Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Options
18990929495165

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,511 ✭✭✭amandstu


    They were suggesting on CNN last night that Trump may be found correct in that if he declassified those documents in his own "mind" then they would actually be declassified. (and might win on that count if it went to the SC)


    If so ,how would that affect his legal jeopardy overall if Garland goes to court over this?



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,318 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    As in the whole "article two" blather Trump constantly shouted about may yet come into play? Surely it wouldn't count after your term(s) ended? And wouldn't that then put the onus on Trump to publicise the documents if they were no longer classified?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,056 ✭✭✭McFly85


    Is there a link? I would be incredibly surprised at CNN if they suggested that tbh.

    It doesn’t actually matter if he considers them declassified or not. The documents in question look to have been wilfully retained so he’d still be on the hook for it.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    And there are certain documents that even the President can't just "declassify" on a whim as well.

    And even if declassified they would still be subject to laws around handling and storage - "Declassified" doesn't mean they can be put out on Facebook or something



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,056 ✭✭✭McFly85


    Yup, and I’m pretty sure when documents are going to be declassified they still have to go through a review process to redact any sensitive information prior to being made available.

    Why anyone would think it’s perfectly ok for someone leaving their job to take confidential information and store it in his house beggars belief.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,318 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Not just that, but to basically claim the President can call "dibs" on any documents he likes the look of, and the government has to lump it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,511 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Sorry I can't find that discussion on youtube ,but it was last night and I am fairly sure it was Erin Burnett with two legal guys ,one of whom was Elie Honig.

    Erin Burnett was surprised at their opinion as she thought you would need a process to formalize the reclassification but both those guys thought that if it went to SC Trump was likely to win.

    I understand that that narrowish point might not get him off the hook(s) but it was disappointing nonetheless.


    It occurs to me that if he does not actually know what is in the documents (quite likely in my view) he may gave a hard time giving a reasonable explanation for wanting to declassify them in the first place)


    He might have to choose between his palette of plausible lies and it could be that if he doesn't use a particular lie at the right time it might be buried under the subsequent lie :)



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,056 ✭✭✭McFly85


    I actually think his best chance is pleading ignorance. Just keep repeating we gave back everything and throw some poor member of staff under the bus. I’m not even sure that would help him as it’s probably still his responsibility, but it sounds more reasonable then “I declassified these without mentioning it to anyone”, or “I’m allowed to take whatever I want”.

    However, that may land him even even hotter water, depending on what fingerprints are on them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,692 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    That argument is certainly one that could be tried in Trump's defence. It only works in that a criminal act consists of 2 separate things

    : the Mens Rea, the formulation of the intent in the knowledge that the act would be a crime. &

    :the Actus Reus, carrying out the act or action itself.

    Now where Trump runs in to issue with any defence relying upon his possession of classified materials being without mens rea and actual criminal intent?

    Is that he has made public statements regarding the changes made to the law regarding what would constitute such a crime, further he signed amendments to the law into place to ensure broader culpability and punishment for mishandling of government records.

    He knows that declassification has to be memorialised. That's it not declassified by the simple act of him moving it to a residence, by a nod and a wink nor by any kind of Trumpy magical incantation.

    Any defence that seeks to rely on Trump acting without Malice aforethought, that he held a belief they were declassified, in regards to documents found? Falls down on this alone. He enacted the legislation, he cannot claim he was unaware of the consequence or legal peril.

    That's before the previous negotiated return, the Spring subpoenaed return and the June affidavit signed by a Trump lawyer that all sensitive docs had been returned are taken into account.



  • Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Still no answer from yourself regarding your opinion on the lies trump has issued around the execution of the warrant resulting in the death of two of his supporters.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Ignorance of the law isn't a defensive however, especially when one of them is one that you changed the penalty for breaking.

    Neither would trying to claim that he wasn't aware that the documents were still being asked for as I believe I read somewhere that he/his lawyers had been contacted requesting them back after his lawyer stated all documents were returned and hence the execution of the warrant.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,630 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    It's more than likely that months before Garlands action, Trump's lawyers were made aware of the NARA view on whom should have legal possession of the Govt documents and the lawyers would have advised Trump of the NARA view that he was not in legal possession of what it saw as classified Govt documents. He could choose to put it to the USSC that he thought it his right, while a private citizen, because of what he claims to be an action of his while president of declassifying the documents and ask it to decide if he or the NARA were correct. [A simile would be of a robber claiming he did no wrong in taking some one else's property because, in his mind, he thought it was OK.] Trump went from thought in mind to actual deed on the documents. I cant see the USSC giving Trump the benefit of the doubt because of the simile unless it sticks with the anti-Govt decision-making style it's following.

    Thing for NARA to do there is get his lawyers to produce to the USSC documentary [the dated instruction letter/memo which he supposedly issued while in office on declassifying documents] evidence proving Trumps case and if they can't because it never existed, then NARA subpoena the Trump lawyers to testify and hand over the NARA subpoenas and letters they got from NARA to the USSC proving it's side of the case. I cant see the Trump lawyers being stupid enough to [trying Trump's refusal tactics] tell the USSC they were claiming lawyer/client privilege and were not going to let the USSC see the Trump letter or the subpoena letters they got from NARA.

    Re a trial on DOJ charges under the espionage act, there'd be no option but for the DOJ to throw the charge sheets into the NARA box and forget about a trial if the USSC went with Trump on the rightful possession issue. It's entirely possible for the USSC to decide, due to lack of standing, that Trump would not be allowed state a case as the DOJ case is backed up by legislation allegedly inclusive of documents which Trump himself approved and signed on extending the range of the espionage act. It all depends on which court sits first to hear evidence and the speed it processes the case before it.

    One other thing. In signing a deal with NARA to set up the Trump presidential library, there'll doubtless be clauses in that deal on the transfer of documents of all kinds [his personal diaries, thoughts and decisions on issues he had to face while acting as the US head of state to protect it and its constitution and laws] not just Govt documents. There has to be a clause in the NARA papers he signed to set up the library giving NARA the ownership rights on Govt documents.

    On the local angle, Trump has cancelled his visit to his family golf course in Doonbeg, Co Clare later this month due tp pressing matters.

    Post edited by aloyisious on


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,584 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Is everyone forgetting that one of the initial claims was the FBI planted documents. Yet now they claim everything is declassified by default

    The initial claim was precisely because Trump knew there were documents there, trying to get ahead of the story.

    So its a complete nonsense that A) he didn't know the docs were there or B) that there were still classified.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,272 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Even if they were declassified (which they're not) any journalist has to be given access under a FOI act



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,406 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    With the supreme court they have now who knows might happen. It will be fun when President Marjorie Taylor Greene gets into power and starts tweeting out (selected extracts from) top secret documents because she had mentally declassified them and nobody can do anything to stop her.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,406 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia



    Setting up an excuse to threaten to publish these documents may be his last gasp bargaining chip here

    (If he has any copies that were not confiscated)



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,406 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Unless the process is in the constitution he'll challenge that in the courts. The USSC has already ruled that POTUS has power to classify or declassify anything he wants in any manner he wants.

    Biden could tweet them out if he wanted and the USSC would likely find in his favour.

    POTUS is commander in chief and there might be a scenario where he would have to reveal classified material without time to go through the hoops. Eg. Cuban missile crisis 2021, Russia only agrees to not fire nukes if Trump shows the exact locations of their nuclear subs...

    Ticking time bomb scenario...

    Cleverly the feds didn't cite any laws that mention classification of docs in the warrant to cut him off that line of defense but the media will repeat Trump's claims so often that all of Trump's supporters will believe it's a witchhunt



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,406 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    But most of these records would be stored electronically and Trump has a print out of the file which he failed to destroy and brought home with him. It's not likely he has the original signed confession where the CIA admit to killing JFK. He has briefing docs he was given but kept for some reason or another and then took with him when leaving the White House.

    Trump would have gotten printouts of classified docs almost every day of his 4 year term.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,630 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Until the news broke that Trump's own CCTV security system had recorded the way the FBI behaved during the recovery of documents visit, coming in empty handed and leaving with 11 boxes of documents. It's possible that Trump & Co may have been silly enough to sit down in a CCTV covered area to watch the re-run while they were [lol] being recorded by it making it clear they lied with their "the FBI planted documents" story.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,435 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    Not sure you want to be bringing up old Dick in a Trump thread when you're on the side of the Trumpists.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 677 ✭✭✭farmerval


    The fact that there has been considerable back and forth regarding returning the documents, as far as Trumps Lawyer signing a document stating that all documents had been returned (when they hadn't) surely blows all defences out of the water.

    He can't claim he didn't realise he had them, he can't claim he hadn't been requested to return them, he has admitted being requested to provide greater security for them etc etc.



  • Registered Users Posts: 677 ✭✭✭farmerval


    This has been another bad week for Trump. You feel that each new scandal at this stage just turns off a bit more of the undecided middle ground voters. Biden getting a climate action bill through congress, actual aid for veterans rather than photo ops, all little things that will hold sway if they both fight the next election.

    Trumps hardcore support won't waver, they'll just keep on digging. It seems to be the nature, something like pro Brexiteers in the UK who still believe that if only Brexit was done right.............

    Also is the incredibly lukewarm leadership contest in the UK a sign of what's to come post Trump for the Republicans, total apathy to lookalike candidates that have nothing new to offer.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm not on anyone's side.

    The reason I brought up Cheney was in response to another poster who said the 2000 election was "stolen" which if people remember the main culprit according to Democrats was Dick Cheney who is now a Democratic hero because of his opposition to Trump.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,094 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Not that it's likely, but would that not enter the realms of court marshal? A former commander in chief releasing state secrets is surely out of the civil courts.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,960 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Even though the president is commander in Chief they arent as member of the military so no it wouldn't be a court marshal, it would be a federal court of some elevated level.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,630 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    No, despite feelings I have [were I a US citizen] about bringing Trumps march to a stop. If he mentioned a specific country or person the US is currently at loggerheads with as a likely recipient, then it could amount to an act of treason, triable before Federal civil court, not courts martial. The individual states themselves can try state citizens for treason if two citizens complain of an act of treason by another citizen, and the complaint met the standards needed for charges laid out in individual state law/s. Treason is defined in federal law as levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. An image of Trump sharing a jail cell with Julian Assange springs to mind.

    Post edited by aloyisious on


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,652 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The Cheyney that is in opposition to Trump is a different Cheyney.

    She has just lost the primary so will lose her seat. If she runs as an independent, it might matter, but she is already getting death threats. Ironically, the one who won the primary is full on with the Trump lie - the Steal.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,413 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,318 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Do you believe the 2020 election was"stolen", or rigged?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,511 ✭✭✭amandstu



    Anyone have a good idea as to whether Cheney can have any effect on the outcome of the next general election?


    Did she get any traction with her appeal to Dems to switch to Reps for the primaries?


    Can she somehow damage Trump's electoral prospects ?



Advertisement