Posted on 08/22/2023 6:05:56 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Leftists are excited. They’ve got him now because Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, doesn’t recall Trump declassifying the documents later seized at Mar-a-Lago. In fact, that’s a big “who cares?”. Trump didn’t need to follow bureaucratic requirements to declassify anything. As one with plenary power over national security under the Constitution, merely by taking them with him, he declassified them.
ABC News' story :
Appearing to contradict former President Donald Trump's primary public defense in the classified documents case, former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows has told special counsel Jack Smith's investigators that he could not recall Trump ever ordering, or even discussing, declassifying broad sets of classified materials before leaving the White House, nor was he aware of any "standing order" from Trump authorizing the automatic declassification of materials taken out of the Oval Office, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.Ever since the FBI's seizure of more than 100 classified documents from his Mar-a-Lago estate last August, Trump has insisted that he declassified all the materials before he left office.
Trump is correct. He declassified the documents by taking the documents. That’s all he needed to do.
Let me explain.
National security questions belong solely to the president. That’s not me saying that; that’s the Supreme Court saying that:
The President, after all, is the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” U.S.Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Given that the president is the big boss, his employee’s rules cannot constrain him. Likewise, because this authority belongs solely to the executive, Congress cannot limit it either.
Here’s my personal question, and maybe those more knowledgeable than myself can educate me:
DOES DECLASSIFICATION HAVE TO GO THROUGH A FORMAL PROCESS?
IS THERE A FEDERAL CODE, STATUTE OR LAW THAT SAYS A DOCUMENT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED DECLASSIFIED UNLESS IT GOES THROUGH THIS FORMAL PROCESS?
There is a formal process for people other than the President. The President has plenary power over declassification, while others can only declassify when he allows them to borrow his authority.
So Trump is guilty of improper retaining classified documents while he was a Senator and Vice President and then storing them in an unsecured site like a garage ... oh wait ... I’ve warped into the wrong universe again
Todd J. Aldinger says the Supreme Court’s recent Dobbs and Bruen decisions allow for Trump and his lawyers to argue that all actions a president takes while in office must be considered legal unless the chief executive is successfully impeached and removed. Trump was impeached and acquitted twice.
RE: oh wait ... I’ve warped into the wrong universe again
The left’s defense of Biden vs Trump is that Biden COOPERATED with the Feds and did not resist their demand to return the classified documents while Trump resisted them.... unlawlfully.
I’ve heard this argument they made on talk radio. Just informing you what their counter arguments are.
Does taking them mean defacto declassification? I really don’t think so so, definitely questionable.
RE: Does taking them mean defacto declassification? I really don’t think so so, definitely questionable.
_________________________________________
Hence my question. Maybe you can answer it:
DOES DECLASSIFICATION HAVE TO GO THROUGH A FORMAL PROCESS?
IS THERE A FEDERAL CODE, STATUTE OR LAW THAT SAYS A DOCUMENT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED DECLASSIFIED UNLESS IT GOES THROUGH THIS FORMAL PROCESS?
“has authority” doesn’t mean automatic without action. He’s recorded saying he didn’t declassify, so that undermines the take means declassifying.
Maybe he can say it, mark or record the action, and be done? As in, verbal, “I declassify this, share it.” That might or should be memorialized. Maybe law, regulation, or tradition addresses this? I am sure somewhere it needs to be memorialized, else whole system falls apart over whether something is or is not classified,
RE: Maybe he can say it, mark or record the action, and be done? As in, verbal, “I declassify this, share it.”
We can’t go by “maybe” and then put a person in jail for violating something that is NOT written down in a Federal Statute or law.
Is there such a law? If so, where is it written?
RE: He’s recorded saying he didn’t declassify, s
But what does the law say? Just because he said he did not declassify does not mean he did not have the right to take them and by doing so, they are deemed declassified.
As the article states, The Supreme Court already ruled on this. See here:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/
The President, after all, is the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” U.S.Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.
__________________
Also, Trump might have mis-spoken when he said “I did not declassify”. It then becomes an issue of whether is inherent powers of taking them INTRINSICALLY means it was de-facto declassified whether r not he was aware of the same.
What he was recorded as saying is IRRELEVANT. WhAT IS THE LAW? Is there one? That’s what I want to know.
Comes under the Presidential Records Act. So he should be sent a reminder that it would be helpful if he would write out his intentions when he leaves office in January 2029.
Surely there is a magic incantation the President must recite as he removes the holy paperclips and holy staples! Surely it is written somewhere in an old book or old napkin FDR used or sumthin.
Sorry, but debating this stuff is falling for the distraction our betters have created for us. Surely one or more of the victims of Stalin’s show trials was guilty of some technical infraction amongst all the bogus charges, too. So what?
In a banana Republic the candidate would either be in jail or dead by election day. Why are we going to be any different?
Biden’s investigation is not done yet. Only pence was cleared of wrongdoing because he immediately gave back the classified documents.
RE: when he leaves office in January 2029.
That’s assuming that he even wins in 2024 ( remember: CHEATING ).
But this case is NOT about 2029, but 2021.
RE: because he immediately gave back the classified documents.
So, there would have been no case against Trump had he not insisted on retaining the disputed documents?
I’m pretty sure if he gave them back that day, there would be no case.
“has authority” doesn’t mean automatic without action...”
Yes, it does. RTFA.
“He’s recorded saying he didn’t declassify...”
No, he isn’t. If you really think so, give me the exact quote, to whom, and a link to the actual recording you stated.
“so that undermines the take means declassifying.”
Your conjecture means nothing. Please study the actual Constitutional issue. It was decided long ago. Again, RTFA, as a start. Click the links in the article for more details.
Or, look up, “Clinton sock drawer declassification” (without quotes) for a more recent ruling, that also references SC precedent rulings.
There is zero dispute amongst serious constitutional SC legal minds on this. Classification laws and regs established by anyone, in any branch of the Fedgov, do not apply to the President while in office.**
The act of removing ANY classified information by the President while in office to an unclassified setting makes them automatically declassified at that very moment. Same with revealing to anyone.
It’s settled law, period. Jack Smith will once again be overruled by the SC, as usual. Just a matter of time.
**There is some dispute over whether Congress can classify their own stuff and prevent the Executive from accessing it. Not settled law. And not applicable to the above issue.
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.