Raid on President Trump's Home

Salt USMC

Intel
SOF Support
Joined
May 3, 2010
Messages
3,203
Location
Washington, DC
A sitting president's ability to declass doesn't carry over into those caveats?
Of course it does, but this post-facto justification from Kash Patel that Pres. Trump declassified every document that he laid eyes on doesn’t make any sense at all. He’s just lying about it.

Edit: And after that, they still wouldn’t be covered under executive privilege
 

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
11,208
Location
CONUS
Of course it does, but this post-facto justification from Kash Patel that Pres. Trump declassified every document that he laid eyes on doesn’t make any sense at all. He’s just lying about it.

Edit: And after that, they still wouldn’t be covered under executive privilege
I concur that he would not be able to downgrade/declassify after he left office. But the argument on the table is that he declassed everything he possessed before he left office. And AFAIK he never said "everything he laid eyes on," it's possible but I remember reading that he claimed it about certain topics, like the Russia Collusion hoax.

It's also entirely possible that the alleged declassification is an after-the-fact fabrication. At the same time, are you willing to concede that he may, in fact, have done so, regardless of how you feel about him or Presidential declass powers?

If he downgraded them to UNCLASS, then he wouldn't need to try to exert executive privilege over classified docs, because they are UNCLASS.
 

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
11,208
Location
CONUS
Sorry, why wouldn’t he declass everything before taking it?
He may have. I thought I remember reading that he said he declass'd everything dealing with the Russia hoax. But I don't know what docs he had at his house, and I don't know what else he may have claimed to have downgraded before he left.
 

Salt USMC

Intel
SOF Support
Joined
May 3, 2010
Messages
3,203
Location
Washington, DC
I concur that he would not be able to downgrade/declassify after he left office. But the argument on the table is that he declassed everything he possessed before he left office. And AFAIK he never said "everything he laid eyes on," it's possible but I remember reading that he claimed it about certain topics, like the Russia Collusion hoax.

It's also entirely possible that the alleged declassification is an after-the-fact fabrication. At the same time, are you willing to concede that he may, in fact, have done so, regardless of how you feel about him or Presidential declass powers?

If he downgraded them to UNCLASS, then he wouldn't need to try to exert executive privilege over classified docs, because they are UNCLASS.
I grant that it’s possible he did. And my comment was a bit of an exaggeration. This is how John Solomon characterized Patel’s declassification statement:

Kash Patel, former National Security Prosecutor, reacts to the FBI raid of President Trump’s home and offices at Mar-a-lago earlier this week and offers a defense that Trump could have ‘verbally declassified the documents’ while he was President. Patel comments, that the the President by law is the ultimate arbiter, as a classification authority. If he says it, it's declassified. He doesn't need to go through the bureaucratic rigmarole, written down in appropriate style, that's not what the Constitution says.” Commenting, that he recalls on number occasions, "not only did President do it by writing in October of 2020, he did it verbally, multiple times in the White House, whole sets of documents.”

If this is true, then it’s even worse. The former president verbally declassified SAP info for the sole purpose of taking it back to Mar A Lago? Why in the world would you do that? That’s such a brazen disregard for security practices that Hillary should be taking notes!*

Even if this declassification statement is true, if Trump runs and is re-elected he should never see classified information again. Such flagrant disregard for even basic security practices just boggles my mind. It’s bad enough that he tweeted about compartmented shit. Sure, if he did declassify this material, then this whole investigation is a moot point and he dodged charges. But man, if anyone is paying attention to this had any sort of opinion on Hillary’s emails, they should be extremely pissed about this.

*Hillary was not and never will be president, which is a good thing
 
Last edited:

amlove21

Pararescue
Verified SOF
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
4,625
Location
The City of Destiny
SSMP
SOF Mentor
If this is true, then it’s even worse. The former president verbally declassified SAP info for the sole purpose of taking it back to Mar A Lago? Why in the world would you do that? That’s such a brazen disregard for security practices that Hillary should be taking notes!*

Even if this declassification statement is true, if Trump runs and is re-elected he should never see classified information again. Such flagrant disregard for even basic security practices just boggles my mind. It’s bad enough that he tweeted about compartmented shit. Sure, if he did declassify this material, then this whole investigation is a moot point and he dodged charges. But man, if anyone is paying attention to this had any sort of opinion on Hillary’s emails, they should be extremely pissed about this.

*Hillary was not and never will be president, which is a good thing
Let's talk "precedent". I completely understand I have only copied your quote, and that those aren't your words. But they do open up a valuable conversation I think we should explore.

The President holds unilateral and plenary power to declassify anything and everything he wants. Literally wave his hand over a box and says *Trumps voice* "Declassified" and poof- no longer classified. That's as far as the process goes. Caveats and read-ins don't matter. If a president exercises his power alone, does he still have power? The charge here- when/if/did he/didn't he declassify what he had prior to leaving office- is an absolute fool's errand. And it rejects the basic premise that we can't get past until it's answered- Is it appropriate to raid a political opponent's house, ever? Was it appropriate in this instance? Does it follow previous precedent?

If there was something huge in the raid to get our collective panties in a bunch about, it would have leaked. It didn't, because the democrats want to hold it till after the election. "We found some empty marked folders!"... ruh-roh. That doesn't sound like nuke secrets and it looks less and less likely that he was malicious in nature.

All other issues here are moot not because "whataboutism", but because equal application of the laws in like circumstances is expected in a free and fair society. I COMPLETELY agree with the bolded above.

Hillary had no power to declassify the truly SCI stuff she housed on a personal email server she destroyed *after* she was subpoenaed. No charges, no raids, no inquiry. So, that's the precedent for this stuff now. If you weren't chanting "LOCK HER UP!" a couple years ago, save the drama for me now. (not you directly, @Salt USMC ; the royal and non-specific "you"). So on this case, I agree with the sentiment, but I feel as if you're on the wrong side of it.

The statement isn't, "Well, if you were mad about Hillary, you should be ready to rain hellfire on this Donald Trump guy! He did it but WORSE!".

The statement *should be*- "Like it or not, we set a precedent with a Secretary of State; that precedent is now solidified. This isn't that big of a deal. Let President Trump go in front of congress and shriek 'EVEN IF I DID WHAT WOULD IT MATTER?!' and then he's good."

Collectively, we have made our bed. Don't complain now that you cant sleep in it. (royal you, not specific).
 

AWP

Formerly Known as Freefalling
SOF Support
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
16,446
Location
Not Afghanistan
I understand that lawyers, DA's and such, want to build an iron clad case before they prefer charges and I am 100 percent onboard with that notion.

The Supreme Court had a..."zealot" feel so strongly about Roe vs. Wade that this person(s) leaked the brief in advance. Our entire government thrives on leaking information it shouldn't. Fox, CNN, MSNBC, Reuters...every fucking news agency has some form of "a source not authorized to comment publicly" phrase ready to go in it's stories. Hell, I'll bet a dollar some reporters have it as a macro so they don't have to type it out or reference a text file with common phrases.

Here we are almost a month after the raid with no charges filed and only the barest of details leaked to the press? The same press that would beat the shit out of Trump for his opinions on cereal or favorite colors or type of grass to use on a lawn in Iowa?

All we have are rumor and speculation, a search warrant that probably burned through a dozen Sharpies for the redaction, and the emotion of the internet?

"The day ain't over and all", but this is a farce. This is ridiculous. The DOJ raided a former president, but didn't have an army of lawyers ready to pour over the results of that raid? No one leaked details? No one's taking a month after the raid? This mountain of evidence has not prompted one goddamned soul to leak its contents to the press?

I do not like Trump at all, but this is bullshit.
 

Topkick

Verified Military
Joined
Apr 26, 2017
Messages
1,317
SSMP
Military Mentor
The President holds unilateral and plenary power to declassify anything and everything he wants. Literally wave his hand over a box and says *Trumps voice* "Declassified" and poof- no longer classified. That's as far as the process goes. Caveats and read-ins don't matter. If a president exercises his power alone, does he still have power? The charge here- when/if/did he/didn't he declassify what he had prior to leaving office- is an absolute fool's errand. And it rejects the basic premise that we can't get past until it's answered- Is it appropriate to raid a political opponent's house, ever? Was it appropriate in this instance? Does it follow previous precedent?
This is where it gets gray with me. So, if this is true then there is no case. He can say he declassified it and you can't prove he didn't. End of story. But, it's dangerous to give that power to any one person and if something gravely dangerous is discovered missing, it must be recovered. IMO this is all part of an on-going witch-hunt, but maybe some important lessons will be learned.
 

amlove21

Pararescue
Verified SOF
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
4,625
Location
The City of Destiny
SSMP
SOF Mentor
This is where it gets gray with me. So, if this is true then there is no case. He can say he declassified it and you can't prove he didn't. End of story. But, it's dangerous to give that power to any one person and if something gravely dangerous is discovered missing, it must be recovered. IMO this is all part of an on-going witch-hunt, but maybe some important lessons will be learned.
It's literally been in the constitution since we wrote it. It's not dangerous, it's necessary for the President to retain that power unilaterally, and the only time this has been an issue has been now.

IMO, you were correct after your second sentence and could have just stopped there.

It is true; and there is no case.
 

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
11,208
Location
CONUS
It's literally been in the constitution since we wrote it. It's not dangerous, it's necessary for the President to retain that power unilaterally, and the only time this has been an issue has been now.

IMO, you were correct after your second sentence and could have just stopped there.

It is true; and there is no case.
I agree. Especially about the "necessary" part.

I don't know what (formerly?) classified information was in former President Trump's possession and I don't think any of the rest of us on the site do either. I do know that there was a huge conspiracy against then-Candidate (and later President) Trump and that he was very concerned about a potential cover-up of it after he left office. Of course, he could also have been concerned about information that would reveal malfeasance on his part, and he took the information with him to obstruct justice. I have my own opinions, based on my own biases, but right now I don't have enough information to make a decision one way or the other.
 

Topkick

Verified Military
Joined
Apr 26, 2017
Messages
1,317
SSMP
Military Mentor
It's literally been in the constitution since we wrote it. It's not dangerous, it's necessary for the President to retain that power unilaterally, and the only time this has been an issue has been now.

IMO, you were correct after your second sentence and could have just stopped there.

It is true; and there is no case.
I want you to be right.
 

amlove21

Pararescue
Verified SOF
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
4,625
Location
The City of Destiny
SSMP
SOF Mentor
I want you to be right.
Well, if history is any indicator, I am not. Is what it is.
I agree. Especially about the "necessary" part.

I don't know what (formerly?) classified information was in former President Trump's possession and I don't think any of the rest of us on the site do either. I do know that there was a huge conspiracy against then-Candidate (and later President) Trump and that he was very concerned about a potential cover-up of it after he left office. Of course, he could also have been concerned about information that would reveal malfeasance on his part, and he took the information with him to obstruct justice. I have my own opinions, based on my own biases, but right now I don't have enough information to make a decision one way or the other.
Agree with all. No clue what was in the haul; no one does. But something is indeed rotten in the state of Denmark, I believe.
 

Cookie_

SOF Support
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
1,012
Remember when all the documents were planted by the FBI?

Now they've all been declassified prior, but nobody knew about it except Trump?

Cool cool. That's the type of excuse a kid comes up with after you catch them in a lie. It's Schrodinger's Classification right now.

If anything, this shows that the declassification process should at least have some sort of formality to it.

Literally a memo that said "I, President Trump, on Day 123, declassify documents abc and xyz" would have prevented all of this.
 

Topkick

Verified Military
Joined
Apr 26, 2017
Messages
1,317
SSMP
Military Mentor
Remember when all the documents were planted by the FBI?

Now they've all been declassified prior, but nobody knew about it except Trump?

It can both, right?

For example "I declassified everything so if they found something that wasn't, it must've been planted"

On the other hand, I agree it may be good to officially stamp/ record the files before they leave with a former president.
 
Top