"It's not theirs, Its mine"

[Sixties Fan]

Everything he took was allowed because….. standing order. So yes, it disproves your post

Every Lawmaker is laughing their heads off at his "Standing Order" argument. And at all of those who want to keep repeating that non existing order.

You are not a Lawmaker, are you?
Ever worked at the White House or National Archives?
----------
After the FBI searched his Mar-a-Lago home and retrieved boxes of documents — some of them labeled “top secret” — former President Donald Trump released a statement claiming that as president, he had a “standing order … that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken to the residence were deemed to be declassified the moment he removed them.”

Numerous experts on national security and the law surrounding classified documents say that isn’t plausible. And in any case, whether some of the documents are classified — as many of them were marked — may be irrelevant to the criminal investigation, since none of the three criminal laws cited as the predicate for the search warrant require documents to be classified for a violation to occur.

Nonetheless, the fact that Trump may have been holding classified documents has raised the stakes of the investigation. And it has also raised questions about the scope of Trump’s declassification powers.

“I have been engaged in declassification issues since the 1970s, and I can attest that there is no precedent for such a standing order,” Richard Immerman, an assistant deputy director of national intelligence in the George W. Bush administration, told us via email. “Further, had he issued a standing order, it surely would have been ‘leaked’ by someone and then challenged.”

“The procedure is far more formal,” said Immerman, who is now a historian at Temple University. “Documents must be declassified page by page; in fact, if TS/SCI [Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information] line by line. The document then is marked declassified (often sanitized) by the authorizing agent along with the date. Consequently, former President Trump’s claim is to me implausible.”

The legal authority for classifying national security information rests in the president’s power afforded as commander-in-chief and is guided by a series of presidential executive orders, beginning with one issued by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1940. The latest of such orders, Executive Order 13526, issued in late 2009 by then-President Barack Obama, lays out in detail the procedures to declassify information, and the various officials who are to be included in such decisions. Still, the president retains the ultimate authority to declassify a document.

In an appearance on Fox News on Aug. 12, conservative writer John Solomon, who is one of Trump’s representatives for interacting with the National Archives and Records Administration, read a statement from Trump’s office in which the former president argued that he had a “standing order” to declassify all documents taken to Mar-a-Lago, and that he didn’t need anyone or anything else to do that.
“As we can all relate to, everyone ends up having to bring home their work from time to time,” Solomon read. “American presidents are no different. President Trump, in order to prepare the work for the next day, often took documents, including classified documents, to the residence. He had a standing order … that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken to the residence were deemed to be declassified the moment he removed them.”

“The power to classify and declassify documents rests solely with the president of the United States,” the statement continued. “The idea that some paper-pushing bureaucrat with classification authority delegated by the president, needs to approve the declassification is absurd.”

Trump, who has referred to the search as a “break-in” and a “witch hunt,” defended himself on his social media platform, Truth Social. He said the documents were “all declassified” and held in “secured storage” at Mar-a-Lago.

Bolton: ‘Almost Certainly a Lie’​

Trump’s former national security adviser, John R. Bolton, told the New York Times he never heard of Trump’s alleged standing order and that it is “almost certainly a lie.”

“I was never briefed on any such order, procedure, policy when I came in,” Bolton told the Times, nor was he aware of such a policy when he worked at the White House or after.

“If he [Trump] were to say something like that, you would have to memorialize that, so that people would know it existed,” Bolton said.

Glenn Gerstell, former general counsel for the National Security Agency from 2015 to 2020 — straddling the Obama and Trump administrations — told us in a phone interview that if there was a standing order, he, too, “was not aware of that.”

“If there was a standing order it doesn’t appear to have been memorialized,” Gerstell said.

The normal procedure to declassify information is “quite detailed,” Gerstell said. First, a determination has to be made that the information is something that is significant and in the public interest, and second, that it meets the threshold for declassification because it does not pose a security threat if revealed. The agency that initiated the classification would be notified and can weigh in on whether it thinks the information should remain classified. The president can override the agency’s recommendation, but it would be taken into consideration.

Trump's Dubious 'Standing Order' to Declassify Documents - FactCheck.org

After the FBI seized boxes of U.S. documents from Mar-a-Lago — some of them labeled “top secret” — former President Donald Trump claimed he had a “standing order" that documents "taken to the residence were deemed to be declassified." Numerous experts say that isn't plausible.

www.factcheck.org

 

[jc456]

Every Lawmaker is laughing their heads off at his "Standing Order" argument. And at all of those who want to keep repeating that non existing order.

You are not a Lawmaker, are you?
Ever worked at the White House or National Archives?
----------
After the FBI searched his Mar-a-Lago home and retrieved boxes of documents — some of them labeled “top secret” — former President Donald Trump released a statement claiming that as president, he had a “standing order … that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken to the residence were deemed to be declassified the moment he removed them.”

Numerous experts on national security and the law surrounding classified documents say that isn’t plausible. And in any case, whether some of the documents are classified — as many of them were marked — may be irrelevant to the criminal investigation, since none of the three criminal laws cited as the predicate for the search warrant require documents to be classified for a violation to occur.

Nonetheless, the fact that Trump may have been holding classified documents has raised the stakes of the investigation. And it has also raised questions about the scope of Trump’s declassification powers.

“I have been engaged in declassification issues since the 1970s, and I can attest that there is no precedent for such a standing order,” Richard Immerman, an assistant deputy director of national intelligence in the George W. Bush administration, told us via email. “Further, had he issued a standing order, it surely would have been ‘leaked’ by someone and then challenged.”

“The procedure is far more formal,” said Immerman, who is now a historian at Temple University. “Documents must be declassified page by page; in fact, if TS/SCI [Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information] line by line. The document then is marked declassified (often sanitized) by the authorizing agent along with the date. Consequently, former President Trump’s claim is to me implausible.”

The legal authority for classifying national security information rests in the president’s power afforded as commander-in-chief and is guided by a series of presidential executive orders, beginning with one issued by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1940. The latest of such orders, Executive Order 13526, issued in late 2009 by then-President Barack Obama, lays out in detail the procedures to declassify information, and the various officials who are to be included in such decisions. Still, the president retains the ultimate authority to declassify a document.

In an appearance on Fox News on Aug. 12, conservative writer John Solomon, who is one of Trump’s representatives for interacting with the National Archives and Records Administration, read a statement from Trump’s office in which the former president argued that he had a “standing order” to declassify all documents taken to Mar-a-Lago, and that he didn’t need anyone or anything else to do that.
“As we can all relate to, everyone ends up having to bring home their work from time to time,” Solomon read. “American presidents are no different. President Trump, in order to prepare the work for the next day, often took documents, including classified documents, to the residence. He had a standing order … that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken to the residence were deemed to be declassified the moment he removed them.”

“The power to classify and declassify documents rests solely with the president of the United States,” the statement continued. “The idea that some paper-pushing bureaucrat with classification authority delegated by the president, needs to approve the declassification is absurd.”

Trump, who has referred to the search as a “break-in” and a “witch hunt,” defended himself on his social media platform, Truth Social. He said the documents were “all declassified” and held in “secured storage” at Mar-a-Lago.

Bolton: ‘Almost Certainly a Lie’​

Trump’s former national security adviser, John R. Bolton, told the New York Times he never heard of Trump’s alleged standing order and that it is “almost certainly a lie.”

“I was never briefed on any such order, procedure, policy when I came in,” Bolton told the Times, nor was he aware of such a policy when he worked at the White House or after.

“If he [Trump] were to say something like that, you would have to memorialize that, so that people would know it existed,” Bolton said.

Glenn Gerstell, former general counsel for the National Security Agency from 2015 to 2020 — straddling the Obama and Trump administrations — told us in a phone interview that if there was a standing order, he, too, “was not aware of that.”

“If there was a standing order it doesn’t appear to have been memorialized,” Gerstell said.

The normal procedure to declassify information is “quite detailed,” Gerstell said. First, a determination has to be made that the information is something that is significant and in the public interest, and second, that it meets the threshold for declassification because it does not pose a security threat if revealed. The agency that initiated the classification would be notified and can weigh in on whether it thinks the information should remain classified. The president can override the agency’s recommendation, but it would be taken into consideration.

Trump's Dubious 'Standing Order' to Declassify Documents - FactCheck.org

After the FBI seized boxes of U.S. documents from Mar-a-Lago — some of them labeled “top secret” — former President Donald Trump claimed he had a “standing order" that documents "taken to the residence were deemed to be declassified." Numerous experts say that isn't plausible.

www.factcheck.org

Again CNN legal analyst says nope

 

[Sixties Fan]

Again CNN legal analyst says nope

[ One, ?, against the facts ]

According to CNN, 18 officials — some anonymously and some on the record — have said that Trump never gave such an order, including national security and intelligence officials, lawyers for the former White House, officials within the Department of Justice (DOJ), and Mick Mulvaney and John Kelly, two of Trump’s three chiefs of staff.

Many of the officials questioned by CNN laughed at the idea, and one senior official described the claim as “bullshit.”

“Nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given,” Kelly said to CNN. “And I can’t imagine anyone that worked at the White House after me that would have simply shrugged their shoulders and allowed that order to go forward without dying in the ditch trying to stop it.”

Others noted that there was no evidence that a “standing order” had ever been issued.

“Total nonsense. If that’s true, where is the order with his signature on it?” one former senior Trump official said.

That same official suggested that there would be “tremendous pushback from the Intel Community and [the Department of Defense], which would almost certainly have become known to Intel and Armed Services Committees on the Hill.”

Security experts have also cast suspicion on Trump’s assertions. While a sitting president can indeed decide which documents should be declassified, they said, such an order couldn’t have been issued without documentation.

“The president is the ultimate classifier and de-classifier — but he can’t just wave a magic wand, and he can’t do it in secret,” Douglas London, a former CIA agent, said to ABC News.

“If [Trump] and his allies are defending his handling of these documents by claiming that they’re no longer classified, they need to show the paper trail,” he added.

David Laufman, a former chief of the DOJ’s counterintelligence division, who investigated the email scandal involving Hillary Clinton, agreed.

“It can’t just be an idea in his head. Programs and officials would have been notified. There is no evidence they were,” Laufman told CNN this week.

As part of its investigation into the documents that were improperly kept at Mar-a-Lago, the FBI is now questioning several former Trump administration officials, inquiring if Trump ever gave such an order, Rolling Stone reported. But whether Trump ordered officials to declassify certain documents doesn’t really matter, as it’s likely that Trump’s actions broke the law regardless of what classification status the materials had at the time the search warrant was executed.

“What’s listed in the search warrant is fascinating both for what it includes and what it doesn’t include,” Glenn Gerstell, former general counsel of the National Security Agency, told NPR, referring to the Espionage Act statutes that were cited in the warrant. “What it doesn’t include…is a statute that makes it a crime to knowingly remove or retain classified documents.”

18 Former Trump Officials Say “Standing Order” to Declassify Docs Never Happened

One former Trump official described the notion as "foolish," noting that no paper trail of such an order exists.

truthout.org

 

[jc456]

[ One, ?, against the facts ]

According to CNN, 18 officials — some anonymously and some on the record — have said that Trump never gave such an order, including national security and intelligence officials, lawyers for the former White House, officials within the Department of Justice (DOJ), and Mick Mulvaney and John Kelly, two of Trump’s three chiefs of staff.

Many of the officials questioned by CNN laughed at the idea, and one senior official described the claim as “bullshit.”

“Nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given,” Kelly said to CNN. “And I can’t imagine anyone that worked at the White House after me that would have simply shrugged their shoulders and allowed that order to go forward without dying in the ditch trying to stop it.”

Others noted that there was no evidence that a “standing order” had ever been issued.

“Total nonsense. If that’s true, where is the order with his signature on it?” one former senior Trump official said.

That same official suggested that there would be “tremendous pushback from the Intel Community and [the Department of Defense], which would almost certainly have become known to Intel and Armed Services Committees on the Hill.”

Security experts have also cast suspicion on Trump’s assertions. While a sitting president can indeed decide which documents should be declassified, they said, such an order couldn’t have been issued without documentation.

“The president is the ultimate classifier and de-classifier — but he can’t just wave a magic wand, and he can’t do it in secret,” Douglas London, a former CIA agent, said to ABC News.

“If [Trump] and his allies are defending his handling of these documents by claiming that they’re no longer classified, they need to show the paper trail,” he added.

David Laufman, a former chief of the DOJ’s counterintelligence division, who investigated the email scandal involving Hillary Clinton, agreed.

“It can’t just be an idea in his head. Programs and officials would have been notified. There is no evidence they were,” Laufman told CNN this week.

As part of its investigation into the documents that were improperly kept at Mar-a-Lago, the FBI is now questioning several former Trump administration officials, inquiring if Trump ever gave such an order, Rolling Stone reported. But whether Trump ordered officials to declassify certain documents doesn’t really matter, as it’s likely that Trump’s actions broke the law regardless of what classification status the materials had at the time the search warrant was executed.

“What’s listed in the search warrant is fascinating both for what it includes and what it doesn’t include,” Glenn Gerstell, former general counsel of the National Security Agency, told NPR, referring to the Espionage Act statutes that were cited in the warrant. “What it doesn’t include…is a statute that makes it a crime to knowingly remove or retain classified documents.”

18 Former Trump Officials Say “Standing Order” to Declassify Docs Never Happened

One former Trump official described the notion as "foolish," noting that no paper trail of such an order exists.

truthout.org

Hahaha hahaha it’s obvious you don’t understand how it works like the legal analyst

 

[Sixties Fan]

Hahaha hahaha it’s obvious you don’t understand how it works like the legal analyst

Ok, who is that analyst? Give a link to the video.

 

[jc456]

Ok, who is that analyst? Give a link to the video.

I posted the report

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

Hahaha hahaha it’s obvious you don’t understand how it works like the legal analyst

This is one CNN analyst:

CNN legal analyst Areva Martin says former President Donald Trump's claim that he had a standing order to declassify any and all documents that he took to Mar-a-Lago is "idiotic and nonsensical from every

 

[Sixties Fan]

Hahaha hahaha it’s obvious you don’t understand how it works like the legal analyst

As you do not know, and do not care about the laws of the country where you live, here is an explanation why the documents belong to the public:
----------------

Why are these documents public property?​

That Trump apparently tried, despite a subpoena and negotiations, to hold documents from his presidency away from the National Archives is -- as with so much of Trump's presidency -- completely unprecedented.
As to why the public owns presidential documents, it's a relatively recent development that, as with so many of the curbs on the presidency, has roots in Watergate.
Historian Timothy Naftali, a professor at New York University and former director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, told me the whole story. His words, edited for length and flow, are in italics, and I've added some subheads.

After leaving office, Nixon wanted his tapes and papers​

A few days after Nixon resigned, a moving van arrived in front of the White House. And the moving van was there to pick up Nixon's documents and his tapes.
And the Ford administration thought, "Oh, my God, what are we going to do?"
So they went to their Office of Legal Counsel, and they asked, "Who owns Nixon's tapes and his papers?" (Naftali is paraphrasing here and above.)

Before Nixon, presidents owned their papers​

The person in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel at the time was a lawyer named Antonin Scalia. And Antonin Scalia said presidents do. It is our tradition in the United States, it goes right back to George Washington that the president's own their papers, and their papers include anything that went to them and anything generated by their staff.
There was no differentiation between public and private documents. It was very similar to the way in which the King and Queen of England control documents.
There's nothing in the Constitution about this, and there was no law.
Congress had not gotten involved because it's a matter of the executive branch, and public opinion had never been such to force presidents to consider their materials public.

Nixon exchanged access to his papers for his pardon​

Richard Nixon was within his rights to say, OK, they're mine and take them back to California.
The Ford administration realized it had a problem because if it handed over the documents and the tapes to Nixon, people might see this as a cover-up.
So the Ford administration sought an agreement with Nixon to make sure that the documents could be available for the court cases, and that he couldn't destroy them for a certain period of time.
That agreement was part of the agreements that led to the pardon. Richard Nixon had to agree to this in order for Ford to give him a pardon.
Nixon agrees to it. Ford gives the pardon.

Congress intervened and passed a law to seize Nixon's documents​

And then Congress finds out about it and says, "Oh, my God, no, no, no, no, no. Yes, it's true the Ford administration is going to make sure the documents that are needed for the court cases are available, but then Nixon can destroy whatever hasn't been subpoenaed. We don't want that." (Naftali is paraphrasing here.)
And so Congress passed a law called the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act of 1974 that effectively seized all of the Nixon materials and considered them public property.

Nixon's papers are seized. This was a very big deal​

This was unprecedented in US history. Absolutely unprecedented. No president's materials had ever been treated this way. All previous presidents had -- they or their estates -- viewed presidential materials as private documents. That includes when the CIA gave presidents national security stuff. All of that.
Just because something is private doesn't mean presidents were allowed to sort of show it around at their golf club.
Anyway, so Congress does this. And the Nixon tapes are seized and Nixon's materials are seized. They do not go to San Clemente (where Nixon lived in California).

Nixon takes Congress to court. He also wanted to get paid​

Nixon cries foul. He says, "Hey, wait a moment. Why am I treated differently from every other president?"
Nixon said, "I own these. It's not right. It's unconstitutional and contrary to the spirit of our of our tradition." So he went to court and said, "You're taking my property away from me. You're actually taking property."
He both wanted to control these documents, but he also, if he was going to lose them, he wanted compensation. Basically, he argued, "Listen, these documents are worth something. And in retirement, I might need this money. So you owe me money for taking my property." (Naftali is paraphrasing here and above.)

The Supreme Court sided with Congress​

What the courts had to figure out was, OK, what really is the difference between private presidential materials -- because everyone agreed that there were certain materials that were private -- and public materials.
There were a series of cases, and those cases laid the foundation for the definitions of public and private, that would then be enshrined in law by the Presidential Records Act of 1978.
Congress decided to pass a law that established what was public and what was private in terms of presidential records.

This means the public owns presidential records​

It means they're owned by the American people. The American people may not be allowed to look at them yet, because they're classified. But at least ownership means the presidents couldn't destroy them.
That's why this mattered. Presidents had to then treat some of the products of their administration as belonging to somebody else, and therefore they couldn't just destroy it at will.
That's why it mattered that Donald Trump flushed documents down the toilet, because he was actually flushing public property down the toilet, and he had no right to do that.
So the Presidential Records Act is a product of the Watergate period. And it's a product of the American people and Congress coming to terms with the powers of the presidency and concluding that the presidency was too strong, and that presidents had taken advantage of areas of the law that the Constitution didn't touch.

Here's why the public owns Trump's presidential records | CNN Politics

That former President Donald Trump apparently tried to hold documents from his presidency away from the National Archives is completely unprecedented. As to why the public owns presidential documents, it's a relatively recent development that has roots in Watergate.

www.cnn.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

I posted the report

Post it again. I am not wasting my time on your allegations.

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[jc456]

As you do not know, and do not care about the laws of the country where you live, here is an explanation why the documents belong to the public:
----------------

Why are these documents public property?​

That Trump apparently tried, despite a subpoena and negotiations, to hold documents from his presidency away from the National Archives is -- as with so much of Trump's presidency -- completely unprecedented.
As to why the public owns presidential documents, it's a relatively recent development that, as with so many of the curbs on the presidency, has roots in Watergate.
Historian Timothy Naftali, a professor at New York University and former director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, told me the whole story. His words, edited for length and flow, are in italics, and I've added some subheads.

After leaving office, Nixon wanted his tapes and papers​

A few days after Nixon resigned, a moving van arrived in front of the White House. And the moving van was there to pick up Nixon's documents and his tapes.
And the Ford administration thought, "Oh, my God, what are we going to do?"
So they went to their Office of Legal Counsel, and they asked, "Who owns Nixon's tapes and his papers?" (Naftali is paraphrasing here and above.)

Before Nixon, presidents owned their papers​

The person in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel at the time was a lawyer named Antonin Scalia. And Antonin Scalia said presidents do. It is our tradition in the United States, it goes right back to George Washington that the president's own their papers, and their papers include anything that went to them and anything generated by their staff.
There was no differentiation between public and private documents. It was very similar to the way in which the King and Queen of England control documents.
There's nothing in the Constitution about this, and there was no law.
Congress had not gotten involved because it's a matter of the executive branch, and public opinion had never been such to force presidents to consider their materials public.

Nixon exchanged access to his papers for his pardon​

Richard Nixon was within his rights to say, OK, they're mine and take them back to California.
The Ford administration realized it had a problem because if it handed over the documents and the tapes to Nixon, people might see this as a cover-up.
So the Ford administration sought an agreement with Nixon to make sure that the documents could be available for the court cases, and that he couldn't destroy them for a certain period of time.
That agreement was part of the agreements that led to the pardon. Richard Nixon had to agree to this in order for Ford to give him a pardon.
Nixon agrees to it. Ford gives the pardon.

Congress intervened and passed a law to seize Nixon's documents​

And then Congress finds out about it and says, "Oh, my God, no, no, no, no, no. Yes, it's true the Ford administration is going to make sure the documents that are needed for the court cases are available, but then Nixon can destroy whatever hasn't been subpoenaed. We don't want that." (Naftali is paraphrasing here.)
And so Congress passed a law called the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act of 1974 that effectively seized all of the Nixon materials and considered them public property.

Nixon's papers are seized. This was a very big deal​

This was unprecedented in US history. Absolutely unprecedented. No president's materials had ever been treated this way. All previous presidents had -- they or their estates -- viewed presidential materials as private documents. That includes when the CIA gave presidents national security stuff. All of that.
Just because something is private doesn't mean presidents were allowed to sort of show it around at their golf club.
Anyway, so Congress does this. And the Nixon tapes are seized and Nixon's materials are seized. They do not go to San Clemente (where Nixon lived in California).

Nixon takes Congress to court. He also wanted to get paid​

Nixon cries foul. He says, "Hey, wait a moment. Why am I treated differently from every other president?"
Nixon said, "I own these. It's not right. It's unconstitutional and contrary to the spirit of our of our tradition." So he went to court and said, "You're taking my property away from me. You're actually taking property."
He both wanted to control these documents, but he also, if he was going to lose them, he wanted compensation. Basically, he argued, "Listen, these documents are worth something. And in retirement, I might need this money. So you owe me money for taking my property." (Naftali is paraphrasing here and above.)

The Supreme Court sided with Congress​

What the courts had to figure out was, OK, what really is the difference between private presidential materials -- because everyone agreed that there were certain materials that were private -- and public materials.
There were a series of cases, and those cases laid the foundation for the definitions of public and private, that would then be enshrined in law by the Presidential Records Act of 1978.
Congress decided to pass a law that established what was public and what was private in terms of presidential records.

This means the public owns presidential records​

It means they're owned by the American people. The American people may not be allowed to look at them yet, because they're classified. But at least ownership means the presidents couldn't destroy them.
That's why this mattered. Presidents had to then treat some of the products of their administration as belonging to somebody else, and therefore they couldn't just destroy it at will.
That's why it mattered that Donald Trump flushed documents down the toilet, because he was actually flushing public property down the toilet, and he had no right to do that.
So the Presidential Records Act is a product of the Watergate period. And it's a product of the American people and Congress coming to terms with the powers of the presidency and concluding that the presidency was too strong, and that presidents had taken advantage of areas of the law that the Constitution didn't touch.

Here's why the public owns Trump's presidential records | CNN Politics

That former President Donald Trump apparently tried to hold documents from his presidency away from the National Archives is completely unprecedented. As to why the public owns presidential documents, it's a relatively recent development that has roots in Watergate.

www.cnn.com

Again, legal analyst said differently .

 

[jc456]

Post it again. I am not wasting my time on your allegations.

I posted it multiple times. Click the little arrow next to my quote you used.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Again, legal analyst said differently .

You cannot name or find it. It does not exist.

 

[Sixties Fan]

I posted it multiple times. Click the little arrow next to my quote you used.

Post it. I am not following your worthless games.

 

[jc456]

You cannot name or find it. It does not exist.

You aren’t good at this

 

[jc456]

Post it. I am not following your worthless games.

I did, it’s obvious you are lazy

go to #709 and hit the little arrow next to the quoted name. Let's see how lazy you really are. You've already responded to the link. The fact you are this lazy is evidence of how useless you are at this.

 

[Sixties Fan]

I did, it’s obvious you are lazy

go to #709 and hit the little arrow next to the quoted name. Let's see how lazy you really are. You've already responded to the link. The fact you are this lazy is evidence of how useless you are at this.

The last paragraph confirms what all other experts have said. Keep laughing, because no court or judge, even Trump appointed ones, are buying your masquerade.
------------------

“While Trump could have declassified whatever he liked while president, his apparent inability to produce any credible evidence that he actually did so is a genuine problem—particularly against the backdrop of an incumbent president who clearly sees the documents as still classified,” Scott R. Anderson wrote at Lawfare Blog.

Honig and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

-----------
The documents belong to the National Archives. Period.

 

[jc456]

The last paragraph confirms what all other experts have said. Keep laughing, because no court or judge, even Trump appointed ones, are buying your masquerade.
------------------

“While Trump could have declassified whatever he liked while president, his apparent inability to produce any credible evidence that he actually did so is a genuine problem—particularly against the backdrop of an incumbent president who clearly sees the documents as still classified,” Scott R. Anderson wrote at Lawfare Blog.

Honig and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

-----------
The documents belong to the National Archives. Period.

oh, so you finally found it. So again, you still got nothing. the raid was all illegally done. And yes, in court it will come out. I'm confident.

 

[Sixties Fan]

oh, so you finally found it. So again, you still got nothing. the raid was all illegally done. And yes, in court it will come out. I'm confident.

Yeah, it is coming out ok, but you are not paying attention to what is actually coming out.

Is it helping Trump ?
Or is it going to show that indeed he had no business having any of it, which is why NARA demanded the documents to be returned. That is what is coming out.

Pay attention. His lawyers do not even know how to file a proper document, as per of my previous posts.