Image 01 Image 03

Rumors of Imminent Trump indictment in Mar-a-Lago case

Rumors of Imminent Trump indictment in Mar-a-Lago case

Last March I cautioned that the Alvin Bragg case was a sideshow, and the Mar-a-Lago case was Trump’s biggest risk

The Independent newspaper in Britain has published a story asserting that Donald Trump will be indicted any day by a Florida grand jury, with regard to the possession and transmittal of national defense, information and obstruction of justice.

As described in the story, possession of classified documents will not be the basis for the indictment, rather it is the conduct with regard to those documents:

The use of Section 793, which does not make reference to classified information, is understood to be a strategic decision by prosecutors that has been made to short-circuit Mr Trump’s ability to claim that he used his authority as president to declassify documents he removed from the White House and kept at his Palm Beach, Florida property long after his term expired on 20 January 2021.

That section of US criminal law is written in a way that could encompass Mr Trump’s conduct even if he was authorised to possess the information as president because it states that anyone who “lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document …relating to the national defence,” and “willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it” can be punished by as many as 10 years in prison.

If there is no charge based on possession of classified documents, that takes away a lot of the “what about Biden” defenses.

The article also says that former chief of staff Mark Meadows testified as part of a deal giving him limited immunity:

A source who was briefed on the agreement claimed that the alleged agreement will involve the ex-chief of staff entering pleas of guilty to unspecified federal crimes but an attorney for Mr Meadows, George Terwilliger, denied that to The Independent. Mr Terwilliger said that the idea that his client would enter any guilty pleas was “complete bulls***” but did not address the matter of immunity in a brief telephone conversation with this reporter.

It is not yet known whether the testimony or the charges in question relate to the documents probe, or a separate investigation into the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Both investigations are being overseen by a Department of Justice special prosecutor, Jack Smith. According to ABC News, Mr Meadows has given evidence in both the documents matter and the January 6 investigation.

We don’t know the legitimacy of the story, but it is consistent with other reports that a federal grand jury was considering charges in Florida, which was the location of the alleged conduct.

Last March I wrote why this case is riskier for Trump. It’s about whether he directed his lawyers to lie to the feds, obstructing justice. If proven, that’s a simple legal theory of criminal liability, unlike all the attenuated and legally-stretched theories in the other cases.

Again, no one will be surprised if he is indicted with regard to Mar-a-Lago, the question is what the specific factual allegations in the indictment will be, whether there is anything new, and what the charges are. It will be interesting to see if there is a rally around effect like there was with the Bragg indictment. A lot of that will depend on what is in the indictment.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Well, Trump is guilty of being Trump. That is all that DC cares about.

    countryboy1947 in reply to Oracle. | June 7, 2023 at 8:21 pm

    Stay tuned folks. Another commie “show trial” coming up. Just in time to interfere with election 2024. Must be just a coincidence. Nobody in the democrat party would have thought of doing this as a political strategy would they?

    MattMusson in reply to Oracle. | June 8, 2023 at 7:14 am

    They are going to charge him with maintaining he is innocent.

    SophieA in reply to Oracle. | June 8, 2023 at 10:38 am

    DJT is guilty of two unforgivable crimes:
    1) He’s Trump
    2) He ran against and beat HRC in the 2016 Presidential election.

    Remind me again about “election deniers.” Leftists still haven’t accepted Bush 2’s valid election wins let alone Trump’s win.

    Difference between 2000 and 2016 is that the courts entertained Al Gore’s complaints.

    Content in reply to Oracle. | June 8, 2023 at 10:40 am

    It’s not even that. Not quite. He’s guilty of sins against the Uniparty & the corrupt status quo. He could be the world’s most ethical & diplomatic man with the least orange hair, and if he was the same threat to the CSQ/globalists, more or less the same SSSS would be going down.

    Trump’s ULTRASUPERDUPERMAGAGASMOSITY just makes it easier to proceed.

    Azathoth in reply to Oracle. | June 8, 2023 at 3:44 pm

    “Well, Trump is guilty of being Trump. That is all that DC cares about.”

    Apparently it’s all that far too many people at LI care about as well.

My take is that the key here is the President’s power to DECLASSIFY documents. Thousands of individuals have authority to access or possess classified documents, but only the President has the absolute authority to declassify any document. Once declassified, the mentioned statute is no longer applicable.

    leoamery in reply to sfharding. | June 7, 2023 at 7:27 pm

    Bunk. Here is the statute(which charcteristically you did not cite) viz: 18 USC 793(d) and (e):

    (d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

    (e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;

    Note well, these sections do not mention that a document needs to be classified. The statute was written that way to make the declassification defense not work.

    Big Don is in peril, not from the statute, but from the corrupt DOJ.

      Isn’t the reason people are “not entitled to receive it” is because it’s classified. Isn’t the reason people are “entitled to receive it” is because it’s classified. If not classified, then the concept of “entitled” does not seem to matter.

        CommoChief in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | June 7, 2023 at 9:37 pm

        Access to info is based upon need to know which roughly corresponds to level/type of clearance. A PFC working as an Intel analyst at Corps HQ might have more information than the LTCs who command the Battalions within that Corps.

        POTUS could declassify whatever he wants though it would be much more defensible to have a written record of the act. A contemporaneous record v vague claims about ‘I did it verbally’ would provide much stronger support if that ever came up, which it appears likely to.

        I disagree about the Biden did it too issue being completely mooted. Both Trump and Biden reportedly had attorneys and/or staff with not only access to docs they retained but who personally handled them. I don’t believe for a moment that the attorneys and/or staff had need to know or the appropriate level of clearance. That means both men were in violation.

        The unique problem for Trump is the section about the requirement to return the document/info to the person entitled to receive it. The National Archive and the DoJ asked for them. Both were entitled to receive them and they weren’t delivered. That’s a much straighter pathway for a prosecutor to navigate.

          Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 7, 2023 at 9:59 pm

          Been thinking. We need a law to govern these matters. We could call it the Presidential Records Act.

          The comment was about statute. So was the response. The comment said that classification was basically an irrelevant issue. “Entitled to know” seems to refute that claim. That’s really the extent of it. The statute was written to cover all cases, including classified material. Here, the allegations are not about unclassified material. As for the rest, until there is an indictment, it’s speculation.

          gonzotx in reply to CommoChief. | June 7, 2023 at 10:23 pm

          Such BS, you really believe that?

          Shame on you

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 11:28 am


          Trump had docs which the Archivist was entitled to have. It is indisputable that the Archivist asked for the docs. It is uncontested that Trump didn’t turn them over. The set of facts here seems to meet the criteria of the statute to sustain a change.

          That said the very selective enforcement by DoJ gives every indication of a politically motivated prosecution by an ideologically driven AG who has a personal animus towards Trump.

          You weren’t specific in what you called BS so I presumed you were objecting about the last para.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 2:30 pm


          The PRA was amended in 2014 subsequent to the Clinton sock drawer case. Part of the amendment grants the Archivist of the USA the power to determine what is and is not a Presidential Record. That section removed the prior ability of the outgoing POTUS to make that determination, which effectively moots the argument for using the Clinton case as precedent.

          Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 3:55 pm

          Like I note below. The 2014 amendments are irrelevant to the present case. Whatever you’re using a source, they’re mistaken or lying.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 4:16 pm

          Great, that means the motions to dismiss based upon your reasoning will undoubtedly be successful.

          Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 5:44 pm

          You apparently think this is still a country governed by the rule of law.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 8:28 pm


          Either the law in whatever form it takes is irrelevant as you argue now or it remains very relevant indeed. If irrelevant then why so concerned about what the law is?

          Hell, why be concerned whether Trump is even guilty or innocent when, if as you argue the rule of law no longer applies, then his guilty verdict is preordained?

      alaskabob in reply to leoamery. | June 7, 2023 at 7:50 pm

      The word for today is “President”. Not “whoever”. If you want a “whoever” think of Joe and HRC.

      Concise in reply to leoamery. | June 7, 2023 at 9:56 pm

      And you (probably characteristically, I don’t really know but assume the worst) fail to note that Donald Trump was the President and issues involving presidential documents fall under the Presidential Records Act.

      Aarradin in reply to leoamery. | June 8, 2023 at 3:34 am

      You need to look at the Presidential Records Act, that’s what is relevant here.

      Authority to classify/declassify rests entirely with the President. Any authority any other federal bureaucracy has, including FBI and the National Archives, stems only from the President’s authority.

      The notion, on which this indictment is predicated, that the archives has authority over the President on his own documents is absurd.

      Federal Courts have already ruled on this. Recently too, search for the “sock drawer” case against Bill Clinton. He was found to have classified documents, which he’d never signed any document specifically declassifying while still in office, in his sock drawer after leaving office.

      You really can’t make up anything more absurd than what D’s actually do.

      Federal judge ruled that he had sole authority to determine what were his “personal papers” rather than public record under the authority of the archives.

      Note that the exception is for POTUS only. The truckloads of classified documents that Biden took after leaving office as VP fall under the law you cited above.

      wendybar in reply to leoamery. | June 8, 2023 at 5:50 am

      WHY aren’t Biden and Pence being indicted??

        MattMusson in reply to wendybar. | June 8, 2023 at 7:17 am

        Biden and Pence were not holding documents that outlined exactly who was guilty of lawbreaking in Operation Crossfire Hurricane. That is exactly what the FBI was after. And, that is what will never see the light of day again.

        M Poppins in reply to wendybar. | June 8, 2023 at 3:55 pm

        “You make beeg joke, ha!” – Akim Tamiroff

      Lucifer Morningstar in reply to leoamery. | June 8, 2023 at 11:23 am

      So why hasn’t the DOJ indicted Joe Biden for the improper illegal possession of classified documents. You know, the classified documents that they found in the closet at this UPenn money laundering organization office. Or the documents they found at his home in Delaware. Or the classified documents they found in his Delaware garage Apparently all from his days as a Senator.

      You can’t really claim he had the authority to keep any of those documents in his possession. You can’t. So why hasn’t Biden been indicted under the same federal law.

        CommoChief in reply to Lucifer Morningstar. | June 8, 2023 at 11:36 am

        IMO there are two reasons Biden hasn’t been indicted.
        1. The most common legal view is that a President can’t be indicted while holding office.
        2. The prosecution is politically motivated with an ideological DoJ fishing for something to use as the basis to ‘get Trump’.

        Personally I think the second reason is the most applicable here; it’s a ‘get Trump’ operation.

          Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 5:30 pm

          They sure were eager to investigate president Trump though. The Biden Special counsel has apparently taken a vacation. Somewhere nice probably. These government hack jobs pay well.

          Lucifer Morningstar in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 6:59 pm

          1. But a sitting president can certainly be impeached. So why aren’t the republicans drafting articles of impeachment to hold Biden accountable and responsible for his illegal acts and actions. It’s not like they need any real evidence. The democrats have shown that. So where are the Articles of Impeachment.

          2. Yes, it’s purely a politically motivated prosecution. That is if they can convince a Florida grand jury to indict Trump. But even if that happens, so what? He’s indicted. Beyond some propaganda value, so what? The democrat leftists have been trying to ‘get Trump’ for years and haven’t succeeded in their efforts. This will simply backfire on the democrats like everything else they’ve tried to ‘get Trump” with.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 8:36 pm


          Impeach Biden? Sure once Comer gets more info fine by me but I ain’t in Congress.

          I believe the DC Circuit has jurisdiction for issues arising out of the PSA conflict between the Archivist and Trump. That would suck balls so I hope I am mistaken on that.

I said it a year ago. They are TERRIFIED of Trump, and what he represents.

They know just how much they had to cheat to get the drooling moron installed over him.

They were ALWAYS going to arrest Trump, because they cannot allow him to get back in office being actually willing to destroy the Deep State.

    Concise in reply to Olinser. | June 7, 2023 at 10:29 pm

    And, just curious but I thought grand jury proceedings were secret. These guys can’t shut up about them.

    MarkSmith in reply to Olinser. | June 8, 2023 at 12:31 am

    I think it is wishful thinking that he can destroy the deep state. He just messes up their plan and delays everything, which mean some of the old guard will be dead before they can take control unless they get their aborted baby blood.

      MattMusson in reply to MarkSmith. | June 8, 2023 at 7:19 am

      Hundreds of people would have to be imprisoned. Tens of thousands would have to be fired. It may be impossible. At least Trump will try.

        MarkSmith in reply to MattMusson. | June 8, 2023 at 8:04 am

        Look up Russian history. Look up Chinese history. Look up Po Pot. Is it not obvious. Trump is not going to stop it. He is just slowing it down. It will take something like very different to stop it. Maybe God will step in. Club for Growth/s

        M Poppins in reply to MattMusson. | June 8, 2023 at 3:57 pm

        thousands upon thousands of executions too. I pray that I live to see it.

What can be said that hasn’t already been said? This is about as dark as American can get. It matters more than the woke war because even an unwoke police state with out of control “democrats” is still a police state.

healthguyfsu | June 7, 2023 at 7:12 pm

This is a witch hunt whether you support Trump or not.

The prosecution of Trump, coupled with the apparent lack of prosecution of any leftist who engaged in far worse conduct, spells the end for the rule of law in America.

Soon leftists will routinely be exercising wholly arbitrary power to crush all dissent.

If the special counsel wishes to indict Trump for failing to turn over defense articles/documents, wouldn’t he have to prove that the items are indeed defense articles?

Were I on the Grand Jury, I would be skeptical that there were true military secrets at Mar-a-Lago without seeing them.

    Aarradin in reply to kelly_3406. | June 7, 2023 at 10:35 pm

    If the case is argued in DC, the jury pool will unanimously vote to convict no matter what – out of pure hatred of President Trump.

    Saw this happen already with the E. Jean Carroll case.

    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to kelly_3406. | June 8, 2023 at 11:59 am

    Were I on the Grand Jury, I would be skeptical that there were true military secrets at Mar-a-Lago without seeing them.

    Whereupon the democrat prosecutors will tell the Grand Jury they don’t have the classification level in order to actually see the actual documents but can trust them and be assured that what Trump has was truly “military secrets” that “threatened the national security”. Cross their hearts . . .

    The_Mew_Cat in reply to kelly_3406. | June 8, 2023 at 1:11 pm

    They only need show that one of these documents was national defense information – a pretty low bar.

      Lucifer Morningstar in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | June 8, 2023 at 7:45 pm

      But how can the prosecution actually do that in a court of law without revealing that document to the jury. A jury I assure you that won’t have the proper security clearance to even see such a national security/national defense classified document. And I don’t doubt the defense would have serious objections to a, “Trust us, it’s a national security/defense document.” statement from the prosecution to the jury.

A lot has been said regarding a President’s inherent power to declassify any material. And, it follows disclose or otherwise make public said material. But such authority evaporates when the material supposedly relates to national defense? That’s beyond absurd. That’s unicorn’s ass absurd. If based on this statute, this case should be dismissed and the prosecutors disbarred. In a just country recognizing the rule of law.

    CommoChief in reply to Concise. | June 8, 2023 at 12:16 pm

    It’s written that way to encompass;
    1. The period from initial possession of info but prior to a classification determination being made.
    2. errors in declassification or in original classification

    The information and it’s ability to cause harm to the US is what really matters anyway, not whether the information is of a particular classification level. There’s so much crap with a Secret or TS classification on it that has no bearing to the ability of the information to harm the unit would make your head spin. Over classification is an old habit for the Feds in every department. TS has been overused so often to make it nearly a status symbol signifying the holder of a TS clearance has achieved minimal worth in the organization.

      Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 12:22 pm

      No one has higher authority than the President. A lower level fed cannot restrict inherent constitutional presidential authority. And then there’s the small matter of the Presidential Records Act.

        CommoChief in reply to Concise. | June 8, 2023 at 2:21 pm

        The statute, passed by Congress which is in fact binding upon the President, is referring to info regardless of classification. The presence or absence of any classification is not relevant for this statute.

        POTUS can absolutely declassify whatever he wishes. However, if the info could cause harm to the US then for this statute it doesn’t matter whether the info is or was ever classified. This statute applies to the info itself and not whether a particular or any classification sticker is on the doc containing the info.

          Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 3:45 pm

          Uh, what? Broadly speaking where a statute and inherent presidential constitutional authority conflict, the statute losses. But I never said the PRA had no application. Exactly the opposite. I do claim that the Espionage Act has no application in this context. And as for the PRA, it has no criminal enforcement mechanism. Whatever this case is, it’s an archival dispute, not a criminal or espionage matter.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 4:14 pm

          We’ll find out when the motions to dismiss are ruled upon.

          Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 5:16 pm

          I wouldn’t assume at this time that a fair and just ruling will issue since we seem to have abandoned fairness and justice in this country.

          sfharding in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 8:28 pm

          Apart from the broader constitutional question of to what extent Congress can bind the President, (or any branch bind another), you suggest this statute refers not to the classification of a document, but instead to it’s potential harm. So who makes that decision? If not the President, then who decides? In what manner or forum is that decision made? Challenged? Adjudicated? Can someone be charged for mishandling documents that are NOT classified, ANY document, because someone (?) claims that maybe, just maybe, it might cause, or have caused harm to the U.S.?
          Such a procedural circus would be never ending.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 8:51 pm


          That’s a good try for a heads I win tails you lose proposition. If I am correct then you get to say the system was unfair but if you are correct then you still get to be correct. No bet.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 9:01 pm

          Ignore the statute if you wish. I ain’t arguing that it is a ‘good’ statute or that some degree of chaos might unfold. I am arguing that the statute exists, that Trump may face issues under it b/c the DoJ is potentially gonna use it for their ‘get Trump’ operation. An indictment is gonna be painful enough they don’t have to convict just go to trial and drag it out so he is stuck in a courtroom and not campaigning. The process will definitely be part of the punishment.

    Concise in reply to Concise. | June 8, 2023 at 12:19 pm

    And to add, as relevant to the Presidential Records Act, classified material is covered just not defense related classified material? or after the president declassifies the material, it is somehow exempt from the Act? or non-classified defense related material (is there a lot of this?) is exempt from the Act that covers all presidential documents? Or something. These legal theories are an embarrassment.

      CommoChief in reply to Concise. | June 8, 2023 at 2:33 pm

      The amendment to the PRA in 2014 grants the National Archivist the discretion to determine what is and what is not a Presidential Record.

        Concise in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 3:53 pm

        Now that’s just plain wrong. Don’t know who is advising you or what source you’re using but that the 2014 amendments had no such effect. What did the 2014 amendments change? Well, if you really want to put yourself to sleep, here they are. One substituted “memoranda” for “memorandums” and “audio and visual records” for “audio, audiovisual” and inserted “, whether in analog, digital, or any other form” after “mechanical recordations”. Another substituted “the President’s” for “his” in introductory provisions. And the last one substituted “advise or assist” for “advise and assist” in introductory provisions.

          CommoChief in reply to Concise. | June 8, 2023 at 4:29 pm

          Oh ok then. So there’s no dispute at all between the Nation Archives and Trump b/c according to you the Archivist must pound sand if the former POTUS says so.

          When do think motions to dismiss based on your analysis will be filled upon since it’s so cut and dried that the Archivist shouldn’t /couldn’t have referred this to DoJ and DoJ shouldn’t/couldn’t act upon that request b/c there’s no basis for the Archivist to even ask for the records in the first place?

          Concise in reply to Concise. | June 8, 2023 at 5:12 pm

          No, you seriously misunderstand. In sum, I’m saying there’s no crime or espionage at issue here. And whatever the status of the records as an archival matter, it isn’t an issue that concerns the DOJ/FBI.

Can’t have President Trump win a third time, they’d rather kill him and I do believe this

Federal Court already ruled on this issue in a case against Bill Clinton – who was found to have classified information, audio tapes, in his sock drawer.

Trump’s lawyers referenced this case in a filing they made last September, on this Mar a Lago case:

“Trump’s newest filing for the first time refers to what has been called “the Clinton sock drawer case,” a 2012 ruling concerning a former president’s power — in this case, Bill Clinton — to unilaterally decide what is a private record and what is a Presidential Records Act document in his post-presidency.”

The court in the Clinton case found for serial rapist Bill Clinton – concluding that, as President, Clinton had sole authority to decide.

    The_Mew_Cat in reply to Aarradin. | June 8, 2023 at 1:13 pm

    A Federal Court ruled, but the case was never appealed, and there is no SCOTUS precedent.

      Concise in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | June 8, 2023 at 5:26 pm

      Ok, but it’s a precedent. And there are other relevant S.Ct. precedents bearing on the inherent constitutional authority of the president. Oh and the Presidential Records Act and the lack thereof a criminal enforcement mechanism.

iconotastic | June 8, 2023 at 12:01 am

Charges? Does a DC jury and Obama judge need charges to convict former President Trump? After all, Trump is obviously guilty of being Trump.

Anyone who thinks this banana republic behavior won’t be directed at other Republican candidates is dreaming.

    Concise in reply to iconotastic. | June 8, 2023 at 11:25 am

    I wonder what, if anything, the House could do (not that I have faith in them to do the right thing, just talking theoretically). I assume that they could defund any such investigations/prosecutions. Could they also offer a grant of immunity to President Trump to testify to the relevant committee regarding this gross abuse of prosecutorial power and political interference? This whole matter is really an intensification of the established pattern of abuses by certain agency elements. It’s only going to get worse if there are no consequences for these wrongs.

      iconotastic in reply to Concise. | June 8, 2023 at 6:05 pm

      Others can answer better than I but my impression is that Congress has no way to address this other than by passing a constitutional law or using the power of the purse.

      If enough of the judiciary and the DoJ are in on the railroad then it is a done deal, I think.

Seems to me like it would be a MUCH HIGHER PRIORITY to charge the current sitting president with mishandling classified documents AND passing intelligence to foreign agents, than a former present with dated material and limited influence in the here and now.

Undoubtedly, the grand jury in Florida was carefully tested by the prosecution for proper amounts of anti-Trump bias before bringing the charges there, so there’s no chance of them *not* charging him. In addition, a proper frothing anti-Trump judge has in all likelihood already been picked out to *randomly* take the case. At that point, the prosecution will run on rails just like all of the J6 prosecutions. Every defense motion will be denied, every biased witness for the prosecution accepted, every bit of incriminating evidence treated as gold and every exculpatory bit excluded, and twelve Hillary/Biden voters will pronounce judgement.

The Oath Keeper prosecution was a trial run. This one is for all the marbles, and Dem control of the government until the sun goes out at the end of the ages.

It is all about who is in the club. Mark Meadows and Mike Pompeo purpose was to thwart Trump. I mean is there one guy that was not connected to get Trump because they screwed up the 2016 election and had to fix that because so many people voted for Trump that their cheating could not work? Probably Flynn was the only one and he was not the greatest choice either.

Lets do another round of BS charges and see if they stick. What a waste of time. These people could careless about USA and what this country is about. Sorry but DeSantis is part of the club. I don’t consider Trump as anything except outside the club.

We are screwed and I thought that a long time ago after Flynn and the Russia BS. With 2 impeachments, J6 and the obvious election fraud including the John James/Gary Peters race. And you believe anything will be different in 2024? We have lost this country. Pretend all you want but kiss your retirement good by and your kids opportunity to advance to high middle class. Ha.

This is what happen in the early days of 1900 with the Bolsheviks. Just like Russia, the US will fall because the elites have taken control and they will be kicked to the curb to have the New World Order take over.

Good luck. I am not joining the club. Many of you already have and don’t even realize it. Covid was the test and you level of compliance is their gauge. The lock downs are just the start, Canada tested the digital currency. That is next.

    Danny in reply to MarkSmith. | June 8, 2023 at 9:26 am

    So when you are aware the Independent’s initial report was wrong, and you have Mark Meadow’s lawyer confirming it was wrong and that Mark Meadows will not be testifying you still attack Mark Meadows on behalf of Trump anyway.

    I would go over the rest of your post but I really don’t have to we could all see what you are from that fact alone.

      MarkSmith in reply to Danny. | June 8, 2023 at 10:52 am

      Was it wrong? Did they retract? Sure I will take Meadow’s attorney’s claim./s

        Danny in reply to MarkSmith. | June 8, 2023 at 11:19 am

        Translation “I am a thick cultist with no brains, my definition of someone being good or bad is if I could find no matter how poorly sourced something somewhere showing they might not be in dear leader’s cult”.

        By the way I trust you will be accepting the Independent at face value when it discusses Donald Trump?

I’m a little confused. If that is how the Deep State is going after Trump then why isn’t Biden also on the block. His “I gave them back when asked” defense is no defense at all. He had no authority to remove the classified documents in the first place unlike Trump who is claiming they are his and were declassified. The crime is not just having them but removing them in the first place.

    Aarradin in reply to diver64. | June 8, 2023 at 3:36 am

    That’s an easy one:

    FBI = D Party’s Gestapo

    And the DOJ is far more corrupt yet.

    They exist to prosecute the enemies of the State – Republicans/Conservatives. And anyone that opposes the D’s ideological agenda in any way.

    D’s get a free pass. On everything.

    mailman in reply to diver64. | June 8, 2023 at 6:10 am

    I suspect Democrats need Biden to stay where he is because he is much easier to control than someone else capable of thinking, no matter how limited, for themselves.

    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to diver64. | June 8, 2023 at 12:47 pm

    His “I gave them back when asked” defense is no defense at all.

    That’s only part of it. The Biden regime also claimed they were “completely transparent” about the fact that Biden had illegally retained classified documents. And that the Biden regime “immediately contacted the National Archives” to “arrange for the retrieval of the documents”. And that finding classified documents in so many locations was, “totally different than the situation with Trump” (wink, wink).

    And of course, we all let the Biden regime get away with their spin-doctoring of the situation.

They are turning him into a martyr so that he will win the Republican nomination. They are betting that he will then lose the general election. If they are wrong, it will be a four-year presidency of retribution. They will deserve what they get.

(For the record, I don’t want Trump to win another term. One reason is simply that he will be a one-term president.)

    Danny in reply to Stuytown. | June 8, 2023 at 9:28 am

    You are correct in all things on that.

    The_Mew_Cat in reply to Stuytown. | June 8, 2023 at 1:17 pm

    It will be a 4-year presidency of incompetent, ineffective retribution. I don’t think the DS is too worried. They know Trump does not have a well-oiled political machine because he has no real friends or true allies outside of his family. 4 or 8 years of DeSantis purging the DS worries them more, but they know they can beat DeSantis soundly on the Abortion issue alone – even with Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket.

angrywebmaster | June 8, 2023 at 5:05 am

They really want to trigger a full blown civil war, don’t they?

I’m now of the belief that there won’t be an election in 2024, that the Democrats will find/manufacture a reason to cancel it.

I prefer to be wrong, but Biden and his cronies are guilty of everything they’ve been accusing Trump of.

    Of course there will be an election. Even if the Democrats had completed their coup against our country (and I don’t think they have. Yet.), there would still be elections.

    Elections in totalitarian regimes have two purposes: the lesser one is to force the population to submit each time to their ruling oppressors. The joke elections in No-Ko, for example, have little to do with ensuring the population doesn’t revolt and everything to do with reminding the people they have no way out. The second purpose of elections in totalitarian regimes is to give the appearance of legitimacy to the rest of the world. See? We’re still “democratic,” we hold elections! Sure, 99% of the vote goes to one party, but that’s because our people LOVE them some monstrous tyranny.

    There will be 2024 elections, and if you live in a state where your elections are a mess, you better get to work cleaning them up fast. Organize at the local and county level and pressure changes. Push your state’s legislature to nix covid-era voting rules, ensure there is oversight at every place your area allows voting and vote counting. No one is going to do it for you, and it’s too late now to count on elections (as we did in Florida, when DeSantis and our legislature cleaned up our voting in the areas that were still under Dem control.).

      The_Mew_Cat in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | June 8, 2023 at 1:19 pm

      They don’t even have to cheat all that much. Just enough to win consistently. Remember JFK – I don’t need a landslide sonny, just a win.

        He was a Democrat. Republicans have always needed landslides (to overcome Democrat cheating).

        CommoChief in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | June 8, 2023 at 3:10 pm

        Make it harder to cheat in your County by working to clean up the voter registration lists. Get a copy of it and a copy of the property tax roll. Now match the addresses. Then do a drive around.

        Do that and you will find addresses used to register that have no building on them. You’ll find 1 bedroom Apts as the address for multiple voters. You’ll find commercial buildings used as the voter address.

        In most States those things would normally cause the registration to be invalid. After the election is too late to complain about it, We have to do the work to ID and remove invalid voter registration before the election begins.

      willow in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | June 8, 2023 at 7:20 pm

      Great comment. One of the reasons why I doubted 2020 election results is because Florida has such a cleaned up system.

    mailman in reply to angrywebmaster. | June 8, 2023 at 6:11 am

    They had elections in Iraq under Saddam. So its not unheard of for dictatorships to have elections.

    We started 2021 losing Georgia with “MUH RIGGED ELECTIONS!!!!” and loss of the senate.

    After Jan 6th Trump started to fade out of the public eye thanks to Jack Dorsey and that is something you should be grateful for because elections after we lost the senate proved to be the start of a Red Wave.

    The wave very nearly saw Democrats lose the governorship of New Jersey, and actually saw them lose the State House, AG, Assistant Governor, and Governorship of VIRGINIA.

    The way Republicans did it was by throwing Trump out the window and appealing to their voters.

    After Trump returned all signs of a red wave died, we lost more often than not and the 2022 general election went very badly, we even lost the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2023.

    If you don’t like the authoritarian Democrat partisan trend in the government the path forward is to get Republicans elected.

    You can’t do that by selecting Trump.

    Even if there is a conviction the chance of Ron DeSantis granting a pardon is 100% if he wins.

    The chance of Trump winning…….it isn’t there. He could win the nomination and hand the next election to Biden.

      starride in reply to Danny. | June 8, 2023 at 11:17 am

      Everything you said was un true……. You can 100% put the blame on the loss of the res wave at the feet of McConnell and the RNC. They actively worked against Trump endorsed candidates.

        Danny in reply to starride. | June 8, 2023 at 11:24 am

        You are a liar sir or a complete brainless fool.

        Name one Independent or Democrat who voted against Mitch McConnell.

        Did Mitch McConnell force us to pick Mastriano master of the 40% vote total? Did he make us pick our atrocious New Hampshire senate candidate? Or force us to pick Blake Masters? Did he force us to pick Heschel Walker?

        Or did after he tried to get us to pick actual viable candidates fund Trump’s atrocious picks? Trump hoarded his money for his presidential run.

        Brian Kemp won while Herschel Walker lost.

        We’ve been all through this, but I still don’t get how you guys think that Trump is the savior of the whatever, yet his endorsement alone is not enough to pull a win. He sure thought it would be. Why don’t you?

          Azathoth in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | June 8, 2023 at 4:44 pm

          What was TRump’s endorsement success record in 2022? 86% or something like that.

          You’re bitching because it wasn’t 100%

          Why wasn’t it 100%?

          Because the GOP élite work WITH the Democrats. Nevertrumpers work WITH the Democrats.

          That’s ridiculous. Almost all of the Trump-endorsed candidates were safe anyway (they were races in which, as Pelosi said of AOC, a glass of water with a D–in this case R–by its name would win). But the Trump-backed candidates in races that mattered–that decided the House, Senate, and governorships–were humiliated.

          He is the very worst judge of people I’ve ever seen in my entire life. He literally thought that Oz (from NJ) would be a great pick for Senate in Pennsylvania . . . because he was on TV (and because he flattered Trump). Ditto his crazy endorsement of Herschel Walker in Georgia. Trump apparently thinks that being on TV–and saying nice things about Trump–is the key to winning elections. That is completely crazy, and voters rejected that complete crazy in droves.

          Trump is Trump, and there is nothing wrong with supporting him, but at some point, you have to look at the required willful denial of reality and facts that you have to spin through in maintaining that support in your own mind and wonder if it’s worth it. If it is, sure, go for it. But if it’s not, maybe . . . give it some more thought? /Just sayin’ (as they say)

          CommoChief in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | June 8, 2023 at 9:07 pm

          What was the record for Statewide Offices? Gov and Senator? That’s what counts b/c that’s how electoral college votes are won other than what in Maine and I think Nebraska.

          Winning a Congressional district is way easier than a statewide race but if you want to see if the endorsement was valuable look at CD that were D+5 or higher and count how many were picked up post Trump endorsement.

      The_Mew_Cat in reply to Danny. | June 8, 2023 at 1:22 pm

      I’m not convinced that DeSantis is more electable than Trump in the 2024 general. It will be very close regardless, and a lot depends on 3rd party spoilers like Manchin. DeSantis is OK with a national abortion ban so he may be electoral poison in WI, MI, PA, VA, AZ, and many other states. Trump is demonized by the Media, but on the issues, he is more acceptable to suburban women.

        Manchin could be a spoiler; he’d certainly draw interest from the middle, but it’s getting late in the game, and he doesn’t have a team, he wouldn’t get the Dem party’s support, and he needs to be setting things in motion yesterday.. I don’t think he’ll run, and if he does, it will go nowhere because he just doesn’t have the money/backing.

        DeSantis does not support a national abortion ban, where on earth did you get that idea? He signed a six-week abortion ban here in Florida because that was doable. He didn’t ban it. And he is certainly not out there campaigning on a national anything to do with abortion. He’s a governor. He’s most likely to side with states rights on abortion. Doing otherwise would be political suicide.

        Danny in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | June 8, 2023 at 8:53 pm

        DeSantis doesn’t support a nationwide abortion ban.

        He also has shown himself to be fantastic at selling himself to suburban women.

        I do agree we do not have the election in the bag by not doing Trump, but with Trump the Democrats will win whoever they have (including Biden).

        It will not be close if Trump is the nominee. On that you are just wrong. We literally just saw people campaigning as Trump’s mini-me in the mid west and it was catastrophic. Mastriano’s results weren’t any better than what we get in California. New Hampshire saw a Trump mini-me get rejected by a population that picked a Republican head of the ticket to win. In Arizona Blake Masters got a historic 46%, and then lets not forget Georgia home to the man Trump tried to scapegoat (who won re-election by 8% increasing his victory margin dramatically WITH TRUMP ATTACKING HIM) while the Trump mini-me lost.

        You are saying “On the issues he is more acceptable to suburban women”-No he isn’t. Suburban women don’t like Trump and yes the candidate can become the issue. They already made up their minds.

        You literally had to invent a position for DeSantis he isn’t advocating for to come to that conclusion by the way.

        For some arsenical issues to suburban women how about Jan 6th?

        To vote for Trump you are voting for his behavior after he lost in 2020, and as demonstrated 2022 the suburbs simply will not do that.

        If we nominate Trump yes we are throwing the election to Biden, and it is deliberate.

        We have many recent examples of his results.

    gonzotx in reply to angrywebmaster. | June 8, 2023 at 10:34 am

    We are too cowered to have a civil war, we are not the same people

    Look what Covid did to us and our freedoms with the most minimal of resistance

Facts truth do not matter. Pres, in this case a rare non-corrupt one, has plenary authority to declassify anything. Banana republic. Salvagable but get off your asses and work on it.

It sounds to me like a lot of creating reinterpretation of laws based on get trump.

Watergate was considered a “Constitutional crisis.” What we have now is far worse, and could more properly be called a “Crisis of Legitimacy.”

The basic contract between citizens of a supposed Constitutional republic government is being shredded by ongoing bad faith of the governing class.

Only a few notable items: Baseless, show-trial “investigations,” using intelligence services to spy on political opposition through a sham FISA proceeding, invasion of attorney client privilege first by going after Cohen, then Giuliani, government agencies pressuring social media to censor opposition stories, abuse of emergency powers under guise of “Covid.”

And now an ongoing abuse of prosecutorial power against the head of the political opposition. The left complaints about “J6.” In truth the only thing remarkable about that day is that it was not more widespread and violent. If present trends continue, our government will have removed the fundamental basis to recognize its legitimacy, and The People will have every right to substitute a new one.

Traitors loyal to their New World Order masters are attacking patriot Trump.

All that matters is keeping the intrigue high and the media loaded with new and negative things to fill the airwaves and coax cables. That way everything about Trump can continue to have a cloud over it. I won’t be surprised if RFKJr is next in this treatment. Have to keep any of those speaking against the DC cabal from getting popular without being seriously “tainted” or at least being fired at by media day in and day out. They are very obedient that way.

Peter Floyd | June 8, 2023 at 9:21 am

Not a wise idea making Trump into a martyr. Woke liberals are incapable of comprehending the consequences of their actions let alone the myriad unforeseen consequences. Al least 75 million voted for Trump and 80% of them believe the election was stolen and that his supporters have been victimized and the country led to ruin. You can debate that all you wish but the reality is that 50 million plus is a formidable force that has coalesced around several central figures with most of them armed. Keep pushing the provocations and sometime very soon a spark is going to ignite a flame that cannot be put out until the wore are annihilated and confined to mental institutions where they can receive the help their mentally disturbed minds desperately require.

I would argue the timing has everything to do with this story:

FBI director Christopher Wray ‘CAVES’ to the House Oversight Committee as he’s forced to release docs on Joe Biden foreign bribery claims – and lawmakers can look at it from TODAY

    Little picture big picture.

    The number of DOJ officials unaware that there would be backlash among Republican Primary voters is zero.

    They want Trump as the nominee.

    He is nominated now, and even if they drop charges (they won’t) he can’t win the general, and with the charges going he is even less likely to win.

      MarkSmith in reply to Danny. | June 8, 2023 at 10:54 am

      Why can’t he win the general? Maybe same reason DeSantis can’t?

        Danny in reply to MarkSmith. | June 8, 2023 at 11:14 am

        He can’t win the general because most Americans do not like him and will vote for whoever he runs against, he is deeply unpopular in Michigan, Pennsylvannia and Wisconsin, he is not liked in Georgia (where his senate candidate lost while Brian Kemp won) or Arizona either.

        He has since losing made alienating voters who voted against him his #1 priority with his grade a bullshit.

        Surveys found that most Americans backed Alvin Bragg indicting Trump, they did not care that it was a political rather than legal act.

        None of that applies to DeSantis.

        If you have given up just get out and stop trying to sabotage us you will get to laugh at us if we lose.

        The fact that you are here yelling “MUH RIGGED 2020 MUH RIGGED MUH RIGGED MUH RIGGED MUH VOTTTTTEEERRRR FRAAAUUUUUDDDD!” proved beyond a doubt that in your own mind you know that we lost the 2020 election it was not stolen by voter fraud (if you actually thought it was you would have left the political arena).

          Azathoth in reply to Danny. | June 8, 2023 at 4:50 pm

          ” he is deeply unpopular in Michigan, Pennsylvannia and Wisconsin”

          In 2016 he won all three.

          In 2020, large amounts of ballots were cast in the dead of election night after the polls were closed and the workers and observers had been sent home in all three.

          That is what happened.

          Barely. And that was only because Hillary didn’t bother to campaign there and treated them like her blue wall “right.” Had she deigned to campaign among the unwashed masses in these states, she may well have won. Wrap your mind around that one.

          Danny in reply to Danny. | June 8, 2023 at 9:01 pm

          To also reply to Azathoth

          1. 2016 will have been 8 years ago in 2024.

          2. Hillary Clinton did not show up at all in some of those states, did not pour resources into them, and did not have a strong ground game because she determined those states would be out of play she in fact called them the blue wall.

          3. Despite that Trump won fewer Wisconsin votes in 2016 than Romney in 2012. Michigan and Pennsylvania was also barely a victory.

          4. With Trump as the referendum item we lost all of those states in 2018.

          5. Liar that just never happened. Votes were counted in the dead of night they got cast in accordance with state law.

          6. This bullshit about voter fraud changing the way those states voted has had an impact. Instead of winning Wisconsin in 2022 we lost many important races there including governor, and we lost the supreme court in 2023. Michigan voters voted to informally repeal voter i.d. as a backlash against our claiming voter fraud in Michigan after they voted for Gretchen Whitmer in historic numbers and handed the house and senate in their state to Democrats. In Pennsylvania Mastriano got the results we get out of California or Vermont and Republicans lost many extremely important posts.

          If you have given up why are you trying to pick the next nominee? Shouldn’t you be encouraging us to go for DeSantis an electable popular governor in order to prove your case that elections are rigged instead of drawing Trump into further humiliation when exactly the same people do exactly the same thing?

          Azathoth in reply to Danny. | June 9, 2023 at 9:24 am

          Fuzzy, 304 to 227 is an odd definition of ‘barely”

          And both of you seem to not understand that Hillary didn’t hit those state because THEY WERE SOLID BLUE STATES.

          The Dems thought there was no chance they could lose those states.

          And Danny, when the left is bragging, in print and on film about how they cheated it is only the most idiotic that suggest that those who notice it are liars, do you count yourself among such?

          You believe the mainstream narrative –wholly– to judge from what you’re writing, so maybe so….?

      The_Mew_Cat in reply to Danny. | June 8, 2023 at 1:24 pm

      Whether Trump can win the general depends on factors that are unknown right now, like the state of the economy and third party spoilers.

        I tend to disagree. There is a very strong anti-Trump sentiment across the nation, and it includes Indies as well as moderate Dem and Republican voters (including voters who have previously voted for Trump at least once).

        That is death to any presidential candidate because they can’t win without pulling from those groups. And it really doesn’t seem that Trump is making any effort to appeal to anyone outside his base–whom he can really basically ignore at this point, and they will still walk over broken glass to vote for him.

        It’s the people who will walk over broken glass to vote against him that he needs to worry about. Maybe he will at some point? It’s just not clear how much he can undo the deep, visceral hatred people have for him because, fairly or unfairly, he is deeply hated and deeply divisive. I’m not talking in the abstract here, this is Hillary-level hate for the man. And just as her supporters thought it unfair and not worth worrying about, Trump’s supporters ignore this at their, his, and our nation’s peril.

        Danny in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | June 8, 2023 at 2:48 pm

        To add to Fuzzy Slippers statement which frankly does speak for me (I usually have some minor nitpick) the Trump hate is present in must win states and accounts for a majority in those states.

        There are plenty of places that have interactive electoral college maps, play with one and try to find the path to victory without Wisconsin, Michigan or Pennsylvania.

        We also have already ran your test of lets do it with Trump because it’s the economy stupid it is called 2022.

        We have recent results of what happens when the people of this country are voting on Trump.

    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to Leslie Eastman. | June 8, 2023 at 1:34 pm

    . . . and lawmakers can look at it from TODAY

    And the public? Does the public that pay their over-inflated salaries get to look at these documents? The complete documents without redactions or editing? Or course not. So it’s totally irrelevant to say the documents have been “released”. They haven’t been. The usual republican suspects will read the documents, we’ll all be regaled with howls of republican outrage, and then nothing further will happen. Nothing. So until those documents are released unedited, unredacted to the public they are irrelevant and serve no purpose.

Capitalist-Dad | June 8, 2023 at 9:54 am

The Stasi has been very clever in formulating the charges to skirt around the letter of the law on confidential documents, we can call this too clever by half strategy the US version of the old Soviet charge of hooliganism. Too bad they didn’t use this particular trick against Hillary Clinton when as Secretary of State she was blanketing multiple insecure servers (without full time Secret Service protection) with classified documents.


Who determines what is the conditional threshold of “relating to the national defense”? The President.

Because the constitution names him Commander in Chief and the Executive.

Who “entitles” a person to receive documents “relating to the national defense”? The President.

When the President “willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted” to another person, is that person entitled to receive those documents? Yes.

Because the President — not the Congress — determines what constitutes matters relating to the national defense and the law must be suspended towards that person when only the President willfully communicates… etc… because the President has determined that is is vital to the national defense to pass on those documents those parties.

But if those documents in Mara Lago are deemed “relating to the national defense”, did Trump beak the law if he passed it along to, say, his lawyers if he is no longer president?
Only if they are classified, which, as far as we know, were declassified.

Oh… So is that why they are using Section 39, to do an end run around the Constitution and make it seem unelected employees of the Department of Justice get to determine what constitutes national defense?

    Danny in reply to George S. | June 8, 2023 at 2:42 pm

    That is good if he declassified it.

    If he didn’t then president Biden had a right to demand the documents return.

    This case will be in Florida so it won’t be a kangaroo court.

    The issue is Trump does not appear to have made a statement or put anything in writing to show the documents declassification… will be him vs the prosecutor for who the Floridian jurors believe.

    There are right ways to do things then there is the Trump way.

      If it’s the prosecutors word against the Trump administration, there would be no case. You know, that pesky “Presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” thing the Left hates so much.
      -In short, Trump ordered the personal papers transferred to a secure personal location after the election, with the obvious intent of keeping them. Some of the documents were explicitly declassified (Crossfire Hurricane), some implicitly by his action.
      -They were designated personal papers (as opposed to Presidential records) by the Chief Executive at the time (Trump) and not subject to NARA control, although in the rush (as all administrations do) a number of Presidential records and unspecified classified documents were swept up. As NARA identified records they wanted in their control and informed Trump’s lawyers, with the consent of Trump these papers were transferred to NARA.
      -As *formerly* classified documents were found that should have not been transferred, the government was notified, the FBI came over and picked them up, and transported them to whatever arcane vault needed to reclassify them.
      -As documents were found that were formerly classified *and* Trump wanted to keep were found by NARA, he kept them (as is his right to do with declassified personal papers)
      -The head of NARA hates Trump, but has no authority to remove documents he doesn’t want to let go because they are personal papers, not Presidential records.
      -The FBI/DOJ hates Trump and is willing to lie like a rug to get him. Thus the raid, and although we have not seen it yet, I’m willing to bet money that some of the documents recovered were immediately reclassified (since the new Executive branch had control of them again) so they could be stuffed in a vault somewhere and conveniently ignored.

        Danny in reply to georgfelis. | June 8, 2023 at 9:31 pm

        You have some major holes in the argument.

        First lets get this out of the way Miami is not D.C. it will not be a kangaroo court.


        1. You can’t declassify as a former president. Papers marked as and known to be classified by the United States Government….for them not to be classified takes an actual order from someone with authority to declassify them, or in the case of documents with a time limit to their classification status the time to expire. There is no practice of “if he orders it to his house it is no longer classified”. The obvious intent of keeping them….well if his public statements which the prosecution will be playing in court routinely was some degree of courts will overturn the election for using paper ballots, or Mike Pence will overturn the election by use of powers he doesn’t actually have. If he was going to remain president there was no reason for him to declassify.

        2. We learned that a variety of other papers were identified as still classified, and requested by the government to. There is no reason to believe the independent that one of them was a contingency plan for invading Iran but the thing is the law does not actually recognize a difference between absurd use of classification status and reasonable use of it. Perhaps it should, perhaps the next president should have some reforms to stop have absurd levels of classification. But that isn’t what we have today.

        3. That doesn’t change the ones that were classified.

        4. Agree but again irrelevant

        5. Again irrelevant

        6. Not just irrelevant but again if say Trump had just pointed to a random employee or took out his laptop and gotten a word document saying “I have declassified every document I ordered moved to my personal residence” that would be more than enough evidence he declassified them as president.

        Or if he had just told someone else he declassified them. If he had told Mark Meadows they are now declassified he would have a defense witness capable of refuting prosecutions claims the documents he is being charged for are classified materials.

        It is not the prosecutions word against Trump’s. It is the prosecution having evidence the documents in question are classified, and Trump claiming he declassified them when he had the opportunity to do so, but without any evidence he had done so.

        Yes Trump had enemies and some of those had power.

        That is the reason you don’t do things like a complete and utter moron.

        We are offered receipts if we spend 80 cents on a 2 liter bottle soda, there is good reason for that.

        I actually hope that Trump is not convicted and don’t think he should have been indicted for this but it is very much worth pointing out the stupidity and arrogance that caused this case.

        Mark Meadows is not scheduled to testify……really he couldn’t even tell his chief of staff “I am planning a massive transfer of documents I am declassifying please make a legal not of it I don’t want a miscommunication to lead to people thinking those are still relevant to the government”.

        This isn’t a kangaroo court and there is a chance of conviction. This is not the Alvin Bragg prosecution which actually is a political circus hoping to create a kangaroo court, this is a serious case Trump has a chance of losing and it is because of his arrogance.

        The arrogance being that even if he did declassify it when he realized he had never told anyone, or left any kind of paper or electronic trail to prove it he chose not to just give back the documents.

        I do not support this prosecution. I will not sugar coat it however and pretend this is another Alvin Bragg thing.

    CommoChief in reply to George S. | June 8, 2023 at 3:17 pm

    The problem with the ‘Trump declassified it’ argument is that you tend to ignore the fact that Biden could have simple reclassified it. All it would take is a note on WH stationary stating something like;
    ‘All declassification decisions undertaken by President Donald J Trump are hereby revoked. All prior levels of classification apply. Signed Joe Biden, POTUS.

    The information on the docs in Trump’s possession would be instantly reclassified. The doc or piece of paper isn’t what is classified, it’s the info on the paper that counts.

      I’m not a lawyer, yet this *still* seems like a good example for the Bad Legal Takes tag. The government (i.e. the Executive branch in this case) can only classify items *in their possession* or any President could simply classify anything in the possession of anybody they don’t like, and then order that person thrown in prison. Take for example the Crossfire Hurricane project, which Trump declassified, in which the FBI used sketchy data and political smear documents from opposition candidates along without outright lies in an attempt to build an obviously fictitious case of Russian election collusion against the Trump administration. Declassified documents relating to this are scattered *everywhere* and to suddenly declare that their possession is a Federal felony is a legal opinion that should rightfully get you disbarred.

        CommoChief in reply to georgfelis. | June 8, 2023 at 4:39 pm

        The information is what is classified not the piece of paper or computer file. If X information was originally classified incorrectly as unclassified not for public release instead of TS/code word and that info gets emailed to 100 people before the mistake is caught and is then classified correctly as TS/code word then that’s how it goes. It isn’t criminal at that point. It becomes criminal if when in possession and notified you don’t turn it over and/or cooperate with purging the info..

        All you gotta do under that scenario is turn over the info, wipe the CPUs it touched and everything is fine. Refuse to cooperate though and shit gets real very quickly.

        Danny in reply to georgfelis. | June 8, 2023 at 9:47 pm

        The problem is the information that gets classified is very much relevant.

        Lets say Trump determined that a contingency plan for invading Iran from say 1981 was no longer relevant to national security and ordered it declassified and thought it would be interesting to bring with him.

        Now lets say Lloyd Austin tells Biden “Mr. President our current doctrine largely overlaps with 1981 with modifications due to invention of new technology. You are sending Vladimir Putin Ukraine’s play book if that is not reclassified. Donald Trump might not think a document showing how we would have used our firepower in 1981 is relevant today but I do”

        Well now you have all of the elements you need to reclassify a document that has been declassified. You have the relevant official from who’s office the document originated (the DOJ) you have agency authority, and presidential authority.

        Classification is overused because this is all it takes to classify a document

        “The federal government has a fairly simple process for classifying documents. The originator of a document, usually a foreign policy or national security staff member, decides if it needs to be classified. In almost all cases this is a simple decision. Has its predecessor’s been classified? If so, classify. Each federal agency has a central repository that employees connect with when producing a classified document which gives the document a number so it can be identified later, and the actual originating component contacted.”

        I was using a 1981 invasion of Iran plan as a hypothetical, but what would go into contesting Trump’s declassification is the same as what goes into classifying the document in the first place which isn’t very much.

        A president does not have powers to declassify by thought, all orders from the president must be in speech or in writing. There is no such thing as “you have to interpret his body language and use telepathy to know an order has been issued”.

      Azathoth in reply to CommoChief. | June 8, 2023 at 4:57 pm

      “‘All declassification decisions undertaken by President Donald J Trump are hereby revoked. All prior levels of classification apply. Signed Joe Biden, POTUS.”

      What are you, 6?

      That’s not how this works.

        CommoChief in reply to Azathoth. | June 8, 2023 at 9:22 pm

        It was an example of exactly the sort of thing they could have done in the first few hours of the Biden admin. Just as in the last few hours of the Trump admin they declassified docs.

        What one POTUS can do another can undo. If you don’t think the Biden team would do something like that you may need to rethink the level of duplicity among the Biden WH team.

        By the way is the constant name calling and put downs an example of the unity you were demanding the other day?

        Danny in reply to Azathoth. | June 9, 2023 at 12:52 am

        If you are through insulting Commo see just above for an extreme example of what reclassifying a document would look like.

        Commo is also right about how easy to is to step into compliance.

        Azathoth in reply to Azathoth. | June 9, 2023 at 9:29 am

        Both of you– a secret, once revealed, cannot become a secret again.

        Presidents cannot sign EOs blanket declaring the actions of previous administrations invalid.

        They CAN invalidate EOs of previous administrations, but declassifications aren’t EOs

Nothing glazes my eyes over faster than legalize, buy read this post this morning and seems to be just another Kangaroo Court session to smear DJT