By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Hiku said:
ConservagameR said:

Ok so Trump get's to take docs he shouldn't be taking? The Government allows that, or would they have made a mistake?

Allowing the docs to get out, if they shouldn't have, wouldn't really be Trumps fault unless he snuck them out in that case.

Since he's said to be a complete and utter moron by some, you wouldn't assume he would know what he had or if he could have it. 

As for regardless, the Government wants the docs back, it's not possible Trump had an old man boomer moment and missed them?

Did the FBI assume this like Hillary and come back to Trump and mention they knew there were 11 more boxes and wanted all of it?

Were all the boxed docs together in the same place where it would be impossible to hand over what he did, yet miss 11?

Even if someone on the inside leaked the fact Trump still had classified boxes, does that mean Trump knew they were there?

Would this make this leaker a good trustworthy person? Could Trump assume this is a plot against him once the FBI bursts in?

Depends a lot on how much Trump did and knew himself for certain. Did Trump pack anything and go through everything once in Florida?

Did Trump have others pack and move the boxes to Florida, as well as have them moved around there for him, like for locking them down safely?

Just curious about what the known facts are as to the situation. Seems to me like a lot of assumptions being made by many yet so far.

The facts we have so far:

- May 2021.
A
n official from NARA (National Archives and Records Administration) contacts Trump's team after realizing that several important documents weren't handed over before Trump left the White House.

- January 2022.
After months of discussions with Trump's team, NARA retrieves 15 boxes of Trump White House records from Mar-a-Lago. 

- February 18, 2022.
NARA informs the Justice Department that some of the documents retrieved from Mar-a-Lago included classified material. NARA also tells the department that, despite being warned it was illegal, Trump tore up documents while he was president.

- April 7 2022.
NARA publicly acknowledges that the Justice Department is involved in an investigation pertaining to the sensetive documents found at Mar-a-Lago.

- June 3, 2022.
Trump recieved a grand jury subpoena to return classified documents. FBI agents visit Mar-a-Lago to collect 15 boxes of classified documents.
One of Trump's attorneys signs a letter asserting that there is no more classified information stored at Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence.

- August 8, 2022.
The FBI executes a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.
More than 20 additional bboxes containing classified information was removed from the premise.

- August 12, 2022.
Parts of the search warrant is unsealed. You can read it here. We learn of what they were looking for, and the potential crimes that were being investigated. Including the Espionage Act, obstruction of justice and criminal handling of government records.

They also revealed what they found:
- 1 set of documents marked "top secret/SCI."
- 4 sets of "top secret" documents.
- 3 sets of "secret" documents.
- 3 sets of "confidential" documents.

More than 20 boxes, as well as binders of photos, sets of classified government materials and at least one handwritten note.

So most of the things you asked about, we don't know yet.
There are a lot of strict proceedures for the handling of classified documents. So if Trump somehow got approval to take them to his home legally, and/or de-classified them as he claims, there will be a paper trail he can point to in order to prove it.

As for if he could chalk this up to another boomer moment, on top of June where his lawyer assured them that all classified documents were removed, I'm not sure as I'm not a legal expert. But that signed letter from Trump's attorney that assured them that all classified documents had now been removed, as well as whatever the informant told them, will probably make that more difficult.

As for if the leaker is trustworthy, we don't know for sure what they said. But what FBI revealed that they were looking in the search warrant matches up with what they found.

Now that's easier to follow. Looks like a lot of what if's and what abouts so far. Curious to see how many clear answers we will and won't get.

sundin13 said:
ConservagameR said:

Ok so Trump get's to take docs he shouldn't be taking? The Government allows that, or would they have made a mistake?

Allowing the docs to get out, if they shouldn't have, wouldn't really be Trumps fault unless he snuck them out in that case.

Since he's said to be a complete and utter moron by some, you wouldn't assume he would know what he had or if he could have it. 

As for regardless, the Government wants the docs back, it's not possible Trump had an old man boomer moment and missed them?

Did the FBI assume this like Hillary and come back to Trump and mention they knew there were 11 more boxes and wanted all of it?

Were all the boxed docs together in the same place where it would be impossible to hand over what he did, yet miss 11?

Even if someone on the inside leaked the fact Trump still had classified boxes, does that mean Trump knew they were there?

Would this make this leaker a good trustworthy person? Could Trump assume this is a plot against him once the FBI bursts in?

Depends a lot on how much Trump did and knew himself for certain. Did Trump pack anything and go through everything once in Florida?

Did Trump have others pack and move the boxes to Florida, as well as have them moved around there for him, like for locking them down safely?

Just curious about what the known facts are as to the situation. Seems to me like a lot of assumptions being made by many yet so far.

Trump was the head of the government at the time. I'm not sure why you think "It was the government's responsibility" is any kind of defense when the person we are talking about was the President...

Yes, but that didn't and doesn't make Trump The Government. As (past) President I'm pretty sure he didn't have unlimited power.

Also, if the Government doesn't have dedicated long term people who are in charge of the Governments docs, then that's laughably sad.



Around the Network
ConservagameR said:

sundin13 said:

Trump was the head of the government at the time. I'm not sure why you think "It was the government's responsibility" is any kind of defense when the person we are talking about was the President...

Yes, but that didn't and doesn't make Trump The Government. As (past) President I'm pretty sure he didn't have unlimited power.

Also, if the Government doesn't have dedicated long term people who are in charge of the Governments docs, then that's laughably sad.

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that the government does not have dedicated people in charge of government documents.  If this is any indication it would appear that the government knew exactly who had the documents and gave a certain person every chance to hand those documents back to the government.  The laughable sad part is that Trump again has moved the country into another crisis and people continue to look for excuses to blame everyone else besides him.  We would not be here talking about this today if he returned those documents and not force the hand of the government to take them back.



ConservagameR said:

sundin13 said:

Trump was the head of the government at the time. I'm not sure why you think "It was the government's responsibility" is any kind of defense when the person we are talking about was the President...

Yes, but that didn't and doesn't make Trump The Government. As (past) President I'm pretty sure he didn't have unlimited power.

Also, if the Government doesn't have dedicated long term people who are in charge of the Governments docs, then that's laughably sad.

There is a huge difference between having people in charge of documents and having someone who babysits the President and slaps his hand when he tries to steal them. The people in charge of the documents are the reason Trump is being tracked down for stealing them...



Machiavellian said:

ConservagameR said:

Yes, but that didn't and doesn't make Trump The Government. As (past) President I'm pretty sure he didn't have unlimited power.

Also, if the Government doesn't have dedicated long term people who are in charge of the Governments docs, then that's laughably sad.

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that the government does not have dedicated people in charge of government documents.  If this is any indication it would appear that the government knew exactly who had the documents and gave a certain person every chance to hand those documents back to the government.  The laughable sad part is that Trump again has moved the country into another crisis and people continue to look for excuses to blame everyone else besides him.  We would not be here talking about this today if he returned those documents and not force the hand of the government to take them back.

Based on what Sundin said to me prior before what you've quoted. "Also, if" isn't a conclusion either. Not even close.

sundin13 said:
ConservagameR said:

Yes, but that didn't and doesn't make Trump The Government. As (past) President I'm pretty sure he didn't have unlimited power.

Also, if the Government doesn't have dedicated long term people who are in charge of the Governments docs, then that's laughably sad.

There is a huge difference between having people in charge of documents and having someone who babysits the President and slaps his hand when he tries to steal them. The people in charge of the documents are the reason Trump is being tracked down for stealing them...

Ruling about tapes in Bill Clinton’s sock drawer could impact Trump Mar-a-Lago raid debate | The Post Millennial

Read about the Clinton tapes. Here's a few key points.

"The ruling made other sweeping declarations, including that a "president's discretion on what are personal vs. official records is far-reaching and solely his, as is his ability to declassify or destroy records at will," Solomon writes."

"Presidents can also destroy records they wanted during their tenure, and presidents only need to inform the Archives that they're doing so."

"The judge also ruled that it was unreasonable for NARA to forcibly seize the tapes after a president leaves office."



When a politician shows empathy and compassion to people, that person can be a powerful advocated for change the US is looking for  

Beto changes republican voters minds to now care about their own interests and not those of the powerful  



Around the Network
ConservagameR said:
Machiavellian said:

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that the government does not have dedicated people in charge of government documents.  If this is any indication it would appear that the government knew exactly who had the documents and gave a certain person every chance to hand those documents back to the government.  The laughable sad part is that Trump again has moved the country into another crisis and people continue to look for excuses to blame everyone else besides him.  We would not be here talking about this today if he returned those documents and not force the hand of the government to take them back.

Based on what Sundin said to me prior before what you've quoted. "Also, if" isn't a conclusion either. Not even close.

sundin13 said:

There is a huge difference between having people in charge of documents and having someone who babysits the President and slaps his hand when he tries to steal them. The people in charge of the documents are the reason Trump is being tracked down for stealing them...

Ruling about tapes in Bill Clinton’s sock drawer could impact Trump Mar-a-Lago raid debate | The Post Millennial

Read about the Clinton tapes. Here's a few key points.

"The ruling made other sweeping declarations, including that a "president's discretion on what are personal vs. official records is far-reaching and solely his, as is his ability to declassify or destroy records at will," Solomon writes."

"Presidents can also destroy records they wanted during their tenure, and presidents only need to inform the Archives that they're doing so."

"The judge also ruled that it was unreasonable for NARA to forcibly seize the tapes after a president leaves office."

Yes, the president do have far reaching power but when it comes to certain documents the president does not.  Any documents that pertain to our nuclear capability whether weapons or tech, the president cannot destroy or keep at his home after leaving office.  The Clinton tapes do not fall in the same category as those documents. The problem with the link you provided is that it talks about the presidential records.  Meaning those are specific type and classification of records which mind you does not cover top secrete/secrete SCI documents. Actually when I read this link, its conclusion is wrong.  It says the FBI sought records created by the Trump presidency but actually they sought government documents that are not part of records created by the Trump presidency but instead owned by the government.  It would be good if your source actually knew what they were talking about.

Also the president cannot destroy or declassify top secrete/secrete SCI documents on his own.  So no he cannot make some standing order that all documents of this type is declassified just by waving his hand.  What we do know that ex presidents do not have the same power afforded them when out of office and the FBI and NARA did follow the steps to obtain these documents according to policy.  Any ruling that does not specifically goes into the type of documents is a waste of time because what is really at issue here are the specific docs an ex president does not have a right to keep.

After looking over the hearing on the affidavit, its clear the FBI is looking at criminal intent, obstruction of justice concerning presidential records.  They are looking at specific highly classified government documents that Trump has no rights to keep.  NDI documents are not the same as presidential records and Trump may have believed he can just keep those documents but its probably going to cost him.

Last edited by Machiavellian - on 19 August 2022

ConservagameR said:
Machiavellian said:

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that the government does not have dedicated people in charge of government documents.  If this is any indication it would appear that the government knew exactly who had the documents and gave a certain person every chance to hand those documents back to the government.  The laughable sad part is that Trump again has moved the country into another crisis and people continue to look for excuses to blame everyone else besides him.  We would not be here talking about this today if he returned those documents and not force the hand of the government to take them back.

Based on what Sundin said to me prior before what you've quoted. "Also, if" isn't a conclusion either. Not even close.

sundin13 said:

There is a huge difference between having people in charge of documents and having someone who babysits the President and slaps his hand when he tries to steal them. The people in charge of the documents are the reason Trump is being tracked down for stealing them...

Ruling about tapes in Bill Clinton’s sock drawer could impact Trump Mar-a-Lago raid debate | The Post Millennial

Read about the Clinton tapes. Here's a few key points.

"The ruling made other sweeping declarations, including that a "president's discretion on what are personal vs. official records is far-reaching and solely his, as is his ability to declassify or destroy records at will," Solomon writes."

"Presidents can also destroy records they wanted during their tenure, and presidents only need to inform the Archives that they're doing so."

"The judge also ruled that it was unreasonable for NARA to forcibly seize the tapes after a president leaves office."

None of the statues that Trump would be charged under would be part of the Presidential Records Act (as per the Search Warrant), so this doesn't really apply. The PRA is irrelevant here as even if it is "broken" it is toothless.



Rab said:

When a politician shows empathy and compassion to people, that person can be a powerful advocated for change the US is looking for  

Beto changes republican voters minds to now care a bout their own interests and not those of the powerful  

That's funny because I've never voted Republican and always voted Democrat or independent and I realize what a pompous dick Beto is.  He is nothing but an grandstander that will get up on table to get anyone willing to listen to him.  Fuck him and he will lose. I live in Texas and there is no way that wheelchair asshole is going to lose to this fuck.  Texas is heavy Republican state and only major cities are outliers which I live just north of Austin.

What the Democrats should have done was find someone better but there aren't any good ones in this state.  So default win goes to Republicans.   I'll abstain my vote for Governor.

To put it simple you are a fool thinking Beto stands any chance.  He'll get 35% of vote if he is lucky.  No Democrat has come close to winning governorship here in decades and it will be the same next election.

He couldn't even beat Ted Cruz and nobody likes Ted Cruz.

Last edited by sethnintendo - on 20 August 2022

sethnintendo said:
Rab said:

When a politician shows empathy and compassion to people, that person can be a powerful advocated for change the US is looking for  

Beto changes republican voters minds to now care a bout their own interests and not those of the powerful  

That's funny because I've never voted Republican and always voted Democrat or independent and I realize what a pompous dick Beto is.  He is nothing but an grandstander that will get up on table to get anyone willing to listen to him.  Fuck him and he will lose. I live in Texas and there is no way that wheelchair asshole is going to lose to this fuck.  Texas is heavy Republican state and only major cities are outliers which I live just north of Austin.

What the Democrats should have done was find someone better but there aren't any good ones in this state.  So default win goes to Republicans.   I'll abstain my vote for Governor.

To put it simple you are a fool thinking Beto stands any chance.  He'll get 35% of vote if he is lucky.  No Democrat has come close to winning governorship here in decades and it will be the same next election.

He couldn't even beat Ted Cruz and nobody likes Ted Cruz.

Who cares if Beto is a dick? The difference he could make is immense. Will he win? Not if people like you who are on the left abstain because they don't like him. Weigh your options and vote. The choice should be clear.



sundin13 said:
sethnintendo said:

That's funny because I've never voted Republican and always voted Democrat or independent and I realize what a pompous dick Beto is.  He is nothing but an grandstander that will get up on table to get anyone willing to listen to him.  Fuck him and he will lose. I live in Texas and there is no way that wheelchair asshole is going to lose to this fuck.  Texas is heavy Republican state and only major cities are outliers which I live just north of Austin.

What the Democrats should have done was find someone better but there aren't any good ones in this state.  So default win goes to Republicans.   I'll abstain my vote for Governor.

To put it simple you are a fool thinking Beto stands any chance.  He'll get 35% of vote if he is lucky.  No Democrat has come close to winning governorship here in decades and it will be the same next election.

He couldn't even beat Ted Cruz and nobody likes Ted Cruz.

Who cares if Beto is a dick? The difference he could make is immense. Will he win? Not if people like you who are on the left abstain because they don't like him. Weigh your options and vote. The choice should be clear.

God damnit you are right.  I'd rather have him than Abbott.  I guess I'll vote for him but don't think he will even come close.

It's just sad that these are people we have to vote for.  You'd think there were better candidates or people but they probably avoid politics for good reason.  It's just weird I have more respect for a conservative like Adam Kinzinger than some supposedly up and coming Democrat that really hasn't done shit his whole life.