Here's your affidavit, bro.

Pretty much the only unredacted complete section is the letter from Trump's counsel to the DOJ laying out how its blatantly unconstitutional to try to impose criminal liability on a president for exercising their plenary power of classification. There is no counterargument to that anywhere in the unredacted sections of the affidavit. It points to a breitbart article saying that claiming the materials were classified was misleading because Trump had declassified them, followed by about 3 pages of redacted text.

Imagine that, Goom still going on about plenary power of classification, when 18 USC § 793 (or 1519, or 2071) makes no differentiation regarding whether the documents in question are classified or not.



These documents are not, and have never been, the property of TFG. They are the property of the US government.

This post was edited by Surfpunk on Aug 26 2022 11:21am

trump's "declassification" amounts to "i said they're declassified" rather than the actual legal process of declassification. and we both know it.

had they been legitimately declassified a FOIA request would be available to anyone to get them and there'd be no reason to physically possess them.

Yup. And whether or not he had this magic ability to wave his hand and declassify this stuff (he doesn't), it doesn't change that the information in those documents can still be reasonably expected to either cause harm to the national defense or to be to the advantage of a foreign nation.

goom has an absolute opinion that they are declassified even if trump just thinks it in his head.
we've had 10 pages of that argument. He is 100% convinced that the "because I said so" Is valid proof from trump

and yet, that's how a plenary power works. Its a question of unauthorized documents, when the president is the authority. He can't be held in violation of his own authority, nor can any criminal or legislative process infringe on it. Unitary executive theory is already law of the land for pretty much everything, but particularly when it comes to a case concerning a president's authority over the constitutional powers he holds that have never been challenged in court.

I still haven't seen any real counterargument to this, from the DoJ, from the media cheerleaders, from anyone. Look at how Bill Barr's memo quashing the Mueller probe dealt with the noxious issues of process crimes like obstruction and underlying nothingburger. He pointed out how there was no precedent, how comparative mundane crimes almost universally required underlying criminal conduct, and how attempts to criminalize a president's deliberative processes would inherently infringe on the constitution and serve no legitimate purpose, being only a political hatchet. The counterargument from the NYT op ed board has been a big "NO U".



Because it is, and because that's how all standing precedent applies, and because there's no counterargument to it.
Formal methods and procedures of classification are just codifications of powers that derive from the president's power of classification. Mid level bureaucrats do not hold supreme executive power, no moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at them

This post was edited by Goomshill on Aug 26 2022 11:52am

this is one of those cases where for unknown reasons the precedent and procedures we have for these things dont matter, just the fact that legally any president can without oversight declassify and classified material. without the morality or process mattering to Goom.

whereas if Biden had for example declassified something verbally it would be an affront to long standing practices followed for national security.

and yet declassified materials by law are to be made available to any us citizen through the legally passed freedom of information act.

if trump has declassified an item and its not legally available through a FOIA request how can it legally be declassified? because if it hasnt been officially marked declassified its not available through FOIA.

maybe u havent seen this counterargument because i'm smarter than everyone else on earth? who can say.

You know its possible to oppose something politically and morally and ethically, but not criminally?
Raiding the homes of your political opponents and trying to lock them in prison is the first recourse of tyrants in a banana republic.
If you don't like the way Biden exercises the powers granted to him in an election by the American people, there's another election in 2 years, that's the recourse, that's the safety valve baked into the republic.

Remember the whole 'unmasking' saga as Obama spied on Trump? Obama could have just gone and declassified it all with a word, he could have sent a copy of Michael Flynn's phone transcripts to the New York Times. It wouldn't be a criminal act, and at least he'd be owning up publicly to what he was doing anyway (probably actually did sent a transcript to the NYT).

The framers of our constitution intentionally based the powers of the executive upon the powers of monarchs, making sure they were constrained by the separation of powers and keep away from writing laws and deciding controversies. But the powers reserved to the president are absolute. Those who enforce his policies serve at his pleasure, with powers delegated by him, not their own. When it comes to classification and declassification, the president is the king, his word law. And unless Joe Biden wants to join the ranks of despots of old who wielded their authority to lop the head off their predecessor, nobody has authority to challenge the president's plenary powers.