Raid on President Trump's Home
- Thread starter Marauder06
- Start date
757
Member
@Devildoc good read.
The one area I'm curious about from your article is,
"The supposedly confidential papers stolen from Trump’s safe are not subject to the Federal Records Act because they are copies of papers that exist in other places. And by definition, if the President removes them from the White House to another place, they are no longer classified. His action, taken before the new occupant was sworn in, was completely lawful. The act of removing them from a SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility, e.g. the White House) by the only person lawfully empowered to do so, is not subject to prosecution."
Classified Information is weird and I don't feel like trying to figure out the layers that could be at play, though I'm inclined to agree with the above analysis based on practicality.
However, Bloomberg actually produced an interesting article about this whole thing with a section that really stood out, bolding my own.
"Presidents do have ultimate decision-making power over the classification of documents, and Trump could theoretically have declassified any records he removed from the White House. Indeed, former Trump National Security Council member Kash Patel has claimed Trump did just that before leaving office. There is no set procedure for presidential declassification, meaning that could be the basis for a defense if a case proceeds against Trump. But even if Trump was found to have declassified documents, he could still potentially be prosecuted for removing or destroying them. And Richard Painter, chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, points out that declassification of documents for an improper purpose could be a crime in itself. “If he declassified documents in order to remove them and destroy them, he’s destroying evidence, and that’s obstruction of justice or obstruction of Congress,” Painter said."
Do I think that will stick? Probably not, but its not about the odds, its about the stakes. Clinton was impeached because he got his willy washed and then lied about it, not for the stuff he was being investigated for...so anything seems possible. If they went in because "classified documents" but found something else and a judge says it's admissible...wellllllll, who knows.
The one area I'm curious about from your article is,
"The supposedly confidential papers stolen from Trump’s safe are not subject to the Federal Records Act because they are copies of papers that exist in other places. And by definition, if the President removes them from the White House to another place, they are no longer classified. His action, taken before the new occupant was sworn in, was completely lawful. The act of removing them from a SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility, e.g. the White House) by the only person lawfully empowered to do so, is not subject to prosecution."
Classified Information is weird and I don't feel like trying to figure out the layers that could be at play, though I'm inclined to agree with the above analysis based on practicality.
However, Bloomberg actually produced an interesting article about this whole thing with a section that really stood out, bolding my own.
"Presidents do have ultimate decision-making power over the classification of documents, and Trump could theoretically have declassified any records he removed from the White House. Indeed, former Trump National Security Council member Kash Patel has claimed Trump did just that before leaving office. There is no set procedure for presidential declassification, meaning that could be the basis for a defense if a case proceeds against Trump. But even if Trump was found to have declassified documents, he could still potentially be prosecuted for removing or destroying them. And Richard Painter, chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, points out that declassification of documents for an improper purpose could be a crime in itself. “If he declassified documents in order to remove them and destroy them, he’s destroying evidence, and that’s obstruction of justice or obstruction of Congress,” Painter said."
Do I think that will stick? Probably not, but its not about the odds, its about the stakes. Clinton was impeached because he got his willy washed and then lied about it, not for the stuff he was being investigated for...so anything seems possible. If they went in because "classified documents" but found something else and a judge says it's admissible...wellllllll, who knows.
That's not the craziest idea. If Trump is the existential level threat that some Dem/Rep politicians make him out to be, then doing something with this much political blowback makes sense even if it galvanizes your opponents.
I can't wrap my head around this idea that turning the Schedule F employee classification into at will employment is a good thing.
(I'm mistaken. Schedule F was the classification Trump created that was at will employment, which was rescinded by Biden)
Say Trump comes in a "drains the swamp" of all 50k such employees; what then?
Do all those agencies just absorb the lose of that many personnel and keep trucking along? Do they think they can replace all those people quickly?
Also, if there's anything that should be common sense in politics, it's that the rules are eventually used by the opposition. Imagine if in 2028 President Ocasio-Cortez came in vowing to fire 50k staff and replace them with DemSocs; people would lose their shit.
ETA: I picked AOC for that example not because I think she'd ever win, but because she's gonna be the new Socialist boogeyman used to scare the GOP/Neolib Dems.
Last edited:
Topkick
Verified Military
You are right on here. I agree. Elections have consequences, free and fair or not, as we are seeing right now. When Obama won fair and square, conservatives knew it and they ate it. The issue with Trump is that most conservatives don't believe Biden won. Although Trump supports this idea, its not something he created or owns. Most Conservatives are skeptical that Biden, of all people, could garner more votes than Trump or Obama ever did.
The other 1,810,000+ other federal employees start doing their jobs?
I was listening to Meghan Kelly while I was washing dishes tonight. She mentioned that one of the things searched was Melania Trump's closet. If that is true, how did they know to search there?
Devildoc
Verified Military
Or if the warrant covers everything, why did they mention her closet specifically? That weird.
So I wanted to revisit this (fmr. Gov Cuomo's comments regarding the raid) for a moment. Why would he do this?
On today's episode of stranger than fiction...
Is he that mad at the Democrat party for his ouster that he's lashing out?
Is he desperately trying to stay relevant and in the political spotlight after his unceremonious fall from grace?
Does he already know that this was a legit(ish) action, and by coming up on the net help bolster Dems' claims that it's legit.
..."
That's a good point. If this was a "we're looking everywhere" thing, this it's natural they would look in the former First Lady's closet. This could be cherry-picking to make it seem more salacious. "They even looked in... TRUMP'S PERSONAL BATHROOM!!"
I hope Trump doesn’t run. But with his ego it’s probably inevitable that he will. And if so, the GOP convention is going to be a major shit show.
Whatever the reasons for the raid, you can’t reasonably discount politics as one of the catalysts. It played a part. I repeat…it played a part and nothing will convince me that it didn’t.
Was it deliberately timed? Every aspect of national politics in an critical election year is strategically timed.
Does the raid change the equation? I don’t think it changes anything. Trump is such a polarizing figure those who hate him will continue to hate him and those who support him will continue to support him.
D
Deleted member 2517
Guest
Honest question-
What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind?
What evidence needs to be provided that would lead you to believe this was warranted? What info would need to come out of this raid that would lead you believe the former president deserves to be brought up on charges?
What source would have to report this information for you to believe it? Is there any outlet you trust to give you straightforward information regarding the former POTUS and any alleged crimes he may have committed?
What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind?
What evidence needs to be provided that would lead you to believe this was warranted? What info would need to come out of this raid that would lead you believe the former president deserves to be brought up on charges?
What source would have to report this information for you to believe it? Is there any outlet you trust to give you straightforward information regarding the former POTUS and any alleged crimes he may have committed?
Topkick
Verified Military
Fair question. I think the Russia collusion debacle combined with a years long, empty handed feverish hatred from the MSM and the establishment has solidified a skepticism that is now nearly impenetrable. At this point, conservatives are likely going to question anything that the swamp claims Trump has done. They have made it pretty clear that they are out to get him.
[/QUOTE]
Honestly, regardless of which party did it or was in office, the precedent set by raiding a former POTUS' home has serious implications. I didn't like or vote for Obama and yet if this was him being raided, it would take Treason level charges with enough evidence to virtually guarantee a conviction to warrant the...ummm... warrant. He better have the damned nuclear launch codes in his possession. Remember that once anything is done successfully in politics, it will happen repeatedly. Sued over the hanging chads 20 years ago? Now we have lawsuits every election on a continually grander scale. If you don't think that every time the balance of power changes, the former office holder isn't going to have to deal with these types of shenanigans, you are dead wrong. We've gone from the most admired and respected country in the world to the country everyone is laughing at behind our backs in a period of 20 years. The only reason they aren't doing it directly to our faces is that we are still the most capable of projecting power globally.
Dame
Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
- Messages
- 3,315
Sir, I hate to say it but, they just wanted to look in her thong drawer.
Topkick
Verified Military
Boys will be boys
Guess these SS guys forgot they weren’t in LATAM any more
Similar threads
