CSNbbs

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 09:03 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 05:11 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]Here I am going to agree with Tanq. If there were classified documents, neither Trump nor anyone else could make or retain copies for personal use.

The POTUS !!IS!! the final authority on classification. He can do what he wants. If he decided the documents were declassified then they are declassified. Simple as that. At that point only the originals are supposed government property. He can copy them at that point and retain them for his personal archives. This has happened with all presidents in modern times. You can see just this type of material at any presidential library.

18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

(01-15-2023 02:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:13 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 01:50 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]I have mixed emotions in a way. I think the deep state are a bunch of evil bastards, whose constant attacks on Donald Trump for the last six years are banana republic stuff. On the other hand I sort of hope their witch hunts find a witch at some point. The biggest favor that they could do for the USA would be to take Donald Trump out of the presidential mix for 2024. Right now republicans have a Trump problem. They can’t win with him and they can’t win without him. Take him out of the picture and they can stop the socialist/communist democrats in 2024.

I think Trump is politically finished in reality.
-Unless- These evil bastards have breathed new life into him. They could possibly stir up enough mud to make even you and AM vote for him. Don’t underestimate their ability to f it up.

Oh, if he is the republican nominee I will definitely vote for him. I don’t know if he can win though.

My bigger worry is that he runs third party. He could not win but he would drain off enough votes to hand it to the democrats.

I don’t want any democrat to win any election ever. Their leaders are a bunch of evil bastards, and their followers are useful idiots.

I have came to this same conclusion.

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 09:03 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]The POTUS !!IS!! the final authority on classification. He can do what he wants. If he decided the documents were declassified then they are declassified. Simple as that. At that point only the originals are supposed government property. He can copy them at that point and retain them for his personal archives. This has happened with all presidents in modern times. You can see just this type of material at any presidential library.

18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

If Trump has that power its up to the government to prove he didn't. A ruling doesn't prove that. Why would he have to say it to anyone....but himself? Can the government prove he didn't? No they can't, not if he has that power to just "say" these are declassified.

Assuming the bold the government would need a nextx that it must be said or written to another person. While I did not bookmark it I did a search with the time frame 2012-2016 you know before any of this....

I did read one article that if a President wanted something declassified he has sole judgement on doing just that. He could say or show any document and no one could stop him from doing just that. In that context saying it to himself would fit. But that was only a article so maybe that person was wrong.

tanq, I haven't studied that one yet ... but I will by the nigh' end ... however I stand by both previous arguments in defense or as plaintiff ... they're bulletproof and simple to understand...

you're playing a dangerous game with this 'spy v. spy' spin ... sorry, bubby, but I'm not biting on these two cases being similar in relevance other than how the law is currently defined and how it applies to both ... that's right up your alley, sir!

and like any good lawyer would state in earnest if asked off the record, "yeah, my mind is made up ... now, how do I argue to victory..."

"cya in court, honey!" :gutjab: #waybackMachine

, broheim!

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 09:03 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]The POTUS !!IS!! the final authority on classification. He can do what he wants. If he decided the documents were declassified then they are declassified. Simple as that. At that point only the originals are supposed government property. He can copy them at that point and retain them for his personal archives. This has happened with all presidents in modern times. You can see just this type of material at any presidential library.

18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

-Again, please direct us to be section in the constitution that deals with this procedure-


First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

-The only court that would mean anything in this particular case is the Supreme Court. They should have gone straight there in a case of this magnitude.-


Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

-The fact of removing them was all that was really needed if his intent was to declassify them. Again, please point to the section in the constitution that lays out a procedure to be followed.-


It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'.

-Getting there slowly but you’re making an effort. Good for you! Laying the groundwork for admitting you were wrong is good.-

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

-He hasn’t been charged with anything. He really doesn’t need to mount a defense yet. If they have the guts to charge him with something it will be epic. Epic all the way to the Supreme Court. And the evil bastards will lose and make Trump a martyr with a much better shot at the White House than he presently has.

(01-15-2023 04:36 PM)WKUYG Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

If Trump has that power its up to the government to prove he didn't. A ruling doesn't prove that. Why would he have to say it to anyone....but himself? Can the government prove he didn't? No they can't, not if he has that power to just "say" these are declassified.

Assuming the bold the government would need a nextx that it must be said or written to another person. While I did not bookmark it I did a search with the time frame 2012-2016 you know before any of this....

I did read one article that if a President wanted something declassified he has sole judgement on doing just that. He could say or show any document and no one could stop him from doing just that. In that context saying it to himself would fit. But that was only a article so maybe that person was wrong.

hence, argument #2

it's fair to state 'we don't know what is contained in any docs held by DJT or Biden' (which renders any 'verdict by discussion', moot at this point ... but it can be fonzies playing Perry Mason on a bbs)

the only remaining question in my mind (other than studying 798) is how it all plays out downstream ... there's too many scenarios in the land-o-wicked for nuts zongo to make that prediction at this point....

(01-15-2023 04:53 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

-Again, please direct us to be section in the constitution that deals with this procedure-


First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

-The only court that would mean anything in this particular case is the Supreme Court. They should have gone straight there in a case of this magnitude.-


Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

-The fact of removing them was all that was really needed if his intent was to declassify them. Again, please point to the section in the constitution that lays out a procedure to be followed.-


It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'.

-Getting there slowly but you’re making an effort. Good for you! Laying the groundwork for admitting you were wrong is good.-

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.;

-He hasn’t been charged with anything. He really doesn’t need to mount a defense yet. If they have the guts to charge him with something it will be epic. Epic all the way to the Supreme Court. And the evil bastards will lose and make Trump a martyr with a much better shot at the White House than he presently has.

which is XACLY! what Owl #s has feared all along with AM's constant bashing and JR's possible "mole theory"... there's a great script in this thread if ya think about it thru a different lens...

(01-15-2023 05:03 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:36 PM)WKUYG Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793


anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

If Trump has that power its up to the government to prove he didn't. A ruling doesn't prove that. Why would he have to say it to anyone....but himself? Can the government prove he didn't? No they can't, not if he has that power to just "say" these are declassified.

Assuming the bold the government would need a nextx that it must be said or written to another person. While I did not bookmark it I did a search with the time frame 2012-2016 you know before any of this....

I did read one article that if a President wanted something declassified he has sole judgement on doing just that. He could say or show any document and no one could stop him from doing just that. In that context saying it to himself would fit. But that was only a article so maybe that person was wrong.

hence, argument #2

it's fair to state 'we don't know what is contained in any docs held by DJT or Biden' (which renders any 'verdict by discussion', moot at this point ... but it can be fonzies playing Perry Mason on a bbs)

the only remaining question in my mind (other than studying 798) is how it all plays out downstream ... there's too many scenarios in the land-o-wicked for nuts zongo to make that prediction at this point....

I thought you were going to comment on the absurdity of the bolded. Or maybe you did

(01-15-2023 05:28 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 05:03 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:36 PM)WKUYG Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

If Trump has that power its up to the government to prove he didn't. A ruling doesn't prove that. Why would he have to say it to anyone....but himself? Can the government prove he didn't? No they can't, not if he has that power to just "say" these are declassified.

Assuming the bold the government would need a nextx that it must be said or written to another person. While I did not bookmark it I did a search with the time frame 2012-2016 you know before any of this....

I did read one article that if a President wanted something declassified he has sole judgement on doing just that. He could say or show any document and no one could stop him from doing just that. In that context saying it to himself would fit. But that was only a article so maybe that person was wrong.

hence, argument #2

it's fair to state 'we don't know what is contained in any docs held by DJT or Biden' (which renders any 'verdict by discussion', moot at this point ... but it can be fonzies playing Perry Mason on a bbs)

the only remaining question in my mind (other than studying 798) is how it all plays out downstream ... there's too many scenarios in the land-o-wicked for nuts zongo to make that prediction at this point....

I thought you were going to comment on the absurdity of the bolded. Or maybe you did

hush ... you're interrupting muh study time ...

I don't have the disdain for tanq like some of yaz ... ol' boy may appear to be socially inadequate/distasteful to some (there's something I can relate to ... 'they've' told me), but he's got some serious chops upstairs ... I never discount/underestimate that metric...

(01-15-2023 04:36 PM)WKUYG Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

If Trump has that power its up to the government to prove he didn't. A ruling doesn't prove that. Why would he have to say it to anyone....but himself? Can the government prove he didn't? No they can't, not if he has that power to just "say" these are declassified.

Here is the road path ---

First the government must show the document is prima facie classified. In this respect, the 11th Circ. has already noted that.

Once that element is done, there are two paths forward for Trump --- a) negate the primary element; or b) do an affirmative defense that he declassified it.

For a):

Trump would then bear the burden of providing evidence to 'stack against' the government showing. If Trump's evidence is 'I did it in my mind', there has to be *some* evidence that it in fact happened. Otherwise there is zero to stack against it.

For b):

1) The burden of moving forward falls to Trump. He has to show some evidence of any sort that that shows the element that he in fact declassify it. With no evidence ('I did it in my mind'), as a matter of law Trump cant present the affirmative defense.

2) If Trump actually can show evidence of this affirmative defense, then the burden of persuasion (not the burden of moving forward, mind you) falls to the government. At that point they must show evidence above a reasonable doubt that Trump didnt perform that action.

In short, Trump will bear the burden of showing in some fashion, or with some evidence, that he did in fact declassify.

The sole initial burden is that the government has to make an *initial* case that the documents are classified. One that both the 11th Circ. saw and accepted, *and* one that the Special Master noted and also noted that he saw the prima facie case made by the government.

Those rulings dont have precedent, but they are a very good indication that the government can meet the burden of making a prima facie showing.

Quote:Assuming the bold the government would need a nextx that it must be said or written to another person. While I did not bookmark it I did a search with the time frame 2012-2016 you know before any of this....

Again, the prima facie case exists in the records that the document is classified. Not just that but the markings tend to indicate that as well.

At that point, the government has met *its* burden.

Trump then has to show at least *some* evidence that he in fact declassified them. As detailed above.

Quote:I did read one article that if a President wanted something declassified he has sole judgement on doing just that. He could say or show any document and no one could stop him from doing just that. In that context saying it to himself would fit. But that was only a article so maybe that person was wrong.

I am on the fence if the President has the power to 'do it in his mind'. It may be so.

But, to use that as a defense in court, Trump will need some proof that he declassified. More generally, any person in a court will need some proof of that act.

On a personal level --- I dont believe trump. He is a lying sack of **** who will do/ say anything to get out of a situation. I believe he told his attorneys in the Trump v USA cases to make this line -- and they told him to get stuffed. In the various prongs, they would have to make some note under oath -- and they realize they need more proof than the orange haired lying sack of **** saying it. So even when pressed by the Special Master, they stayed miles away from that path.

If there was any proof, I would assume he would have brought it forward then. If he succeeded at his initial plea for the Special Master, that would have *seriously* kneecapped the government from any chance at getting through to him on this issue.

So he continues to yell in public the declassified garbage, all the while knowing he cannot back it up. Again, just imo.

Yeah Stink, you’re right. Just don’t tell him I said so. My problem is using it to argue the Dark Side.

Anyone remember it took 4 days for Republicans to select a Speaker?

(01-15-2023 04:53 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ][quote='tanqtonic' pid='18725703' dateline='1673799824']

18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

-Again, please direct us to be section in the constitution that deals with this procedure-

If he 'does it in his mind', in the legal realm there has to be evidence of some sort.

Quote:First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

-The only court that would mean anything in this particular case is the Supreme Court. They should have gone straight there in a case of this magnitude.-

The 11th has looked at the evidence and the arguments. Tells me the government made its prima facie case that the documents at first glance *are* classified. And that is part of their decision.

And Trump actually did elevate this prong to the SupCt. Which bounced it and told him to fk off and not bother us with this.

But I assume you did not realize this with the above.

Quote:Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

-The fact of removing them was all that was really needed if his intent was to declassify them. Again, please point to the section in the constitution that lays out a procedure to be followed.-

Im not saying 'a procedure must be followed' in that regard. I am saying Trump needs to have evidence of some sort. Interestingly the idiot quip of saying 'I can declassify them with my mind' isnt the type of evidence needed or required.

Quote:If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

-He hasn’t been charged with anything. He really doesn’t need to mount a defense yet. If they have the guts to charge him with something it will be epic. Epic all the way to the Supreme Court. And the evil bastards will lose and make Trump a martyr with a much better shot at the White House than he presently has.

Well hes gotten his head bashed in three times at the 11th Circ. and once at SCOTUS on this already.

And we have at least three rulings at the appellate level that say 'Trump has zero right to possess *any* document' out of the nut pile trove he tried to hoard away.

And we have one legal ruling at the appellate level that said Trump has even less right to hoard documents marked classified.

When faced with what has been said about this matter in particular, the 11th Circ. three times, and SCOTUS once, and balance it against your rantings and ravings -- sorry chuckles Ill go with the 11th and SCOTUS. Sorry about that ......

Edited to add: I am pretty sure that I have never said 'Trump doesnt have the power to do this by Jedi mind trick'. I *am* saying it is the mark of an idiot to claim that, let alone think that is a really effective thing.

Please note *exactly* where I have *ever* said he 'doesnt have that power'. At best, Ive said that it very up in the air. Stupid as fing rock to do that, and irresponsible as all hell, but those are different from what you claim I have said. Please quit with the fing strawman arguments.

(01-15-2023 06:04 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote: [ -> ]Anyone remember it took 4 days for Republicans to select a Speaker?

What happened to Biden’s border bump? He was pushing 50%.

(01-15-2023 06:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:53 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ][quote='tanqtonic' pid='18725703' dateline='1673799824']

18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

-Again, please direct us to be section in the constitution that deals with this procedure-

If he 'does it in his mind', in the legal realm there has to be evidence of some sort.

Quote:First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

-The only court that would mean anything in this particular case is the Supreme Court. They should have gone straight there in a case of this magnitude.-

The 11th has looked at the evidence and the arguments. Tells me the government made its prima facie case that the documents at first glance *are* classified. And that is part of their decision.

And Trump actually did elevate this prong to the SupCt. Which bounced it and told him to fk off and not bother us with this.

But I assume you did not realize this with the above.

Quote:Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

-The fact of removing them was all that was really needed if his intent was to declassify them. Again, please point to the section in the constitution that lays out a procedure to be followed.-

Im not saying 'a procedure must be followed' in that regard. I am saying Trump needs to have evidence of some sort. Interestingly the idiot quip of saying 'I can declassify them with my mind' isnt the type of evidence needed or required.

Quote:If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

-He hasn’t been charged with anything. He really doesn’t need to mount a defense yet. If they have the guts to charge him with something it will be epic. Epic all the way to the Supreme Court. And the evil bastards will lose and make Trump a martyr with a much better shot at the White House than he presently has.

Well hes gotten his head bashed in three times at the 11th Circ. and once at SCOTUS on this already.

And we have at least three rulings at the appellate level that say 'Trump has zero right to possess *any* document' out of the nut pile trove he tried to hoard away.

And we have one legal ruling at the appellate level that said Trump has even less right to hoard documents marked classified.

When faced with what has been said about this matter in particular, the 11th Circ. three times, and SCOTUS once, and balance it against your rantings and ravings -- sorry chuckles Ill go with the 11th and SCOTUS. Sorry about that ......

Edited to add: I am pretty sure that I have never said 'Trump doesnt have the power to do this by Jedi mind trick'. I *am* saying it is the mark of an idiot to claim that, let alone think that is a really effective thing.

Please note *exactly* where I have *ever* said he 'doesnt have that power'. At best, Ive said that it very up in the air. Stupid as fing rock to do that, and irresponsible as all hell, but those are different from what you claim I have said. Please quit with the fing strawman arguments.

I guess since you have determined that he is guilty the only question left is; when are they going to arrest him?

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 09:03 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]The POTUS !!IS!! the final authority on classification. He can do what he wants. If he decided the documents were declassified then they are declassified. Simple as that. At that point only the originals are supposed government property. He can copy them at that point and retain them for his personal archives. This has happened with all presidents in modern times. You can see just this type of material at any presidential library.

18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

let's first establish the script that is 18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

Quote:(a)Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1)concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2)concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3)concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4)obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes

I'm glad you turned me on to this guy ... this just further proves my arguments for the defense in DJT's case and the plaintiffs against Biden* and son...

it's now much easier to understand the 'whys'...

1, DJT hasn't been charged - none of either statute (793/798) addresses "declassification process" - both only address what happens if in possession/disclose when avoiding this supposed/theoretical 'ghost' process AS ONLY critical to national intelligence (collusion/treason/conspiracy/etc ... yeah, I'm paraphrasing/repeating - but that's how ya succinctly prove the point)

from my first response, I reapply #2. ... easily my fave argument for the defense of DJT

Quote:2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

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

now, let's quickly deal with the geriatric career washtubbytonnage feller and his dipshite pos son...

2. ye ol' squiggly 46* & son should be very nervous moving forward

based on what is "known" to date, it's not a 'reach' to come to the conclusion that the docs contain intel that may violate both 793/798 ... as a strict legal/constitutional adherent, this should cause you greater concern than DJT simply being a dipshite...

---------

tanq, I'm lost with ya on this one ... sorry, but I see nothing in either statute that proves any illegality v. DJT and only potential souring v. bidet* & son...

@doneTheDue&Paid'emToo ... #cyaInCourt,Honey


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

prove me wrong ... I'm a big boy ...

(01-15-2023 06:24 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 06:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:53 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793


anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

-Again, please direct us to be section in the constitution that deals with this procedure-

If he 'does it in his mind', in the legal realm there has to be evidence of some sort.

Quote:First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

-The only court that would mean anything in this particular case is the Supreme Court. They should have gone straight there in a case of this magnitude.-

The 11th has looked at the evidence and the arguments. Tells me the government made its prima facie case that the documents at first glance *are* classified. And that is part of their decision.

And Trump actually did elevate this prong to the SupCt. Which bounced it and told him to fk off and not bother us with this.

But I assume you did not realize this with the above.

Quote:Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

-The fact of removing them was all that was really needed if his intent was to declassify them. Again, please point to the section in the constitution that lays out a procedure to be followed.-

Im not saying 'a procedure must be followed' in that regard. I am saying Trump needs to have evidence of some sort. Interestingly the idiot quip of saying 'I can declassify them with my mind' isnt the type of evidence needed or required.

Quote:If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

-He hasn’t been charged with anything. He really doesn’t need to mount a defense yet. If they have the guts to charge him with something it will be epic. Epic all the way to the Supreme Court. And the evil bastards will lose and make Trump a martyr with a much better shot at the White House than he presently has.

Well hes gotten his head bashed in three times at the 11th Circ. and once at SCOTUS on this already.

And we have at least three rulings at the appellate level that say 'Trump has zero right to possess *any* document' out of the nut pile trove he tried to hoard away.

And we have one legal ruling at the appellate level that said Trump has even less right to hoard documents marked classified.

When faced with what has been said about this matter in particular, the 11th Circ. three times, and SCOTUS once, and balance it against your rantings and ravings -- sorry chuckles Ill go with the 11th and SCOTUS. Sorry about that ......

Edited to add: I am pretty sure that I have never said 'Trump doesnt have the power to do this by Jedi mind trick'. I *am* saying it is the mark of an idiot to claim that, let alone think that is a really effective thing.

Please note *exactly* where I have *ever* said he 'doesnt have that power'. At best, Ive said that it very up in the air. Stupid as fing rock to do that, and irresponsible as all hell, but those are different from what you claim I have said. Please quit with the fing strawman arguments.

I guess since you have determined that he is guilty the only question left is; when are they going to arrest him?

Im not a charging authority... Duh...... Ask a stupid question.....

And how *dare* I have an opinion. Even when I designate it as such.

You are *so* brave to have to endure an opinion. Shall we set up a relief fund for you?

I do love the massive pearl clutching over a specifically delineated opinion..... lolz.

(01-15-2023 06:11 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:53 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 02:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 11:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ][quote='tanqtonic' pid='18725703' dateline='1673799824']

18 USC 793 would bar the copying. Again, 793 does not require 'classified information' for a violation.

You would be correct for a violation of 798. But 793 is separate and apart from 798.

aw shite, let's have some fonzies with 18 USC 793

Quote:(a)Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, ...........................................information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b)Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense;

anyone wanna take a stab at what hasn't been released to date ... anyone notice certain 'thingys' ... no hints this time (fk it, ya got a freebie with "released to date")...

fk the rest of the legalese mumbo jumbo ... the above is enough...

the argument is simple ... this should be good...

#muhTurn

since everyone is continually playing dodgeball, let's address the obvious in tang's original posit in 18 USC 793...

1. it's obvious the italicized applies to Biden & son's 'case' based on all the intel the public now knows ... from Burisma --->>> Hunter's laptop --->>> muh 'big guy' --->>> 6 years ... yet, there's zero evidence any of said documents related to defense of the nation in DJT's case ... and why is that ... b/c nothing has been released other than a shiteload of 'muh spin + politics that stir the pot'..

2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

regardless, not one fk'n soul knows what's in these docs ... all this bs is nothing more than "ifs" ... there's a reason they'll never release any content in scope in either scenario...

now, I'mma gonna go back to laughing at all this stupid shite...

Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

-Again, please direct us to be section in the constitution that deals with this procedure-

If he 'does it in his mind', in the legal realm there has to be evidence of some sort.

Quote:First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

-The only court that would mean anything in this particular case is the Supreme Court. They should have gone straight there in a case of this magnitude.-

The 11th has looked at the evidence and the arguments. Tells me the government made its prima facie case that the documents at first glance *are* classified. And that is part of their decision.

And Trump actually did elevate this prong to the SupCt. Which bounced it and told him to fk off and not bother us with this.

But I assume you did not realize this with the above.

Quote:Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

-The fact of removing them was all that was really needed if his intent was to declassify them. Again, please point to the section in the constitution that lays out a procedure to be followed.-

Im not saying 'a procedure must be followed' in that regard. I am saying Trump needs to have evidence of some sort. Interestingly the idiot quip of saying 'I can declassify them with my mind' isnt the type of evidence needed or required.

Quote:If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

-He hasn’t been charged with anything. He really doesn’t need to mount a defense yet. If they have the guts to charge him with something it will be epic. Epic all the way to the Supreme Court. And the evil bastards will lose and make Trump a martyr with a much better shot at the White House than he presently has.

Well hes gotten his head bashed in three times at the 11th Circ. and once at SCOTUS on this already.

And we have at least three rulings at the appellate level that say 'Trump has zero right to possess *any* document' out of the nut pile trove he tried to hoard away.

And we have one legal ruling at the appellate level that said Trump has even less right to hoard documents marked classified.

When faced with what has been said about this matter in particular, the 11th Circ. three times, and SCOTUS once, and balance it against your rantings and ravings -- sorry chuckles Ill go with the 11th and SCOTUS. Sorry about that ......

Edited to add: I am pretty sure that I have never said 'Trump doesnt have the power to do this by Jedi mind trick'. I *am* saying it is the mark of an idiot to claim that, let alone think that is a really effective thing.

Please note *exactly* where I have *ever* said he 'doesnt have that power'. At best, Ive said that it very up in the air. Stupid as fing rock to do that, and irresponsible as all hell, but those are different from what you claim I have said. Please quit with the fing strawman arguments.

we also know the who, the how, the where, the why that issued those rulings...

after reading thru the statutes you presented, I see nada/zero/zilch that would possibly yield such judgement other than political bias...

(01-15-2023 07:37 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

let's first establish the script that is 18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

Quote:(a)Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1)concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2)concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3)concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4)obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes

I'm glad you turned me on to this guy ... this just further proves my arguments for the defense in DJT's case and the plaintiffs against Biden* and son...

it's now much easier to understand the 'whys'...

1, DJT hasn't been charged - none of either statute (793/798) addresses "declassification process"

First 798 --

798 addresses it implicitly. If there is a process or not, that may eliminate the element of "Classified information".

First step, the govt shows the presence of a document being classified. The 11th (twice) has noted this. As has the Special Master.

Second step -- Trump claims he 'declassified' them. The issue is that he has to show *some* evidence to prove that. Doing it in your mind isnt any evidence of anything.

Now 793 -- doesnt matter. 793 doesnt need 'classified information'. All it needs is 'information related to the US defense'. Two different items, two different phrases.

Classified isnt needed for 793. Classified *can be used* to show it fits under 793.

Quote: - both only address what happens if in possession/disclose when avoiding this supposed/theoretical 'ghost' process AS ONLY critical to national intelligence (collusion/treason/conspiracy/etc ... yeah, I'm paraphrasing/repeating - but that's how ya succinctly prove the point)

But the paraphrase gets it wrong. Not 'critical'. More 'related to'.

Quote:from my first response, I reapply #2. ... easily my fave argument for the defense of DJT

Quote:2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

The timeline is important. As President, Trump is King of the Hill. He probably cannot be touched by *anything* related to 793 or 798.

Once Trump is *not* President, all bets are off. Trump is then a private citizen.

793 can be used for mere improper storage. Once Trump is a private citizen, he no longer has the privilege as King of the Hill to store *anything* that 793 describes. Regardless of classified or not.

Not just 'can be used' -- it *is*used. Frequently. It covers any taking, storing, control of, or transfer from someone of the covered items. And another sub-section lowers the criminal intent from 'willingly' to 'reckless'.

Quote:based on what is "known" to date, it's not a 'reach' to come to the conclusion that the docs contain intel that may violate both 793/798 ... as a strict legal/constitutional adherent, this should cause you greater concern than DJT simply being a dipshite...

I have zero love for Biden. No sweat off my back if he falls into this same bear trap.

Quote:tanq, I'm lost with ya on this one ... sorry, but I see nothing in either statute that proves any illegality

Quote:prove me wrong ... I'm a big boy ...

I'll zap you an outline with the statutes and the actions. I dont want to get Barteet into a surly mood, and WashSons seems really close to surly as well.

be good stink.

Great questions though. And thanks for gandering the statutes. As opposed to regurgitating what gatewaypundit says.....

(01-15-2023 08:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 07:37 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-15-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Also --

Also, there is a danger of 798. While trump has said boldly and proudly that he 'declassified all of it', the procedure works against him.

First, and as the 11th Circ has noted, the DOJ has already shown a prima facie case that the documents are classified.

Trump then has to assert an affirmative defense -- that he declassified them. If Trump says he declassified them, he has to show *some* proof of that action. Thus, the comments 'declassify by Jedi Mind meld' wont work -- there is no proof, no objective evidence that he did.

It may be very well that the President has that power to 'declassify by only thinking about it'. The problem for Trump is that for that to be a valid legal defense, there must some some evidence of that actually happening. FoSizzles comments on the process now are shown to ahve a very valid rationale for occurring.

If Trump is going to use a 'I declassified them' -- then his attorneys better start to find and present *some* proof to show that aside from Trump's own say so.

let's first establish the script that is 18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

Quote:(a)Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1)concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2)concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3)concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4)obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes

I'm glad you turned me on to this guy ... this just further proves my arguments for the defense in DJT's case and the plaintiffs against Biden* and son...

it's now much easier to understand the 'whys'...

1, DJT hasn't been charged - none of either statute (793/798) addresses "declassification process"

First 798 --

798 addresses it implicitly. If there is a process or not, that may eliminate the element of "Classified information".

First step, the govt shows the presence of a document being classified. The 11th (twice) has noted this. As has the Special Master.

Second step -- Trump claims he 'declassified' them. The issue is that he has to show *some* evidence to prove that. Doing it in your mind isnt any evidence of anything.

Now 793 -- doesnt matter. 793 doesnt need 'classified information'. All it needs is 'information related to the US defense'. Two different items, two different phrases.

Classified isnt needed for 793. Classified *can be used* to show it fits under 793.

Quote: - both only address what happens if in possession/disclose when avoiding this supposed/theoretical 'ghost' process AS ONLY critical to national intelligence (collusion/treason/conspiracy/etc ... yeah, I'm paraphrasing/repeating - but that's how ya succinctly prove the point)

But the paraphrase gets it wrong. Not 'critical'. More 'related to'.

Quote:from my first response, I reapply #2. ... easily my fave argument for the defense of DJT

Quote:2. to the bold text: if the President has knowledge of all classified docs , does that not indicate sect b) is moot unless conspiracy/treasonous?

The timeline is important. As President, Trump is King of the Hill. He probably cannot be touched by *anything* related to 793 or 798.

Once Trump is *not* President, all bets are off. Trump is then a private citizen.

793 can be used for mere improper storage. Once Trump is a private citizen, he no longer has the privilege as King of the Hill to store *anything* that 793 describes. Regardless of classified or not.

Not just 'can be used' -- it *is*used. Frequently. It covers any taking, storing, control of, or transfer from someone of the covered items. And another sub-section lowers the criminal intent from 'willingly' to 'reckless'.

Quote:based on what is "known" to date, it's not a 'reach' to come to the conclusion that the docs contain intel that may violate both 793/798 ... as a strict legal/constitutional adherent, this should cause you greater concern than DJT simply being a dipshite...

I have zero love for Biden. No sweat off my back if he falls into this same bear trap.

Quote:tanq, I'm lost with ya on this one ... sorry, but I see nothing in either statute that proves any illegality

Quote:prove me wrong ... I'm a big boy ...

I'll zap you an outline with the statutes and the actions. I dont want to get Barteet into a surly mood, and WashSons seems really close to surly as well.

be good stink.

Great questions though. And thanks for gandering the statutes. As opposed to regurgitating what gatewaypundit says.....

I'll address your rebuttal in the a.m. ... you know where my head's at now (it's hard enough processing the legalese semi-sober) + I'm out of my element trying to play in your world ... however, I do love me a challenge ...