Posted on 06/10/2023 6:10:51 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Yes, it’s true, according to the information contained in the Jack Smith indictment of President Donald John Trump, The Conservative Treehouse likely holds similar “classified documents” as outlined in the case by the special prosecutor.
Once you understand how, you then understand one of the most overlooked nonsensical aspects to the insufferable DOJ and FBI case that has been pushed in the media for the past year.
It is entirely possible for a person, any person, especially a person who follows the news, to possess documents containing “classified markings.” The indictment accuses President Trump of withholding documents containing “classified markings,” a very specifically deployed obtuse wording intended to create the implication of something nefarious where nothing nefarious exists.
There is a big difference between a classified document and a document containing classified markings. As an example, anyone who has looked at the Carter Page FISA application, made public in July 2018, has reviewed a document containing “classified markings.” When a document is declassified, they do not remove the markings.
You might think this is a one-off use of the “documents with classification markings” lingo, but it’s not. This language is the underpinning of the entire DOJ/FBI framework that predicated the raid on Mar-a-Lago. Specifically, neither NARA nor the DOJ-NSD requested President Trump or his team to return Classified Documents. The DOJ demanded the return of any documents that contained “classified markings.” [SEE BELOW]
Because the verbiage is so intentionally obtuse (ie. Lawfare), a fulsome production in compliance with this DOJ demand would include any newspaper or magazine articles that had a picture of the Carter Page FISA application, or any printed online article that might contain the same or similar elements. There is a big difference between asking for a classified document return, and asking for a return of documents that contain “classified markings.” [Example from CTH, below left]
As a result, it is entirely possible, I would say almost certain, that President Trump -and his legal team- returned every document that contained classified information but may have omitted documents that retained “classified markings”. There’s the spirit of compliance, and the letter of absolute compliance when contrast against a very granular interpretation of the request.
It is obvious from the demand, the DOJ/FBI were casting a wide net on the compliance side, knowing that amid hundreds-of-thousands of presidential documents and records, there would be obscure documents with classified markings that had nothing to do with national security. Thus, the “classified markings” establishes a Lawfare compliance tactic.
It will be interesting to see how this nonsense progresses. It becomes easier to call it nonsense, when you simply accept the approach being used. If the DOJ-NSD, FBI, Special Counsel or NARA were genuinely interested in ‘national security issues’, they would not be playing obtuse word games in order to structure court filings simply for media narrative engineering and propaganda purposes.
Again, all of these insufferable pretending elements simply create more avenues for smart legal minds to highlight to the court. The judges can see through this nonsense, and their action or lack thereof becomes part of showcasing their own agenda. Fortunately Judge Cannon has a very solid background on the Mar-a-Lago documents case. She wouldn’t need to have this stuff pointed out to her; she has already experienced it.
In the interim, for your own conversational points with friends and family, simply draw their attention to the difference between Classified Documents and documents containing “classified markings,” eventually everyone except the rabid orange-man-bad moonbats will figure out the games being played.
Bullcrap… she sold them to several foreign leaders in exchange for Clinton Foundation. She had no right to even posses them. And the war plan for Iran was declassified. But Biden appreciates your support… tool.
yes that was a real tell
yes that was a real tell
title: Identical Classified Documents
text: similar “classified documents”
Great points. Good article. Thx for posting.
“President Obama appointed [in 2009] Ferriero to simultaneously head the new National Declassification Center, which had ‘been given four years to go through 400 million pages of federal documents that remain top secret. They date to World War I.’”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferriero
I've seen no evidence or proof of that, do you have any? Reports are, it was last seen with Trump, who was admitting it was still classified, after he had left office, and he was in an unapproved facility. Which appears to indicate he's still harboring classified information, unless you have any evidence to the contrary.
By federal law, presidential papers should be kept separate from personal papers.
If a box clearly has personal papers, it should be reasonable to believe it does not have presidential papers.
BTTT.
“war plan”
18 U.S. Code § 793 -
Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
(d)Whoever,
>lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note
>>relating to the national defense,
>>or information relating to the national defense
>>>which information the possessor has reason to believe
>>>>could be used to the injury of the United States
>>>>or to the advantage of any foreign nation,
>willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it,
>or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
Neither the document nor plan specific information within the “attack plan” document was given away by Trump.
Trump actually said “This is secret information. Look, look at this” on a recording
Technically speaking, a document that is stamped “Unclassified” has classification markings. It’s an odd phrasing, but when the government or politicians use odd phrasing, there is usually a reason.
I’d also mention that individual pages of a classified document that contain no classified information may retain the markings used for the completed document.
We may find...or not... that 90% of this is word games around “classified markings” versus containing classified information.
One simple “yes or no” question: Would this case have been brought if Trump were not running for President again?
Could you tell the jury, what information you might be able to tell a foreign country about that attack plan that the foreign country might not already know from the indictment and newspaper reports?
Not a thing except the type was too small to read from where I was at.
Some documents were “Confidential”. Like something that might appear in TIME magazine.
Correction. None of the documents were classified.
;-)
I think it would have been.
The Democrats are trying to send three messages:
1. rich Republican presidents will have too much to lose
2. not rich Republican presidents will not be able to pay the massive legal bills
3. leave the governing to Democrats.
Republicans abhor. Democrats hate.
Maybe not, but since Trump himself campaigned hard on locking Hillary up for mishandling classified info, and was elected on that expectation, it's a valid issue for those wanting to be President?
“...now wanting us to believe mishandling classified shouldn’t even be a thing, anymore.
No, he doesn’t say that. He had power to declassify. Hillary never did. He mentioned it today. All the boxes were stacked up in front of the White House ready for the arrival of a truck. There was no attempt to hide them or engage in espionage. It was all handled by the Secret Service.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.