Now, is DoJ Prosecutor Andy McCarthy being honest with you?
Posted on 06/14/2023 4:24:58 PM PDT by randita
Michael Bekesha, the ‘Clinton sock drawer’ lawyer, misses the distinction between agency records and presidential records.
I’ve already extensively addressed why the Presidential Records Act (PRA) is not a viable defense against charges that President Trump unlawfully and willfully retained national-defense information under Section 793(e) of the federal criminal code (which, in hope of avoiding Senator Lindsey Graham’s conniptions, I’ll refrain from calling the Espionage Act). So I’ll state the main point as succinctly as I can: Agency records are not presidential records.
Trump’s case is about agency records regarding the national defense — mainly, classified intelligence reporting generated by U.S. spy agencies. The PRA, by contrast, addresses documents and other records generated by and for the president in the carrying out of his duties.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
It’s all BS. Every Presidential Library has documents so sensitive you have to have clearance to view them in a private setting.
Doesn’t matter.
“Significantly, the PRA explicitly excludes agency records from the definition of “presidential records.” Under Section 2201(2)(B) the term presidential records “does not include any documentary materials that are . . . official records of an agency.” As if the term agency were not clear enough, the PRA incorporates the definition set forth in Section 552 of Title 5, U.S. Code. (That definition has been moved. In 1978, when the PRA was enacted, it was in Section 552(e); it is now in Section 552(f).) That provision broadly instructs that an agency is any executive department, military department, Government corporation, Government controlled corporation, or other establishment in the executive branch of the Government (including the Executive Office of the President), or any independent regulatory agency.
Further, the provision broadly defines an agency record to include any information the agency or its contractors maintain in connection with the agency’s operations. Patently, intelligence reports compiled by the Defense Intelligence Agency, CIA, NSA, FBI, and other U.S. national-security agencies are agency records. They are not presidential records by definition and by common sense — i.e., these agencies are created by Congress, their operations are authorized by Congress, they are underwritten with taxpayer funds by Congress, and Congress is empowered to conduct oversight of their activities, which necessitates that agency officials and lawmakers have access to their records.”
So, am I to understand bureaucracies hold the ultimate keys to power in our form of government?
And no, I didn’t read the article because it is being a pay wall.
“ANY Document that is handed to the President is a Presidential Record,
no matter which agency generates it.”
The law begs to differ. Read excerpt at Post 23.
This type of idiocy wouldn't even pass muster in your local mom & pop business.
.
When they are provided to the President, they become Presidential Records.
Mark Levin
.
.
If this were true, then an acting President couldn’t declassify anything.
But, the big picture is Joe and Hunter had Intel assessments and National Security Docs.
Sorry,
I interpret that section you posted as meaning ALL Records are not
Presidential Records. But that excerpt says noting about records that
have been passed on to the President for his review.
I disagree.
Every one of these agencies are under the authority of the President of the United States. He doesn't answer to them.
Stop posting this crap that suggests these "U.S. national-security agencies" function as a fourth branch of government. This is preposterous on its face.
McCarthy is a deep state piece of chit that is incapable of understanding the U.S. Constitution. He needs to understand exactly what the first sentence of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution means. Perhaps it is difficult for McCarthy since he never had a real job in his life. It’s difficult because he never founded and operated a business. He was never an executive.
Thinking like McCarthy relies on the notion that the permanent bureaucratic state does not answer to the President. He does not understand that all documents, processes, and procedures within the executive branch are for the benefit and at the direction of the President. The classification of records does not pertain to the President, but rather to everyone that works for the President. All laws and executive orders that address classified information direct everyone except the President on the procedures for classified information.
The Presidential Records Act even states the President chooses which records are personal or not, despite the Presidential Records Act is clearly unconstitutional per sentence 1 of Article II, section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Only a moronic peanut farmer would have signed it into law, because it attempts to codify executive decision making. Only an idiot President would allow Congress to usurp executive powers.
McCarthy can place himself on the same cognitive level as Jimmy Carter.
Have you also asked yourself about the 31 MILLION documents Obama has in an old Sears warehouse near Chicago???
Alright, Andrew, this is it!! All your ramblings are on the line on this one. Either you are right or you are banished to the MAGA eternal enemy hell hole known as the Deep State. It appears McCarthy needs to go back to law school and attend a few lectures by Mark Levin. It’s a shame that lawyers like McCarthy and Barr let their personal prejudices destroy their legal objectivity.
Have you also asked yourself about the 31 MILLION documents Obama has in an old Sears warehouse near Chicago???
that is 3,875,000 average a year.
Article II section 1: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”
No agencies and none of their work product are separate from the unitary executive as described above. The President is RESPONSIBLE for all agency work and documents, and they belong to him.
He is wrong. The PRA also includes documents “received “ by the President. This would include classified briefings. Another point is that the documents in question or copies. The government still has the original documents.
IIRC, Comey included a “lack of intent” to break the law as to why he would not recommend prosecution. So if the Clinton sock drawer defense isn’t appropriate where is the intent to break the law if Trump honestly thought the Sock Drawer defense was proper precedent where is the intent?
IIRC, Comey included a “lack of intent” to break the law as to why he would not recommend prosecution. So if the Clinton sock drawer defense isn’t appropriate where is the intent to break the law if Trump honestly thought the Sock Drawer defense was proper precedent where is the intent?
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.