Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

‘For Goodness Sake!’: Congressman Jim Jordan Breaks Down Major ‘Flaw’ In Argument Against Trump
The Daily Caller ^ | 06/13/2023 | BRIANNA LYMAN

Posted on 06/13/2023 9:21:24 AM PDT by SeekAndFind


SCREENSHOT: CNN

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan broke down the major “flaw” in the indictment against former President Donald Trump Sunday on CNN with Dana Bash.

Trump announced the indictment Thursday, ahead of the official indictment being unsealed Friday. The charges against Trump include 31 counts of alleged violation of the Espionage Act or the willful retention of national security information, as well as one count of “conspiracy to obstruct justice,” one count of “withholding a document or record,” one count of corruptly concealing a documents or record,” one count of “concealing a documents in a deferral investigation,” one count of “scheme to conceal” and one count of “false statements and representations.”

Bash asked Jordan to comment on part of the indictment.

“The indictment said: ‘TRUMP directed NAUTA,’ who’s his personal aide, ‘to move boxes before Trump Attorney 1’s June 2 review, so that many boxes were not searched and many documents responsive to the May 11 Subpoena could not be found and were in fact not found by Trump Attorney 1.’ [sic] In plain English, this alleges that Trump instructed his aide to help him remove sensitive documents in defiance of a federal subpoena. A), Does that trouble you? And B) If he thought he had the right to have these documents, why was he trying so hard to hide them?” Bash asked.

“No, it doesn’t bother me because again, you can’t have obstruction of something when there was no underlying crime. The standard is set. The standard is what the Constitution says. The commander-in-chief — the president of the United States — has the ability to classify and control access to information. That’s what the Constitution and the court have said. So you can’t obstruct when there is — you can’t obstruct when there is no underlying crime,” said Jordan.

“He is not the president of the United States — ”

“That is the fundamental flaw,” Jordan shot back.

“And you’re just taking him at his word?” Dana asked.

“And when he was president, he declassified the material. He’s been — he’s been very clear about that.”

“He says point-blank, on tape, ‘As president I could have declassified it. Now I can’t.’ He says, in his own words, it’s on tape as part of this indictment, that he did not declassify the material. Therefore, it is classified.”

“Dana … saying he could have, saying he could have is not the same as saying he didn’t,” Jordan pushed back.

“He said, ‘now I can’t’,” Bash said.

“Now he can’t — right — because he’s not president now. But when he was president, he did declassify it. He said that,” Jordan said.

“Which means that what he was holding was classified,” Bash argued.

“Not if he declassified it when he was president of the United States, for goodness sake!”

“But he’s saying point-blank in this audio tape that he did not declassify it,” Bash said. “What you’re saying just doesn’t make sense on its face.”

“Dana, what this truly is, Dana, is an affront to the rule of law. It’s an affront to consistent application of the law. You have Secretary Clinton — who had classified material on a server — she was not president of the United States. She was Secretary Clinton. You have that happen, nothing happens to her,” Jordan continued before the duo moved on to other issues.

Bash was referencing was a July 2021 call which alleged Trump showed a “plan of attack” to a writer, a publisher and two staffers, which he said was prepared for him by the Department of Defense, according to the indictment. “As president, I could have declassified it,” Trump allegedly said at the time, and “now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aifakes; bidengate; indictment; jimjordan; nocasejack; plenarypower; presdjtrump; trump; trump2024
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-168 next last
To: ConservativeInPA; econjack

RE: the President can classify or declassify anything he wants without anyone’s approval

Ok, let’s accept that for now… here’s the main focus of the indictment — why didn’t he declassify the document he waved in front of the reporter ( by his own admission on the recording )?

And is it a crime for him to wave the classified document to a reporter ( assuming it is indeed classified )?


101 posted on 06/13/2023 1:38:27 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: CrazyCatChick

And it’s a lie.


102 posted on 06/13/2023 1:39:19 PM PDT by Fledermaus (It's time to get rid of the Three McStooges; Mitch, Kevin and Ronna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Did you fail grammar?


103 posted on 06/13/2023 1:40:23 PM PDT by Fledermaus (It's time to get rid of the Three McStooges; Mitch, Kevin and Ronna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The ex president

can’t de - classify now

it was done previously

when he was president

before he left office

simple as that


104 posted on 06/13/2023 1:43:35 PM PDT by Firehath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

There are probably dozens of Iran attack plans based on different circumstances.

Who cares? I’ve got hundreds of invasion plans on various countries but, alas, no one listens to me! LOL


105 posted on 06/13/2023 1:43:58 PM PDT by Fledermaus (It's time to get rid of the Three McStooges; Mitch, Kevin and Ronna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID


106 posted on 06/13/2023 1:44:30 PM PDT by Fledermaus (It's time to get rid of the Three McStooges; Mitch, Kevin and Ronna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

My goodness, can’t ANYONE speak or read English any longer.

FR is starting to be filled with people that could work at CNN or MSNBC.


107 posted on 06/13/2023 1:46:02 PM PDT by Fledermaus (It's time to get rid of the Three McStooges; Mitch, Kevin and Ronna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“‘As president I could have declassified it. Now I can’t.’ “

Simple: He didn’t want to show it to someone and used that as an excuse.


108 posted on 06/13/2023 1:46:36 PM PDT by CodeToad (No Arm up! They have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That question may get litigated in all of this. I have to say I hope the idea that just because a president takes a bunch of classified documents with him as he walks out the door makes them declassified is not upheld. Imagine the mischief Biden could create when he leaves office. He could take a lot of classified data that would be valuable to businesses or other countries and sell it to the highest bidder. Since the data would no longer be classified, he wouldn’t be guilty of any crime, unless he specifically sold information to an enemy of the United States


109 posted on 06/13/2023 1:48:38 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, I am free at last!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It’s too bad he just approved trillion$ in new spending for by executive branch. Maybe he just learned about all of this corruption after his debt ceiling vote.

I am getting real sick of these guys.

They sure love to get corrupt bureaucrats in front of them so that they can scold them in front of the cameras but they won’t do ANYTHING that would actually solve the problem.

It’s real simple....Not one penny is approved for anything in the house and every piece of legislation before the Senate is filibustered until the FBI is gutted and reformed.

These guys have the power to get that done if they actually cared. They don’t though.

They hate us just as much as the Democrats do.


110 posted on 06/13/2023 1:48:58 PM PDT by nitzy (I wonder if the telescreens in 1984 were first called "free Obamascreens")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrewsMum

RE: But if you impede the investigation, that’s obstruction of justice.

But what Justice was obstructed?

Here is the argument said in Trump’s defense :

The president is the ultimate authority on national security. Congress cannot decide for him what is classified and what isn’t nor can Congress or executive branch employees decide whether he made reasonable national security decisions.

Likewise, people who work for agencies such as the National Archives, which started the fuss, cannot claim that laws or regulations override their boss’s plenary constitutional power.

Once Trump took those documents from the White House while still president, he effectively and finally determined that they did not implicate national security.

The dispute then becomes, whether or not Trump has the right to hold those documents, and that is supposed to be litigated and determined by a court of law. If so, how is that obstructing? Does a former President not have the right to litigate a point of disagreement?


111 posted on 06/13/2023 1:49:31 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

RE: Did you fail grammar?

Ask the author of this article. I simply copied and paste what he wrote.

But thus far, you have avoided answering my question.


112 posted on 06/13/2023 1:52:44 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ok. That’s what I missing. Thanks!


113 posted on 06/13/2023 1:53:34 PM PDT by DrewsMum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus; plain talk

RE: THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID

Ok, what exactly did he actually say on the recording?


114 posted on 06/13/2023 1:54:44 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

RE: My goodness, can’t ANYONE speak or read English any longer.

Exactly what post in this thread are you referring to?


115 posted on 06/13/2023 1:55:52 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The obstruction charge comes from Trump actively hiding boxes of documents to prevent them from being searched by his attorneys, then causing his attorneys to falsely certify that all boxes had been searched and all classified documents returned. As you say, the return was to be litigated, but he is accused of trying hide documents that were supposed to be part of that litigation process.


116 posted on 06/13/2023 1:58:45 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, I am free at last!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
"“The indictment said: ‘TRUMP directed NAUTA,’ who’s his personal aide, ‘to move boxes before Trump Attorney 1’s June 2 review, so that many boxes were not searched and many documents responsive to the May 11 Subpoena could not be found and were in fact not found by Trump Attorney 1.’ [sic] In plain English, this alleges that Trump instructed his aide to help him remove sensitive documents in defiance of a federal subpoena. A), Does that trouble you? And B) If he thought he had the right to have these documents, why was he trying so hard to hide them?” Bash asked."

Look at big boorained Dana blithely asking "Does that trouble you?" and Jimmy missing a golden opportunity to burn Dana and Jack Smith for indicting an aide, an ordinary American, for merely moving boxes at his employer's request, and trying to bankrupt Nauta through lawfare.

Goddamnit, Jimmy, listen to what you are being offered when talking to a head-full-of-mush like Dana Bash. You could have punched down so hard it would have made the actual #Narrative for a cycle, not some Daily Caller clickbait.

117 posted on 06/13/2023 1:58:51 PM PDT by StAnDeliver (Tanned, rested, and ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
A President - in the middle of a speech - can decided to share 'classified' information with his audience. That's his right. He doesn't answer to a committee. No one tells him what he can share... or not. It's all his to use as he chooses.

The President can do that because classified information is created for the benefit of the President...

118 posted on 06/13/2023 2:00:58 PM PDT by GOPJ (Target, Busch and Disney support sexual mutilation and sterilization of children. Boycott )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

RE: hope the idea that just because a president takes a bunch of classified documents with him as he walks out the door makes them declassified is not upheld.

Up to this point, the above statement you made simply show’s UNCERTAINTY regarding the law. If it were clear, why does this idea need to be “upheld” or “not upheld”?

Also, how is a classified document DEEMED to be declassified? There seems to be no formal written procedure for this other than the President saying I DECLASSIFIED THIS. But then , how do we know that he indeed said so?


119 posted on 06/13/2023 2:03:57 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“ And is it a crime for him to wave the classified document to a reporter ( assuming it is indeed classified )?”

Just waving it around, probably not a crime. But remember that the transcript does seem to indicate that he actually had the writer read portions of it. “Look what I found, this was Milley’s plan of attack, just read it and show…” Also, even if Trump didn’t actually show the document to anyone, but read aloud classified portions of the document, that would be the same thing.

But as I have said several times, Trump is not being charged with a crime relating to the Milley document. I think they have a different reason for including that in the indictment.


120 posted on 06/13/2023 2:05:17 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, I am free at last!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-168 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson