The question remains, though. In these sad times, no matter how clearly it is shown that the law has been violated, will it matter? What is or is not lawful doesn't seem to be a concern in our politics, nor does it seem to be a concern of many of our politician — Ciceronianus
It strikes me that responses to the indictment being made by Trump supporters and Republicans, which seem mostly based on tu quoque arguments, — Ciceronianus
That is why we have the law and courts. At the end of the day, if the courts conclude guilt, the opinion of the public does not matter. America in general might complain about rulings, but we abide by them. Trump will go to jail, many people will insist they don't believe it, but he will suffer the consequences under the law if found guilty. The court of opinion is always a biased rabble of logically inconsistent feelings and emotions struggling for power. Its irrelevant in the face of a country that solidly favors and enforces the law. — Philosophim
Well, I hope you're right. But I think we face a situation where a significant portion of the populace doesn't favor the law, and believes it shouldn't be enforced, in this case as to this individual. That anyone could accept him as credible or honorable mystifies me; he seems a kind of paragon of brazen deceit and selfishness. But there are those who do. — Ciceronianus
The Court notes at the outset that there is broad language in Armstrong I stating that the PRA accords the President “virtually complete control” over his records during his time in office. 924 F.2d at 290. In particular, the court stated that the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: “[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.” Id., citing H.R. Rep. No. 95-1487, at 13 (1978), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 5744. Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records.
his personal records
Trump could roll a blunt with those documents for all I care. Neither the DOJ nor NARA have the power to designate documents presidential or personal records. That discretion lies solely with the executive. — NOS4A2
It’s not irrelevant if those are his personal records. He can dispose of them as he pleases, according to the constitution and precedent. — NOS4A2
Moreover, Moss said, the question of whether the documents were personal or presidential records is beside the point in a case involving the Espionage Act, like the one against Trump.
“Whether as a presidential record or a personal record, the records at issue in this indictment still have classification markings and contain information relating to the national defense,”
There are documents you would be prohibited from sharing even if they had been declassified. Is that your understanding? — Srap Tasmaner
...during his time in office...
The case against him is not regarding his time in office. It's about the records he stole, hid, and lied about possessing after leaving office. — creativesoul
Regardless, though, the indictment isn't limited to the PRA or civil remedies available under it. It involves violation of the Espionage Act, obstruction, and other criminal matters. — Ciceronianus
I’m fairly certain that the president’s authority can override whoever marks documents as classified, unless executive authority is invested in the Dept. of Justice or someone else I am unaware of. — NOS4A2
Do you really think Trump walked into the white house and took documents? — NOS4A2
I don't believe he was indicted for stealing documents, but for retaining them, hiding them, and lying about having them.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.