Judge Ruled Ex President has “Unconstrained
and Sole Authority” of records and Docs from his Administration.
Posted on 08/26/2022 3:50:51 PM PDT by lasereye
A redacted version of the Affidavit that was the basis for DOJ’s Mar-a-Lago raid was made public today. In my judgment, it adds little to our knowledge of the case.
The Affidavit recites various statutes and recounts the history of 15 boxes of documents that were removed from the White House to Mar-a-Lago and subsequently sent to the National Archives by President Trump. It says that those boxes included some documents that were marked as classified. It recites that there are additional boxes still at Mar-a-Lago, and says there is reason to believe that these boxes, too, may contain classified information. Information on this point is, however, redacted.
Broadly speaking, there are several statutes at issue. The Presidential Records Act says that records of a former president belong to the National Archives. There are no penalties for violation of the Presidential Records Act by a former president.
The criminal statutes relied on by the FBI relate generally to 1) putting classified documents in an unauthorized location, and 2) conveying classified information to an unauthorized person. There is nothing in the Affidavit (the unredacted portions, anyway) that changes what I wrote here:
I have no idea whether classified information is included in the 15 boxes that Trump has in his basement or not. It wouldn’t be surprising. The serious criminal statutes on classified information relate to passing it on to, say, the Russians or Chinese. As far as we know, there is no suggestion that Trump gave classified information to anyone. He was perfectly entitled to know it and to view it himself; the issue is that he may have taken it to an unauthorized location, i.e., Mar-a-Lago. Until now, this has generally not been considered a serious offense. Sandy Berger is an exception, although he got a slap on the wrist. But in his case, the point was that he stole a document from the Archives, apparently something damaging to the Clinton administration, so as to delete it from the historical record. There is no such suggestion, as far as we know, with regard to Trump.
Of course, Trump had the power to declassify documents. I assume he also had the power to authorize that documents be stored in a particular location, although that may not survive his term in office. The Affidavit includes as an attachment a letter from Trump’s lawyer that argues, among other things, that the statutes on keeping documents in an unauthorized location does not apply to a president, since he is not an “officer…of the United States.”
It is possible that there is something serious and important going on here, but the Affidavit offers no such evidence. Vast quantities of federal records are marked as classified, most of which have little or no importance. Boxes sitting in a basement at Mar-a-Lago have no likely national security significance. This is unlike the Hillary Clinton case; Hillary was conducting current, official State Department business on an unauthorized server that could easily have been penetrated by the Russians, Chinese or others. There is no suggestion in the Affidavit (again, the unredacted portions) that foreign powers have penetrated, or are likely to penetrate, Trump’s basement. Nor is there any suggestion that Trump has transmitted secret information to anyone–something he could have done, of course, at any time in the last five and a half years, if he was so inclined.
The obvious question is why this controversy exists at all. Why didn’t Trump just send the remaining boxes back to the Archives, as he did the first 15? At this point, we have no idea. I suspect that this is a petty struggle between rabid anti-Trumpers in the Biden administration and a pig-headed former president.
Who knows, maybe it will turn out someday that something important was at stake after all. But I doubt it.
President Trump gave the FBI etc permission to go through the boxes I believe back in June. I think the author of this piece is out of touch with reality.
Gee Trump should have stored them electronically on an unsecured server and sent copies to his associates via non-encrypted emIl like Satan’s Prom Queen.
So the redaction was a 'success' then, eh?
/s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WacPc7c37fs
Former SCOTUS clerk to Gorsuch says nothing they can do to DJT...and it’s very succinct.
Powerline is a great site. Scott’s review of music and musicians is first class. You will learn a lot about stories behind the songs as well as some great covers you have never heard of. Hayward is the best writer as far as politics go. Hinderacker is my least favorite. A lawyer with typical verbosity and a few zingers such as today’s “pig-headed” Trump. Still like the site. Glad Mirrengoff is gone.
.
Nice!
WHO audited the 33 million sheets of data OBAMA took-—to digitize?
Never has been done—
Where are those records???
The Affidavit recites various statutes and recounts the history of 15 boxes of documents that were removed from the White House to Mar-a-Lago and subsequently sent to the National Archives by President Trump.
The last iteration leak reported by Maggie Hag at the NYT claimed 700 pages.
Unless their “boxes” are like sardine cans, this would fit nicely in one banker box with room leftover for a 12 pack.
So Trump took the government owned soiled toilet paper kept in bags at the Archives. Classified and Top Secret poo you know.
bkmk
And then there's originals, transmissions, copies...etc etc.
Hillary's were worse...they were transmissions. Her attorneys deleted "personal" cough cough...records...and apparently...her emails were a big nothing despite the fact that some were classified. AND she was using her own system. Geez...
The FBI Affidavit Is So Redacted, They Even Redacted Their Reasons For Redacting What They Redacted
“”It is possible that there is something serious and important going on here, but the Affidavit offers no such evidence.””
Not according to the MSM and Professor Dershowitz.. They are able to read beneath the blacked out redactions...able to do something the rest of us aren’t able to do. Their talents are simply amazing. They WILL have it their way and no other.
That seems to be two separate questions: A. Did Trump do something bad. B. Was it (worse than/not as bad as) what Hillary did.
I think the answer to A is clearly yes. I don’t know enough about the laws or the subject matter to know the answer to B. Seems like both of the 2016 candidates are incredibly arrogant people who think the laws do not apply to themselves.
How did he do something bad? This raid was mere speculation. They allowed him to keep documents there...why didn’t they take them all in June??
So what is this thing that he did that was “clearly” bad?
Clever!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.