Care4all said:


> Who said the president could not declassify or is limited to do such.
> 
> What we are saying, is that there's an executive order process to doing such...  There is no psychic powers that can declassify....
> 
> Once Trump declassifies National Security documents or contents of a document, then any one, you, or me, or the Russians or the Chinese or the Iranians can get freedom of information act requests, (FOIA) to get copies of those national security documents.....  Which can have serious national security consequences, and get people killed, and open our security threats to a colossal level.
> 
> It is not something any president, sane or demented, has ever done alone, or even contemplated doing alone, without consultation with those who classified the information at various security levels, to make certain it does not harm us by releasing the top secret, national security information to the world of enemies that we have.... Let alone to declassify hundreds of classified documents in one magic wand sweep, 7 days before his presidency ends, and he loses all security clearance, unless granted by the sitting president.
> 
> Are you really trying to argue him doing such a thing was good for the country, or something???
> 
> And then, he wrongfully took all the government's presidential records to Mara Lago Resort, which BY LAW these records had to be transferred to the National Archives from his offices before he exited the white house...with sole access upon request of the Archives by the president for 5 years....unless needed by an investigation by congress or the DOJ, if determined justified.
> 
> What is he trying to hide from us?
> 
> And lastly, why did he take marked classified documents, hundreds of them, which were not his presidential records, but National security involved documents, created by others, with him to Mara Lago???  What in tarnation would he need that information on our National Security for as a former president....?  Seriously???  What the hell????


And you all have consistently failed to show the process that THE PRESIDENT MUST USE to declassify information.

His "thinking it" comment was hyperbole and you fuckers, as usual, completely missed it.


----------



## Care4all

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> You're behind the times...lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> obamawhitehouse.archives.gov


Yep, other presidents have modified it since Nixon created it, as I said.  But it has not changed much, from the last version, to what Nixon admin first created....the purpose, and classification levels are the same.

But most importantly, Trump did not do his own new replacement executive order on it, so the last E/O on it stands as law.

There is no executive order by him that states the president can declassify, without ever telling anyone, or just by thinking it...as he foolishly claims.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Care4all said:


> Yep, other presidents have modified it since Nixon created it, as I said.  But it has not changed much, from the last version, to what Nixon admin first created....the purpose, and classification levels are the same.
> 
> But most importantly, Trump did not do his own new replacement executive order on it, so the last E/O on it stands as law.
> 
> There is no executive order by him that states the president can declassify, without ever telling anyone, or just by thinking it...as he foolishly claims.


EO 13526 gives the president ultimate classification authority.  It also doesn't apply any declassification process to the president.


----------



## Care4all

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> And you all have consistently failed to show the process that THE PRESIDENT MUST USE to declassify information.
> 
> His "thinking it" comment was hyperbole and you fuckers, as usual, completely missed it.


The same process as anyone else in the executive order, silly one....  Go to the agency that created the marked classification and tell them his plans to declassify, hear them out if they have concerns, and then make his decision, and allow the agency of classification to protect their sources, by pulling out their agents that would be put in danger by the declassification, before the declassification takes place that would basically hand the documents over to our enemies, then the president signs the declassification order.


----------



## konradv

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> And you all have consistently failed to show the process that THE PRESIDENT MUST USE to declassify information.
> 
> His "thinking it" comment was hyperbole and you fuckers, as usual, completely missed it.


Fine, what’s he going to tell the judge?  They usually don’t go for trolling in the courtroom.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Care4all said:


> The same process as anyone else in the executive order, silly one....  Go to the agency that created the marked classification and tell them his plans to declassify, hear them out if they have concerns, and then make his decision, and allow the agency of classification to protect their sources, by pulling out their agents that would be put in danger by the declassification, before the declassification takes place that would basically hand the documents over to our enemies, then the president signs the declassification order.


No where does it say that the president is held to that standard.  Go ahead.  Give it up.  You ain't got shit on Trump, again.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

konradv said:


> Fine, what’s he going to tell the judge?  They usually don’t go for trolling in the courtroom.


Tell the judge to fuck off, because the judge has no authority over the president....lol


----------



## konradv

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Tell the judge to fuck off, because the judge has no authority over the president....lol


He isn’t the president and, yes, the judge does have the authority, regardless.


----------



## rightwinger

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> And you all have consistently failed to show the process that THE PRESIDENT MUST USE to declassify information.
> 
> His "thinking it" comment was hyperbole and you fuckers, as usual, completely missed it.


The President does not have any special process
If he decides to declassify information and release it to the world, he must use the existing declassification protocols to complete the process


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

rightwinger said:


> The President does not have any special process


Ok... motherfucker, there you go...lol.  Fuckin finally!!!


----------



## Foolardi

rightwinger said:


> <sob> But…..but…..What about Hillary?


 Um! ... She's Back.Worser than any new sequel of - Hellraiser - { 1987 }
   She even resembles a version of those hellbound characters.
   A Female styled version of both the lead and chattering Cenobites


----------



## Foolardi

rightwinger said:


> The President does not have any special process
> If he decides to declassify information and release it to the world, he must use the existing declassification protocols to complete the process


Where's yer authority.You have none.Nor do these drat Democrats.
   No time in America's history has one Party been so derelict in their
  sworn duty via their Oath of Office.
   That is why so many Dems seeking office or re-election are absent
  or refusing to debate their betters { GOP candidates }.
   It's similar to the old Mafia.


----------



## rightwinger

Foolardi said:


> Where's yer authority.You have none.Nor do these drat Democrats.
> No time in America's history has one Party been so derelict in their
> sworn duty via their Oath of Office.
> That is why so many Dems seeking office or re-election are absent
> or refusing to debate their betters { GOP candidates }.
> It's similar to the old Mafia.



I “think” I have authority


----------



## tahuyaman

rightwinger said:


> Afraid there is
> 
> A document and the information it contains is classified until it is formally declassified.
> 
> Somebody claiming it is no longer Top Secret because…..The President told me so ……is not going to get you very far.
> 
> You had better have something in writing from the President providing what specific information is now declassified.
> 
> A broad….”All those documents over there are now declassified” does not cut it


President’s have a very broad authority to declassify information.


----------



## tahuyaman

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> And you all have consistently failed to show the process that THE PRESIDENT MUST USE to declassify information.
> 
> His "thinking it" comment was hyperbole and you fuckers, as usual, completely missed it.


There is not a single process he must use.


----------



## rightwinger

tahuyaman said:


> President’s have a very broad authority to declassify information.


Yes they do

But they have to actually declassify it, not claim they did after being caught with TOP SECRET documents

That?
Oh…..I declassified that stuff years ago


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> I took a similar course in becoming a Trump supporter.
> 
> Aside from the incredibly partisan attacks on him from the so-called “justice” department, the man got results when he was president.  Turns out putting America first really is a good idea.  No one ever improved the quality of lives for Americans by trying to do something else.


All the lies and bullshit on him is just that. All those who have to extremify their arguments in am emo tirade in the endless quest for emotional validation, suck.


----------



## iceberg

Stann said:


> Unfortunately my family has had dealings with trump on two different occasions, both were bad experiences. My mother's cousins ( I believe that would make them first cousins once removed for me. ) were truck farmers in Southern New Jersey. They were caught up with his Atlantic City
> scandal when he bankruptured his own casino. They never fully recovered from the financial losses and I believe it led to their premature deaths. So I knew from the good girl what a horrible person he was. No one you would want for a later, no one you can trust, no one deserving of any type of respect or loyalty. Totally corrupt with a character that is unredeemable. That's somehow he keeps getting away with it. I believe he was right you could actually kill someone in the middle of New York City and walk away from it a free man. Today on his " truth social " ( bad joke if there ever was one. ) He said he was second only to Jesus. Get ready for and even bigger con.


And we should believe you, why?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> Unfortunately my family has had dealings with trump on two different occasions, both were bad experiences. My mother's cousins ( I believe that would make them first cousins once removed for me. ) were truck farmers in Southern New Jersey. They were caught up with his Atlantic City
> scandal when he bankruptured his own casino. They never fully recovered from the financial losses and I believe it led to their premature deaths. So I knew from the good girl what a horrible person he was. No one you would want for a later, no one you can trust, no one deserving of any type of respect or loyalty. Totally corrupt with a character that is unredeemable. That's somehow he keeps getting away with it. I believe he was right you could actually kill someone in the middle of New York City and walk away from it a free man. Today on his " truth social " ( bad joke if there ever was one. ) He said he was second only to Jesus. Get ready for and even bigger con.


Your mother's cousins are indeed your cousins once removed.  Their children would be your second cousins.

Sorry, but I have to consult with another poster.  Hey Golfing Gator , you call BS on this guy, or what?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> Even when you think Trump is telling the truth, even on those rare occasions, he is lying. He's not trustworthy. As many as eight women came forward and said they had abortions because he eschewed wearing condoms when they had sex. He said they didn't fit on his micropenis and even the thin ones reduced his enjoyment of sex. When asked about the abortions in 2016 interview Trump refused to answer the question. In 2019 Michael Cohen denied the existence of a trump love child even though Trump friendly American Media paid $15,000 to " catch and kill " a story about a former trump bodyguard Dino Sayjudin who mentioned the purported love child. *Despite all this become the religious right to back him because he feigned concerned about abortion. *He knows everybody's witnesses and knows how to use them against themselves. Religious folk seem to love and forgive total losses. Donald Trump has never been sincere about anything except taking advantage of whatever position he is in to benefit himself.


Every Republican president since the Roe v. Wade decision has spoken out against it.  Trump is the one who appointed justices who actually over-turned it.  

By doing that, he defeated the Democrats on the issue that they are most single-minded and fanatical about.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> And you all have consistently failed to show the process that THE PRESIDENT MUST USE to declassify information.
> 
> His "thinking it" comment was hyperbole and you fuckers, as usual, completely missed it.


Exactly.

If the president - any president, including Joe Biden - treats classified information as if it were unclassified, then it is in fact unclassified, because his action declassifies it.  If Obama whispers classified information to a foreign head of state, with a hot mic, that information is declassified, if only for the purpose of that conversation.  Obama could not be prosecuted for that.

The Sec State, the Speak House, the Pres pro Temp of the Senate, have no such power, but the president does.  

That's the kind of thing a typical Democrat cannot understand unless it is the MSM explaining it about Obama.  They understand classified cover sheets spread on the floor mean "Orange Man BAD," but nuance is hard for them.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Let me make sure I understand something before I start crowing:

All of the Democrats on this thread are convinced that 100% Trump broke the law, and that the DOJ/FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago was for the purpose of gathering evidence of that crime.  Some of you think his crime is theft, some that his crime is mishandling of classified information, and some that his crime is espionage.  Some think it some combination of those.

But you all are for. sure. that he committed a crime and that the raid collected irrefutable evidence of that crime.

However . . . 

None - which means "not one" - of  you is willing to wager just seven days off the board that he will be indicted in the next six months?


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Exactly.
> 
> If the president - any president, including Joe Biden - treats classified information as if it were unclassified, then it is in fact unclassified, because his action declassifies it.  If Obama whispers classified information to a foreign head of state, with a hot mic, that information is declassified, if only for the purpose of that conversation.  Obama could not be prosecuted for that.
> 
> The Sec State, the Speak House, the Pres pro Temp of the Senate, have no such power, but the president does.
> 
> That's the kind of thing a typical Democrat cannot understand unless it is the MSM explaining it about Obama.  They understand classified cover sheets spread on the floor mean "Orange Man BAD," but nuance is hard for them.


keep in mind these are the morons who said trump told people to drink bleach. they hear one thing and make it another.


----------



## Synthaholic




----------



## KissMy

Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and Paine warned us about those who claim the king is law, reminded us that in our land the law is king, and warned us about those whose search for total power would destroy the democratic checks and balances.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> Trump declassifying top secret documents:
> 
> View attachment 701346


A joke about a joke. Good one !


----------



## Stann

Synthaholic said:


>


Another joke about a joke. Thanks !


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> Every Republican president since the Roe v. Wade decision has spoken out against it.  Trump is the one who appointed justices who actually over-turned it.
> 
> By doing that, he defeated the Democrats on the issue that they are most single-minded and fanatical about.


through trickery and deciet using a minority opinion to get it done. he effectively destroyed the credoibility of the Supreme Court by appointing 3 judges who were willing to lie under oath ( commit perjury ) so now we have criminals on the bench.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Your mother's cousins are indeed your cousins once removed.  Their children would be your second cousins.
> 
> Sorry, but I have to consult with another poster.  Hey Golfing Gator , you call BS on this guy, or what?



It is a very convenient story which calls into play its truthfulness, that is for sure.   Probably not a true story.

But also not on the same level as the guy bragging about how much money he has with specific figures


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> By doing that, he defeated the Democrats on the issue that they are most single-minded and fanatical about.



Or did he energize them to the extent the "red wave" which should be a tidal wave in Nov will not come to pass and the Dems will pick up two senate seats due to it.


----------



## rightwinger

Stann said:


> A joke about a joke. Good one !


Reagan told jokes

That is a skill Trump lacks


----------



## Stann

rightwinger said:


> Reagan told jokes
> 
> That is a skill Trump lacks


trump tells jokes all the time, he just doesn't know it. Just yesterday he said he was second only to Jesus.


----------



## dblack

Stann said:


> trump tells jokes all the time, he just doesn't know it. Just yesterday he said he was second only to Jesus.


Trump second!?!  Who is this "Jesus" character, anyway? What are his ratings like?


----------



## Stann

dblack said:


> Trump second!?!  Who is this "Jesus" character, anyway? What are his ratings like?


A book that he is the star in half of it has been on the best sellers list since 1450.


----------



## rightwinger

Stann said:


> A book that he is the star in half of it has been on the best sellers list since 1450.


Jesus has more real estate than Trump, but no golf courses


----------



## Stann

rightwinger said:


> Jesus has more real estate than Trump, but no golf courses


Wasn't it St Andrews in Scotland where golf was invented by the monks ?


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Let me make sure I understand something before I start crowing:
> 
> All of the Democrats on this thread are convinced that 100% Trump broke the law, and that the DOJ/FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago was for the purpose of gathering evidence of that crime.  Some of you think his crime is theft, some that his crime is mishandling of classified information, and some that his crime is espionage.  Some think it some combination of those.
> 
> But you all are for. sure. that he committed a crime and that the raid collected irrefutable evidence of that crime.
> 
> However . . .
> 
> None - which means "not one" - of  you is willing to wager just seven days off the board that he will be indicted in the next six months?


Cause they talk shit but in the end know it's just shit. 

The question is, why do we reply so much to people we all know are full of shit?


----------



## Mac-7

I see that Golfing Gator ’s attempt to divert attention from the failed policies of joe biden is still active

Thanks in great part to lib policies by biden we face staggering inflation, food and energy shortages, not to mention crime and a broken border with mexico

But libs like Gator are still pushing Look-Over-There 

They should be ashamed


----------



## the other mike

How much would anyone want to bet that at least one of these guys is a member of the FISA Court?


----------



## Foolardi

iceberg said:


> And we should believe you, why?


Because somehwere,somehow along the line { Old Railway used to
  transport Valuable stolen art from the best European Museums }
   as in - The Train - { 1964 } Directed by John Frankenheimer and starring
   Burt Lancaster { confirmed Liberal }.
   Said art from French Museums being rushed along to Germany
  before the Nazi's get trapped as the Allied Forces are closing in.
   We can and should believe in the nobility of Lancaster as
   Paul Labiche who works undercover as part of the Resistance.
    Because all of Frances greatest paintings are on the line.
     Since the overtly cocky and proud Nazis appear to have it
      nailed.The Train is heavily armed by Nazis.
      I can believe in that Movie even though somewhat hyped.
      There was an Event in 1944 where a Paris Museum had valuable
   paintings looted by the occupying Nazis.
      Because it's a Belief worth trusting when Evil is overmatched by
     such good.even though just a single Person { Labiche }
     The movie is classic also because of the actor { Paul Scofield }
     a seldom used thespian but in every role is outstanding.
    As Nazi Colonel Franz Von Waldheim he is irreplaceable.


----------



## Foolardi

Mac-7 said:


> I see that Golfing Gator ’s attempt to divert attention from the failed policies of joe biden is still active
> 
> Thanks in great part to lib policies by biden we face staggering inflation, food and energy shortages, not to mention crime and a broken border with mexico
> 
> But libs like Gator are still pushing Look-Over-There
> 
> They should be ashamed


At this stage it is no longer a question of Failed Biden Policy's
   It's far more reaching.The guy is actually Demented!


----------



## Foolardi

the other mike said:


> How much would anyone want to bet that at least one of these guys is a member of the FISA Court?
> 
> View attachment 701701


Mad,giddy and Dazed.All are confused.Even Confucius would chime-in.
   Instead ... ' Have no friends not equal to yourself '.
    Try ... Have only friends on a level playing field with Lucifer.
   Or loosely ... It is better to have hated and lost than never to have 
       hated at all.
    Why waste Hate.


----------



## Stann

iceberg said:


> Cause they talk shit but in the end know it's just shit.
> 
> The question is, why do we reply so much to people we all know are full of shit?


Talk about shit, it's all about shit when you talk about trump, why would you expect anything else from that Creep.


----------



## iceberg

Mac-7 said:


> I see that Golfing Gator ’s attempt to divert attention from the failed policies of joe biden is still active
> 
> Thanks in great part to lib policies by biden we face staggering inflation, food and energy shortages, not to mention crime and a broken border with mexico
> 
> But libs like Gator are still pushing Look-Over-There
> 
> They should be ashamed


Yea, sir doosh a lot will rag on Trump for making a reference (much like the drink bleach bullshit) but is a church mouse on...









						Biden's policies will magically diminish hurricanes this year according to KJP
					

It is easy to suspect that Leftists believe in the magical power of words, intentions, and laws. They often make extravagant claims about how renaming something will change it fundamentally (e.g. chan...




					hotair.com
				












						Biden Repeats False Claim About AR-15 Bullet Velocity In Call For Ban | The Daily Wire
					






					www.dailywire.com
				




At most he will say "yea, stupid" 5hen BUT TRUMP SAID!!! "


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Or did he energize them to the extent the "red wave" which should be a tidal wave in Nov will not come to pass and the Dems will pick up two senate seats due to it.


The energized thing is possible. If only Dems were as dedicated to improving our lives as they are to killing the unborn.

But now they have to be open about it.  No more hiding behind a court ruling. They must openly advocate abortion to and through the moment of birth.


----------



## Mac-7

Foolardi said:


> At this stage it is no longer a question of Failed Biden Policy's
> It's far more reaching.The guy is actually Demented!


Yes

How remarkable that libs inside the white house in the prime of life who pull biden’s strings each day appear to have dementia also based on the lib policies they promote


----------



## playtime

donny's brain monkey is so busy these days.


----------



## iceberg

playtime said:


> donny's brain monkey is so busy these days.


Well I hope you get some free time soon.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Seymour Flops said:


> Exactly.
> 
> If the president - any president, including Joe Biden - treats classified information as if it were unclassified, then it is in fact unclassified, because his action declassifies it.  If Obama whispers classified information to a foreign head of state, with a hot mic, that information is declassified, if only for the purpose of that conversation.  Obama could not be prosecuted for that.
> 
> The Sec State, the Speak House, the Pres pro Temp of the Senate, have no such power, but the president does.
> 
> That's the kind of thing a typical Democrat cannot understand unless it is the MSM explaining it about Obama.  They understand classified cover sheets spread on the floor mean "Orange Man BAD," but nuance is hard for them.


They're so desperate to see Trump prosecuted, they'll say anything.

Next, they're going to claim Congress can pass a law governing how classified material is declassified.  That'll be bullshit, too, of course.


----------



## Mac-7

iceberg said:


> Yea, sir doosh a lot will rag on Trump for making a reference (much like the drink bleach bullshit) but is a church mouse on...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden's policies will magically diminish hurricanes this year according to KJP
> 
> 
> It is easy to suspect that Leftists believe in the magical power of words, intentions, and laws. They often make extravagant claims about how renaming something will change it fundamentally (e.g. chan...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hotair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden Repeats False Claim About AR-15 Bullet Velocity In Call For Ban | The Daily Wire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailywire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At most he will say "yea, stupid" 5hen BUT TRUMP SAID!!! "


What do we expect

Golfing Gator is a democrat partisan sailing under false colors


----------



## iceberg

Mac-7 said:


> What do we expect
> 
> Golfing Gator is a democrat partisan sailing under false colors


And he sure gets pissed and hands out narratives if you tell him that.


----------



## Mac-7

iceberg said:


> And he sure gets pissed and hands out narratives if you tell him that.


Yes he does

Gator has a very high opinion of himself


----------



## the other mike

Foolardi said:


> At this stage it is no longer a question of Failed Biden Policy's
> It's far more reaching.The guy is actually Demented!


I think Kamala (€¡a) Harris is 
spiking his diet cokes with smack.


----------



## playtime

iceberg said:


> Well I hope you get some free time soon.


_
& i hope you can come up with a retort that's little less impotent next time.  _


----------



## iceberg

playtime said:


> _& i hope you can come up with a retort that's little less impotent next time.  _


Well, when speaking to a limp dick...


----------



## Foolardi

Stann said:


> Talk about shit, it's all about shit when you talk about trump, why would you expect anything else from that Creep.


Because of the Many and vast Improvements he made to America
   and for Americans.Like some Slimy leftist could comprehend.
   Thanx for Confirming who and what you are.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> The energized thing is possible. If only Dems were as dedicated to improving our lives as they are to killing the unborn.
> 
> But now they have to be open about it.  No more hiding behind a court ruling. They must openly advocate abortion to and through the moment of birth.



It is far less about abortion itself than it is the attack on rights and freedoms.  Your beloved party has made it clear that marriage rights are next in line to be removed and after that they will go after birth control


----------



## playtime

iceberg said:


> Well, when speaking to a limp dick...



lol ... since i am a born & raised hetero female ... shirley you must mean someone else.

ya got anything else?


----------



## Foolardi

the other mike said:


> I think Kamala (€¡a) Harris is
> spiking his diet cokes with smack.


Or ... Drag Queen Storytime ... Anyone.
   It the left goes any further left,they will have totally
    got the goat of the Martians.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> It is far less about abortion itself than it is the attack on rights and freedoms.  Your beloved party has made it clear that marriage rights are next in line to be removed and after that they will go after birth control


This has nothing to do with the OP. 

hypocritical fuck.


----------



## dudmuck

playtime said:


> donny's brain monkey is so busy these days.


----------



## Faun

johngaltshrugged said:


> Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
> At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.
> 
> Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
> He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
> Did that hurt?



Nice to see Hillary didn't have any classified material on her email server.


----------



## Mac1958

rightwinger said:


> Trump has a difficult time hiring quality attorneys
> 1. He ruins their careers
> 2. He lies to them
> 3. He doesn’t follow legal advice
> 4. He doesn’t keep his mouth shut
> 5. He stiffs them on the bill


But _*aside*_ from that, he's the perfect client!


----------



## iceberg

Faun said:


> Nice to see Hillary didn't have any classified material on her email server.


How do you know?


----------



## Faun

iceberg said:


> How do you know?



Because Obama could have thought them declassified.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> It is far less about abortion itself than it is the attack on rights and freedoms.  Your beloved party has made it clear that marriage rights are next in line to be removed and after that they will go after birth control


So you are good or not good with aborting a baby at nine months?


----------



## iceberg

Faun said:


> Because Obama could have thought them declassified.


Show me where Trump said that's how he did it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> So you are good or not good with aborting a baby at nine months?



I am against abortions at any point in time. 

But there are far better ways to stop abortions than outlawing them.


----------



## Faun

iceberg said:


> Show me where Trump said that's how he did it.



Trump said presidents can declassify documents ‘by thinking about it.’


----------



## bravoactual

There is "*No Policy For Declassifying*" classified information.

So, all those security briefings I had to attend when I was stationed the Pentagon TeleCommunications Center never really happened.

My experience they are in fact very real.  You sit in room and you are lectured on the proper/improper storage and/or handling of Classified Information.

The following were Security Clearances I had.

*SPECAC* - Special Access - Up to and including Top Secret.

*SECRET* - Access Secret Informa;tion.

*Top Secret* - Access to Top Secret Classifed Information

*N.A.T.O.* - Access to N.A.T.O. level Classified Informaton

*C.E.N.T.O.* - Access to C.E.N.T.O. level Classified Information.

*S.E.A.T.O. *- Access to S.E.A.T.O. - Access to S.E.TO. Classified Information.

*ATOMAL* - Access to Atomic/Nuclear Classified Information.

*WHITEROCKET* - Access to White House level Classified Information.


I attended Security Briefing every 6-Months, reviewing proper procedures for the handlind, dissmenation and storage of classified information.

I worked on a daily basis with Classified Infomation.   I know of at least 7-Men and Women who were either court-martialed/convicted of mishandling Classified Information.  After each trial, I had to go into a secure room and be briefed once more on what would happen if I or another person mishandled or sold Classified Information.

Here are some examples of how to handle Classified Material.









						46 CFR § 503.59 - Safeguarding classified information.
					






					www.law.cornell.edu
				








__





						2054. Synopsis Of Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA)
					

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.




					www.justice.gov
				








__





						Federal Register :: Request Access
					





					www.ecfr.gov
				




Penalty For The Disclosure of Classified Information.









						18 U.S. Code § 798 -  Disclosure of classified information
					






					www.law.cornell.edu
				




Penalty For Unauthorized Removal and Retention of Classified Documents or Material.









						18 U.S. Code § 798 -  Disclosure of classified information
					






					www.law.cornell.edu
				




The member of this forum who posted there were NO policies or procedures for the handling and storage of Classified Information/Material was factually incorrect..i.e. A LIAR!!!


----------



## Golfing Gator

A question for the Trumpers.

If the POTUS was to think to himself..."there really is no reason for anything in this country to be classified"  Would everything then become declassified?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> A question for the Trumpers.
> 
> If the POTUS was to think to himself..."there really is no reason for anything in this country to be classified"  Would everything then become declassified?


Did he say that's how he did it or are you bleaching shit up as usual? 

And you totally ignore 2 stupid things I pointed out Biden said. 

Hypocritical fuck.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> I am against abortions at any point in time.
> 
> But there are far better ways to stop abortions than outlawing them.


I can dig it. That used to be my take.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> A question for the Trumpers.
> 
> If the POTUS was to think to himself..."there really is no reason for anything in this country to be classified"  Would everything then become declassified?


Of course it would. What part of "sole power" are you and your comrades having so much trouble with?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> I can dig it. That used to be my take.



Why did it change?


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Of course it would. What part of "sole power" are you and your comrades having so much trouble with?


any part he doesn't like and can rag on trump for.  

meanwhile biden says his economic policies weaken hurricanes and he doesn't say shit.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Of course it would. What part of "sole power" are you and your comrades having so much trouble with?



Thanks, I needed a good laugh this morning.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Why did it change?


how is this about trump and your OP?

things like this seem to get you selectively irate.


----------



## the other mike

Foolardi said:


> Or ... Drag Queen Storytime ... Anyone.
> It the left goes any further left,they will have totally
> got the goat of the Martians.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Oddly, you did not answer the question.
> 
> Why is that?


You never answer a lot of mine. 

Why is that?


----------



## Rambunctious

The president has total and full power to declassify.... no one sits above him with this duty.... so yes... he doesn't have to tell a soul when he declassifies and he can do so retroactively as well...


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Why did it change?


The reaction from the abortion lobby and it's followers to the leaked ruling made me realize that I was siding with fanatics who don't give a shot about freedom other than the freedom to kill babies.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> The reaction from the abortion lobby and it's followers to the leaked ruling made me realize that I was siding with fanatics who don't give a shot about freedom other than the freedom to kill babies.



Weird how people can see the same thing and come away with totally opposite views. 

Had Thomas not slipped in the part about marriage and birth control the response might have been a bit different.  But now your party has made it clear that there is nothing that is safe in this country.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Had Thomas not slipped in the part about marriage and birth control the response might have been a bit different.  But now your party has made it clear that there is nothing that is safe in this country.


Yes that really triggered the drama queens.

Unborn children are safer in some states. The idea that Clarence Thomas wants to ban inter-racial marriage is sillier than the whole coke can thing which I wouldn't have thought possible.

You want birth control in the constitution lobby for an amendment. Since no one wants to ban it I'm not sure the point but have fun with it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes that really triggered the drama queens.
> 
> Unborn children are safer in some states



But no safer in general, and perhaps even less so.



Seymour Flops said:


> The idea that Clarence Thomas wants to ban inter-racial marriage is sillier than the whole coke can thing which I wouldn't have thought possible.



Not talking about inter-racial marriage, but same sex marriage.  That he will attack because it does not impact his life at all.



Seymour Flops said:


> You want birth control in the constitution lobby for an amendment. Since no one wants to ban it I'm not sure the point but have fun with it.



It does not need to be in the constitution, and yes people from your beloved party have talked about getting the ruling on BC over turned.

You really should pay more attention to those you are so devoted to.


----------



## Foolardi

Faun said:


> Nice to see Hillary didn't have any classified material on her email server.


KInda hard to see what isn't there.Like using Bleachbit or smashing
  Blackberry cell phones.Butt .. You nude dat ... right.
   Like the way Hillary treated the parents of slain Benghazi
     Mission CIA Contractors Tyrone Woods.As the caskets arrived
  home for burial.
     Hillary was particularly dismissive  with the Father of Tyrone Woods.
    Charles Woods explained how Hillary lied again when there was
     a casket ceremony." She stood in front of my son's casket and blamed
   the rage directed at american embassies on a Video. "


----------



## LA RAM FAN

johngaltshrugged said:


> I'm sorry, are you actually comparing taking home the docs that prove the DNC, HRC, Obama & his WH & fed law enforcement illegally targeted DT & committed felony sedition in the act is the same as declassifying every single document in the US?
> Nice strawman you got going there but it's losing it's stuffing
> 
> View attachment 699760


Langley agent candyass excels in straw man arguments,


----------



## skews13

Wballz49 said:


> Declassification 101
> 
> 1. President or Congress ordering all JFK records declassified.  Memorandum sent to all Agencies with those records to start declassification process(blacking shit out).  Records released on websites and foia requests.
> 
> 2.President in National Security Scif briefing on North Korea they need somebody to get inside.  President calls Dennis Rodman in to help.  Rodman has no Security Clearance, President tells staff to let Rodman seeTop Secret  documents about what issue is.  President has declassified documents for Rodman to read while in this meeting.
> 
> Truman didn’t have Atomic Bomb papers at his house
> 
> Kennedy did not have Castro assassination papers at his house.
> 
> Clintons boy Burger stuffed classified documents in his pants while reviewing in National Archives Scif.  He gets caught and convicted of Felony.  Pardoned bu Bush🤦‍♂️
> 
> 
> Trumps issue is he took them home.  Its a closed and shut case.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> But no safer in general, and perhaps even less so.
> 
> 
> 
> Not talking about inter-racial marriage, but same sex marriage.  That he will attack because it does not impact his life at all.
> 
> 
> 
> It does not need to be in the constitution, and yes people from your beloved party have talked about getting the ruling on BC over turned.
> 
> You really should pay more attention to those you are so devoted to.


Our Country Thanks to One demented individual { Potus Joe }
   has never been this precariously in harms way.Having no idea'r as to
  just who Illegally filtered into the interior of our once stable heartlands.
    We can see the way Liberal cities are now shockingly unsafe in the extreme.
   Now even precious life { Fetus } are virtually taken for granted.
  That sort of thing was never even remotely allowed in our history.
   Pregnant women were honored and given the ultimate degree of respect.


----------



## Faun

Foolardi said:


> KInda hard to see what isn't there.Like using Bleachbit or smashing
> Blackberry cell phones.Butt .. You nude dat ... right.
> Like the way Hillary treated the parents of slain Benghazi
> Mission CIA Contractors Tyrone Woods.As the caskets arrived
> home for burial.
> Hillary was particularly dismissive  with the Father of Tyrone Woods.
> Charles Woods explained how Hillary lied again when there was
> a casket ceremony." She stood in front of my son's casket and blamed
> the rage directed at american embassies on a Video. "



Yes, I'm aware Hillary had all emails wiped from her server and devices so that they couldn't be hacked.

Still, thanks to Trump, there was no classified material on them.


----------



## MizMolly

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Trump is an idiot


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Seymour Flops said:


> You want birth control in the constitution lobby for an amendment.


Wrong.

In fact, the right to privacy has long been in the Constitution.

That the courts refuse to defend that right doesn’t change that fact.

And the people retain the right to recognize and defend the right to privacy through the political process.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Seymour Flops said:


> Unborn children are safer in some states.


Also wrong.

A zygote/embryo/fetus is not a ‘child.’

Indeed, no child who resides in a state that recognizes and defends the right to privacy is ‘in jeopardy.’

The truth is that women in ban states are now far less safe – both their health and lives imperiled by laws compelling women to give birth against their will.


----------



## Golfing Gator

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Also wrong.
> 
> A zygote/embryo/fetus is not a ‘child.’
> 
> Indeed, no child who resides in a state that recognizes and defends the right to privacy is ‘in jeopardy.’
> 
> The truth is that women in ban states are now far less safe – both their health and lives imperiled by laws compelling women to give birth against their will.



Well, I for one always viewed my children as such even in the womb.   From the moment we knew my wife was pregnant both times it was a child that was inside of her.  There truly is no other option.


----------



## Blaster

Golfing Gator said:


> Not talking about inter-racial marriage, but same sex marriage.  That he will attack because it does not impact his life at all.


Does it impact your life?


----------



## Blaster

MizMolly said:


> Trump is an idiot


Is that your final answer?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Blaster said:


> Does it impact your life?



I am one of those rare folks that can care about something that does not impact my life.    You might give it a try just once and see how it feels.  You will likely hate it, but who knows.

Now, as a libertarian it is my belief that the government should not be involved in marriage at all.  But as long as it is, it cannot discriminate on the basis of something as benign as the sex of the two adults involved (they should also not limit it to two adults, but that is a different topic).

I hold this same view on the use of pot.   I have no desire to use it myself, but if someone can sit in their living room and drink a 5th of Jack legally, they should be able to smoke a joint or eat a pot brownie legally if they want to do so.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> But no safer in general, and perhaps even less so.


Safer from being pulled apart alive.


Golfing Gator said:


> Not talking about inter-racial marriage, but same sex marriage.  That he will attack because it does not impact his life at all.


You mean like Obama and Clinton attacked same sex martiage? That's a perfect example of your party not having energy for improving the lives of Americans but being totally driven to protect the abortion industry.

Same sex marriage isn't in the constitution but Dems decided not to pass laws protecting it.


Golfing Gator said:


> It does not need to be in the constitution, and yes people from your beloved party have talked about getting the ruling on BC over turned.


A person from your beloved party signed the Defense of Marriage Act while president.  A person from your beloved party said that desegregating public schools would make them a racial jungle. Y'all liked that so much that you made him president too.


Golfing Gator said:


> You really should pay more attention to those you are so devoted to.


What senior politician said that?


----------



## Seymour Flops

bravoactual said:


> There is "*No Policy For Declassifying*" classified information.
> 
> So, all those security briefings I had to attend when I was stationed the Pentagon TeleCommunications Center never really happened.
> 
> My experience they are in fact very real.  You sit in room and you are lectured on the proper/improper storage and/or handling of Classified Information.
> 
> The following were Security Clearances I had.
> 
> *SPECAC* - Special Access - Up to and including Top Secret.
> 
> *SECRET* - Access Secret Informa;tion.
> 
> *Top Secret* - Access to Top Secret Classifed Information
> 
> *N.A.T.O.* - Access to N.A.T.O. level Classified Informaton
> 
> *C.E.N.T.O.* - Access to C.E.N.T.O. level Classified Information.
> 
> *S.E.A.T.O. *- Access to S.E.A.T.O. - Access to S.E.TO. Classified Information.
> 
> *ATOMAL* - Access to Atomic/Nuclear Classified Information.
> 
> *WHITEROCKET* - Access to White House level Classified Information.
> 
> 
> I attended Security Briefing every 6-Months, reviewing proper procedures for the handlind, dissmenation and storage of classified information.
> 
> I worked on a daily basis with Classified Infomation.   I know of at least 7-Men and Women who were either court-martialed/convicted of mishandling Classified Information.  After each trial, I had to go into a secure room and be briefed once more on what would happen if I or another person mishandled or sold Classified Information.
> 
> Here are some examples of how to handle Classified Material.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 46 CFR § 503.59 - Safeguarding classified information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.law.cornell.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2054. Synopsis Of Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA)
> 
> 
> This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justice.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Federal Register :: Request Access
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ecfr.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penalty For The Disclosure of Classified Information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 18 U.S. Code § 798 -  Disclosure of classified information
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.law.cornell.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penalty For Unauthorized Removal and Retention of Classified Documents or Material.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 18 U.S. Code § 798 -  Disclosure of classified information
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.law.cornell.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The member of this forum who posted there were NO policies or procedures for the handling and storage of Classified Information/Material was factually incorrect..i.e. A LIAR!!!


I notice you don't quote this supposed member who supposedly said that. Straw MAN it sounds like.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Safer from being pulled apart alive.



No they are not.  While they might be safer in one state nothing stops the mother from going to another state.  The number of abortions will not change by any significant measure. 



Seymour Flops said:


> You mean like Obama and Clinton attacked same sex martiage?



No, not at all.  Both support it.  Many people were once against it, myself included.  But some of us change over time, our views evolve.  



Seymour Flops said:


> Same sex marriage isn't in the constitution but Dems decided not to pass laws protecting it.



A lot of things are not in the Constitution. 



Seymour Flops said:


> A person from your beloved party signed the Defense of Marriage Act while president. A person from your beloved party said that desegregating public schools would make them a racial jungle. Y'all liked that so much that you made him president too.



I have no party, I have not voted for an R or a D since 1996.   Stop projecting.

And yes, they did those thing, but again, people change over time.  This is not a bad thing, despite you thinking it is.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Well, I for one always viewed my children as such even in the womb.   From the moment we knew my wife was pregnant both times it was a child that was inside of her.  There truly is no other option.


But sometimes in those last few days of pregnancy a birthing person exercises the woman's prerogative and changes her mind, darn it.

And no man can say she isn't allowed to stick a blade in that brat's neck and suck it's brains out because she and her doctor are the only ones who have a say in that decision.

So there!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> But sometimes in those last few days of pregnancy a birthing person exercises the woman's prerogative and changes her mind, darn it.
> 
> And no man can say she isn't allowed to stick a blade in that brat's neck and suck it's brains out because she and her doctor are the only ones who have a say in that decision.
> 
> So there!



In what state is that legal?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> No they are not.  While they might be safer in one state nothing stops the mother from going to another state.  The number of abortions will not change by any significant measure.
> 
> 
> 
> No, not at all.  Both support it.  Many people were once against it, myself included.  But some of us change over time, our views evolve.
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of things are not in the Constitution.
> 
> 
> 
> I have no party, I have not voted for an R or a D since 1996.   Stop projecting.
> 
> And yes, they did those thing, but again, people change over time.  This is not a bad thing, despite you thinking it is.


Democrats change with the political tide. They have no guiding principle other than unlimited abortion on demand.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> In what state is that legal?


Why?

Do you oppose that, I ask for the second time?

Answer that and I'll tell you which states have legal abortion until birth.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Do you oppose that, I ask for the second time?



I already answered that and you replied to my answer.  Now you pretend I did not.  You get more dishonest with each post.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> I already answered that and you replied to my answer.  Now you pretend I did not.  You get more dishonest with each post.


You answered with a dodge. The old "I persoally don't like abortion, but . . .
I'll try one more time: should abortion be legal until the moment of birth?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> You answered with a dodge. The old "I persoally don't like abortion, but . . ."



You asked my view of abortion, I gave it to you and you were satisfied with the answer then.

But now that you are getting your ass handed to you, it all changes. 




Seymour Flops said:


> I'll try one more time: should abortion be legal until the moment of birth?



No, it should not.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> You asked my view of abortion, I gave it to you and you were satisfied with the answer then.
> 
> But now that you are getting your ass handed to you, it all changes.


I forgot that you're a Jan Brady who can only go by "exact words, Gregg!"


Golfing Gator said:


> No, it should not.


Take it up with Oregon, Vermont, ant Califoria.

At what point is pulling an unborn child apart with no anesthetic no longer a constitutional right? Please include the exact words in the Constitution that tell you the answer.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> No, it should not.



Not sure how the thread about declassification via the mind morphed to an abortion argument but, when is the magic moment?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Couchpotato said:


> Not sure how the thread about declassification via the mind morphed to an abortion argument but, when is the magic moment?


The moment GG changes the subject.


----------



## Couchpotato

Seymour Flops said:


> The moment GG changes the subject.


I meant the moment a fetus apparently comes alive.  My follow up is different at that time about the fetus from 5 minutes prior to that.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Couchpotato said:


> I meant the moment a fetus apparently comes alive.  My follow up is different at that time about the fetus from 5 minutes prior to that.


Ah.

Excellent questions and the answers must be in the Constitution somewhere since GG is libertarian.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Seymour Flops said:


> Ah.
> 
> Excellent questions and the answers must be in the Constitution somewhere since GG is libertarian.


He must be thumbing through his pocket copy now.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> Not sure how the thread about declassification via the mind morphed to an abortion argument but, when is the magic moment?



When SeeMore started getting his ass handed to him in a basket.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> I forgot that you're a Jan Brady who can only go by "exact words, Gregg!"
> 
> Take it up with Oregon, Vermont, ant Califoria.
> 
> At what point is pulling an unborn child apart with no anesthetic no longer a constitutional right? Please include the exact words in the Constitution that tell you the answer.



Who ever said it was a constitutional right?

Did I ever say that?

Please include my exact words when you thought I said that


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Ah.
> 
> Excellent questions and the answers must be in the Constitution somewhere since GG is libertarian.




Libertarians are for the most part pro-choice, that whole liberty thing and not being told by the Govt what to do.

Libertarians also do not think the Constitution is the only source of our rights and freedoms, but instead it is a limit on what the Govt is allowed to do.  That you view it the opposite is very telling.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> He must be thumbing through his pocket copy now.



Nope, just packing a few more boxes.    Close in 7 days and 16 hours and move 22 hours after that.  Been packing boxes for weeks now.


----------



## dblack

Seymour Flops said:


> I forgot that you're a Jan Brady who can only go by "exact words, Gregg!"
> 
> Take it up with Oregon, Vermont, ant Califoria.
> 
> At what point is pulling an unborn child apart with no anesthetic no longer a constitutional right? Please include the exact words in the Constitution that tell you the answer.


Statists and authoritarians always go here. They want to pretend that the only rights protected by the Constitution are those listed in the Bill of Rights. Even though the Ninth Amendment explicitly states otherwise.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> When SeeMore started getting his ass handed to him in a basket.


I was talking about when a fetus magically becomes alive.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> I was talking about when a fetus magically becomes alive.



In my opinion there is no such moment.    With both of my children they were alive and my children from the second I knew my wife was pregnant.   I feel that way about every baby.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Couchpotato said:


> I was talking about when a fetus magically becomes alive.


He will never - ever- answer that I assure you.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> He will never - ever- answer that I assure you.



And one minute before you posted this shit I had already proven you wrong.

What fun we are having today.


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> The moment GG changes the subject.


And he yells at me for going off topic.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> In my opinion there is no such moment.    With both of my children they were alive and my children from the second I knew my wife was pregnant.   I feel that way about every baby.


So….abortion is murder in your mind?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> And one minute before you posted this shit I had already proven you wrong.
> 
> What fun we are having today.


Sorry,  Jan. The question you won't answer is:

 When does a woman lose her right to have a doctor kill her unborn child?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Who ever said it was a constitutional right?
> 
> Did I ever say that?
> 
> Please include my exact words when you thought I said that


So you agree with the justices who returned the issue to states?


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> And he yells at me for going off topic.


I can't blame him too much for changing the subject, and not just because he was losing the argument so badly. This topic is playing out, because the justice department isn't moving forward on any of this.

 If they had found anything to indict Trump on and they had the balls to indict him they would have done that already. Now they are just waiting for.. whatever it is they wait for when they prolong investigations that they know will lead to nothing.

They will never indict trump, and most of the TDS crowd have implicitly agreed by refusing a simple wager about it.


----------



## tahuyaman

rightwinger said:


> Yes they do
> 
> But they have to actually declassify it, not claim they did after being caught with TOP SECRET documents
> 
> That?
> Oh…..I declassified that stuff years ago


There is not a defined process they must follow.    You don’t know what you’re talking about.


----------



## Couchpotato

tahuyaman said:


> There is not a defined process they must follow.    You don’t know what you’re talking about.


Thats an ongoing issue with 80% of the people commenting on this issue.


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> I can't blame him too much for changing the subject, and not just because he was losing the argument so badly. This topic is playing out, because the justice department isn't moving forward on any of this.
> 
> If they had found anything to indict Trump on and they had the balls to indict him they would have done that already. Now they are just waiting for.. whatever it is they wait for when they prolong investigations that they know will lead to nothing.
> 
> They will never indict trump, and most of the TDS crowd have implicitly agreed by refusing a simple wager about it.


It's just funny how he does all the shit he blames others for but never sees it. 

Any discussion with him is dircular. He will demand you answer his question but never answer yours. 

On top of all that, he loves and misses me. 

It's so cute!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> I can't blame him too much for changing the subject, and not just because he was losing the argument so badly. This topic is playing out, because the justice department isn't moving forward on any of this.



Dude, you changed the subject, not me.  

You used to be a some what honest person on here, what has happened to you? 

Is your devotion to Trump so strong that it has changed you as a person?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Couchpotato said:


> Thats an ongoing issue with 80% of the people commenting on this issue.


Yes, it's very repetitive.  They claim there is a process for the president to follow, they are asked to show the process and they don't because there is no such process.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Dude, you changed the subject, not me.
> 
> You used to be a some what honest person on here, what has happened to you?
> 
> Is your devotion to Trump so strong that it has changed you as a person?


I don't remember doing that, but if you show me, I'll admit it.  I made an offhand comment that I used to take the libertarian stand on abortion in response to either you or some other poster saying that they took the libertarian stand, and you asked what changed it and turned it into an argument against pro-life but with no position of your own other than a baby is a living human, even in the womb, but the mom can still kill it because it's her right.

Anyway, the question was:

When does a woman lose her right to have a doctor kill her unborn child?


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> I don't remember doing that, but if you show me, I'll admit it.  I made an offhand comment that I used to take the libertarian stand on abortion in response to either you or some other poster saying that they took the libertarian stand, and you asked what changed it and turned it into an argument against pro-life but with no position of your own other than a baby is a living human, even in the womb, so long as it is Golfing Gator's baby
> 
> Anyway, the question was:
> 
> When does a woman lose her right to have a doctor kill her unborn child?


Good luck with this windmill, Don.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> .....but the mom can still kill it because it's her right.



That is the libertarian position.



Seymour Flops said:


> When does a woman lose her right to have a doctor kill her unborn child?



Whenever the law says she does.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> That is the libertarian position.
> 
> 
> 
> Whenever the law says she does.


The libertarian position is that we only have rights until the law says that we do not?  Oh-kaaaaay . . . 

If you're busy packing to GTFO of Florida ahead of Ian, don't let me distract you, please.  I wish you safety and good fortune, and a return to the board when you're more able to focus.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> That is the libertarian position.
> 
> 
> 
> Whenever the law says she does.


Libertarians don’t condone murder.  If you believe that child is alive then abortion is murder.  Murder of an innocent to boot


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> The libertarian position is that we only have rights until the law says that we do not? Oh-kaaaaay . . .



If you are just going to lie about waht I said, why even bother to post?   

The libertarian position is that the mother has the right to make the choice and it is none of the Govt's business. 



Seymour Flops said:


> If you're busy packing to GTFO of Florida ahead of Ian



I do not live in Florida you fucking moron. 



Seymour Flops said:


> I wish you safety and good fortune, and a return to the board when you're more able to focus.



Yes, run away and hide after getting your ass handed to you for the last few hours...good choice.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> Libertarians don’t condone murder.  If you believe that child is alive then abortion is murder.  Murder of an innocent to boot



Libertarians are by in large Pro-Choice.

Murder is a legal concept, an "unlawful killing".  If abortion is not illegal, then it is not murder.  

And oddly enough in all the states that are banning it after a point, none of them are making it murder either.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> If you are just going to lie about waht I said, why even bother to post?
> 
> The libertarian position is that the mother has the right to make the choice and it is none of the Govt's business.



 This was the exchange:






Passing a law against something that we have a right to do doesn't take away that right, it infringes on that right.




Golfing Gator said:


> I do not live in Florida you fucking moron.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, run away and hide after getting your ass handed to you for the last few hours...good choice.


I'm not running away.  I thought from your name and avatar that you might live in Florida, and I was concerned.

To get back to the questions that you're dodging:

At what point in the pregnancy can the state ban abortions without infringing on a woman's right to kill her baby?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Libertarians are by in large Pro-Choice.
> 
> Murder is a legal concept, an "unlawful killing".  If abortion is not illegal, then it is not murder.


It's actually pretty divided, between libertarians who believe that a woman has an absolute right to make decisions about her body and libertarians who believe that an unborn child is the littlest libertarian with the right to life.

You can tell when they are fake libertarians pretty easily.  If they claim that bodily autonomy is the basis of the right to abortion, but favor punishing people for not being vaccinated, or wearing a mask, they are fake libertarians.  If they claim that no human has the right to kill another human, except in self-defense, but they favor the death penalty, they are fake libertarians.

Unfortunately, many purported libertarians are of the fake variety, basically conservatives who want to smoke weed, or liberals who want to engage in risky behavior and have others pick up the tab for their lifestyle.


Golfing Gator said:


> And oddly enough in all the states that are banning it after a point, none of them are making it murder either.


I think a lot of states will end banning abortions up following something similar to the Swedish model of banning prostitution:  The customers are guiltly of a crime, but not the prostitutes.

Most women who "choose" abortions are actually pushed into it by their partner, according to peer-reviewed research.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> This was the exchange:



Yes, that was the exchange.  And I gave you the answer.  In this country that right ends when the law says it does.  Why is this confusing for you?



Seymour Flops said:


> Passing a law against something that we have a right to do doesn't take away that right, it infringes on that right.



Semantics. 



Seymour Flops said:


> To get back to the questions that you're dodging:
> 
> At what point in the pregnancy can the state ban abortions without infringing on a woman's right to kill her baby?



They will always infringe on the right to do so be it a 1 week or 9 months.   

I have answered the question every time you asked, why do you keep asking? 



Seymour Flops said:


> I'm not running away. I thought from your name and avatar that you might live in Florida, and I was concerned.



I told you why I was packing.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> It's actually pretty divided, between libertarians who believe that a woman has an absolute right to make decisions about her body and libertarians who believe that an unborn child is the littlest libertarian with the right to life.



Not really.  The official stance of the LP is that abortion is between the mother and her doctor. 



Seymour Flops said:


> You can tell when they are fake libertarians pretty easily. If they claim that bodily autonomy is the basis of the right to abortion, but favor punishing people for not being vaccinated, or wearing a mask, they are fake libertarians.



I agree. 



Seymour Flops said:


> If they claim that no human has the right to kill another human, except in self-defense, but they favor the death penalty, they are fake libertarians.



Yep.



Seymour Flops said:


> I think a lot of states will end banning abortions up following something similar to the Swedish model of banning prostitution: The customers are guiltly of a crime, but not the prostitutes.



Which is a total copout.  The people pushing the laws to ban abortion claim there is no difference between the baby in the womb and the one outside of it.   If they really believed this then the punishment would be the same for abortion as for if a mother paid someone to kill her 1 year old. 



Seymour Flops said:


> Most women who "choose" abortions are actually pushed into it by their partner, according to peer-reviewed research.



Which I am sure you have some links to to said peer-reviewed research


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Libertarians are by in large Pro-Choice.
> 
> Murder is a legal concept, an "unlawful killing".  If abortion is not illegal, then it is not murder.
> 
> And oddly enough in all the states that are banning it after a point, none of them are making it murder either.


You can’t believe that a fetus is a living human entity and also believe that abortion isn’t murder.   Not if you are being honest.  If that fetus is a living human entity is has as much right to life as every other person outside the womb.    Killing can’t be legal based on location.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes, that was the exchange.  And I gave you the answer.  In this country that right ends when the law says it does.  Why is this confusing for you?


You're using an incorrect definition of "rights."  

Rights either exists or they don't.  Laws either honor rights or they infringe on them.


Golfing Gator said:


> Semantics.
> 
> 
> 
> They will always infringe on the right to do so be it a 1 week or 9 months.
> 
> I have answered the question every time you asked, why do you keep asking?


So, you believe that there is a right to kill a baby moments before its birth, even though you believe that it is a living human being.

Why all the stalling to admit that?

When I held the same position on abortion, I would answer that immediately, even though it was a tought position to take, I called it self-defense.

I got tired of defending pulling a baby out of the birth canal by the feet, to maintain the fiction that he or she is still in the womb and then poking scissors through his/her skull to suck the brains out before completing the delivery.  



Golfing Gator said:


> I told you why I was packing.


You may well have, but I don't remember you telling me that.  I don't care why you're packing, as long as it isn't to get away from Hurricane Ian, and even then I only would care in that I would be concerned for you and hoping for the best.

By Allah!  I thought you were Grumpy in the morning and Dopey in the evening, but it seems  you can be both.


----------



## Stann

Foolardi said:


> Because of the Many and vast Improvements he made to America
> and for Americans.Like some Slimy leftist could comprehend.
> Thanx for Confirming who and what you are.


Yes I'm a fellow American, concerned about the extreme hatred and violence that trump has fostered in our country. Never have Americans hated other Americans as much, the only difference in the equation is trump showed up on the scene and fostered that hatred and grew it to an extraordinary level. Hatred and distrust that's trump's gift to America.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> You're using an incorrect definition of "rights."
> 
> Rights either exists or they don't. Laws either honor rights or they infringe on them.



When someone is no longer legally allowed to own a firearm, did they lose the right or was it infringed upon?



Seymour Flops said:


> So, you believe that there is a right to kill a baby moments before its birth, even though you believe that it is a living human being.
> 
> Why all the stalling to admit that?



Because I do not believe that.   I do not personally know any pro-choice people that believe that.  Very few people believe it has to be all or nothing.  That is a child like view...which is why you hold it. 



Seymour Flops said:


> When I held the same position on abortion, I would answer that immediately, even though it was a tought position to take, I called it self-defense.



Good for you, but you and I are really not that alike in anything.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> You can’t believe that a fetus is a living human entity and also believe that abortion isn’t murder.   Not if you are being honest.  If that fetus is a living human entity is has as much right to life as every other person outside the womb.    Killing can’t be legal based on location.



Once again, murder is defined as an unlawful killing of a human being.  

And yes, killing can be legal based on location.  If you are on my porch and I kill you I am guilty murder, if you take one step in my house and I kill you then I am good to go. 

So, tell me....why has not one single state that has limited abortion made it murder after said limit?


----------



## San Souci

Golfing Gator said:


> So, do you agree all the POTUS needs to do is think about it and POOF things are declassified?


If Donald Trump does something ,that makes it Legal. He was ordained by God to save the USA.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Not really.  The official stance of the LP is that abortion is between the mother and her doctor.


I forgot  you're a Party man first and foremost.


Golfing Gator said:


> Which is a total copout.  The people pushing the laws to ban abortion claim there is no difference between the baby in the womb and the one outside of it.   If they really believed this then the punishment would be the same for abortion as for if a mother paid someone to kill her 1 year old.


Yes, it is a cop out.  I politically support such a cop out as a way to save the lives of millions of what you acknowledge are living human beings.  Besides murder for hire by a prolific professional killer has always had stiffer penalties than murder by a person under durress or mental disorder.  Women who do not suffer from duress or mental disorder to not seek to kill their babies.


Golfing Gator said:


> Which I am sure you have some links to to said peer-reviewed research


Happy to:









						Risk of violence from the man involved in the pregnancy after receiving or being denied an abortion - BMC Medicine
					

Background Intimate partner violence is common among women having abortions, with between 6% and 22% reporting recent violence from an intimate partner. Concern about violence is a reason some pregnant women decide to terminate their pregnancies. Whether risk of violence decreases after having...




					bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com
				




This is not an anti-abortion article.  It's conclusion is basically that if women are not allowed to have abortions when their partners insist, they are more likely to experience violence.
Abstract​Background​Intimate partner violence is common among women having abortions, with between 6% and 22% reporting recent violence from an intimate partner. Concern about violence is a reason some pregnant women decide to terminate their pregnancies. Whether risk of violence decreases after having an abortion, remains unknown.
Methods​Data are from the Turnaway Study, a prospective cohort study of women seeking abortions at 30 facilities across the U.S. Participants included women who: presented just prior to a facility’s gestational age limit and received abortions (Near Limit Abortion Group, n = 452), presented just beyond the gestational limit and were denied abortions (Turnaways, n = 231), and received first trimester abortions (First Trimester Abortion Group, n = 273). Mixed effects logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between receiving versus being denied abortion and subsequent violence from the man involved in the pregnancy over 2.5 years.
Results​Physical violence decreased for Near Limits (adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 0.93 per month; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.90, 0.96), but not Turnaways who gave birth (_P_ < .05 versus Near Limits). The decrease for First Trimesters was similar to Near Limits (_P_ = .324). Psychological violence decreased for all groups (aOR, 0.97; CI 0.94, 1.00), with no differential change across groups.
Conclusions​Policies restricting abortion provision may result in more women being unable to terminate unwanted pregnancies, potentially keeping them in contact with violent partners, and putting women and their children at risk.









						The Role of Intimate Partners in Women's Reasons for Seeking Abortion
					

The literature on partners and abortion focuses on intimate partner violence (IPV) and risk for abortion, and partners' control of women's abortion de…




					www.sciencedirect.com
				




Abstract​Purpose​The literature on partners and abortion focuses on intimate partner violence (IPV) and risk for abortion, and partners' control of women's abortion decisions. This paper examines how partners figure in women's abortion decisions, and identifies factors associated with identifying partner as a reason (PAR) for abortion.
Methods​Baseline data were used from the Turnaway Study, a longitudinal study among women (n = 954) seeking abortion at 30 U.S. facilities between 2008 and 2010. Mixed methods were used. Data were analyzed using thematic coding and logistic regression.
Findings​Nearly one third of women reported PAR for abortion. Three most common partner-related reasons were poor relationships, partners unable/unwilling to support a baby, and partner characteristics that made them undesirable to have a baby with. Eight percent who mentioned PAR identified having abusive partners as a reason for abortion. One woman in this subgroup reported being pressured by her partner to seek abortion, whereas others in this subgroup sought abortion to end abusive relationships or to avoid bringing children into abusive relationships. Factors associated with identifying PAR for seeking abortion included race, education, partner's pregnancy intentions, relationship with man involved in the pregnancy, and experience of IPV.
Conclusion​Women make decisions to terminate pregnancies considering the quality of the relationship with and potential support they will receive from the man involved. Even women who report IPV, who may be vulnerable to coercion, report their motivation for the abortion is to end an abusive relationship, rather than coercion into abortion.







			https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/00016349709034906
		










						Intimate partner violence, abortion, and unintended pregnancy: Results from the WHO Multi-country Study on Women's Health and Domestic Violence
					

To explore how intimate partner violence (IPV) is associated with unintended pregnancy and abortion in primarily low- and middle-income countries.Popu…




					www.sciencedirect.com


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Once again, murder is defined as an unlawful killing of a human being.


That’s a cop out and you know it.    Its never legal to kill someone because their existence is inconvenient to you.  


Golfing Gator said:


> And yes, killing can be legal based on location.  If you are on my porch and I kill you I am guilty murder, if you take one step in my house and I kill you then I am good to go.



No you“re not.  It depends on why and how I ended up in your house.  If you invited me in you can’t legally shoot me unless I subsequently threaten you in some way.    You can’t invite someone over for dinner and get tired of them being there and  shoot them in the face. 


Golfing Gator said:


> So, tell me....why has not one single state that has limited abortion made it murder after said limit?



Cowardice.  A state not making something illegal is not proof that it shouldn’t be illegal.    Remind me how many years states  werent passing laws to make slavery illegal.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> I forgot you're a Party man first and foremost.



I have already told you this is an area I differ from the LP on.  Why must you always be so dishonest?  



Seymour Flops said:


> This is not an anti-abortion article. It's conclusion is basically that if women are not allowed to have abortions when their partners insist, they are more likely to experience violence.



You really suck at this math thing.  Hate to break it to you, but "6% to 22%" is not most.  Not even close to most.   Sort of the opposite of most even. 



Seymour Flops said:


> Conclusion​Women make decisions to terminate pregnancies considering the quality of the relationship with and potential support they will receive from the man involved. Even women who report IPV, who may be vulnerable to coercion, report their motivation for the abortion is to end an abusive relationship, rather than coercion into abortion.



This one really does not support your claim either, but it was a bit closer.

Keep on with the Google, I am sure you might find one eventually.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> That’s a cop out and you know it. Its never legal to kill someone because their existence is inconvenient to you.



Clearly the law does not agree with you.  Not sure what to tell you.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> When someone is no longer legally allowed to own a firearm, did they lose the right or was it infringed upon?


It was infringed on. 


Golfing Gator said:


> Because I do not believe that.   I do not personally know any pro-choice people that believe that.  Very few people believe it has to be all or nothing.  That is a child like view...which is why you hold it.


Then when do you draw the line, GG?



Golfing Gator said:


> Good for you, but you and I are really not that alike in anything.


No, becase I give straight answers.  

You know why I do that?  Not to make the questioner happy, but to allow my own opinions to be tested in the marketplace of ideas.  If I were to hide my positions, they would not be fairly tested.  

Plus a straight answer is a lot less work than all the verbal gymnastics you're doing to not answer when you draw the line.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Clearly the law does not agree with you.  Not sure what to tell you.


Huh that the same shit the pro slavery assholes said.  How did that work out?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Couchpotato said:


> No you“re not.  It depends on why and how I ended up in your house.  If you invited me in you can’t legally shoot me unless I subsequently threaten you in some way.    You can’t invite someone over for dinner and get tired of them being there and  shoot them in the face.


That is an excellent analogy to oppose the claim that abortion is about self-defense.


----------



## gtopa1

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump claims presidents can declassify documents ‘even by thinking about it’
> 
> 
> Former President Trump in a new interview asserted presidents don’t have to go through a formal process to declassify sensitive documents and can do so “even by thinking about it.” The former president’s comments came as he has repeatedly argued that he declassified secret and top-secret...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying, ‘It’s declassified.’ *Even by thinking about it.*”
> 
> So, do you all agree with this?  Is just the mere thought of something being declassified enough to make it so?


Proximal cause. Happens before the actual cause.

Greg


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> Clearly the law does not agree with you.  Not sure what to tell you.


You’re refusal to state your opinion on the matter and just hiding behind the “its the law“ bullshit tells me a lot.   I think you know it’s wrong but your too much of a coward to say so.   Thought you said you were a Marine.   Show some moral fucking courage, Devil.


----------



## Couchpotato

Seymour Flops said:


> That is an excellent analogy to oppose the claim that abortion is about self-defense.


The abortion debate isn’t about choice, though the pro abortion people loce that we’ve allowed them to frame it that way.      A fetus is either a life or it isn’t.  If it is abortion is murder and should not be legal at any point in the pregnancy. If it isn’t there’s no reason to restrict it in any way.    The middle grounders are just cowards.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> It was infringed on.



So, it is your view then that all of these laws are unconstitutional?  Laws that stop felons from legally owning a gun, that sort of thing?



Seymour Flops said:


> Then when do you draw the line, GG?



I draw the line at the baby never being aborted.  That is where my line is.  I would like for there to never be an unwanted pregnancy that ends in abortion. 



Seymour Flops said:


> No, becase I give straight answers.
> 
> You know why I do that? Not to make the questioner happy, but to allow my own opinions to be tested in the marketplace of ideas. If I were to hide my positions, they would not be fairly tested.
> 
> Plus a straight answer is a lot less work than all the verbal gymnastics you're doing to not answer when you draw the line.



I have given a straight answer to your every question.   The problem is that my answer does not fit in to one of the two boxes you think all answer have to fit in to, thus you think I am not being up front and honest.  

This is simply not the case, but your lack of intelligence is not really anything I can help you with.   The world is not black and white, this issue is not a simple as either the mother is guilty of murder or you can kill the baby in the womb up to the very second that it is about to exit the birth canal.   But you will never be able to grasp this, your own post have shown that you went from the second extreme to the first.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> Huh that the same shit the pro slavery assholes said.  How did that work out?



The laws were changed.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> You’re refusal to state your opinion on the matter and just hiding behind the “its the law“ bullshit tells me a lot.   I think you know it’s wrong but your too much of a coward to say so.   Thought you said you were a Marine.   Show some moral fucking courage, Devil.



I have stated my opinion.  Abortion is not murder.  How many more times do I need to say that.  Murder is a specific thing.

I am a Marine, there is no such thing as "were a Marine", either you are or you never were.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> That is an excellent analogy to oppose the claim that abortion is about self-defense.



Who has ever claimed that abortion is about self-defense?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> So, it is your view then that all of these laws are unconstitutional?  Laws that stop felons from legally owning a gun, that sort of thing?


Yes, they are.  Just as it would be unconstitutional to say that a felon can never make a speech in public, attend the church of their choice, or could be forced to quarter soldiers in their hime in peacetime.  Before you go crying about violent felons running the streets with firearms, my answer is that violent felons shouldn't be out on the streets in the first place. 

Keep them locked up.  The recidivism rate among released felons is over half in many states, and that only counts the ones who get caught again.  Releasing them, only to have them commit more crimes, finally get caught, and go through the expensive process of convicting them again saves no money at all, and submits honest citizens to more crime.

Save money by legalizing recreational drugs.  Watch the pharmacutical companies put the cartels out of business, and see how much that reduces violent crime.   

You really think those laws prevent felons from owning firearms, if they want them?  They went to prison because they don't care about the law.   Gun laws affect the law-abiding, not criminals. 



Golfing Gator said:


> I draw the line at the baby never being aborted.  That is where my line is.  I would like for there to never be an unwanted pregnancy that ends in abortion.


You don't draw the line there, you favor women having abortions anytime they want.  You do recognize that it is a baby being killed, which I give you props for compared to most of your sister Democrats.

But your so-called position is like saying that you oppose husbands killing their wives because you hope every marriage is a happy one, but not saying wife-killing should be against the law.


Golfing Gator said:


> I have given a straight answer to your every question.   The problem is that my answer does not fit in to one of the two boxes you think all answer have to fit in to, thus you think I am not being up front and honest.


No you are not.  You are making up what you think is a similar question and answering that one.


Golfing Gator said:


> This is simply not the case, but your lack of intelligence is not really anything I can help you with.   The world is not black and white, this issue is not a simple as either the mother is guilty of murder or you can kill the baby in the womb up to the very second that it is about to exit the birth canal.   But you will never be able to grasp this, your own post have shown that you went from the second extreme to the first.


You may well have a respectable position on abortion, even if I don't agree with it.  I can't tell if you do or not, since you won't state your position.

 You get angry when I ask if you favor legal abortion up to the moment of birth, but you won't say when it should be a crime to kill the baby, and when it should not be.  You won't say why a woman's right to abort supercedes a baby's right to live. 

As I've said to many posters many times, when your political outlook makes it that difficult to answer questions, you who should be questioning your political outlook, not getting angry at others for questioning it.


----------



## cnm

Seymour Flops said:


> You get angry when I ask if you favor legal abortion up to the moment of birth


Probably because it's such a bullshit question. I mean, why not a week before birth, or two weeks, or whatever? Where do you draw the line of your outrage?

Anyone who'd want to abort on a whim a week before birth would have got rid of it long before that.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes, they are. Just as it would be unconstitutional to say that a felon can never make a speech in public, attend the church of their choice, or could be forced to quarter soldiers in their hime in peacetime. Before you go crying about violent felons running the streets with firearms, my answer is that violent felons shouldn't be out on the streets in the first place.
> 
> Keep them locked up. The recidivism rate among released felons is over half in many states, and that only counts the ones who get caught again. Releasing them, only to have them commit more crimes, finally get caught, and go through the expensive process of convicting them again saves no money at all, and submits honest citizens to more crime.
> 
> Save money by legalizing recreational drugs. Watch the pharmacutical companies put the cartels out of business, and see how much that reduces violent crime.
> 
> You really think those laws prevent felons from owning firearms, if they want them? They went to prison because they don't care about the law. Gun laws affect the law-abiding, not criminals.



Holy crap, something we agree on.  Must be a cold day for old Satan. 



Seymour Flops said:


> You don't draw the line there, you favor women having abortions anytime they want.



Why must you lie when I just posted the opposite?  Is this really the best you can do?



Seymour Flops said:


> You may well have a respectable position on abortion, even if I don't agree with it. I can't tell if you do or not, since you won't state your position.



I have stated my position a dozen times in this thread alone.  You ignoring it does not change that fact. 



Seymour Flops said:


> You get angry when I ask if you favor legal abortion up to the moment of birth,



No, I get angry when you lie and say that is my position.   You can ask anything you like and I will never get mad 



Seymour Flops said:


> As I've said to many posters many times, when your political outlook makes it that difficult to answer questions, you who should be questioning your political outlook, not getting angry at others for questioning it.



And if that ever happens I will be sure to let you know.  The fact you do not like my answer does not mean I have not given them to you.


----------



## Golfing Gator

cnm said:


> Probably because it's such a bullshit question. I mean, why not a week before birth, or two weeks, or whatever?
> 
> Anyone who'd want to abort on a whim a week before birth would have got rid of it long before that.



He is an all or nothing person, one either has to want to execute abortionist and the mothers or they have to want to let the baby be aborted as it is being born.  He does not understand there are options outside of those two. 

Tis a hallmark of a hyper partisan drone.  Everything to them is black and white.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> The laws were changed.


So you'd be cool with slavery but for the law forbidding it? 


Golfing Gator said:


> I have stated my opinion.  Abortion is not murder.  How many more times do I need to say that.  Murder is a specific thing.


You are being a coward.   Either you believe abortion is morally ok or you dont.  Which is it?  Quit hiding behind "well it's the law".   



Golfing Gator said:


> I am a Marine, there is no such thing as "were a Marine", either you are or you never were.



And you know exactly what I meant.   Quit being pedantic.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Couchpotato said:


> So you'd be cool with slavery but for the law forbidding it?



I am not cool with abortion, why would you think I would be cool with slavery? 



Couchpotato said:


> You are being a coward. Either you believe abortion is morally ok or you dont. Which is it? Quit hiding behind "well it's the law".



I do not believe it is morally ok.  I have made that clear.   There are a lot of things I do not think are morally ok that I do not think should be made illegal.   Morals are a personal thing.


----------



## Seymour Flops

cnm said:


> Probably because it's such a bullshit question. I mean, why not a week before birth, or two weeks, or whatever? Where do you draw the line of your outrage?


That's exactly the point. Where does a person who supports legalized abortion but says not up to the moment of birth draw that line?

Not a question I invented. Plenty of people have answered it with no problem.  Libertarians rarely struggle to answer question but pseudo-libertarians often.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Who has ever claimed that abortion is about self-defense?


How else do you ethically  making legal the killing of a human being?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> How else do you ethically  making legal the killing of a human being?



By calling it abortion.  By questioning what is a "human being".  

It has never been about self defense, that is the first time I have ever seen anyone even try such a claim.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> He is an all or nothing person, one either has to want to execute abortionist and the mothers or they have to want to let the baby be aborted as it is being born.  He does not understand there are options outside of those two.
> 
> Tis a hallmark of a hyper partisan drone.  Everything to them is black and white.


This is funny as hell. You scream at people for being so binary, or black n white, yet you instantly push people to Trump worshipers or partisan drones if they disagree with you. 

Black and white is all you see no matter how you pretend otherwise.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> By calling it abortion.  By questioning what is a "human being".
> 
> It has never been about self defense, that is the first time I have ever seen anyone even try such a claim.


You really are a Democrat. Thinking that changing definitions changes ethics is classic for them.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> You really are a Democrat. Thinking that changing definitions changes ethics is classic for them.



I stated how it was done, which is what you asked.   

The rest is just your imagination.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> You really are a Democrat. Thinking that changing definitions changes ethics is classic for them.



How does one make getting paid to have sex ethically legal?

By calling it porn instead of prostitution.  

Our country does this sort of thing all the time.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> Well, I for one always viewed my children as such even in the womb.   From the moment we knew my wife was pregnant both times it was a child that was inside of her.  There truly is no other option.


Why haggle over near meaningless terms like Child.
   I suppose the term " childs play " can only apply to youngins.
    Or " second childhood " must refer to Seniors.
    Since when is the word " fetus " allowed to be Re-defined.
   Because some scumbag leftist control freaks deem it so.
  Not Hardly.Trump was spot on with his statement from the
  Hugh Hewitt interview regarding his possible " indictment ".
     " I don't think the people of the United States would
      stand for it. " { Mid September 2022 }


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> I stated how it was done, which is what you asked.
> 
> The rest is just your imagination.


then it seems to be a lot of imaginations. 

you ever stop and think "wow, many people seem to have the same problem with me" and think it's you, not them? anyone worth a damn will take that to self-reflect and see if we're really who we think we are based on what we are saying and projecting.

i know you think im in attack mode, but you seem to think everyone is attacking you when they simply disagree with your position. i can disagree with your position and not attack you. in fact, it's preferred. you just won't ever seem to allow that. i disagree, so i worship trump.

yet if i said you disagreed with me on biden so you must worship him, you'd scoff at the idea and run off on some tirade.

i can fight for rights trump (and we all have) without even liking trump. in fact, in my mind that's how it's supposed to work. hating someone, even an awful lot, doesn't take away their rights. but it does seem to blind people to that fact while they run roughshod over those they hate and declare it fair and just based on whatever emotional tie they pull out at the time.

being wrong about your views doesn't make someone a liar. i also have found you very "round about" in your answers. in this thread for example you demanded i give a straight answer - should there be a process for declassifying documents.

yes.

that was all i said. i didn't "however" it, i didn't "but here we have" it. yes. there should be. the question is, do we have one? was trump saying that's how he did it or there is no real process and even thinking about it COULD do it?

from what i can tell, it's door #2 alex, but you refuse to give him that leeway and want to dance around saying STUPID TRUMP because it seems to make you happy to do so. when countered with *the fact* that trump didn't say he did it this way, you simply cry TRUMP WORSHIPER!

there is simply zero middle ground here from you. 

you get all pissy if i go off topic but face it, for the last umpteen pages, you've not been on topic at all. you get all pissy if i dare to "whataboutism" but when you do it, its simply a part of normal conversation.

there is simply zero middle ground here from you.

you attack people, not problems. unfortunately that is all too common these days and even more unfortunately, no one seems to understand that. if you've made people the problem as to why things are so messed up, i suppose to a point that can be correct. but it's far more than that. its our own societies inability to find that middle ground and discuss issues and how we can collectively deal with them. i try to do that as others do but so many trolls make that impossible and any valid discussion turns into emotional validation, which seldom has anything to do with the topic itself.

just how you feel about it.

at last check, how you feel about something never fixes it. coming together for collective solutions, does. or at least it used to. now it seems people don't want things fixed because they want to bitch about them instead.

aka - this entire thread. you want to bitch at trump and pretend he said he mentally declassified things w/o telling anyone. IS THAT WHAT HE SAID HE DID HERE? not that i've ever seen. just that there really isn't a process out there.

however, we agree there should be. now, instead of digging into what that process could look like and how we resolve this so we FIX THE GLITCH, you just giggle at trump for 80+ pages of random bullshit and never once try to suggest you fix this vs bitch at it and anyone who dares to disagree with you.

again however, this is very common and reflective of our society at a whole. SCOTUS nominations - we banter back and forth about what is legal and isn't but we never stop and simply define when you can and can't make the nomination. 

we'd rather bitch about shit than fix it.

and that is our biggest problem today.

keep on ignoring me, dude. i get it. i could go on about how you're scared and get whooped in all these discussions but doing that to others has never been my goal. however, i do go there a lot it seems because that's the general tone of the board. Seymour Flops has been stellar in sticking to the topic but has faced the same issues i do.

your topics are based off emotions which change by the mood and you attack to defend these emotions. if you do it for another reason, please tell me.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> I stated how it was done, which is what you asked.
> 
> The rest is just your imagination.


We're Back to Obama styled Demogoguery.
   " Demogogues are the mob's lackey's." 
DIOGENES " The Cynic " { Greek Philosopher }


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> I stated how it was done, which is what you asked.
> 
> The rest is just your imagination.


I asked how you did it.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> How does one make getting paid to have sex ethically legal?
> 
> By calling it porn instead of prostitution.
> 
> Our country does this sort of thing all the time.


That's how we make it legal, not ethically legal.

If having sex for money is unethical then having sex in front of a camera for money is at least as unethical. So a law with that loophole would make sex for money legal but not ethical.

Killing a human being other than self defense doesn't become ethical because a court rules that it is legal if it is the killers own baby.

But you know that.  DNC or LP, you feel compelled to defend legalized baby killing.


----------



## Seymour Flops

iceberg said:


> then it seems to be a lot of imaginations.
> 
> you ever stop and think "wow, many people seem to have the same problem with me" and think it's you, not them? anyone worth a damn will take that to self-reflect and see if we're really who we think we are based on what we are saying and projecting.
> 
> i know you think im in attack mode, but you seem to think everyone is attacking you when they simply disagree with your position. i can disagree with your position and not attack you. in fact, it's preferred. you just won't ever seem to allow that. i disagree, so i worship trump.
> 
> yet if i said you disagreed with me on biden so you must worship him, you'd scoff at the idea and run off on some tirade.
> 
> i can fight for rights trump (and we all have) without even liking trump. in fact, in my mind that's how it's supposed to work. hating someone, even an awful lot, doesn't take away their rights. but it does seem to blind people to that fact while they run roughshod over those they hate and declare it fair and just based on whatever emotional tie they pull out at the time.
> 
> being wrong about your views doesn't make someone a liar. i also have found you very "round about" in your answers. in this thread for example you demanded i give a straight answer - should there be a process for declassifying documents.
> 
> yes.
> 
> that was all i said. i didn't "however" it, i didn't "but here we have" it. yes. there should be. the question is, do we have one? was trump saying that's how he did it or there is no real process and even thinking about it COULD do it?
> 
> from what i can tell, it's door #2 alex, but you refuse to give him that leeway and want to dance around saying STUPID TRUMP because it seems to make you happy to do so. when countered with *the fact* that trump didn't say he did it this way, you simply cry TRUMP WORSHIPER!
> 
> there is simply zero middle ground here from you.
> 
> you get all pissy if i go off topic but face it, for the last umpteen pages, you've not been on topic at all. you get all pissy if i dare to "whataboutism" but when you do it, its simply a part of normal conversation.
> 
> there is simply zero middle ground here from you.
> 
> you attack people, not problems. unfortunately that is all too common these days and even more unfortunately, no one seems to understand that. if you've made people the problem as to why things are so messed up, i suppose to a point that can be correct. but it's far more than that. its our own societies inability to find that middle ground and discuss issues and how we can collectively deal with them. i try to do that as others do but so many trolls make that impossible and any valid discussion turns into emotional validation, which seldom has anything to do with the topic itself.
> 
> just how you feel about it.
> 
> at last check, how you feel about something never fixes it. coming together for collective solutions, does. or at least it used to. now it seems people don't want things fixed because they want to bitch about them instead.
> 
> aka - this entire thread. you want to bitch at trump and pretend he said he mentally declassified things w/o telling anyone. IS THAT WHAT HE SAID HE DID HERE? not that i've ever seen. just that there really isn't a process out there.
> 
> however, we agree there should be. now, instead of digging into what that process could look like and how we resolve this so we FIX THE GLITCH, you just giggle at trump for 80+ pages of random bullshit and never once try to suggest you fix this vs bitch at it and anyone who dares to disagree with you.
> 
> again however, this is very common and reflective of our society at a whole. SCOTUS nominations - we banter back and forth about what is legal and isn't but we never stop and simply define when you can and can't make the nomination.
> 
> we'd rather bitch about shit than fix it.
> 
> and that is our biggest problem today.
> 
> keep on ignoring me, dude. i get it. i could go on about how you're scared and get whooped in all these discussions but doing that to others has never been my goal. however, i do go there a lot it seems because that's the general tone of the board. Seymour Flops has been stellar in sticking to the topic but has faced the same issues i do.
> 
> your topics are based off emotions which change by the mood and you attack to defend these emotions. if you do it for another reason, please tell me.


Well said. I would add that this applies to many posters on here not just GG.  Some are actually far worse so I don't bother with them.

I wouldn't have spent so much time on GG's verbal Chinese fire drill if not for his history of being reasonable and my hopes for the return of old Golfing Gator.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> That's how we make it legal, not ethically legal.
> 
> If having sex for money is unethical then having sex in front of a camera for money is at least as unethical. So a law with that loophole would make sex for money legal but not ethical.



What is and is not ethical is a rather subjective thing.  You may or may not find having sex for money to be ethical, while someone else might hold an opposite view.   Some think any sex outside of marriage is unethical, you may or may not agree.   Is either side wrong?  Are both sides right?  



Seymour Flops said:


> Killing a human being other than self defense doesn't become ethical because a court rules that it is legal if it is the killers own baby.



We make all sorts of ethical excused for killing another human being that is not covered by self-defense.   Is it ethical for a member of the military to kill during war?  Is it ethical for a police officer to kill in the line of duty even if it was not self-defense?



Seymour Flops said:


> But you know that. DNC or LP, you feel compelled to defend legalized baby killing.



I am not defending anything, this is just one more lie you have chosen to tell since your ass has been handed to you for two straight days.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> I wouldn't have spent so much time on GG's verbal Chinese fire drill if not for his history of being reasonable and my hopes for the return of old @Golfing Gator.



That is interesting as I feel the exact same way about you.  You were once an honest person, you in the past did not lie about what people said to try and win an argument.  Even on the DTT you were not that way.

I have hopes you will find your honesty and integrity again before you become too boring to deal with any longer.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> What is and is not ethical is a rather subjective thing.  You may or may not find having sex for money to be ethical, while someone else might hold an opposite view.   Some think any sex outside of marriage is unethical, you may or may not agree.   Is either side wrong?  Are both sides right?


That's why I said "if" sex for money is unethical. Point being that legalizing sex for money does not make sex for money ethical. Legalizing killing a living human does not make it ethical.


Golfing Gator said:


> We make all sorts of ethical excused for killing another human being that is not covered by self-defense.


We shouldn't.


Golfing Gator said:


> Is it ethical for a member of the military to kill during war?


Nope, unless it is a defensive war.


Golfing Gator said:


> Is it ethical for a police officer to kill in the line of duty even if it was not self-defense?


Nope, unless assisting an innocent person in defending themself.

Are you sure you're libertarian with the small "l"?  Those answers are NAP 101.


Golfing Gator said:


> I am not defending anything, this is just one more lie you have chosen to tell since your ass has been handed to you for two straight days.


Spiking the ball before crosding the goal line is classic Dem fallacy.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> That's why I said "if" sex for money is unethical. Point being that legalizing sex for money does not make sex for money ethical. Legalizing killing a living human does not make it ethical.



So what is the point.  If what is and is not ethical cannot be agreed upon, should it be used to set our laws?



Seymour Flops said:


> We shouldn't.



Says you.



Seymour Flops said:


> Nope, unless it is a defensive war.



So, you have a really low view of us Veterans, especially those that killed someone in combat.



Seymour Flops said:


> Spiking the ball before crosding the goal line is classic Dem fallacy.



I crossed the goal line 2 days ago, since then it has just been piling on as I wait for you to catch up.


----------



## MagicMike

BS Filter said:


> The fact that you keep hounding him and demonizing him proves you're scared to death he's gonna run for President.


If he is installed into power again it will be the death of our republic.
Vladimur's goal of making the U.S.A. into Russia's image through Donald Trump will finally be realized.

Yeah, that's pretty scary.


----------



## BS Filter

MagicMike said:


> If he is installed into power again it will be the death of our republic.
> Vladimur's goal of making the U.S.A. into Russia's image through Donald Trump will finally be realized.
> 
> Yeah, that's pretty scary.


That's hilarious.


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> Well said. I would add that this applies to many posters on here not just GG.  Some are actually far worse so I don't bother with them.
> 
> I wouldn't have spent so much time on GG's verbal Chinese fire drill if not for his history of being reasonable and my hopes for the return of old Golfing Gator.


Same reason I've kept trying. In the past he hasn't always been so emotionally involved in issues. He's just got a hate boner for Trump that he has to show off at the expense of objectivity. 

Push him to far he will simply ignore you. I can get wrapped up in proving his hypocrisy but it won't matter, he won't see it.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> That is interesting as I feel the exact same way about you.  You were once an honest person, you in the past did not lie about what people said to try and win an argument.  Even on the DTT you were not that way.
> 
> I have hopes you will find your honesty and integrity again before you become too boring to deal with any longer.


Why is it always someone else who changed and seldom ourselves?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> So what is the point.  If what is and is not ethical cannot be agreed upon, should it be used to set our laws?
> 
> 
> 
> Says you.
> 
> 
> 
> So, you have a really low view of us Veterans, especially those that killed someone in combat.
> 
> 
> 
> I crossed the goal line 2 days ago, since then it has just been piling on as I wait for you to catch up.


Not ethical and necessity can sometimes go hand in hand. 

You almost always skip the middle ground and continue to argue the extreme.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> So what is the point.  If what is and is not ethical cannot be agreed upon, should it be used to set our laws?


Of course.

Different people with different views negotiate what the laws should be based on their own version of ethics.

That's why we once had at least fifty different sets of abortion laws. Now we'll have that again.

Democrats are threatening to leave states that protect the unborn. I just hope they're not just saying that to get my hopes up.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> That's why we once had at least fifty different sets of abortion laws. Now we'll have that again.



Yes we will, and there will be no fewer than before because none of this addresses actually reducing them...it just moves where they are being done so people in some states can pat themselves on their back. 

But it really never has been about the baby in the womb, just about scoring a political victory.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes we will, and there will be no fewer than before because none of this addresses actually reducing them...it just moves where they are being done so people in some states can pat themselves on their back.
> 
> But it really never has been about the baby in the womb, just about scoring a political victory.


How is that any different than mocking what Trump says but no one else? And given you love to say how you kicked ass in an argument, aren't you after a victory as well vs resolving issues?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes we will, and there will be no fewer than before because none of this addresses actually reducing them...it just moves where they are being done so people in some states can pat themselves on their back.
> 
> But it really never has been about the baby in the womb, just about scoring a political victory.


Well that's democracy for you.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Well that's democracy for you.



Everyone gets to pretend they care about something without actually doing anything about it. 

Pretty much the hallmark of our country over the last few decades.


----------



## playtime

dudmuck said:


>



^^^  *THAT* ^^^ is exactly what was going on in his head when he blurted that out!


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Everyone gets to pretend they care about something without actually doing anything about it.
> 
> Pretty much the hallmark of our country over the last few decades.


It also gives us a chance to see what people do care about.

For example, a ten year old is handed over by her mother to her illegal alien boyfriend who rapes and impregnated her. To cover up the rape, mom drives her two hours to another state for an abortion by a doctor who covers up the age of the rapist.

She then brings the girl back to the rapist who the police are finally shamed into arresting over moms protestations that he did nothing wrong.

Mom still has her daughter and is presumably seeking a man who likes MILFS both and KILFS.

The Democrats reaction:  

"a TWO HOUR car ride?  That's outrageous!"


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> It also gives us a chance to see what people do care about.
> 
> For example, a ten year old is handed over by her mother to her illegal alien boyfriend who rapes and impregnated her. To cover up the rape, mom drives her two hours to another state for an abortion by a doctor who covers up the age of the rapist.
> 
> She then brings the girl back to the rapist who the police are finally shamed into arresting over moms protestations that he did nothing wrong.
> 
> Mom still has her daughter and is presumably seeking a man who likes MILFS both and KILFS.
> 
> The Democrats reaction:
> 
> "a TWO HOUR car ride?  That's outrageous!"



You have become the king of spin, is that what you traded your integrity for?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Well that's democracy for you.



A side effect of the abortion ruling.

Perhaps we will see a decrease in abortions, even if by accident.









						Teen interest in long-lasting birth control soars after Roe
					

Sixteen-year-old Adismarys Abreu had been discussing a long-lasting birth control implant with her mother for about a year as a potential solution to increasing menstrual pain.  Then Roe v. Wade was overturned, and Abreu joined the throng of teens rushing to their doctors as states began to ban...




					www.yahoo.com
				




_Experts say the U.S. Supreme Court’s June ruling appears to be accelerating a trend of increased birth control use among teens, including long-acting reversible forms like intrauterine devices and implants. Appointments have surged and Planned Parenthood has been flooded with questions as doctors report demand even among teens who aren’t sexually active._


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> You have become the king of spin, is that what you traded your integrity for?


How was what I said about the raped child spin? It is exactly what happened.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> A side effect of the abortion ruling.
> 
> Perhaps we will see a decrease in abortions, even if by accident.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Teen interest in long-lasting birth control soars after Roe
> 
> 
> Sixteen-year-old Adismarys Abreu had been discussing a long-lasting birth control implant with her mother for about a year as a potential solution to increasing menstrual pain.  Then Roe v. Wade was overturned, and Abreu joined the throng of teens rushing to their doctors as states began to ban...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Experts say the U.S. Supreme Court’s June ruling appears to be accelerating a trend of increased birth control use among teens, including long-acting reversible forms like intrauterine devices and implants. Appointments have surged and Planned Parenthood has been flooded with questions as doctors report demand even among teens who aren’t sexually active._


Sounds good to me.

My wife asked my daughter's doctor give her birth control pills to help clear acne and regulate her cycle.

Saved me the trouble of coming up with some other cockamamie reason and sounding like dumb dad.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> How was what I said about the raped child spin? It is exactly what happened.



It is exactly how it was related to you by OAAN, that much is true.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Sounds good to me.
> 
> My wife asked my daughter's doctor give her birth control pills to help clear acne and regulate her cycle.
> 
> Saved me the trouble of coming up with some other cockamamie reason and sounding like dumb dad.



Best to get them now before the GOP takes over more states and works to limit access to such things.


----------



## ClaireH

Seymour Flops said:


> Anyone offering a wager about whether Trump gets indicted for any crime having to do with classified documents?


I’ll go with zippo. Is that an acceptable wager Seymour? Biden’s handlers would’ve used their fastest tap shoes possible to produce any evidence by now …one of those “accidental leaks” to the media they have a problem with in the White House.


----------



## ClaireH

Dagosa- I’m also a Trump supporter who did not vote for him the first time around, but soon after Trump was in office he proved himself to be the best candidate who ran, by far.

Trump on paper reveals major accomplishments, like it or not, but don’t worry….I’m here to influence relatively unbiased readers not partisans.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> It is exactly how it was related to you by OAAN, that much is true.


and here we go - attack the source because you can't face the problem. a different point of view must be wrong, you just have to scream at enough shit to find it.

the gator way.


----------



## ClaireH

rightwinger said:


> Great news for Republican voters
> 
> You don’t have to actually pull the lever this year, you can just “think”about the candidate you want


Naww, tell the truth for once RW. Your premise reflects too much lazy-itis that’s running amok these days. Republicans, in general, support individualism and doing one’s best in life without stepping on the rights of others in the process.

You know exactly which subset of the US populace supports lazy-itis shortcuts, and it’s not in the mixed middle nor on the right. Leftists are motivated by looking for short cuts and waste big money in the process, and if shortcuts wind up killing a few hundred thousand of their voters do they care when it’s easy to replace those voters? Not in the least. After all, the motto “ the ends justify the means” also comes from the left- not the middle, not the right.

I will give you 3.5 points for a decent joke RW, you just made it about the wrong party.


----------



## rightwinger

ClaireH said:


> Naww, tell the truth for once RW. Your premise reflects too much lazy-itis that’s running amok these days. Republicans, in general, support individualism and doing one’s best in life without stepping on the rights of others in the process.
> 
> You know exactly which subset of the US populace supports lazy-itis shortcuts, and it’s not in the mixed middle nor on the right. Leftists are motivated by looking for short cuts and waste big money in the process, and if shortcuts wind up killing a few hundred thousand of their voters do they care when it’s easy to replace those voters? Not in the least. After all, the motto “ the ends justify the means” also comes from the left- not the middle, not the right.
> 
> I will give you 3.5 points for a decent joke RW, you just made it about the wrong party.


nice try….

But the reality is that Democrats look out for the well being (General Welfare) of We the People. We have the legislative record to show it.

Republicans look out for the well being of the wealthy.  They have the legislative record to show it.


----------



## Dagosa

iceberg said:


> and here we go - attack the source because you can't face the problem. a different point of view must be wrong, you just have to scream at enough shit to find it.
> 
> the gator way.





ClaireH said:


> Dagosa- I’m also a Trump supporter who did not vote for him the first time around, but soon after Trump was in office he proved himself to be the best candidate who ran, by far.
> 
> Trump on paper reveals major accomplishments, like it or not, but don’t worry….I’m here to influence relatively unbiased readers not partisans.


Really ?
Now that Trump has lost all his competent lawyers and his staff is testifying against him, Trump has picked up the QAnon crowd.

Tell us your not a QAnon member/advocate. Your post is hilarious. Your should go into stand up at a Russian nightclub.


----------



## cnm

Seymour Flops said:


> That's exactly the point. Where does a person who supports legalized abortion but says not up to the moment of birth draw that line?


It's a bullshit question, as is the straw man you create there. It is a decision for the medical team and the mother. If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. But stay out of the room with the patient and her doctors.


----------



## Golfing Gator

ClaireH said:


> Republicans, in general, support individualism and doing one’s best in life without stepping on the rights of others in the process.



80 or so years ago that might have been true.

Not at all true of today's Repubs


----------



## ClaireH

rightwinger said:


> nice try….
> 
> But the reality is that Democrats look out for the well being (General Welfare) of We the People. We have the legislative record to show it.
> 
> Republicans look out for the well being of the wealthy.  They have the legislative record to show it.


Your comments regarding the Democrat party do not reflect the current Democrats in charge. The Democrat party has absolutely evolved further left and most know it. Many traditional Democrats understand the distinction, but human nature of loyalty has many continuing to defend a once beloved party that looks very different now.

Read about what it means to be a traditional Democrat and we will find some agreement with your comments, but certainly not the subset that is in control currently with their demands for repayment for their votes.


----------



## ClaireH

Golfing Gator said:


> 80 or so years ago that might have been true.
> 
> Not at all true of today's Repubs


Lol 80 years ago. I’m just a little over half that age and your comment is bogus.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> It is exactly how it was related to you by OAAN, that much is true.


Tell me which facts are wrong, because they were related to me by OAAN, whatever that is.



Golfing Gator said:


> Best to get them now before the GOP takes over more states and works to limit access to such things.


A very realistic concern, I'm sure. 

Except you never did get around to naming:



> people from your beloved party have talked about getting the ruling on BC over turned.


Post # 1,006 of this aborted thread.



cnm said:


> It's a bullshit question, as is the straw man you create there. It is a decision for the medical team and the mother. If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. But stay out of the room with the patient and her doctors.


So, if the medical team and the mother decide on an abortion as the contractions begin, that's nobody's business?

GG, feel free to answer that one as well as cnm.


----------



## Golfing Gator

ClaireH said:


> Lol 80 years ago. I’m just a little over half that age and your comment is bogus.



Nope.  While perhaps you people that vote for the Repubs might  support individualism and doing one’s best in life without stepping on the rights of others....the people you vote for do not.  

They tell you they are going to, then don't do it, because they know you will vote for them anyhow


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> A very realistic concern, I'm sure.
> 
> Except you never did get around to naming:











						Some States Already Are Targeting Birth Control
					

Republican lawmakers in a handful of states have attacked funding for IUDs and Plan B.




					www.pewtrusts.org
				












						Texas Republicans in Congress vote against bill to protect right to contraception
					

The House passed the measure, but it will have a harder time getting through the evenly divided Senate.




					www.texastribune.org
				




_The bill, which faces far more hurdles passing through the Senate, largely responds to U.S. Supreme Court Justice *Clarence Thomas’ recent opinion casting doubt on past rulings guaranteeing legal protections for contraceptives.* _


----------



## Dagosa

ClaireH said:


> Your comments regarding the Democrat party do not reflect the current Democrats in charge. The Democrat party has absolutely evolved further left and most know it. Many traditional Democrats understand the distinction, but human nature of loyalty has many continuing to defend a once beloved party that looks very different now.
> 
> Read about what it means to be a traditional Democrat and we will find some agreement with your comments, but certainly not the subset that is in control currently with their demands for repayment for their votes.


Crappolla.
the most devout progressive supports programs  that are favored by a MAJORITY of Americans. The so called far left are more mainstream then repugnants and even moderate liberals. Medicare for all, free college education….all supported by majority








						Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college
					

From government-mandated paid maternity leave to tuition free college, the CNBC All-America Economic Survey reveals a surprising American appetite for some very progressive policies.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## bravoactual

The Traitor Keystone Cops (read a lawyers) have until Friday to present evidence that the F.B.I. planted evidence at Shit-A-Lago to frame the Traitor.

I find that as likely as the Great Pumpkin landing in Linus Van Pelt's, "*Sincere Pumpkin Patch*".


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Some States Already Are Targeting Birth Control
> 
> 
> Republican lawmakers in a handful of states have attacked funding for IUDs and Plan B.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pewtrusts.org


"A handful of states" huh?  Wow!

I don't know if you read that article.  It seems not.  

They are not going after all birth control even in that "handful of states."  Republicans in Missouri are trying to cut state funding for the morning after pill which is the earliest form of abortion.  Not trying to ban it, not trying to put doctors in jail for prescribing it.  Just not wanting to fund it.  

Unlike yourself, those lawmakers know where they draw the line.  At the moment of conception, the time that science tells us a new human being is formed.

The other states mentioned were Idaho and Louisiana.  I'll let you explain what the Repubicans there are doing that offends you.


Golfing Gator said:


> Texas Republicans in Congress vote against bill to protect right to contraception
> 
> 
> The House passed the measure, but it will have a harder time getting through the evenly divided Senate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.texastribune.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The bill, which faces far more hurdles passing through the Senate, largely responds to U.S. Supreme Court Justice *Clarence Thomas’ recent opinion casting doubt on past rulings guaranteeing legal protections for contraceptives.* _


So Republicans did not vote for a Democratic bill?  Shouldn't that have been posted in breaking news?


----------



## MagicMike

BS Filter said:


> That's hilarious.


Why do you hate your country?

Why do you think it is "hilarious" (your word) that the Kremlin finally achieves it's goal of destroying America from within through Donald Trump?


----------



## ClaireH

Dagosa said:


> Crappolla.
> the most devout progressive supports programs  that are favored by a MAJORITY of Americans. The so called far left are more mainstream then repugnants and even moderate liberals. Medicare for all, free college education….all supported by majority
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college
> 
> 
> From government-mandated paid maternity leave to tuition free college, the CNBC All-America Economic Survey reveals a surprising American appetite for some very progressive policies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


Are you trying to err…encourage me to laugh at your source? Come on, how leftist of you…CNBC. The validity of
a “CNBC All American Poll” is about as worthy of consideration as one accepts it as being: rated far left bias, rated less than par for accuracy due to that political bias. To be fair, I haven’t checked the rating within the past couple of months to see how the most used media bias rating companies rate that org. Last I checked- it was exactly how I described- left bias with lower rating for accuracy due to political bias. Come up with something valid to have an honest discussion.

Hey, wasn’t CNBC that the same outfit that had Hillary winning by a landslide in 2016 following their bogus polls prior to the election and also using exit poll info? Lol Next….


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> I am not cool with abortion, why would you think I would be cool with slavery?


Well your response to abortion being immoral in your view is you're "ok" with other people participating in it since it's legal indicates that while you might not personally own slaves were it legal you would be fine with other people doing it since morals are a personal thing, right? 



Golfing Gator said:


> I do not believe it is morally ok.  I have made that clear.   There are a lot of things I do not think are morally ok that I do not think should be made illegal.   Morals are a personal thing.


Where do think our laws come from?   There are reflection on our society's morals.


----------



## themirrorthief

iceberg said:


> No I don't think it should be that easy.
> 
> But if what he, had was raid worthy, why did they leave in June without taking any?


biden can shake hands with the invisible man


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> "A handful of states" huh?  Wow!
> 
> I don't know if you read that article.  It seems not.
> 
> They are not going after all birth control even in that "handful of states."  Republicans in Missouri are trying to cut state funding for the morning after pill which is the earliest form of abortion.  Not trying to ban it, not trying to put doctors in jail for prescribing it.  Just not wanting to fund it.
> 
> Unlike yourself, those lawmakers know where they draw the line.  At the moment of conception, the time that science tells us a new human being is formed.
> 
> The other states mentioned were Idaho and Louisiana.  I'll let you explain what the Repubicans there are doing that offends you.



It does offend me as someone's birth control is none of their business.

But you being the big government authoritarian just loves it


----------



## BS Filter

MagicMike said:


> Why do you hate your country?
> 
> Why do you think it is "hilarious" (your word) that the Kremlin finally achieves it's goal of destroying America from within through Donald Trump?


I love my country.  You're mentally ill.


----------



## iceberg

themirrorthief said:


> biden can shake hands with the invisible man


Well good. He finally did it right.


----------



## Couchpotato

Golfing Gator said:


> It does offend me as someone's birth control is none of their business.
> 
> But you being the big government authoritarian just loves it


The state not funding a particular type of contraception isn’t them banning it.


----------



## cnm

Seymour Flops said:


> So, if the medical team and the mother decide on an abortion as the contractions begin, that's nobody's business?


You certainly have no business in the room with the mother and the obstetricians. Get the fuck out of there.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> It does offend me as someone's birth control is none of their business.


If it is none of their business, why would you be mad at them for not paying for it?


Golfing Gator said:


> But you being the big government authoritarian just loves it


But do you really find them that threatening?  Even in the GOP, opposition to even the morning after pill is on the fringe wing.  Unlike the DNC, the GOP is not owned by its most radical fringe.  I've never heard Trump oppose BC, and the overwhelming majority of Republicans are Trumpers.

You'd be better off focusing on him than the fringe who are not even opposing birth control, but abortion which is what the morning after pill is.

You said that you know that the baby inside the mother's womb is a  living human being.  Is that  from the moment of conception?


----------



## Seymour Flops

cnm said:


> You certainly have no business in the room with the mother and the obstetricians. Get the fuck out of there.


So it is nobody's business if the mom feels the contraction and says, "I changed my mind.  Abort that baby!"

No law should prevent that?

Suppose the doctor actually says, "that is too much, I'm not doing it."  Should the woman birthing person non-birthing person be able to sue the doctor for that refusal?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Couchpotato said:


> The state not funding a particular type of contraception isn’t them banning it.


Yeah, good point.  GG sure loves him some government funding.

I guess he's not the worst libertarian ever.  I was on a forum called "Libertarian Forum" and there were guys worse than him.  

Still . . .


----------



## MagicMike

Golfing Gator said:


> It does offend me as someone's birth control is none of their business.
> 
> But you being the big government authoritarian just loves it


No you don't.
Not if you defend Putin's prostitute, Donald J. Trump.


----------



## MagicMike

BS Filter said:


> I love my country.  You're mentally ill.


No you don't.
Not if you defend Putin's prostitute Donald J. Trump.


----------



## bravoactual

Golfing Gator said:


> Nope.  While perhaps you people that vote for the Repubs might  support individualism and doing one’s best in life without stepping on the rights of others....the people you vote for do not.
> 
> They tell you they are going to, then don't do it, because they know you will vote for them anyhow



To quote Major Frank Burns,"*I don't individuality as long as everybody does it together*".


----------



## BS Filter

MagicMike said:


> No you don't.
> Not if you defend Putin's prostitute Donald J. Trump.


Not buying.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Yeah, good point.  GG sure loves him some government funding.
> 
> I guess he's not the worst libertarian ever.  I was on a forum called "Libertarian Forum" and there were guys worse than him.
> 
> Still . . .



Much worse....and the forum with not rules banned me for disagreeing with the owner


----------



## Foolardi

Seymour Flops said:


> That's how we make it legal, not ethically legal.
> 
> If having sex for money is unethical then having sex in front of a camera for money is at least as unethical. So a law with that loophole would make sex for money legal but not ethical.
> 
> Killing a human being other than self defense doesn't become ethical because a court rules that it is legal if it is the killers own baby.
> 
> But you know that.  DNC or LP, you feel compelled to defend legalized baby killing.


There are degrees and shades of ethical.Especially concerning Sex and
  killing.During war killing is not optional but mandatory.
   Having sex even in the privacy of ones bedroom and being married
  was once considered illegal depending on the state and the times.
    Under Sodomy laws.
      I could say this about Man and Ethics ... 
       " Man is nothing else than fetid sperm,a sack of dung,the
     food for worms .... You have never seen a viler dunghill. "
                -- St.Bernard of Clairvaux { 1090-1153 }
                                Abbot of Clairvaux 
       " A Man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,education,
        and social ties; * no religious basis is necessary.Man would indeed be in a poor
         way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward
      after death. " 
                    -- Albert Einstein 

    * Demonstrably Ignurnt hypothesis.Considering Einstein saying :
      " GOD does not play dice. "


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Much worse....and the forum with not rules banned me for disagreeing with the owner


Yes, that wasn't so much a forum, as an extended tantrum.


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> Much worse....and the forum with not rules banned me for disagreeing with the owner


" with not rules " what on earth does that mean.
   Maybe just a ruler ... eh.A nice thick wooden ruler like the ones
   Nuns in Parochial school used in my day { Late 50's early 60's}
    across a misbehavin' students knuckles.
     For even smallish infractions.Like talking while the nun
      is talking or writing on the chalk board.
    Far different than  what occurs at this pop stand.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> Yes they do
> 
> But they have to actually declassify it, not claim they did after being caught with TOP SECRET documents
> 
> That?
> Oh…..I declassified that stuff years ago


Yes, if anyone can prove that he is only claiming to have declassified the documents and did not declassify them at the time, you will have a point.

Do you know of anyone who can prove that Trump did not declassify them?

Additional question:  Did Trump declassify the documents in the Crossfire Hurricane binder?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes, if anyone can prove that he is only claiming to have declassified the documents and did not declassify them at the time, you will have a point.
> 
> Do you know of anyone who can prove that Trump did not declassify them?
> 
> Additional question:  Did Trump declassify the documents in the Crossfire Hurricane binder?



In this case Trump will have to prove he did.  He was caught with documents marked as classified.  The default position is that those documents are classified.  The person caught with them will have to show they are not


----------



## Seymour Flops

When this whole idea of Trump declassifying documents came up, I thought pretty much the same as a lot of Democrats on here.  I thought, 'Wait, Trump can't just "declassify" something on a whim, right?  Surely there is a process for that.  Doesn't congress have a say in what is classified, either by passing laws, or by creating regulatory agencies?'

But then I researched it, which is the piece many of you are missing.  I looked up Navy vs. Egan which ruled that the president has sole authority to determine what information is classified and what is not.  I read the Executive Orders, but I understood that no president is bound by Executive Orders since they are just written versions of his own orders or his predecessors.  

Then I learned about Obama's on the post decision to mentally declassy information that he wanted to pass on to Russia to help them plan attacks and his statement that:

*“There’s classified, and then there’s classified.  There’s stuff that is really top secret, top secret—and there’s stuff that … you might not want out on the transom … but is basically stuff that you could get in open source.”*

Was he right?

Yes, by definition, what a president decides about classified information is right.









						Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia
					

Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia




					960thepatriot.com
				












						It’s No Secret That the Obama Administration Has Been Terrible on Transparency
					

President Obama turned a few heads on Fox News Sunday when host Chris Wallace asked him whether Hillary Clinton’s emails—some of which contained...




					slate.com


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> When this whole idea of Trump declassifying documents came up, I thought pretty much the same as a lot of Democrats on here.  I thought, 'Wait, Trump can't just "declassify" something on a whim, right?  Surely there is a process for that.  Doesn't congress have a say in what is classified, either by passing laws, or by creating regulatory agencies?'
> 
> But then I researched it, which is the piece many of you are missing.  I looked up Navy vs. Egan which ruled that the president has sole authority to determine what information is classified and what is not.  I read the Executive Orders, but I understood that no president is bound by Executive Orders since they are just written versions of his own orders or his predecessors.
> 
> Then I learned about Obama's on the post decision to mentally declassy information that he wanted to pass on to Russia to help them plan attacks and his statement that:
> 
> *“There’s classified, and then there’s classified.  There’s stuff that is really top secret, top secret—and there’s stuff that … you might not want out on the transom … but is basically stuff that you could get in open source.”*
> 
> Was he right?
> 
> Yes, by definition, what a president decides about classified information is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia
> 
> 
> Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 960thepatriot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s No Secret That the Obama Administration Has Been Terrible on Transparency
> 
> 
> President Obama turned a few heads on Fox News Sunday when host Chris Wallace asked him whether Hillary Clinton’s emails—some of which contained...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com



Yep, nothing in there about Declassification via telepathy. 

Obama did not mentally declassify information, he did it with a physical act of sharing the information with someone.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Do you know of anyone who can prove that Trump did not declassify them?


Yes, the agency that controls each document has a record of its classification
If Presidential orders to declassify information were never issued then affected documents are still classified


----------



## pknopp

Seymour Flops said:


> When this whole idea of Trump declassifying documents came up, I thought pretty much the same as a lot of Democrats on here.  I thought, 'Wait, Trump can't just "declassify" something on a whim, right?  Surely there is a process for that.  Doesn't congress have a say in what is classified, either by passing laws, or by creating regulatory agencies?'
> 
> But then I researched it, which is the piece many of you are missing.  I looked up Navy vs. Egan which ruled that the president has sole authority to determine what information is classified and what is not.  I read the Executive Orders, but I understood that no president is bound by Executive Orders since they are just written versions of his own orders or his predecessors.
> 
> Then I learned about Obama's on the post decision to mentally declassy information that he wanted to pass on to Russia to help them plan attacks and his statement that:
> 
> *“There’s classified, and then there’s classified.  There’s stuff that is really top secret, top secret—and there’s stuff that … you might not want out on the transom … but is basically stuff that you could get in open source.”*
> 
> Was he right?
> 
> Yes, by definition, what a president decides about classified information is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia
> 
> 
> Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 960thepatriot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s No Secret That the Obama Administration Has Been Terrible on Transparency
> 
> 
> President Obama turned a few heads on Fox News Sunday when host Chris Wallace asked him whether Hillary Clinton’s emails—some of which contained...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com



 This has been covered countless times. No one is missing it. Yes, a president can declassify anything he wants BUT there is a process to do that. With the right to do that comes with the obligation of oversight. 

 All Trump has to do is show it went through that process. He can't.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Yep, nothing in there about Declassification via telepathy.


But plenty about the president being the sole authority over classified information.


Golfing Gator said:


> Obama did not mentally declassify information, he did it with a physical act of sharing the information with someone.


Then Trump did it with the physical act of moving them to Mar-a-Lago..


----------



## Seymour Flops

pknopp said:


> This has been covered countless times. No one is missing it. Yes, a president can declassify anything he wants BUT there is a process to do that. With the right to do that comes with the obligation of oversight.
> 
> All Trump has to do is show it went through that process. He can't.


Show me the process.


----------



## pknopp

Seymour Flops said:


> But plenty about the president being the sole authority over classified information.
> 
> Then Trump did it with the physical act of moving them to Mar-a-Lago..



 That's not how it works.


----------



## pknopp

Seymour Flops said:


> Show me the process.



 You acted the expert. Why don't you know?


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> Yes, the agency that controls each document has a record of its classification
> If Presidential orders to declassify information were never issued then affected documents are still classified


SM.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> SM.


?


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Show me the process.


Why should anyone go through the effort to show you the process when you will just deny it anyway?


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> Why should anyone go through the effort to show you the process when you will just deny it anyway?


Then show me the process and you can crow I told you so when I deny it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> But plenty about the president being the sole authority over classified information.
> 
> Then Trump did it with the physical act of moving them to Mar-a-Lago..



They are not the sole authority, they might be the highest authority but please do not be like that other moron and claim only the president has the power to classify and declassify. 

If he told anyone, then you might be on to something.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> They are not the sole authority, they might be the highest authority but please do not be like that other moron and claim only the president has the power to classify and declassify.


It's not my claim, it's the Supreme Court's claim in Navy v. Egan. Do you know of something you could link that supersedes that ruling?


Golfing Gator said:


> If he told anyone, then you might be on to something.


So the rules were different for Obama.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> It's not my claim, it's the Supreme Court's claim in Navy v. Egan. Do you know of something you could link that supersedes that ruling?



That is not what the ruling says.  The ruling does not say the POTUS is the ONLY one that can do it.  

Do you honestly think that the POTUS personally classifies every single document in the US, and that the POTUS personally approves each and every security clearance given in the US? 

You are just pulling my leg now trying to get a rise since you have had your ass handed to you, aren't you?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> It's not my claim, it's the Supreme Court's claim in Navy v. Egan. Do you know of something you could link that supersedes that ruling?
> 
> So the rules were different for Obama.



Not at all, Obama told people he was giving the information to Russia.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Then show me the process and you can crow I told you so when I deny it.



If you could be honest, I would play your games 

But why don’t you just come clean and admit Trump lied. 
Like a kid caught with his hand in a candy jar, Trump just creates a lie and you guys swear by it.

Truth is, Trump never declassified those documents and never had any intention of doing so.


What is even scarier than Trump improperly storing classified information is the claims that he just looked at all the Classified documents and gave a blanket declassification order without considering the threat to national security contained in those documents

That shows a callous disregard for his ability to declassify information


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Yep, nothing in there about Declassification via telepathy.
> 
> Obama did not mentally declassify information, he did it with a physical act of sharing the information with someone.


Did Trump say be did it this way or was he referring to there not being a process in place and this simply being an example?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> That is not what the ruling says.  The ruling does not say the POTUS is the ONLY one that can do it.
> 
> Do you honestly think that the POTUS personally classifies every single document in the US, and that the POTUS personally approves each and every security clearance given in the US?


The president has sole authority because the executive power is vested in the president. Of course the president delegates many authorities but they are still his powers. No member of any of the three branches has the power to over rule his classification decisions.

No one can classify any information over the president's objection.


Golfing Gator said:


> You are just pulling my leg now trying to get a rise since you have had your ass handed to you, aren't you?


If that's your new fallback, sure.


----------



## flan327

1srelluc said:


> LOL.....That's right, keep all your focus on Trump. That's the plan.


What’s YOUR plan?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> No one can classify any information over the president's objection.



You finally got something right.  This though is not the same as ONLY the POTUS can do it.  

Well done!   

There is hope for you yet.


----------



## flan327

iceberg said:


> Did Trump say be did it this way or was he referring to there not being a process in place and this simply being an example?


He said it THAT way


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Not at all, Obama told people he was giving the information to Russia.


You said it was his physical act of sharing the information.

Did Obama say to Putin "I hereby declassify what I'm about to tell you?"


----------



## Bobob

1srelluc said:


> LOL.....That's right, keep all your focus on Trump. That's the plan.


That is indeed right. Trump keeps the focus on himself. That is the plan.
I wonder how the so-called "patriots", who love America, see his taking highly classified documents
and splattering them all over his house. Do these "patriots" truly believe that a president can decide by thought that he has declassified these highly sensitive documents? What was he doing with them?
Why didn't he return them when asked? Are you "patriots" not concerned that we have assets in other countries who could be compromised and maybe murdered? Trump sure as hell didn't care, for sure.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> You finally got something right.  This though is not the same as ONLY the POTUS can do it.
> 
> Well done!
> 
> There is hope for you yet.


Only the POTUS has the authority which is what "sole authority" means.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Only the POTUS has the authority which is what "sole authority" means.



If he had sole authority then nobody else could do it, period.  

Now are are back to you thinking the POTUS personally assigns clearances to people and classifications to every single document that is classified. 

You have dashed my hopes for you.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> If he had sole authority then nobody else could do it, period.
> 
> Now are are back to you thinking the POTUS personally assigns clearances to people and classifications to every single document that is classified.
> 
> You have dashed my hopes for you.


I'll get his therapy lined up.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> If he had sole authority then nobody else could do it, period.


That is not what sole authority means.


Golfing Gator said:


> Now are are back to you thinking the POTUS personally assigns clearances to people and classifications to every single document that is classified.


Look up the word "delegate."


Golfing Gator said:


> You have dashed my hopes for you.


Your hope is to create enough strawmen to avoid simply admitting your mistake.


----------



## rightwinger

rightwinger said:


> If you could be honest, I would play your games
> 
> But why don’t you just come clean and admit Trump lied.
> Like a kid caught with his hand in a candy jar, Trump just creates a lie and you guys swear by it.
> 
> Truth is, Trump never declassified those documents and never had any intention of doing so.
> 
> 
> What is even scarier than Trump improperly storing classified information is the claims that he just looked at all the Classified documents and gave a blanket declassification order without considering the threat to national security contained in those documents
> 
> That shows a callous disregard for his ability to declassify information



I can’t understand Trumps arrogance when it comes to protecting classified information 

To him, the only issue is the inconvenience of having to protect it. 
He has no concern about the damage releasing that information may cause


----------



## ClaireH

Dagosa said:


> Really ?
> Now that Trump has lost all his competent lawyers and his staff is testifying against him, Trump has picked up the QAnon crowd.
> 
> Tell us your not a QAnon member/advocate. Your post is hilarious. Your should go into stand up at a Russian nightclub.


Dagosa-you only see what you’re told to believe by CNBC- source you posted earlier so I’m using that information. I might review your former posts to see how often you pull up CNBC sources to “prove” your opinion is accurate as with your  “CNBC polling verification” ha

I’m not a member of QAnon but maybe I should look into it more, because if there’s something that you’re venomously against maybe there’s some good to it after all, I need to check more.

Kind of like when the ignorant spout off the phrase mega MAGA as if that’s an insult. Please inform the readers how making America great is a bad thing to support, I’m ready to take notes


----------



## iceberg

Seymour Flops said:


> That is not what sole authority means.
> 
> Look up the word "delegate."
> 
> Your hope is to create enough strawmen to avoid simply admitting your mistake.


its kinda like you have your hand on his forehead at arms length and he keeps swinging in the air trying to hit you.


----------



## flan327

Seymour Flops said:


> You said it was his physical act of sharing the information.
> 
> Did Obama say to Putin "I hereby declassify what I'm about to tell you?"


Ask him

Or
Better yet

STOP LYING


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> I can’t understand Trumps arrogance when it comes to protecting classified information
> 
> To him, the only issue is the inconvenience of having to protect it.
> He has no concern about the damage releasing that information may cause


Replying to yourself On purpose or did you forget who you were at the moment?

What damage would be caused by releasing the Crossfire Hurricane documents?


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Replying to yourself On purpose or did you forget who you were at the moment?
> 
> What damage would be caused by releasing the Crossfire Hurricane documents?


did he?

Doesn‘t look like it
What was he waiting for?


----------



## Dagosa

ClaireH said:


> Dagosa-you only see what you’re told to believe by CNBC- source you posted earlier so I’m using that information. I might review your former posts to see how often you pull up CNBC sources to “prove” your opinion is accurate as with your  “CNBC polling verification” ha
> 
> I’m not a member of QAnon but maybe I should look into it more, because if there’s something that you’re venomously against maybe there’s some good to it after all, I need to check more.
> 
> Kind of like when the ignorant spout off the phrase mega MAGA as if that’s an insult. Please inform the readers how making America great is a bad thing to support, I’m ready to take notes


Maybe you should. If you buy Trumps shit, you buy into QAnon. I highly recommend you look into QAnon. Misery loves company.

You should feel insulted by being associated with MAGA.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> did he?
> 
> Doesn‘t look like it
> What was he waiting for?


Sorry, I misunderstood your question.

I don't know why Trump hasn't released it yet.  

My guess is that he was waiting for a dramatic moment during the 2024 election.


----------



## Dagosa

Seymour Flops said:


> Sorry, I misunderstood your question.
> 
> I don't know why Trump hasn't released it yet.
> 
> My guess is that he was waiting for a dramatic moment during the 2024 election.


Trump has to be released from jail by then to release anything.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> Sorry, I misunderstood your question.
> 
> I don't know why Trump hasn't released it yet.
> 
> My guess is that he was waiting for a dramatic moment during the 2024 election.


LOL

You think Trump has that much patience?


----------



## Foolardi

Golfing Gator said:


> Yep, nothing in there about Declassification via telepathy.
> 
> Obama did not mentally declassify information, he did it with a physical act of sharing the information with someone.


Obama dint do squat for America or Americans.The census from 10 years
  ago found that under Obama's first term  the Middle Class fell into
  DECLINE for the first time in Modern  history.Obama also racked up by far
  The largest Budget deficts in American History averaging Over $ 1.2 Trillion
    his first term.Compare that to Bush 43's 2007 Budget Deficit of $ 162 Billion.
   For context.Also under Obama Average Pay declined by $ 4,5oo yearly.
   Where in Trumps last 2 years in office Middle Class average annual pay
    Increased by $ 5,ooo.
   Double aggravating is how the Obama's managed to leave the
   White House significantly Richer.With Netflix offering $ 100 Million
     and $ 65 Million + for Obama's book deal { w/o even submitting a 
  manuscript }.
    Pretty neat eh.Yeah like how neat it was in Edgar Allen Poe's day 
  to use leeches to draw out the bad blood.


----------



## Foolardi

rightwinger said:


> LOL
> 
> You think Trump has that much patience?


 He never seemed to suffer any quick temper tantrum when
  abroad and using diplomacy.
   First thing Obama did when Abroad was to seek out an audience
    to speak badly about our Country and it's history.


----------



## rightwinger

Foolardi said:


> He never seemed to suffer any quick temper tantrum when
> abroad and using diplomacy.
> First thing Obama did when Abroad was to seek out an audience
> to speak badly about our Country and it's history.


----------



## krichton

johngaltshrugged said:


> Well the Dems seem to think they can indict & convict DT with just strong feelings.
> At least thinking involves actual brain function & not just some Pavlovian response to your emotional triggers.
> 
> Yes, I think if he considers them unclassified, they are unclassified.
> He has the ultimate authority in these matters.
> Did that hurt?



I agree, they're "declassified" but only in his empty head.  It doesn't mean they actually are according to the laws and procedures of the federal government.  Many criminals have the same thought process, they think something belongs to them when it doesn't, because they "think" it does.   They "think" that if they can take something away from you, then it rightfully belongs to them.  Great job, relating to criminals.


----------



## Seymour Flops

krichton said:


> I agree, they're "declassified" but only in his empty head.  It doesn't mean they actually are according to the laws and procedures of the federal government.


The USSC said that the president is the ultimate authority.  Who that is above the president created these laws and legal procedures and was able to include the president in those who must follow those laws and legal procedures.


krichton said:


> Many criminals have the same thought process, they think something belongs to them when it doesn't, because they "think" it does.   They "think" that if they can take something away from you, then it rightfully belongs to them.  Great job, relating to criminals.


Actually, the criminal mindset is "that dude diss'd me, so it's his fault that I had to attack him."  Pretty much the entire Democrat approach to Donald Trump.


----------



## rightwinger

krichton said:


> I agree, they're "declassified" but only in his empty head.  It doesn't mean they actually are according to the laws and procedures of the federal government.  Many criminals have the same thought process, they think something belongs to them when it doesn't, because they "think" it does.   They "think" that if they can take something away from you, then it rightfully belongs to them.  Great job, relating to criminals.



Trump lied

He was never concerned with the classification of those documents….he just wanted them

He never had any intention of declassifying them….nor should he have


----------



## Couchpotato

rightwinger said:


> Trump lied
> 
> He was never concerned with the classification of those documents….he just wanted them
> 
> He never had any intention of declassifying them….nor should he have


And you KNOW this because....  right I forgot, you dont know shit.


----------



## rightwinger

Couchpotato said:


> And you KNOW this because....  right I forgot, you dont know shit.


I KNOW this because of the way Trump behaved, how his lie evolved over time and because nobody on Trumps staff has stepped forward to confirm Trump discussed declassifying with them.


----------



## Couchpotato

rightwinger said:


> I KNOW this because of the way Trump behaved, how his lie evolved over time and because nobody on Trumps staff has stepped forward to confirm Trump discussed declassifying with them.


Yes we all know the persona that's been publicly depicted about our Presidents.    We don't actually know much about them at all.    We certainly dont know all of what was or wasnt declassified by the this, the last, or any President.     So please stop acting like you do.    

Oh,  maybe they can check that list of all the classified and declassified documents you fools keep talking about.  I wonder why that hasnt been checked yet....


----------



## iceberg

Dagosa said:


> Maybe you should. If you buy Trumps shit, you buy into QAnon. I highly recommend you look into QAnon. Misery loves company.
> 
> You should feel insulted by being associated with MAGA.


Doosh


----------



## Dagosa

iceberg said:


> Doosh


Burp


----------



## Stann

Golfing Gator said:


> I am against abortions at any point in time.
> 
> But there are far better ways to stop abortions than outlawing them.


Abortions have been on a steady decrease for years now. Better prevention and better education are helping reduce it. For some strange reason they increased during the pandemic.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Stann said:


> Abortions have been on a steady decrease for years now. Better prevention and better education are helping reduce it. For some strange reason they increased during the pandemic.



The abortion rate to pregnancies has stayed pretty steady over time.   As you point out, fewer pregnancies always means fewer abortions.  This is the way to reduce abortions.

They went up during the pandemic as people were have sex more as they could not go out and do anything else.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> The abortion rate to pregnancies has stayed pretty steady over time.   As you point out, fewer pregnancies always means fewer abortions.  This is the way to reduce abortions.
> 
> They went up during the pandemic as people were have sex more as they could not go out and do anything else.


I'm guessing that the government's clear intent to ruin the economy and end freedom added to desire not to have children.


----------



## Couchpotato

Stann said:


> Abortions have been on a steady decrease for years now. Better prevention and better education are helping reduce it. For some strange reason they increased during the pandemic.


Generally speaking murder rates have been on the decline for decades.  Should we legalize that as well?   That's what we are talking about here.   The killing of innocent human beings.   Passing laws to make that legal doesn't make it any less horrific.


----------



## bravoactual

Foolardi said:


> He never seemed to suffer any quick temper tantrum when
> abroad and using diplomacy.
> First thing Obama did when Abroad was to seek out an audience
> to speak badly about our Country and it's history.



The Traitor is a very petty individual.  He has a need for instant gratification.  He needs to be in spotlight.  He poor to non-existent implus control and lashes out at any who disagrees with him.  I would example Maggie Haberman's book, he has not read (not that he knows how to read), he attacked her automatically.


----------



## bravoactual

Couchpotato said:


> Generally speaking murder rates have been on the decline for decades.  Should we legalize that as well?   That's what we are talking about here.   The killing of innocent human beings.   Passing laws to make that legal doesn't make it any less horrific.



Abortion is NOT murder.  There is no heart beat at 6-Weeks.  Anti-Choice is about forcing Women to have a baby they cannot afford or take care of.  It forces Women to give birth to children without skull.  Anti-Choice is about denying Women the right to have control over their body.


----------



## bravoactual

iceberg said:


> Doosh



Dullard.


----------



## bravoactual

Couchpotato said:


> And you KNOW this because....  right I forgot, you dont know shit.



It isn't that you do not know jack shit, it's that you're proud you do not know jack shit.


----------



## Couchpotato

bravoactual said:


> Abortion is NOT murder.  There is no heart beat at 6-Weeks.  Anti-Choice is about forcing Women to have a baby they cannot afford or take care of.  It forces Women to give birth to children without skull.  Anti-Choice is about denying Women the right to have control over their body.


You’re killing a unique human entity.   No amount of legal bullshit or “choice” arguments change that.


----------



## Couchpotato

bravoactual said:


> It isn't that you do not know jack shit, it's that you're proud you do not know jack shit.


It’s funny and also sad that you THINK you know.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> You’re killing a unique human entity.   No amount of legal bullshit or “choice” arguments change that.


I hope you spout off  the same way about  capital punishment.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato


Couchpotato said:


> You’re killing a unique human entity.   No amount of legal bullshit or “choice” arguments change that.


you do get that “natural abortion“ occurs frequently and often by accident when using poor judgement . Does that mean the mother should be charged with involuntary manslaughter ?


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> I hope you spout off  the same way about  capital punishment.


The obvious difference being the aborted human was never convicted of some heinous crime for which they are being punished.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> Couchpotato
> 
> you do get that “natural abortion“ occurs frequently and often by accident when using poor judgement . Does that mean the mother should be charged with involuntary manslaughter ?


I don’t think it should be legal to intentionally end an innocent human life.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> I don’t think it should be legal to intentionally end an innocent human life.


Even to save the mother ?


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> Even to save the mother ?


Ok so in the less than 1% of abortions that are “to save the mother” and rape/ incest I’ll concede we should allow abortions so long as you will stipulate that the other 99% shouldn’t be allowed.  Deal?


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> Ok so in the less than 1% of abortions that are “to save the mother” and rape/ incest I’ll concede we should allow abortions so long as you will stipulate that the other 99% shouldn’t be allowed.  Deal?


Medical decisions are ALL made on bases of probability.
If the life or safety of the mother is in doubt during pregnancies, the discussion  between doctor and family will sound like this….
80-20 chance for survival of mother, or 50-50 Etc.
So, which percentage should be assigned for an allowable abortion by a gov legislation  if your Daughter/ wife were in delivery ? Which percentage of survival should the legislation assign ?


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> Medical decisions are ALL made on bases of probability.
> If the life or safety of the mother is in doubt during pregnancies, the discussion  between doctor and family will sound like this….
> 80-20 chance for survival of mother, or 50-50 Etc.
> So, which percentage should be assigned for an allowable abortion by a gov legislation  if your Daughter/ wife were in delivery ? Which percentage of survival should the legislation assign ?


You’re trying to use the 1% to justify the other 99.    99% of abortions are convenience abortions They have zero to do with the health of the mother.    So when you’re ready to concede that those 99% are wrong and should be outlawed we can discuss how we deal with the remaining 1.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> You’re trying to use the 1% to justify the other 99.    99% of abortions are convenience abortions They have zero to do with the health of the mother.    So when you’re ready to concede that those 99% are wrong and should be outlawed we can discuss how we deal with the remaining 1.


Nope, I’m asking a question. Many states allow no exceptions. Answer the question. Btw, 1% doesn’t leave 99.99%


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> You’re trying to use the 1% to justify the other 99.    99% of abortions are convenience abortions They have zero to do with the health of the mother.    So when you’re ready to concede that those 99% are wrong and should be outlawed we can discuss how we deal with the remaining 1.


That just 1% is 10,000 women per year out of a million whose lives are put at risk…..or 140,000 women per year whose lives are put at risk by arbitrary legislation of nearly all males makes. Get real…..


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> You’re killing a unique human entity.   No amount of legal bullshit or “choice” arguments change that.


So women don’t count ?


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> So women don’t count ?


Who said that?   Again, 99% of abortions are for convenience.   Let’s eliminate those then we can bicker over the other 1%.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> That just 1% is 10,000 women per year out of a million whose lives are put at risk…..or 140,000 women per year whose lives are put at risk by arbitrary legislation of nearly all males makes. Get real…..



A person’s sex organs have nothing to do with whether killing an innocent person should be legal or not.   I’m against both sexes ending innocent lives.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Navy Vs. Egan, 1988.

*19
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, 81 S.Ct. 1743, 1746, 6 L.Ed.2d 1230 (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, 100 S.Ct. 763, 765, n. 3, 62 L.Ed.2d 704 (1980). See also United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258, 267, 88 S.Ct. 419, 425, 19 L.Ed.2d 508 (1967); United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1, 10, 73 S.Ct. 528, 533, 97 L.Ed. 727 (1953); Totten v. United States, 92 U.S. (2 Otto) 105, 106, 23 L.Ed. 605 (1876). The authority to protect such information falls on the President as head of the Executive Branch and as Commander in Chief.*


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> Nope, I’m asking a question. Many states allow no exceptions. Answer the question. Btw, 1% doesn’t leave 99.99%


2 separate sentences dummy.


----------



## xyz

If Trump can classify/declassify/whatever business with his butt:


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> 2 separate sentences dummy.


1% of those having abortions is 140,000 women. You call that insignificant ?


----------



## Dagosa

xyz said:


> If Trump can classify/declassify/whatever business with his butt:
> View attachment 704996


Trump have his smartest brain cramp while taking a dump.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> 1% of those having abortions is 140,000 women. You call that insignificant ?


Not as significant as the other 99%, no.   Are you ready to concede those abortions should be outlawed?     Once that happens we can the remaining 1%.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> Not as significant as the other 99%, no.   Are you ready to concede those abortions should be outlawed?     Once that happens we can the remaining 1%.


 Nope…you’re the one who hates women. We went through this decades ago.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> Nope…you’re the one who hates women. We went through this decades ago.


yeah I hate women because I don’t think killing babies should be legal.


----------



## Seymour Flops

More than a little ironic that those who profess not to understand that a president has sole authority over classification and that if he thinks a document is declassified, then for his purposes it is also profess to believe that a person can change their sex by mere "thinking" that they are now female.


----------



## WorldWatcher

Seymour Flops said:


> More than a little ironic that those who profess not to understand that a president has sole authority over classification and that if he thinks a document is declassified, then for his purposes it is also profess to believe that a person can change their sex by mere "thinking" that they are now female.



Documents are not "declassified" it is the information in the document that is declassified.

For example lets say that there are 6 copies of a specific document containing specific classified information.  One located in the White House, 5 located amongst various agencies which also need the document.  In addition there are subordinate documents that contain (either in part of in whole some of the same classified information).

Under a normal process when the information contained in a highly classified documents is declassified (or downgraded) that impacts all copies of the document (it's information, and subordinate documents containing the same information in whole or portions of a subordinate document).

So If the FPOTUS "declassified" a document, he is really declassifying the information in that document.  If the FPOTUS, while acting as POTUS, "declassified" the information without telling anyone (either directly or in writing) for that specific document, you end up with:

One copy of the information located at the White House being "declassified", and 
Five copies of the information located at the responsible agencies still being classified as the responsible agencies will not know the information was declassified because they FPOTUS (while POTUS) just mentally declassified the information in his head.
The result is someone could be prosecuted for improper handling of classified material for actions related to the 5 responsible agency documents, but not for improper handling of the exact same document if the source of the document was the White House.  By this we are talking about the information in the document and subordinate information which sourced the document which can have even wider reaching impacts.

The national security infrastructure cannot function in a reasonable way if the same information is both classified and declassified at the same time simply because the POTUS chooses not to tell anyone.

WW


----------



## Couchpotato

WorldWatcher said:


> Documents are not "declassified" it is the information in the document that is declassified.
> 
> For example lets say that there are 6 copies of a specific document containing specific classified information.  One located in the White House, 5 located amongst various agencies which also need the document.  In addition there are subordinate documents that contain (either in part of in whole some of the same classified information).
> 
> Under a normal process when the information contained in a highly classified documents is declassified (or downgraded) that impacts all copies of the document (it's information, and subordinate documents containing the same information in whole or portions of a subordinate document).
> 
> So If the FPOTUS "declassified" a document, he is really declassifying the information in that document.  If the FPOTUS, while acting as POTUS, "declassified" the information without telling anyone (either directly or in writing) for that specific document, you end up with:
> 
> One copy of the information located at the White House being "declassified", and
> Five copies of the information located at the responsible agencies still being classified as the responsible agencies will not know the information was declassified because they FPOTUS (while POTUS) just mentally declassified the information in his head.
> The result is someone could be prosecuted for improper handling of classified material for actions related to the 5 responsible agency documents, but not for improper handling of the exact same document if the source of the document was the White House.  By this we are talking about the information in the document and subordinate information which sourced the document which can have even wider reaching impacts.
> 
> The national security infrastructure cannot function in a reasonable way if the same information is both classified and declassified at the same time simply because the POTUS chooses not to tell anyone.
> 
> WW


Of course we dont live in the 70's anymore where there are X number of copies of a classified document which are cataloged and kept track of in that way.     While I agree that a President should inform the infrastructure in some way that he's declassifying this or that information there really is no legal requirement for him to do so, which I will also agree is fucking bat shit crazy and should have been something we realized was a problem and fixed 2 decades ago but whatever.


----------



## WorldWatcher

Couchpotato said:


> Of course we dont live in the 70's anymore where there are X number of copies of a classified document which are cataloged and kept track of in that way.     While I agree that a President should inform the infrastructure in some way that he's declassifying this or that information there really is no legal requirement for him to do so, which I will also agree is fucking bat shit crazy and should have been something we realized was a problem and fixed 2 decades ago but whatever.



If there are no paper documents today (as opposed to the 70's) then what were the classified documents collected as a function of the search warrant in the MAL store room and in the FPOTUS's desk draw on August 8th with highly classified cover sheets and documents (evidence photo submitted to the court)?

Of course there are still paper copies of documents and multiple controlled copies in multiple locations.

WW


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> yeah I hate women because I don’t think killing babies should be legal.


That makes no sense. You must be an ignorant male.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> Not as significant as the other 99%, no.   Are you ready to concede those abortions should be outlawed?     Once that happens we can the remaining 1%.


The male who thinks 140,000 women‘s health is insignificant.
.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> yeah I hate women because I don’t think killing babies should be legal.


So, we’ve established you hate women.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> So, we’ve established you hate women.


Ok.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> The male who thinks 140,000 women‘s health is insignificat



Not as significant as the deaths of 1.26 million others.  No.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> Not as significant as the deaths of 1.26 million others.  No.


Really, you actually think denying women the right to choose will work in preventing abortions ? It didn’t otherwise and more woman were maimed and killed when it drove them underground for non chemical. It’s really stupid when the  majority are chemically induced very early in the pregnancy….
Its the typical male ignorance and hatred of women.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> Ok.


Second acknowledgement. We’re getting somewhere understanding the male piglet mind.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> Really, you actually think denying women the right to choose will work in preventing abortions ? It didn’t otherwise and more woman were maimed and killed when it drove them underground for non chemical. It’s really stupid when the  majority are chemically induced very early in the pregnancy….
> Its the typical male ignorance and hatred of women.


All of them? No. No more than outlawing murder prevents all people from committing that crime.   Should we legalize that too?     It’s not about choice it’s about whether as a society we are willing to condone the killing of innocent human life.   I’m not.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> All of them? No. No more than outlawing murder prevents all people from committing that crime.   Should we legalize that too?     It’s not about choice it’s about whether as a society we are willing to condone the killing of innocent human life.   I’m not.


And the loss of women's rights over their own body ? Not even close. Only the pregnant woman should have the say, not white male bureaucrats.


----------



## Dagosa

Couchpotato said:


> All of them? No. No more than outlawing murder prevents all people from committing that crime.   Should we legalize that too?     It’s not about choice it’s about whether as a society we are willing to condone the killing of innocent human life.   I’m not.


Legalize something only murders who are mostly male ? Hell no.


----------



## Couchpotato

Dagosa said:


> Legalize something only murders who are mostly male ? Hell no.


What?     Have you been drinking?


----------



## Seymour Flops

WW, I rearranged the order of  your post, because I want to address your conclusion first, and then go over the points you made, since you worked hard on them and they are logical but for the flaw I point out first:


WorldWatcher said:


> The national security infrastructure cannot function in a reasonable way if the same information is both classified and declassified at the same time simply because the POTUS chooses not to tell anyone.
> 
> WW


All that sounds very reasonable as what laws and regulations congress might think about passing - after congress proposes and the states agree, to amend the constitution to give Congress the power to regulate how information is classified. 

Right now, the Constitution gives sole power to classify and declassify information to the president.  The president can delegate authority to subordinates, but their power is only there so long as he delegates it.  

I know that you disagree that a president should be the sole authority.  But neither you, nor anyone on this thread or any other, has yet shown a law, rule, or regulation, that constrains the U.S. president from exercising his constitutional authority over classification and de-classification.  Nor have they shown any law, rule or regulation that requires the president to take any specific action to declassify information.  So, he can indeed just decide in his mind that information is declassified.  

Just repeating "that sounds silly!" doesn't really advance the dialogue.  Let's look at precedent of a president deciding in his mind about classified information.

Obama did exactly that about Hillary's emails:

*President Obama turned a few heads on Fox News Sunday when host Chris Wallace asked him whether Hillary Clinton’s emails—some of which contained information since deemed to be classified—damaged national security. Obama replied, “There’s classified, and then there’s classified.” He went on, “There’s stuff that is really top secret, top secret—and there’s stuff that … you might not want out on the transom … but is basically stuff that you could get in open source.”*









						It’s No Secret That the Obama Administration Has Been Terrible on Transparency
					

President Obama turned a few heads on Fox News Sunday when host Chris Wallace asked him whether Hillary Clinton’s emails—some of which contained...




					slate.com
				




That story goes on to talk about how Obama tried to reduce the amount of information that is classified, and in fact did for original documents.  But then the Deep State, the Entrenched Bureaucracy, or whatever you want to call them, decided to keep stamping stuff classified anyway.

Obama made a distinction between "classified" and "_classified_," when he was president.  Maybe that distinction doesn't make sense to me.  Maybe if I really, REALLY, *REALLY* hated Obama, I'd love to say that is a *CRIME*, because *classified is classified*, period. No backs.  Tick-tock the game is locked!  

But unfortunately for me, Obama was the president so he absolutely had the power to make that distinction.  I realized that such a claim would be wrong, so I didn't make it.

The above snark wasn't aimed at you, but the others on here, who just keep repeating themselves.



WorldWatcher said:


> Documents are not "declassified" it is the information in the document that is declassified.
> 
> For example lets say that there are 6 copies of a specific document containing specific classified information.  One located in the White House, 5 located amongst various agencies which also need the document.  In addition there are subordinate documents that contain (either in part of in whole some of the same classified information).


Correct.  I think derivative might be more accurate than subordinate, but I know what you meant.


WorldWatcher said:


> Under a normal process when the information contained in a highly classified documents is declassified (or downgraded) that impacts all copies of the document (it's information, and subordinate documents containing the same information in whole or portions of a subordinate document).


But it can be very slow to "trickle down" to those subordinate/derivative documents.  

From the same Slate article above (not exactly a Trump cult rag, I'm sure you'll agree):

*In the years of Obama’s presidency, the number of Original Classification Authorizations—new pieces of information that are deemed confidential, secret, or top secret—has gone down by 45 percent, from 4,109 in 2008 to 2,276 in 2014, the last year for which numbers exist. (The steepest decline, to 2,978, occurred in Obama’s first year; the dip has since been steady but slow.) This is a positive trend. In a memo dated March 23, Gen. Clapper called on the heads of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies to reduce the number still further.

However, this has not been accompanied by a reduction in the number of classified documents. To the contrary, the number of derivative classifications— decisions to stamp specific documents classified based on a general decision about the subject at hand—has soared, from 23.2 million in 2008 to 77 million in 2014.*

The deepstate loves secrecy.  Knowledge is power and they want to keep it to themselves.


WorldWatcher said:


> So If the FPOTUS "declassified" a document, he is really declassifying the information in that document.


Not necessarily.  Remember that under the constitution, it is the president's prerogative and his alone to determine when, why, and how information is to be classifed, unclassified, declassified, or reclassified.

So, if he wants to declassify one copy of a document while not declassifying the information contained in order to make it publicly available, there is no law, rule or regulation that says that the president cannot do that.


WorldWatcher said:


> If the FPOTUS, while acting as POTUS, "declassified" the information without telling anyone (either directly or in writing) for that specific document, you end up with:
> 
> One copy of the information located at the White House being "declassified", and
> Five copies of the information located at the responsible agencies still being classified as the responsible agencies will not know the information was declassified because they FPOTUS (while POTUS) just mentally declassified the information in his head.


That's exactly right.  If the POTUS wanted to declassify only his copy, but still require the responsible agencies to secure it, there is no law, rule, nor regulations that is binding on the president that says he cannot do that.


WorldWatcher said:


> The result is someone could be prosecuted for improper handling of classified material for actions related to the 5 responsible agency documents, but not for improper handling of the exact same document if the source of the document was the White House.  By this we are talking about the information in the document and subordinate information which sourced the document which can have even wider reaching impacts.


Yes, the old saying "rank has its privileges," is nowhere more true than in presidential designation of information as it relates to its being classified or unclassified.  Just because a president can declassify a document so that he can take it with him to the Office of the Former President, does not mean that an agency head can then take all documents with the same information to his house.

Which is a silly point to even have to make, because nobody ever before got in a twist about senior officials taking classified documents home with them, for work purposes, until they thought they had yet another chance "Get Trump!"


----------



## WorldWatcher

Seymour Flops said:


> I know that you disagree that a president should be the sole authority.



I provided a long post and you took the time to go through it and address different points, that is appreciated even though I definitely disagree with some of them.  That is the nature of a discussion board.

However I will take exception to this one statement as it references me personally, no where does my posting indicate that I disagree with the concept that the President has ultimate classification and declassification if legally permissible.  For example a President can't classify documents for strictly political gain or to hide evidence of a crime. 

However when it comes to national security information as a function of government, I have no problem with the President having ultimate authority.

However for something to actually be classified or declassified the President cannot secretly and mentally do it.  (S)he must tell someone so they can execute a legal order or document such classification or declassification actions again so that the procedures as it impacts derivative (yes, better word then subordinate - thank you.) classified information.

WW

(Note I use "ultimate" and you use "sole".  There are others with legislative authority under the law and via the EO who have classification and declassification authority, so I use ultimate meaning the highest level.)


----------



## Couchpotato

WorldWatcher said:


> If there are no paper documents today (as opposed to the 70's) then what were the classified documents collected as a function of the search warrant in the MAL store room and in the FPOTUS's desk draw on August 8th with highly classified cover sheets and documents (evidence photo submitted to the court)?
> 
> Of course there are still paper copies of documents and multiple controlled copies in multiple locations.
> 
> WW


I didn’t say hard copies didn’t exist.  I said there arent a limited number of hard copies that someone catalogs and tracks.    Im not sure where everyone got the idea that that’s the way things work in that world.  Movies I suspect, but having worked in the IC my entire adult life I can assure you it doesn’t.


----------



## Seymour Flops

WorldWatcher said:


> I provided a long post and you took the time to go through it and address different points, that is appreciated even though I definitely disagree with some of them.  That is the nature of a discussion board.
> 
> However I will take exception to this one statement as it references me personally, no where does my posting indicate that I disagree with the concept that the President has ultimate classification and declassification if legally permissible.  For example a President can't classify documents for strictly political gain


I'm guessing that presidents of both parties classify things for political gain pretty frequently.  If you could prove it, it could be an impeachable offense, if congress thought so, but I'm not sure there is a criminal statute that says that.


WorldWatcher said:


> or to hide evidence of a crime.


Hiding evidence of a crime is a crime in itself, outside of classification.  So that doesn't affect any debate about presidential powers to classify.  I have the sole power to spend my paycheck.  If I hire a contract killer with my paycheck, that is a crime, but that doesn't change the fact that I have sole power to spend it.



WorldWatcher said:


> However when it comes to national security information as a function of government, I have no problem with the President having ultimate authority.
> 
> However for something to actually be classified or declassified the President cannot secretly and mentally do it.  (S)he must tell someone so they can execute a legal order or document such classification or declassification actions again so that the procedures as it impacts derivative (yes, better word then subordinate - thank you.) classified information.


The president would best be served to tell someone about a declassification decision if they need to know about the declassification decision.  In the case at point, it is a president deciding in his mind that documents that he wishes to take with him to the white house residence, and in the end to the future office of the former president, he only need make the decision and order them taken. 

Or just put them in his briefcase and take them himself.  

He doesn't have to explain himself to anyone - when it comes to classification and declassification -  because he is the president.

If he decided in his mind to declassify documents, and ordered a subordinate to take the documents to an unsecure location without telling him they are declassified, the subordinate would have a solid defense if the FBI arrested him on the way to his car.  He doesn't need a signed paper, or a recording of the president saying "I declassify these."  The fact that the president ordered him to take them to an unsecure locations makes it reasonable for him to presume the president declassified them. 

Just like Biden does when he takes documents to his beach house.  There is no ceremony where Biden announces the temporary declassification of each document.

All this was decided by the USSC.  The debate on here is between people who accept that truth and people who do not.



WorldWatcher said:


> WW
> 
> (Note I use "ultimate" and you use "sole".  There are others with legislative authority under the law and via the EO who have classification and declassification authority, so I use ultimate meaning the highest level.)


You're not wrong to use ultimate, but it is just as correct to say "sole."  In particular because as my upstream article stated about the Obama administration, far to many subordinates take it upon themselves to put classification stamps on material that the president has not ordered classified.

It reminds me very much of people in the administration going to congress and claiming executive privilege.  Perfectly fine and correct, if the president has invoked it.  But with many of those witnesses, they presume the answer to every question is executive privileged.  That is not right.  The president has the privilege and should invoke it or not invoke it and be able to be held accountable for it. 

That is a problem under administrations from both parties for at least the last thirty years.


----------

