The above also references the court case you referenced before @NOS4A2, which has this to say:

The only reference in the entire statute to the designation of records as personal versus Presidential also calls for the decision to be made by the executive, and to be made during, and not after, the presidency. It provides: “materials produced or received by the President, [and other Executive Office employees], shall, to the extent practicable, be categorized as Presidential records or personal records upon their creation or receipt and be filed separately.”

Given that there is no record of Trump categorising such documents as personal records during his Presidency, they cannot be considered his personal records under the Presidential Records Act. Simply taking them with him when he left isn't sufficient.

It appears he did file them separately, took them with him, and disputed with NARA over them. If you find that he took something designated as presidential records with him, be sure to let me know.

Whose lives did he put at risk? — NOS4A2

Directly: The people involved with collection of the information, including informants in other countries and the agents who collected it.
Indirectly: the entire US and some allies, by risking exposure of military capabilities of the US and allies, and identifying what we know and don't know about our adversaries.

Text of the indictment:
"The disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military and human sources, and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods."

It appears he did file them separately, took them with him, and disputed with NARA over them. If you find that he took something designated as presidential records with him, be sure to let me know. — NOS4A2

The Presidential Records Act defines what are Presidential Records. Follow the link and read it.

Also remember that, after months of demands from NARA, Trump returned 15 boxes of documents that included some with classification markings, some of which are related to National Security and would be covered by the Espionage Act. In the court filing for the motion for a Special Master, Trump's attorneys referred to all of these as "Presidential Records".

Regarding "filed separately", review the picture that Nauta took of the documents spilled on the floor. The contents include newspapers, photos, and a classified document.

Also that court ruling only says that "there is nothing under the statute that the Court can compel the Archivist to do."

It continues by saying:

The PRA authorizes NARA to invoke the same enforcement mechanism embodied in the Federal Records Act, which begins with a request to the Attorney General to institute an action for the recovery of missing records. Compare 44 U.S.C. § 2112(c) with 44 U.S.C. § 3106. The statute does not mandate that NARA invoke this enforcement scheme but rather vests complete discretion with the agency to utilize that mechanism. 44 U.S.C. § 2112(c) (“When the Archivist considers it to be in the public interest, he may . . . .” (emphasis added). The Archivist has chosen to invoke the mechanism in the past when it deemed such action appropriate. See, e.g., United States v. McElvenny, No. 02-3027, 2003 WL 1741422 (S.D.N.Y. April 1, 2003) (seeking recovery of a map of Cuba annotated by President John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis).

So it appears you're incorrect in your claim that NARA doesn't have the authority to take back documents it considers Presidential records.

It appears he did file them separately, took them with him, and disputed with NARA over them. If you find that he took something designated as presidential records with him, be sure to let me know. — NOS4A2

He took things that were neither presidential records nor personal records; documents with classification markings related to national defence.

You can read the indictment for a list of the one's he's being charged over.

Frivolous Trump Argument No. 1: Classified Intelligence Reports Compiled by Government Agencies Are ‘Personal Records’ under the Presidential Records Act — Michael

Incredible article, written by Andrew McCarthy - a former DOJ prosecutor, who's a staunch Conservative with a history of defending Trump's behavior. I hope NOS4A2 reads it.

Allegedly real (am not watching myself). :lol: The headline I mean. Defendant was arrested.



Fox News labels Joe Biden a ‘wannabe dictator’ during Trump speech
^{— Royce Kurmelovs · The Guardian · Jun 14, 2023}

It's surreal, but it works up their audience (=Trump's base). I'm also amazed at how much mileage the GOP is getting out of the FBI 1023 form, and how it's been misrepresented. (see this thread).

It appears he did file them separately, took them with him, and disputed with NARA over them. — NOS4A2

He also turned over at least fifteen boxes of material to the Archives in the first go round. Why did he do that if they were all personal records? The NARA discovered material with classification markings in these boxes and alerted the Justice Department, and yadda yadda yadda here we are.

@NOS4A2

[Trump's] scared shitless. This is the way he compensates for that. He gives people the appearance he doesn’t care by doing this...For the first time in his life, it looks like he’s being held accountable...Up until this point in his life, it’s like, ‘I’m not going to pay you. Take me to court.’ He’s never been held accountable before. — John Kelly, retired US Marine General and fmr WH Chief of Staff (R)

https://twitter.com/ReallyAmerican1/status/1669008051959889920

Crappy Birthday, Traitor-1.

It would be so gratifying to see him go to jail, probably for the rest of his life since he's 77.

It would be so gratifying to see him go to jail, — frank

I would be adequately gratified merely by his exit from my in-box. To be replaced by something more boringly acceptable and mediocre. Where he festers is of no consequence to me as long at is no longer in my consciousness. A luxury retirement home would be a very small price to pay as long as it had no outgoing internet.

So if I'm following you correctly, Trump (if he so choose to do so) could have

1) As Commander in Chief obtained the blueprints for building an H-Bomb (or the nuclear codes or a list of all foreign secret assets or etc),
2) Declared them to be his personal property,
3) Taken them with him when he left office (since they're now his personal property)
4) And then sell them to the highest bidder (or put them on Truth Social)

And all this would be perfectly legal. Am I getting this correct?

I would be adequately gratified merely by his exit from my in-box. To be replaced by something more boringly acceptable and mediocre. Where he festers is of no consequence to me as long at is no longer in my consciousness. A luxury retirement home would be a very small price to pay as long as it had no outgoing internet. — unenlightened

I hear you.

Leaders should be like figureheads on the ship of state, out in front, catching all the weather and doing and saying nothing, while the power and steering happens at the stern. Figureheads that like to think they're in charge can only send the ship backwards.

Somewhere, out there, some poor soldiers life was at risk. This is the kind of propaganda that justifies jailing dissidents, starting wars, and droning innocents.

You cannot name a single person whose life is at risk, I’m afraid, which leads me to believe this is just the NatSec, neoconservative propaganda we tell ourselves to justify state tyranny. The only thing at risk is the power and prestige of the US government, people like General Mark Milley, who apparently was drawing up plans to invade Iran despite what he wrote in his book. Or people like the FBI, who put spooks in a presidential campaign, spied on a candidate, based on lies and misinformation. People here are advocating for the use of the Espionage Act to jail political opponents, perhaps yearning for the opaque and censorial days of the Obama administration, which jailed more people under that law than all previous administrations combined. Former official John Kiriakou said it best, jailed as he was for speaking to a reporter:

“The purpose of an Espionage Act prosecution, however, is not to punish a person for spying for the enemy, selling secrets for personal gain, or trying to undermine our way of life. It is to ruin the whistleblower personally, professionally and financially. It is meant to send a message to anybody else considering speaking truth to power: challenge us and we will destroy you.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/06/obama-abuse-espionage-act-mccarthyism

This is a new sort of McCarthyism and I’m glad I’m not on your side. Morally speaking, I put all activities of this sort in the morally depraved category, and any defense of it under the category of deep-state boot licking.

31 CHARGES OF VIOLATING THE ESPIONAGE.ACT. I'm so glad the former "leader" of "the deep state", his co-conspirators & flunkies are finally being PROSECUTED by "the deep state". For a while there, NOS, I worried that "the deep state" was broken because "45"'s regime had failed so spectacularly for four years to "lock her up" "build a wall paid for by Mexico" or "steal the 2020 election from Sleepy Joe (who wasn't in power) & some GOP-controlled states". :smirk:

You cannot name a single person whose life is at risk — NOS4A2

I note that you had nothing to say with regard to my debunking your claim about these documents being his personal records, as opposed to Presidential Records under the PRA. Instead, you've moved the goalpost - making it unreachable, since I cannot possibly know what's in the documents. Neither do you, and yet you assume it's a false claim. No national security expert would agree with you.

“The purpose of an Espionage Act prosecution, however, is not to punish a person for spying for the enemy, selling secrets for personal gain, or trying to undermine our way of life. It is to ruin the whistleblower personally, professionally and financially. It is meant to send a message to anybody else considering speaking truth to power: challenge us and we will destroy you.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/06/obama-abuse-espionage-act-mccarthyism

This is a new sort of McCarthyism and I’m glad I’m not on your side. Morally speaking, I put all activities of this sort in the morally depraved category, and any defense of it under the category of deep-state boot licking. — NOS4A2

Trump is a hypocrite, not a whistleblower exposing some bad acts by the government (btw, actual whistleblowers, like Snowden, understand the legal risk they're taking), and he's only being prosecuted because he hid documents he should not have had from Evan Corcoran, who was conducting a search to satisfy the demands of the Grand Jury subpoena, and because Trump's words and actions led to a false statement in the affidavit confirming the search was thorough and all docs with classified markings had been found and returned. Had he made a good faith effort to comply with the search warrant, there would be no charges. This is unequivocal obstruction of justice (remember Nixon? Obstruction was the final nail in HIS coffiin), and this is what establishes his corrupt intent.

What's your excuse for putting him above prosecution for obstruction of justice?

This short video featuring Bill Barr makes the same case I made.

This is a new sort of McCarthyism and I’m glad I’m not on your side. — NOS4A2

I know it's terrible. I think he's going to crash land in jail this time. :starstruck:

This is a new sort of McCarthyism and I’m glad I’m not on your side. — NOS4A2

Estimating the number of victims of McCarthy is difficult. The number imprisoned is in the hundreds, and some ten or twelve thousand lost their jobs. In many cases, simply being subpoenaed by HUAC or one of the other committees was sufficient cause to be fired.

Google.

Yes, one man's indictment is the same as hundreds imprisoned and thousands losing their jobs. Trump's ego is just that big.

It's surreal, but it works up their audience (=Trump's base). I'm also amazed at how much mileage the GOP is getting out of the FBI 1023 form, and how it's been misrepresented. (see this thread). — Relativist

Unfortunately I cannot find it, but there was a great BBC documentary about how totally surreal the world of the media in Putin's Russia had become where people could not know facts from fiction and thus, how truth was meaningless and how the objective was to have the people confused. This documentary was made many years ago, far earlier than there was any Ukraine war. Then I had difficulties to understand the whole documentary: how can it be that Russians cannot separate fact from fiction?

In a similar fashion, I think Trump goes (and will go) into the surreal. Anything doesn't matter, there is no objectivity or truth or falsehood, it's all about just where you stand and if with whom you support, that is do you support Trump or are you against him. Everything is just a rhetorical attempt to get new supporters and hold the supporters you have. And that there cannot be any other way. As if objectivity and truth and falsehood doesn't exist.

Longer time goes when Trump isn't in jail, furthermore it is proof to Trump's supporters that everything is a political witch hunt, the giant liberal conspiracy against Trump. And that's Trump's line: everything is a witch hunt against him that isn't supportive.

I think the next US elections will be quite surreal.

I think you're talking about the firehose propaganda technique.

The aim is to devalue truth by continuously changing the official story. Trump doesn't have the discipline or power over the media necessary to match Putin at that.

Ex-president dishing out threats... Calling opponent "the devil"...

Donald Trump threatens to prosecute Hillary Clinton
^{— CNN · Oct 9, 2016 · 1m:1s}


Presidential Debate - DT: Bc you'd be in jail! - Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump
^{— ABC15 Arizona · Oct 9, 2016 · 36s}


Trump’s Threat to Jail Clinton Also Targets Democracy’s Institutions
^{— Max Fisher, Amanda Taub · The New York Times · Oct 11, 2016}

Trump team won't pursue charges against Hillary Clinton
^{— Jon Sopel · BBC · Nov 22, 2016}

11 times Trump threatened Clinton with prison
^{— CNN · Nov 15, 2017 · 1m:18s}
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/11/15/trump-clinton-doj-special-prosecutor-vstan-orig-bw.cnn

Whether ironic or not, the rhetoric/tactic wasn't new.

Trump doesn't have the discipline or power over the media necessary to match Putin at that. — frank

He doesn't have to.

What Trump lacks his supporters simply dream to exist as his abilities. Total bumbling is 4D Chess, remember? And as every negative news article is part of the global conspiracy against him, he is then absolutely fabulous.

What Trump lacks his supporters simply dream to exist as his abilities. Total bumbling is 4D Chess, remember? And as every negative news article is part of the global conspiracy against him, he is then absolutely fabulous. — ssu

Trump supporters aren't in the majority, though. Trump has never been able to control what information Americans have access to the way Putin controls Russian information. I agree that they both use the firehose technique, but Putin has more power to create that sense of disconnection from facts. I'm not saying Americans are particularly well-informed.

That's true. And of course a dictator for life is very different from a US president.

And we shouldn't forget that many who vote for Trump aren't the ones wearing the MAGA hats. Just as many of those who vote for Democrats aren't the stereotypical American liberal.

:up:

Most Republicans I know are good people. They go to work, pay their bills on time, are decent to their friends and neighbors, good parents, etc. If any of them had a kid who acted like Trump they would say, "Stop being a sore loser. Stop accusing the game of being rigged every time you lose. Stop fighting with the referees." That's why it amazes me that so many of them support Trump, seemingly unconditionally. Trump is the quintessential sore loser, a spoiled brat... it's only okay when he wins -- when someone else wins, it's because they cheated. We all knew someone like that when we were young, didn't we? No one wants to play with that kid, and every decent parent knows it. So they usually put a stop to that behavior. But with Donald Trump, they support it...

Not only that, but he has considerable support among Christian fundamentalists despite being a womanizer, a liar and a cheat, a man obsessed with earthly wealth and prestige, and from New York City of all places! I remember when Mike Huckabee published a book that opened with a story about going to a fancy restaurant in New York and they didn't even know what grits are. 'Nuff said. "New York" used to be code for "everything wrong with America". You might as well say "Babylon". And then they turned out in droves to support the quintessential New Yorker.

The most convincing explanation I've heard is that what these Americans practice is in fact an heretical offshoot of Christianity that is essentially a cult of masculinity. (Josh Hawley's new book is Manhood: The Masculine Virtues America Needs. He got the memo.) Trump fits that bill, despite having nothing else in common with these folks. You would think the Access Hollywood tape all by itself would be disqualifying to conservative Christians, but it certainly wasn't to these folks. That needs explaining.

It is deeply peculiar that so much of the current posture of the GOP can be understood as anxiety among certain people about the place of men in a changing world.

Most Republicans I know are good people. They go to work, pay their bills on time, are decent to their friends and neighbors, good parents, etc. If any of them had a kid who acted like Trump they would say, "Stop being a sore loser. Stop accusing the game of being rigged every time you lose. Stop fighting with the referees." That's why it amazes me that so many of them support Trump, seemingly unconditionally. Trump is the quintessential sore loser, a spoiled brat... it's only okay when he wins -- when someone else wins, it's because they cheated. We all knew someone like that when we were young, didn't we? No one wants to play with that kid, and every decent parent knows it. So they usually put a stop to that behavior. But with Donald Trump, they support it... — GRWelsh

Exactly.

The reason it doesn’t matter, and they support him no matter what, is because they’ve been conditioned to do so— through the dominance of conservative media. Limbaugh, Fox News, WSJ, etc. Once social media was added to the mix and Trump ran for president, the stage was already set and people already primed.

They’ve gone off the rails now. Now everything is a conspiracy— elections are stolen when we lose, facts are rejected if they go against the narrative we prefer, or if Trump says so, etc. The left has problems and are also conditioned, but not to the degree of reality-denying delusion. They still try to maintain some contact with the world.