Quote (Goomshill @ Aug 26 2022 06:43pm)
Theres no legal precedent for how to resolve such a claim of a former president. No lawyer can give a true legal opinion beyond 'nobody has ever tested it in court'. Trump said he declassified them, he had absolute authority, he says he had a standing order for documents being removed, and even without those claims just his actions of taking them arguably sets implicit policy. Who can contradict the authority of the authority? No court or legislator or prosecutor can usurp a president's decision making process. There are thousands of laws a president is not above, he can't shoot someone on 5th avenue or run into the mall of america with an m16 and hold up Lid's sports apparel for some hot jerseys. But when it comes to violating executive authority, a president might as well be a king. Unitary executive theory long predates Trump and the first precedent on a president's power over disclosure dates to Washington
This is one of those legal questions where until a few weeks ago, a credible law professor's answer would be that it doesn't matter. That our system doesnt account for such scenarios because it doesnt need to.
First off, let's acknowledge that you've been a Trump toady for the past 6 years, and you'll follow any argument that helps him.
Second, there's not a bunch of legal precedents around a former president taking and withholding sensitive classified documents, because it's never happened before.
Third, the talking points don't seem to acknowledge my (uninformed legally) argument, which is that there needs to be some process regarding a president declassifying documents. The idea in his head has to somehow make it into our reality in order to be relevant. There needs to be something signed or proclaimed. He did none of this, therefore, all his ideas are bullshit.
Fourth, this means he's going to be held legally responsible for all the laws he violated. The threats from the cult will not make this go away.