Liberal Forum

neueregel » 14 Jun 2023, 10:13 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:13 am

I don't keep a library of quotes from posters and talking heads. In a couple of weeks, I'll forget you called this witch hunt a slam dunk as well. By then, we'll have moved on to the next tragedy.

Have you read the indictment?  Y/N?

Buffalo » 14 Jun 2023, 10:09 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:09 am

Last I knew in the US one is still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  You goddamn ****,, liberal idiots with terminal TDS, armchair lawyers already have him guilty.  How many times can you cry "We got him now"? **** idiots!!!

you **** idiot.

you already claim he is innocent.

 
 

Majik » 14 Jun 2023, 10:02 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:02 am

Tell me ...
What's the precedent of President's handling top secret documents

--------------------------------------------------------

https://www.archives.gov/isoo/policy-do ... si-eo.html

This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation’s progress depends on the free flow of information both within the Government and to the American people. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation’s security and demonstrating our commitment to open Government through accurate and accountable application of classification standards and routine, secure, and effective declassification are equally important priorities.
Part 1 - Original ClassificationSection 1.1. Classification Standards.(a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;
(2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government;
(3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and
(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
(b) If there is significant doubt about the need to classify information, it shall not be classified. This provision does not:
(1)amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or
(2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.
(c) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.
(d) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security


 ec. 1.2. Classification Levels.(a) Information may be classified at one of the following three levels:(1) ‘‘Top Secret’’ shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
(2) ‘‘Secret’’ shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
(3) ‘‘Confidential’’ shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
(b) Except as otherwise provided by statute, no other terms shall be used to identify United States classified information.
(c) If there is significant doubt about the appropriate level of classification,
it shall be classified at the lower level. 
 

maineman » 14 Jun 2023, 10:12 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:12 am

There doesn't need to be one.  Trump is not President.  And, he tries to build his defense using the PRA, but the PRA concerns "Presidential Records" only.  The first 31 counts of Jack Smith's indictment concern "Agency Records", which are NOT the property of the President, and are CERTAINLY not the property of a private citizen who USED TO BE the President.  He had no right to have them.  He had no right to show them to other people.  He had no right to fail to return them when he was asked to do so.

Wrong, there isn't one ...
Because No former president has ever been charged with any of these accusations ....ever.


 

maineman » 14 Jun 2023, 10:20 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:20 am

Have you read the indictment?  Y/N?

Certainly not.

Majik » 14 Jun 2023, 10:32 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:32 am

Wrong, there isn't one ...
Because No former president has ever been charged with any of these accusations ....ever.

There's a first time for everything!    

Majik » 14 Jun 2023, 10:32 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:32 am

Wrong, there isn't one ...
Because No former president has ever been charged with any of these accusations ....ever.

until trump, one big criminal.

neueregel » 14 Jun 2023, 10:36 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:36 am

Certainly not.

How can you then claim it's a witch hunt?

maineman » 14 Jun 2023, 10:39 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:39 am

There's a first time for everything!  

Good thing you chose the Navy, no way you would have survived as an Army First Lieutenant in Vietnam......the Viet Cong wouldn't have been your problem, if you can cipher that, Jethro.

maineman » 14 Jun 2023, 10:18 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:18 am

what exactly is "sold"?  Do you have an example of such a "transaction"?

Yes....
let's take Germany as an example ....
Biden and the Neocons wanted Germany to shutdown the Nordstrom 2 pipeline as per our foreign policy against Russia .....Germany first refused stating it would Devastate their economy ....
And then our Ambassador had "consultations" ( which is just another way of saying we sold our foreign policy by promising Germany help with their energy woes)with Sholtz whom miraculously reversed course to the detriment of Germany ....,
thus completing a political transaction.....


 

maineman » 14 Jun 2023, 10:39 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:39 am

There's a first time for everything!  

Wanna bet that if Trump loses the 2024 election this indictment goes away?
 

Majik » 14 Jun 2023, 10:56 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:56 am

Wanna bet that if Trump loses the 2024 election this indictment goes away?

why should it?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------October 24, 2022 TOP LEGAL NEWS OF THE WEEKFact check explores presidential authority to declassify Share:
[email]?subject=Fact%20check%20explores%20presidential%20authority%20to%20declassify%20%7C%20American%20Bar%20Association&body=I%20thought%20you%20might%20like%20this%20post.%0D%0A%0D%0A-----%0D%0A%0D%0AMore%20than%20two%20months%20after%20FBI%20agents%20seized%20boxes%20of%20materials%20at%20former%20President%20Donald%20Trump%27s%20Florida%20residence%2C%20known%20as%20Mar-a-Lago%2C%20the%20federal%20investigation%20continues%20amid%20conflicting%20legal%20interpretations%20of%20a%20president%27s%20authority%0D%0A%0D%0ACheck%20out%20the%20full%20post%3A%20https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-ne ... authority/[/email]More than two months after FBI agents seized boxes of materials at former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence, known as Mar-a-Lago, the federal investigation continues amid conflicting legal interpretations of a president’s authority to declassify sensitive information. The federal classification of national security documents is used to control how officials handle information whose release may cause the nation harm.Getty Images / Mario TamaTrump added to the confusion when he said in an interview with Fox personality Sean Hannity, “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it. ... If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified. Even by thinking about it.”Most national security legal experts dismissed the former president’s suggestion that he could declassify documents simply by thinking about it. But as an ABA Legal Fact Check posted Oct. 17 explains, legal guidelines support his contention that presidents have broad authority to formally declassify most documents that are not statutorily protected, while they are in office.The system of classifying national security documents is largely a bureaucratic process used by the federal government to control how executive branch officials handle information, whose release could cause the country harm. The government has, however, prosecuted cases for both mistaken and deliberate mishandling of information. Under the U.S. Constitution, the president as commander in chief is given broad powers to classify and declassify such information, often through use of executive orders.Some secrets, such as information related to nuclear weapons, are handled separately under a specific statutory scheme that Congress has adopted under the Atomic Energy Act. Those secrets cannot be automatically declassified by the president alone and require, by law, extensive consultation with executive branch agencies.In all cases, however, a formal procedure is required so governmental agencies know with certainty what has been declassified and decisions memorialized. A federal appeals court in a 2020 Freedom of Information Act case, New York Times v. CIA, underscored that point: “Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures,” the court said.


https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanew ... authority/
 
 
 

jerrab » 14 Jun 2023, 10:30 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:30 am

--------------------------------------------------------

https://www.archives.gov/isoo/policy-do ... si-eo.html

This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation’s progress depends on the free flow of information both within the Government and to the American people. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation’s security and demonstrating our commitment to open Government through accurate and accountable application of classification standards and routine, secure, and effective declassification are equally important priorities.
Part 1 - Original ClassificationSection 1.1. Classification Standards.(a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;
(2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government;
(3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and
(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
(b) If there is significant doubt about the need to classify information, it shall not be classified. This provision does not:
(1)amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or
(2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.
(c) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.
(d) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security

 ec. 1.2. Classification Levels.(a) Information may be classified at one of the following three levels1) ‘‘Top Secret’’ shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
(2) ‘‘Secret’’ shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
(3) ‘‘Confidential’’ shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
(b) Except as otherwise provided by statute, no other terms shall be used to identify United States classified information.
(c) If there is significant doubt about the appropriate level of classification,
it shall be classified at the lower level.

How does Bill Clinton’s tapes-in-sock-drawer controversy impact the Trump case   

https://choiceclips.whatfinger.com/2023 ... rump-case/
 
 

jerrab » 14 Jun 2023, 10:22 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:22 am

you **** idiot.

you already claim he is innocent.

He IS innocent til proven guilty you ****, liberal, idiot!!! 

 

jerrab » 14 Jun 2023, 11:11 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 11:11 am

why should it?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------October 24, 2022 TOP LEGAL NEWS OF THE WEEKFact check explores presidential authority to declassify Share:
[email]?subject=Fact%20check%20explores%20presidential%20authority%20to%20declassify%20%7C%20American%20Bar%20Association&body=I%20thought%20you%20might%20like%20this%20post.%0D%0A%0D%0A-----%0D%0A%0D%0AMore%20than%20two%20months%20after%20FBI%20agents%20seized%20boxes%20of%20materials%20at%20former%20President%20Donald%20Trump%27s%20Florida%20residence%2C%20known%20as%20Mar-a-Lago%2C%20the%20federal%20investigation%20continues%20amid%20conflicting%20legal%20interpretations%20of%20a%20president%27s%20authority%0D%0A%0D%0ACheck%20out%20the%20full%20post%3A%20https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-ne ... authority/[/email]More than two months after FBI agents seized boxes of materials at former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence, known as Mar-a-Lago, the federal investigation continues amid conflicting legal interpretations of a president’s authority to declassify sensitive information. The federal classification of national security documents is used to control how officials handle information whose release may cause the nation harm.Getty Images / Mario TamaTrump added to the confusion when he said in an interview with Fox personality Sean Hannity, “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it. ... If you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified. Even by thinking about it.”Most national security legal experts dismissed the former president’s suggestion that he could declassify documents simply by thinking about it. But as an ABA Legal Fact Check posted Oct. 17 explains, legal guidelines support his contention that presidents have broad authority to formally declassify most documents that are not statutorily protected, while they are in office.The system of classifying national security documents is largely a bureaucratic process used by the federal government to control how executive branch officials handle information, whose release could cause the country harm. The government has, however, prosecuted cases for both mistaken and deliberate mishandling of information. Under the U.S. Constitution, the president as commander in chief is given broad powers to classify and declassify such information, often through use of executive orders.Some secrets, such as information related to nuclear weapons, are handled separately under a specific statutory scheme that Congress has adopted under the Atomic Energy Act. Those secrets cannot be automatically declassified by the president alone and require, by law, extensive consultation with executive branch agencies.In all cases, however, a formal procedure is required so governmental agencies know with certainty what has been declassified and decisions memorialized. A federal appeals court in a 2020 Freedom of Information Act case, New York Times v. CIA, underscored that point: “Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures,” the court said.

agencies! not Presidents  Appeals court..............not Supreme Court
 

Majik » 14 Jun 2023, 10:56 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:56 am

Wanna bet that if Trump loses the 2024 election this indictment goes away?

Sure... it'll go to trial before then.

sunburn » 14 Jun 2023, 11:14 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 11:14 am

agencies! not Presidents  Appeals court..............not Supreme Court

he  did not notify appropriate agencies that he decertified  documents so he did not decertify them.

and they are not his personal property.

Majik » 14 Jun 2023, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 10:52 am

Yes....
let's take Germany as an example ....
Biden and the Neocons wanted Germany to shutdown the Nordstrom 2 pipeline as per our foreign policy against Russia .....Germany first refused stating it would Devastate their economy ....
And then our Ambassador had "consultations" ( which is just another way of saying we sold our foreign policy by promising Germany help with their energy woes)with Sholtz whom miraculously reversed course to the detriment of Germany ....,
thus completing a political transaction.....

You said that Biden SOLD our policy and others have put a $5M figure on what he was supposedly "paid" to "sell" this policy.

What you are describing is diplomacy.

Majik » 14 Jun 2023, 9:49 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 9:49 am

Are they?
Maybe the parties in control of those governments .....but not their electorates or their opposition party's....

nikki haley would have a better chance of winning the election.

jerrab » 14 Jun 2023, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2023, 11:28 am

he  did not notify appropriate agencies that he decertified  documents so he did not decertify them.

and they are not his personal property.

The DOJ's defense for Clinton:
In defending NARA, the Justice Department argued that NARA doesn’t have “a duty to engage in a never-ending search for potential presidential records” that weren’t provided to NARA by the president at the end of his term. Nor, the department asserted, does the Presidential Records Act require NARA to appropriate potential presidential records forcibly.


The government’s position was that Congress had decided that the president and the president alone decides what is a presidential record and what isn’t. He may take with him whatever records he chooses at the end of his term.