quick question for those claiming that because Trump isnt President anymore he couldnt declassify stuff in his possession

[Sixties Fan]

Maybe TRUMP used the same security protocols Hillary used to set up a personal server, well except unlike Hillary TRUMP had the authority to declassify materials.

IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT​

• The National Archives in February said it had recovered 15 boxes of presidential records that former President Donald Trump had taken to his home in Mar-a-Lago. This was a breach of the Presidential Records Act.
• 
  
• Some of the documents were marked classified national security.
• 
  
• Hillary Clinton used a private email address for exchanges with her State Department staff. In three instances, email chains included information with ambiguous classification markings.

Clinton’s emails

Clinton’s email troubles started in 2014, when the House Select Committee on Benghaziasked the State Department for all of her emails. The department didn’t have them all because, instead of only using the State Department email system (with an email address ending in @state.gov), Clinton used a personal email address (@clintonemail.com) housed on private servers located in her Chappaqua, New York, home.

In 2014, Clinton’s lawyers combed through the private server and turned over about 30,000 work-related emails to the State Department and deleted the rest, which Clinton said involved personal matters, such as her daughter’s wedding plans.

Clinton repeatedly said she did not have any classified emails on her server, but the results of an FBI investigation found otherwise.

Of the tens of thousands of emails investigators reviewed, 113 contained classified information, and three of those had classification markers. Former FBI Director James Comey said in 2016 that Clinton should have known that some of the 113 were classified, but others she might have understandably missed. In a sign of the uncertainty around classification, in 2018, a Justice Department report found that the classification markings were not clear.

Ultimately, Clinton paid a political, not a legal, price for her email practices. Republicans wielded the episode against her as proof that she was untrustworthy. Trump said she was "guilty as hell" and often raised the specter of what the roughly 30,000 personal emails she deleted might have contained. House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said she showed a "fundamental lack of judgment and wanton disregard" for matters of national security.

The FBI issued its findings in July 2016. Broadly, it said classified information had been improperly transmitted, but carelessness, not an intent to skirt the law, was the cause. The issue began to fade, but it resurfaced at the end of October 2016, right before the election. Many believe that in a razor-thin election, that timing torpedoed her campaign.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Maybe TRUMP used the same security protocols Hillary used to set up a personal server, well except unlike Hillary TRUMP had the authority to declassify materials.

Trump’s documents
The details of the warrant behind the search of Trump’s residence remain unclear. We do know that Trump crossed swords with the National Archives when it was learned that he had taken official records with him when he left the White House. The Presidential Records Actrequires that everything go to the archives.

The head of the National Archives, David Ferriero, told the House Oversight and Reform Committee in February that his agency had recovered 15 boxes of presidential records from Mar-a-Lago. Ferriero said they had "identified items marked as classified national security information within the boxes."

In an echo of Clinton’s email practices, Ferriero also said "some White House staff conducted official business using nonofficial electronic messaging accounts that were not copied or forwarded into their official electronic messaging accounts, as required by section 2209 of the Presidential Records Act."

In 2018, about halfway through Trump’s presidency, the National Archives learned that Trump was tearing up documents, another breach of the rules. They contacted the White House counsel’s office, and matters improved.

"White House staff were attempting to tape them back together," Ferriero told the House committee. "Although White House staff during the Trump administration recovered and taped together some of the torn-up records, a number of other torn-up records that were transferred had not been reconstructed by the White House."

It is unclear from Ferriero’s letter if documents torn up before the National Archives intervened were retained. Trump said his staff had been cooperating with the National Archives at the time of the raid.

Clinton’s emails, Trump’s boxes of files: A comparison

Soon after FBI agents raided his Mar-a-Lago estate, former President Donald Trump posted a statement decrying the "weapo

www.politifact.com

 

[candycorn]

Do you ever actually read the post you are responding to?

Truth

 

[Sixties Fan]

Maybe TRUMP used the same security protocols Hillary used to set up a personal server, well except unlike Hillary TRUMP had the authority to declassify materials.

A key difference between the two
Bradley Moss, a Washington-based lawyer who works on national security cases, said the cases of Clinton and Trump are significantly different.

"Trump took properly marked hard copy classified documents from the White House, shipped them to Florida, and stored them in an unsecured location at his residence," Moss said.

The presence of classified information in Clinton’s emails was less obvious.

"The e-mails were never marked as classified because these were communications from unclassified government accounts," Moss said.

In three instances, email chains included information with classification markers. It was never clear that Clinton was aware of the presence of that marked information, or if the classification marking was clear.

Marked information is not to be confused with emails containing unmarked information that could be deemed classified. That is a looser definition, and one that can be applied retroactively. Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University, said in one case, an email in one chain forwarded a front-page New York Times story about a drone strike. Under its rules, the CIA called that classified, Blanton said.

When classified information was clearly involved, Blanton said Clinton’s "briefings were on a different system, a classified Blackberry that was managed by State Department IT people."

Clinton’s emails included moments when staffers wrote that for them to go into more detail, they would need to switch to a secure classified State Department system.

Moss cautioned that while some documents at Mar-a-Lago were clearly marked as classified, many questions remain, such as "where the records were originally located, who boxed them up, when Trump became aware of the existence of the records at Mar-a-Lago, and what, if any, efforts Trump took to rectify the situation once he was informed."

The answers to those questions, he said, would help determine if anyone could be held criminally liable, and whether Trump himself faces any legal risk.

As for the personal emails that Clinton erased, the FBI said its investigation might have found some of them. Overall, the agency said it was reasonably confident that there was no intentional misconduct.

Clinton’s emails, Trump’s boxes of files: A comparison

Soon after FBI agents raided his Mar-a-Lago estate, former President Donald Trump posted a statement decrying the "weapo

www.politifact.com

 

[pknopp]

IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT​

• The National Archives in February said it had recovered 15 boxes of presidential records that former President Donald Trump had taken to his home in Mar-a-Lago. This was a breach of the Presidential Records Act.
• 
  
• Some of the documents were marked classified national security.
• 
  
• Hillary Clinton used a private email address for exchanges with her State Department staff. In three instances, email chains included information with ambiguous classification markings.

Clinton’s emails

Clinton’s email troubles started in 2014, when the House Select Committee on Benghaziasked the State Department for all of her emails. The department didn’t have them all because, instead of only using the State Department email system (with an email address ending in @state.gov), Clinton used a personal email address (@clintonemail.com) housed on private servers located in her Chappaqua, New York, home.

In 2014, Clinton’s lawyers combed through the private server and turned over about 30,000 work-related emails to the State Department and deleted the rest, which Clinton said involved personal matters, such as her daughter’s wedding plans.

Clinton repeatedly said she did not have any classified emails on her server, but the results of an FBI investigation found otherwise.

Of the tens of thousands of emails investigators reviewed, 113 contained classified information, and three of those had classification markers. Former FBI Director James Comey said in 2016 that Clinton should have known that some of the 113 were classified, but others she might have understandably missed. In a sign of the uncertainty around classification, in 2018, a Justice Department report found that the classification markings were not clear.

Ultimately, Clinton paid a political, not a legal, price for her email practices. Republicans wielded the episode against her as proof that she was untrustworthy. Trump said she was "guilty as hell" and often raised the specter of what the roughly 30,000 personal emails she deleted might have contained. House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said she showed a "fundamental lack of judgment and wanton disregard" for matters of national security.

The FBI issued its findings in July 2016. Broadly, it said classified information had been improperly transmitted, but carelessness, not an intent to skirt the law, was the cause. The issue began to fade, but it resurfaced at the end of October 2016, right before the election. Many believe that in a razor-thin election, that timing torpedoed her campaign.

Ultimately, Clinton paid a political, not a legal, price for her email practices. Republicans wielded the episode against her as proof that she was untrustworthy.

Do you suppose they will hold Trump to the same standard?

 

[Sixties Fan]

You keep saying that, but where is the law you claim says that?

Proven false, but you keep saying it.

IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT​

• The search warrant served on former President Donald Trump has raised some novel legal questions involving national-security classification.
• If the federal government pursues legal action against Trump over document laws, one obvious defense for Trump might be that he declassified these documents before leaving office.
• Sitting presidents do have wide powers to declassify documents, but they are supposed to go through a detailed procedure to do so.
• This case is so unprecedented that experts urge caution before projecting how courts may respond to such an argument.
The search warrant served on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home appears to involve documents that investigators say should not have remained in Trump’s possession after his presidency. This development has elevated some novel legal scenarios involving national-security classification.

Some of the papers in question may be ordinary presidential documents that fall under the Presidential Records Act of 1978. This law transferred ownership of presidential records to the U.S. government and established a record-keeping structure for presidents to use going forward.

However, a subset of documents being sought by the government might be classified for national security reasons. If so, a law known as Section 1924 could come into play. This provision says that knowingly removing classified documents with the intent to keep them in an unauthorized location is a crime.

If charges are ever brought under the latter law, one obvious defense for Trump might be that he declassified these documents before leaving office. If that was done, then no classified documents would mean no crime.

Is this realistic?

Legal experts say there’s reason to believe this legal argument won’t keep Trump out of legal peril — but they add that this is such an unusual case that it’s hard to rule out any eventuality.

What to know about presidential declassification powers

The search warrant served on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home appears to involve documents that investiga

www.politifact.com

 

[Maxdeath]

Does not matter IF there were any classified documents in his possession. Does not matter IF there were any documents that were declassified or not. Does not matter IF all they found were receipts for hamburgers and sodas. All that mattered and will matter is that first of all it was Trump. Second of all it was a Republican.
44 kept material and nothing was made of it. Hillary kept classified documents on an unsecured server and sent them to others in emails and bleach bitted them once they were subpoenaed And nothing was made of it. The Clinton’s took furniture and other items from the White House and nothing was made of it.
There was even an affidavit made saying there was no classified information at Trumps home.
But it does not matter all that mattered was that there was a raid for political purposes. But somehow the democrats seem to not understand that they have now set in motion political policies that can be used against themselves as well. The saying tit for tat comes to mind.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Ultimately, Clinton paid a political, not a legal, price for her email practices. Republicans wielded the episode against her as proof that she was untrustworthy.

Do you suppose they will hold Trump to the same standard?

You did not understand one thing the article said, did you?

Is it because you really do not want to know what the law says? Or Trump must be innocent, as he always says he is?

 

[pknopp]

Does not matter IF there were any classified documents in his possession. Does not matter IF there were any documents that were declassified or not. Does not matter IF all they found were receipts for hamburgers and sodas. All that mattered and will matter is that first of all it was Trump. Second of all it was a Republican.
44 kept material and nothing was made of it. Hillary kept classified documents on an unsecured server and sent them to others in emails and bleach bitted them once they were subpoenaed And nothing was made of it. The Clinton’s took furniture and other items from the White House and nothing was made of it.
There was even an affidavit made saying there was no classified information at Trumps home.
But it does not matter all that mattered was that there was a raid for political purposes. But somehow the democrats seem to not understand that they have now set in motion political policies that can be used against themselves as well. The saying tit for tat comes to mind.

And Trump said he would prosecute Hillary for all of this but did not. He was too busy tweeting and calling people names. So your argument boils down to the idea that the Democrats have followed through while Trump did not. Is that really a good argument?

 

[Sixties Fan]

You keep saying that, but where is the law you claim says that?

Proven false, but you keep saying it.

Presidential declassification power

The president’s classification and declassification powers are broad.

The president, as commander in chief, is ultimately responsible for classification and declassification. When people lower in the chain of command handle classification and declassification duties — which is usually how it’s done — it’s because they have been delegated to do so by the president directly, or by an appointee chosen by the president.

The majority ruling in the 1988 Supreme Court case Department of Navy v. Egan — which involved 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 court’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."

Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, told PolitiFact in 2017 that such authority gives the president the authority to "classify and declassify at will."

Robert F. Turner, associate director of the University of Virginia's Center for National Security Law, told us in 2017 that "if Congress were to enact a statute seeking to limit the president’s authority to classify or declassify national security information, or to prohibit him from sharing certain kinds of information … it would raise serious separation of powers constitutional issues."

The official documents governing classification and declassification stem from presidential executive orders. But even these executive orders aren’t necessarily binding on a president. The president is not "obliged to follow any procedures other than those that he himself has prescribed," Aftergood said. "And he can change those."

The situation recalls the "infamous comment" by President Richard Nixon that "when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal." But national-security specialists at the blog Lawfare wrote that this "is actually true about some things. Classified information is one of them. The nature of the system is that the president gets to disclose what he wants."

If a president’s appointees disagree with those actions, the president "can overrule their decisions," Turner said. "Within the executive branch, the president is the boss."

What to know about presidential declassification powers

The search warrant served on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home appears to involve documents that investiga

www.politifact.com

 

[pknopp]

You did not understand one thing the article said, did you?

Is it because you really do not want to know what the law says? Or Trump must be innocent, as he always says he is?

Bite me. I simply asked a question concerning one statement in your argument. I've already addressed the rest. Did you read anything I wrote earlier?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Could Trump cite presidential declassification power in this case?
One key point is that presidential declassification power does not continue once a president is out of office.

"While it is true that the president can classify and declassify at will, the same is obviously not true of a former president, who ceases to be commander in chief as soon as he leaves office," Aftergood said in an Aug. 11 interview.

Could Trump argue that he declassified certain documents in private, while president? That is not how the system is designed to work.

"Merely proclaiming a document or group of documents declassified and doing nothing more would not suffice," Bradley Moss, a Washington, D.C.-based lawyer who works on national security cases, told PolitiFact.

Follow-through is required.

"He had to identify the specific documents he was declassifying, he needed to memorialize the order in writing for bureaucratic and historical purposes, and he needed to have staff physically modify the classification markings on the documents themselves," Moss said. "Until that was done, the documents, per the security classification procedures, still have to be handled, transmitted and stored as if they were classified."

Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University, agreed.

"If the documents are still marked classified 18 months after their removal from the White House," Blanton told PolitiFact, "then Trump was too busy to order them declassified at the time."

However, experts cautioned that nothing is ordinary about the current situation involving Trump. In such an unusual and high-stakes scenario, it’s hard to be too certain about how the courts would rule.

"We’re in uncharted territory on the issue of criminally prosecuting a former president over mishandling classified documents," Moss said. "There is no legal precedent to look to for guidance. It raises all sorts of constitutional implications and it is anyone’s guess how it would play out."

What to know about presidential declassification powers

The search warrant served on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home appears to involve documents that investiga

www.politifact.com

 

[Care4all]

His standing order makes it a nothing-burger.

There is no such thing as a standing order to reclassify top secret documents.

It would be in writing, the procedure to reclassify the documents throughout the government system holding these documents, to reclassify and MARK THEM DECLASSIFIED, so that all people in government know their new status.

Was this ever done?

First trump had no top secret marked documents....well that was not true...

Then it was the FBI PLANTED top secret documents in their search....but trump slipped, or his son slipped up and told us their close circuit security cameras were running the whole time, so they had to stop lying about documents being planted...

And now it is John Soloman claiming there was a standard order of declassification if he brought them to his whitehouse residence.....



Show us this standard order, and show us the procedure put in place to remark the top secret classified documents in the govt system to DECLASSIFIED and Trump's signature and date, he declassified them, on the REQUIRED MARKINGS.

 

[BlueGin]

No, they do not think that Trump "suck" back into the White House.

He took all of those boxes as he left the White House on January 20th, 2021

He did not go through the proper process always required to declassify documents. He simply took them. And kept all of those declassified and Top Secret documents in a non secure place. His home in Mar A Lago.

There is no “process” a president is required to go through to declassify documents.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Bite me. I simply asked a question concerning one statement in your argument. I've already addressed the rest. Did you read anything I wrote earlier?

No, I have not read anything you wrote before. I came at a later post. Will check on it.

 

[Lesh]

They don’t apply to the president.

The PRA was written FOR the President

 

[Lesh]

We do know that Trump crossed swords with the National Archives when it was learned that he had taken official records with him when he left the White House. The Presidential Records Act requires that everything go to the archives.

 

[Sixties Fan]

There is no “process” a president is required to go through to declassify documents.

I posted the facts. You like your fantasy, so be it.
And he was already a Former President when he took what was in all of those 15 boxes which were returned, and the 12 recently taken

 

[debbiedowner]

And you apply that same standard to Obama, do you? No, I didn't think so.

The media has trained you well.

This may or may not help you dog.

WATCH: Fox News host Bret Baier slaps down Trump's declassification defense and Obama attack

 

[Curried Goats]

Do you think Trump snuck back into the white house after Biden was sworn in and took the stuff? If not then the simple fact remains that as President ANYTHING he wants can be declassified and all it takes is him to say so. No paper work no stamps just him saying it. So unless he snuck in after Biden was sworn in and took it then EVERYTHING he has and had was unclassified by the simple act of him taking it.

Don't try and think, you'll only hurt yourself. What we know is that the FBI got a warrant to raid Trumps residence from a sitting judge after he was already subpoenaed and handed over documents.