"No such law exists"

[Port Tack]

The "legal scholar" is wrong. Trump has every right to have such documents, per the law he cited and more importantly per the Constitution of the United States.

What executive is above the President?

He wasn't the president when he took them and he would not have been charged if it wasn't a crime.

 

[QP!]

No, those are called plea deals after charges have been filed.

Nobody get's escape from actually committing the crime.

So why wasn't Biden charged since he broke the law?

LIES.

These talks happen BEFORE charges are filed.

They determine what the charges will be and can lessen charges for those who cooperate and see the book thrown at those (maximum charges) for those who do not.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Yup.

Just another continual lie in the string of lies by Tinker.


The "Socks case" was litigation by Tom Fitton demanding to get Bill Clintons memoire recordings that he stored in his socks drawer.

Tom argued since Clinton recorded them while he was POTUS they therefore were work product and thus government records, and not personal, and he wanted access to the under FOIA.

The court ruled that they were not government doc's and they clarified in law that things like Memoires and Diaries and Private writings would not be considered gov't docs and could be kept personally by the POTUS.


There was no notice that the POTUS could declare anything personal. It defined what WAS personal. It also clarified what was NEVER personal,a nd those were gov't doc's, Classified doc's and Top secret doc's.

It said the archives could not dictate was a president considered personal records.

This is why the DOJ is charging Trump under some obscure espionage act from 1917 and not current laws, which by the way, overrule the espionage act.

To be convicted under the espionage act you have to prove intent to cause the US harm by sharing intelligence with foreign nations, which Trump certainly didn't do.

This is nothing but a show.

 

[Port Tack]

As head of the executive branches the president determines the rules for what is classified and what isn't.

If he says they aren't then they aren't.

He is the boss.

There is nothing here.

How come his lawyers did not say that and why would our justice dept indict him if no law was broken? Why would a jury of his peers on a Grand jury vote to indict? You are a fucking imbecile.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

More lies by you. Nothing in the ruling you cite says "if a president declares something personal records NARA has zero say in the matter and the president can keep it..."

You completely made that up and added it where it does not exist.

Others have quoted to you when you repeat this lie that the PRA, Trump always cites says exactly the opposite, It DEFINES what can be called a personal record, and does not leave that for a POTUS to determine. It also defines what can NEVER be called a personal record (gov't docs, classified docs, top secret doc's) and those must ALWAYS be given back to NARA, the day after the POTUS leaves office.

It appears that Putin is being distracted by the war in Ukraine and is having trouble recruiting better disinformation agents. Stinker can't even keep his/her stories straight anymore.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

As head of the executive branches the president determines the rules for what is classified and what isn't.

If he says they aren't then they aren't.

He is the boss.

There is nothing here.

How come his lawyers did not say that and why would our justice dept indict him if no law was broken? Why would a jury of his peers on a Grand jury vote to indict? You are a fucking imbecile.

Option 1: Because Trump has fucked over so many lawyers that only the most incompetent will work for him.

Option 2: Because Tink doesn't know what she's talking about.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

How come his lawyers did not say that and why would our justice dept indict him if no law was broken? Why would a jury of his peers on a Grand jury vote to indict? You are a fucking imbecile.

1. It isn't pre-trial yet

2. the DOJ is corrupt and under the orders of Biden

3. An indictment only means there may be enough evidence to go to trial, it is not a sign of guilt.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

LIES.

These talks happen BEFORE charges are filed.

They determine what the charges will be and can lessen charges for those who cooperate and see the book thrown at those (maximum charges) for those who do not.

Wrong.

Laws are set, if you break one you are guilty.

There is nothing in the law that allows anyone to let people out of that situation, only the punishment which they receive.

You might very well be the dumbest person in the history of the internet.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

1. It isn't pre-trial yet

2. the DOJ is corrupt and under the orders of Biden

3. An indictment only means there may be enough evidence to go to trial, it is not a sign of guilt.

Soooo....option 2? Why do you think the DOJ was pure under Trump and suddenly corrupt under Biden?

 

[QP!]

It said the archives could not dictate was a president considered personal records.

This is why the DOJ is charging Trump under some obscure espionage act from 1917 and not current laws, which by the way, overrule the espionage act.

To be convicted under the espionage act you have to prove intent to cause the US harm by sharing intelligence with foreign nations, which Trump certainly didn't do.

This is nothing but a show.

More LIES and stupidity by you.

It said no such thing.

It said with regards to Tom Fittons specific lawsuit DEMANDING that NARA declare Clinton's Memoires gov't records so he could then get them under FOIA, that in fact NARA had no such power to dictate what WAS and WAS not a personal or government record, as those things are DEFINED already and Memoires ARE NOT gov't records by definition already. NARA does not get them. They are not subject to FOIA.

So Fitton suing and demanding they do that, was dismissed by the Court as NARA cannot do what he was demanding they do.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

LIES.


You are lying about what it says.


There are CLEAR definitions as to what ARE and ARE NOT presidential records. Diaries and Memoires are NOT.

What the Court is saying there is in response to that idiot Tom Fitton suing to demand that NARA declare Clintons Memoires Presidential records, as work product he created while in office, so he can get them under FOIA.

The Court is saying there 'NARA cannot simply declare Memoires or Diaries as personal records, since by definition they are not and thus we are dismissing this case'.

Be less stupid.

And where would a person find these clear definitions?

Certainly you have a list of them somewhere.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

More LIES and stupidity by you.

It said no such thing.

It said with regards to Tom Fittons specific lawsuit DEMANDING that NARA declare Clinton's Memoires gov't records so he could then get them under FOIA, that in fact NARA had no such power to dictate what WAS and WAS not a personal or government record, as those things are DEFINED already and Memoires ARE NOT gov't records by definition already. NARA does not get them. They are not subject to FOIA.

So Fitton suing and demanding they do that, was dismissed by the Court as NARA cannot do what he was demanding they do.

The Supreme Court ruling that I quoted never mentions memoirs.

 

[QP!]

Wrong.

Laws are set, if you break one you are guilty.

There is nothing in the law that allows anyone to let people out of that situation, only the punishment which they receive.

You might very well be the dumbest person in the history of the internet.

You are so stupid you are denying cooperation agreements are entered into pre indictment or any charges being filed.

You are so stupid you are denying some people are given immunity and are NEVER charged for doing the same crime others did who are charged because they are cooperating witnesses.


You say i am dumb because i am telling you the above happens and exists and is normal in law, simply because you are so stupid and do not know this happens and thus you think you are right.


You are not. You are stupid.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Soooo....option 2? Why do you think the DOJ was pure under Trump and suddenly corrupt under Biden?

I never said they were.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I never said they were.

So you think Trump's DOJ was corrupt? Or are you just running away again, Tink?

 

[QP!]

The Supreme Court ruling that I quoted never mentions memoirs.

memoirs is the casual term used.

Here is how they define it in law in your link...

...The PRA provides that “diaries, journals or other personal notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal which are not prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the course of, transacting Governmental business” should be treated as personal records...

So the law above is CLEAR that such personal records as ALREADY DEFINED are not subject to NARA nor FOIA.

Tom Fitton sued anyway demanding NARA DECLARE them gov't records regardless of what the definition said (again from your link)

... Plaintiff asks the Court to declare audiotapes created by former President William Jefferson Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during the Clinton administration to be “Presidential records” under the Presidential Records Act (“PRA”),..

The Court ruled NARA has no such power to declare "... notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal..." as gov't records then subject to NARA and FOIA, as Fitton was demanding and thus they dismissed the case.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

So you think Trump's DOJ was corrupt? Or are you just running away again, Tink?

They may have been, there were no issues that came up for me to investigate it.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

They may have been, there were no issues that came up for me to investigate it.

Run, Tink, Run. LOL

The fact you believe an organization of thousands of personnel can flip from purity to corruption overnight is interesting, Tink.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

memoirs is the casual term used.

Here is how they define it in law in your link...



So the law above is CLEAR that such personal records as ALREADY DEFINED are not subject to NARA nor FOIA.

Tom Fitton sued anyway demanding NARA DECLARE them gov't records regardless of what the definition said (again from your link)



The Court ruled NARA has no such power to declare "... notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal..." as gov't records then subject to NARA and FOIA, as Fitton was demanding and thus they dismissed the case.

Trump isn't being charged under the PRA, he is being charged under the Espionage Act.

Only six charges do not fall under the espionage act and they are all the same with different wording relating to the charge that he hid documents.

Nothing about the charges relate to the PRA.

 

[QP!]

And where would a person find these clear definitions?

Certainly you have a list of them somewhere.

On NARA websites and through the links to the PRA cited within which are copied to you each week, you ignore and then tell the same lies again.

How are documents in the White House determined to be an official Presidential record or a personal record?

The Presidential Records Act (PRA) defines what constitutes “Presidential records” and what are “personal records.” 44 U.S.C. 2201. Personal records include “diaries, journals, or other personal notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal which are not prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the course of, transacting Government business.”

The PRA also requires that all documentary materials “be categorized as Presidential records or personal records upon their creation or receipt and be filed separately.” 44 U.S.C. 2203(b). The President does not have discretion to categorize a Presidential record as a personal record.