I’m not quite grasping the, uh, nuances of the argument being made by Trump’s lawyers, and I don’t think the Special Master will either. They claim the documents are all declassified, but won’t state how/why/when because...reasons?
I don’t trust media interpretations.
I also distrust the competency of the Trump lawyers.
Trump and his representatives have said he declassified all this stuff.
Seems pretty straight forward to ask, ok when and how?
If they can’t answer, I’m sure the Matter will assume for now they are classified. That will give the government a reason to keep them.
Maybe he declassified them maybe he didn’t. If he didn’t it would have been better to never make the claim.
My guess is a 5th amendment protection against self-incrimination.
The Special Master is asking for President Trump to "provide details about Trump’s claim to have “declassified” documents that were seized during the FBI in the search of Mar-a-Lago." Any details that President Trump divulges will be used against him in a future indictment.
The Trump team wants the DoJ to build its case against Trump independently without President Trump leaving breadcrumbs for them to follow. They want the DoJ to prove that President Trump illegally possessed those documents. Do they have proof that those documents were still classified?
I know this sounds like the government is in the position of having to prove a negative, that the documents were not declassified, but the burden is on them to make the case that President Trump that he's guilty, not on President Trump to prove that he's innocent.
Therefore, the so-called Trump Team is holding their cards close to their vest and waiting for an indictment before revealing their facts. I'd think they believe they are forced to this extreme measure because the DoJ is compromised by bias and a perceived existential threat and Trump won't get a fair treatment with them.
-PJ
How can you prove you declassified what you don’t know they have? Since when does an American have to prove their innocence? The government needs to prove he didn’t declassify.
There's a great series of videos on Youtube that explains why you should never say ANYTHING to the police.
The most important reason I recall is this: "Even if you tell the absolute truth, you may be mistakenly contradicted by a credible witness whose testimony might convince a jury that you are lying."
I recall a discussion regarding the damage claimed by a plaintiff who loaned a wheelbarrow. The defense could consist of any of several arguments.
1) The defendant never borrowed the wheelbarrow.
2) The defendant borrowed the wheelbarrow and returned it in good condition.
3) The wheelbarrow was already damaged when the defendant borrowed it.
If damaging the wheelbarrow was a crime, then the prosecutor would have to prove ALL of the above claims to be false. The defendant would not have the burden of proof.
Trump's team is similarly positioned. It is not their burden to prove that Trump did not declassify any particular document. Instead, my expectation is that a judge at a trial might have to instruct the jury as to whether or not a former President has the authority, perhaps while still in office, to declassify and possess documents which at some time in the past had been classified.
Trump's lawyers are simply not willing to do the job that some potential prosecutor might be obligated to do in the future.
Because the government must prove that there are documents that meet these requirements. You are innocent until proven guilty. The prosecution has to say why they believe the documents don't count under a blanket declassification. The defense only has to show that the prosecution is wrong. The defense does not have to prove innocence. Which is what the Special Master is asking for.
“I’m not quite grasping the, uh, nuances of the argument being made”
_________________________________________
Well, that’s no surprise.
Accused persons are frequently advised not to speak to the police or the prosecutors, except in the presence of their lawyers, prior to the trial. This protects the elements of their defense from the prosecution developing specific counter evidence or arguments prior to hearing it for the first time in court.
It is forced to build its case on the evidence it can gather independently. Sometimes this is very difficult and results in a decision to reduce the charges to what can be proven or to a decision not to prosecute the case at all.
President Trump‘s lawyers are simply exercising a common defense strategy to protect their client during subsequent legal proceedings.
The president, his attorneys claim, doesn’t require any other government official or procedure to verbally pronounce a document declassified. He is, by authority of his office, the highest classification/declassification authority in the government. The challenge for the government is to prove that an order given given by a sitting President to Executive Office of the President subordinates that all classified documents being packed by GSA for removal from the White House to Mar-a-Lago (sp) were declassified is, in fact, inadequate to accomplish the declassification action. In order to do that, the government would have to prove that the president lacks the authority of the chief executive. Not sure if the government even wants to go there in pursuing this case.
It doesn’t matter if the order was improperly carried out. The issue is whether or not 1) the president was competent to give the order; 2) that he still was President at the time the order was given, and 3) whether or not subordinates improperly carrying out administrative procedures to mark the documents as declassified meet the elements of the offense for the serious allegations (treason/espionage) supposedly being made by the government against President Trump.
Because providing the details of the President’s declassification of the documents (which btw is known to the GSA which handled the transfer days before he left the WH), provides exposure of defensive evidence (which may be needed and could then not be used) should the idiots try to INDICT him... on “just because we say so”. Make the very declas details the REASON basis for an indictment-— when it can not ever be.
Getting the Special Master to “enable” their continued invention of a “crime” into a process “crime”. This is the point of the comments that declassification is NOT subject to the bureaucrats that served under the Executive. There is much precedence and Constitutional support- Presidential declass is the TOP clearance.
In this case the declas lifts the rock exposing the worms who have been violating Federal Statutes governing their actions....for several decades. Extra-judiciary and Extra- Executive actions of the said ... administrative state, which has NO power to do this unless they fake it— as they have done, and which protects THEM not national security. Like calling Trump a Russian agent, invented by hitlery’s money and completely fabricated narrative washed through willing complicit criminal police actions to cover up said actions.