More J6 need to know info

[JonC]

Why do you keep repeating this story? It is not relevant to this discussion. The analyst had no legal authority to take the documents. Again, POTUS does have legal authority to take documents. The VP does not. The analyst does not.

The incidents are not the same. By repeating this story you are spreading disinformation that DT should be treated like the analyst.

Additionally, unless you worked in the WH for a POTUS, your experience with classified docs is NOT the same.

DT says he declassified everything he took with him. By repeatedly stating he did not declassify the docs, you are not presenting all the facts, which is misinformation and demonstrates bias.

The courts will ultimately decide if he had the right to have the docs. Please give all the facts instead of posting your opinions as if they are facts.

peace to you

Because you keep on repeating it. I used it as an illustration. We have a two tiered justice system.

I just figured you were trying to avoid the actual discussion and wanted to go off on a tangent.

 

[JonC]

Trump’s documents were locked up, guarded by Secret Service, not in an unlocked garage. No comparison.

That's the funny thing about classified information. It doesn't matter. Either it was a handled properly or it is not.

 

[canadyjd]

Because you keep on repeating it. I used it as an illustration. We have a two tiered justice system.

I just figured you were trying to avoid the actual discussion and wanted to go off on a tangent.

Wow! Talk about projection. I ignored your reference to the analyst because it wasn’t relevant to the discussion until you brought it up again.

Since you keep bringing it up, do you think DT should be treated the same, legally, as the analyst you keep talking about?

peace to you

 

[JonC]

Wow! Talk about projection. I ignored your reference to the analyst because it wasn’t relevant to the discussion until you brought it up again.

Since you keep bringing it up, do you think DT should be treated the same, legally, as the analyst you keep talking about?

peace to you

I brought it up in response to a reply. Sorry if it wasn't you (I can't always keep you guys apart).

I believe that the analyst received an extreme sentence. It was based on a Trump policy which elevated the mishandling of classified information. But the analyst, while certainly in the wrong, was not selling or giving the information to a third party. That said, I also get the seriousness of the issue. And the judge stuck to the letter of the law. I just don't know that her crime deserved destroying her life. It was more neglect than a malicious act.

I guess a better question than should Trump be treated the same as the analyst is should the analyst be treated the same as Trump. I think it is probably in between. Both was neglect (from what I have read about Trump, it doesn't appear he intended to take classified information but the analyst did to work on the material at home).

That brings up another issue (for another thread) - should motives and intent influence sentencing or should the law be blind and stick to the letter of the law?

 

[canadyjd]

That's the funny thing about classified information. It doesn't matter. Either it was a handled properly or it is not.

That is simply an untrue statement. POTUS is in a class by himself when it comes to classified info. DT claims he declassified everything he took, which he had the legal authority to do.

Let’s not forget….

1. Hilary sent classified docs to a printer at her home and had the maid pick it up. She was not charged.

2. Hillary’s assistant, Umma something something, had classified docs on a computer own by her husband… who was convicted of sending pictures of his junk to an underaged girl. The FBI.. Struck n Struck… looked at a sample, determined “nothing to see” and then destroyed the laptop. No one was charged.

3. Biden, as VP, took classified docs on Ukraine and stored them in his garage in plain sight. His crack head son, who has been accused by a Russian oligarch of receiving a $5 million bribe AND who demanded the Ukrainian prosecutor that was investigating his company be fired AND Joe Biden as VP demanded he be fired…. AND that prosecutor was fired…. And no one has been charged.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

….

I guess a better question than should Trump be treated the same as the analyst is should the analyst be treated the same as Trump…..?

That is not a “better” question. It is a question designed to avoid answering the first question.

Obviously, the analyst should not be treated the same as DT because the analyst wasn’t POTUS.

Do you see a difference between the authority POTUS has concerning classified docs and everyone else?

peace to you

 

[JonC]

That is simply an untrue statement. POTUS is in a class by himself when it comes to classified info. DT claims he declassified everything he took, which he had the legal authority to do.

Let’s not forget….

1. Hilary sent classified docs to a printer at her home and had the maid pick it up. She was not charged.

2. Hillary’s assistant, Umma something something, had classified docs on a computer own by her husband… who was convicted of sending pictures of his junk to an underaged girl. The FBI.. Struck n Struck… looked at a sample, determined “nothing to see” and then destroyed the laptop. No one was charged.

3. Biden, as VP, took classified docs on Ukraine and stored them in his garage in plain sight. His crack head son, who has been accused by a Russian oligarch of receiving a $5 million bribe AND who demanded the Ukrainian prosecutor that was investigating his company be fired AND Joe Biden as VP demanded he be fired…. AND that prosecutor was fired…. And no one has been charged.

peace to you

No, it is true.

I think you are smart enough to realize you are wrong. That is why, I believe, you bring up Clinton (who should have been charged) to defend why Trump shouldn't.

The reason Trump shouldn't be charged is that he didn't pack up and store those documents himself. Pence didn't even know he had classified documents. We don't know that Biden knew he had them either.

But Clinton knowingly emailed classified information on a non authorized email.

This also shows why we know Trump did not declassify the information. It is information, not parchments, that are classified. We say "documents", but it is the information on those documents. If declassified there is a record and the information itself is declassified (not specific paper copies, but the information).

Trump DID have the authority to declassify the information. BUT he has to declassify it. Trump could have declared "this information is declassified", and it would be forwarded to the agency that had initially classified that information (but it would be declassified).

The whole "the POTUS just has to think it and it is done" was misinformation you apparently fell for.

 

[JonC]

That is not a “better” question. It is a question designed to avoid answering the first question.

Obviously, the analyst should not be treated the same as DT because the analyst wasn’t POTUS.

Do you see a difference between the authority POTUS has concerning classified docs and everyone else?

peace to you

It is a better question, and it doesn't avoid the issue.

The analyst and a former President should be under the same law. I think the analyst's neglance was more serious. Trump also was not POTUS at the time. He was a former President who could have declassified information.

I don't know why you are so fixated on this topic. Is it still an issue?

 

[canadyjd]

…..
Trump DID have the authority to declassify the information. BUT he has to declassify it. Trump could have declared "this information is declassified", and it would be forwarded to the agency that had initially classified that information (but it would be declassified).

The whole "the POTUS just has to think it and it is done" was misinformation you apparently fell for.

DT is making a legal argument that he has absolute authority as POTUS to declassify, even if by “thinking about it”. He is making the legal argument that, as POTUS, he doesn’t have to go through a process to have an agency “declassify” something because he is the one to declassify it.

You are certainly free to disagree with his legal argument, and it will certainly be before the SCOTUS at some point, but to declare his legal argument to be “misinformation” is, in itself, misinformation. You don’t have the authority to declare his legal argument to be misinformation.

It demonstrates your bias and the fact you are repeating dem talking points on the issue, just like the “sheeple” you keep referring to on the right.

Let’s deal with facts, not dem or repub talking points.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

DT is making a legal argument that he has absolute authority as POTUS to declassify, even if by “thinking about it”. He is making the legal argument that, as POTUS, he doesn’t have to go through a process to have an agency “declassify” something because he is the one to declassify it.

You are certainly free to disagree with his legal argument, and it will certainly be before the SCOTUS at some point, but to declare his legal argument to be “misinformation” is, in itself, misinformation. You don’t have the authority to declare his legal argument to be misinformation.

It demonstrates your bias and the fact you are repeating dem talking points on the issue, just like the “sheeple” you keep referring to on the right.

Let’s deal with facts, not dem or repub talking points.

peace to you

"Even if thinking about it" .

Are you being serious? And if so, who said that and who believed it?

The POTUS does not, technically, have to go through a process. That isn't what I am talking about. I am talking about what happens when information is declassified. That is a process as it is not the parchment but the information. It doesn't mean the POTUS cannot legally say "I declassify this information" and take it home. It means the classifying agency then has to go through a process to make sure the information is actually declassified on their end (so as not to violate the POTUS' order). And the declassifying person has to assign a category for the information.

Otherwise people end up with declassified information incorrectly classified or labeled as "classified", "secret", "top secret", "official", etc.

I mean, it is also wrong to have declassified documents mislabeled as classified. This often indicates somebody is trying to hide something.

Yes, let's talk facts.

You seem to be accusing Trump of having misclassified documents (documents he declassified but kept hidden under the lable of classified).

How did Trump categorize the information when he declassified it? Is it CUI? FOUO? Public?

He could simply "think about it". That is funny. I have not heard that before. . I assume you are kidding.
.


But yes, let's deal with the facts.

Why should a man who attacks a police officer and breaks in windows of the US Capitol not be charged?

 

[canadyjd]

….
Yes, let's talk facts.

You seem to be accusing Trump of having misclassified documents (documents he declassified but kept hidden under the lable of classified).

I only stated DT’s legal argument for possession of these docs. I didn’t accuse him of anything.

What you have done is “spin” what said and claimed I “seem” to be accusing DT of something.

You are dancing, JonC. Dancing around the fact that you are repeating dem talking points, just like the folks you accuse of being “sheeple” on the right repeating things they hear.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

"Even if thinking about it" .

Are you being serious? And if so, who said that and who believed it?…..

…..He could simply "think about it". That is funny. I have not heard that before. . I assume you are kidding. …..

That is extremely funny…. Since you are the one who mentioned it in Post #147.

…….

The whole "the POTUS just has to think it and it is done" was misinformation you apparently fell for.

peace to you

 

[MrW]

That's the funny thing about classified information. It doesn't matter. Either it was a handled properly or it is not.

I think I implied Trump handled it properly, plus he may have (idk) declassified them while President.

 

[JonC]

I only stated DT’s legal argument for possession of these docs. I didn’t accuse him of anything.

What you have done is “spin” what said and claimed I “seem” to be accusing DT of something.

You are dancing, JonC. Dancing around the fact that you are repeating dem talking points, just like the folks you accuse of being “sheeple” on the right repeating things they hear.

peace to you

I'm asking. When a document is declassified it is assigned a category (like CUI or FOUO). What category did Trump assign the information when he declassified it and did he notify others to do the same with the data?

 

[JonC]

I think I implied Trump handled it properly, plus he may have (idk) declassified them while President.

I am inclined to think that Trump and Pence didn't realize classified information was among the documents. It is actually a very common occurrence, and in such instances has never constitutes a crime.

Most of the time mishandling classified documents is only reported to the immediate institution, and rarely even security. I can't tell you how many times I ran into this issue conducting interviews. It is common. Often accidental.

 

[JonC]

That is extremely funny…. Since you are the one who mentioned it in Post #147.



peace to you

It is. I read it on the BB before.

But I never saw a legitimate link that Trump claimed that superpower. I assumed a certain member just made it up.

So you are telling me that is a serious claim (a President can just think about declassifying information and...BOOM....it's declassified? In those cases, what category of declassification does that information become? Or does the President just think that too? If so, exactly how do others know how to handle that information? Are there also clairvoyants at every level? Who changes the cover pages? The do the clairvoyants tell others or is there a spell the President speaks to magically take care of it? Or is that a part of the President's superpower? He thinks it, it's declassified, assigned a category, and the labeling just appears?

 

[MrW]

I am inclined to think that Trump and Pence didn't realize classified information was among the documents. It is actually a very common occurrence, and in such instances has never constitutes a crime.

Most of the time mishandling classified documents is only reported to the immediate institution, and rarely even security. I can't tell you how many times I ran into this issue conducting interviews. It is common. Often accidental.

I read a few of the emails marked classified that Hillary Clinton had destroyed. Boring to me; I quit reading after a few lines in each of them.

 

[canadyjd]

I'm asking. When a document is declassified it is assigned a category (like CUI or FOUO). What category did Trump assign the information when he declassified it and did he notify others to do the same with the data?

Again, I am stating DT’s legal argument that as POTUS he doesn’t have to follow those rules.

Do you remember now bringing up the whole “if POTUS thinks it, it’s done” line?

Just curious because you seemed to have forgotten what you had stated just a few posts prior, and then stated you had never heard it before.

Having a bad day?

peace to you

 

[JonC]

I read a few of the emails marked classified that Hillary Clinton had destroyed. Boring to me; I quit reading after a few lines in each of them.

Here's a cool story.

I interviewed a guy for a clearance (a TS5). He said that he currently had to leave the room when a manual was discussed because it was Top Secret information.

The funny thing was he wrote that manual, the project just didn't need a clearance at the time.

 

[JonC]

Again, I am stating DT’s legal argument that as POTUS he doesn’t have to follow those rules.

Do you remember now bringing up the whole “if POTUS thinks it, it’s fine” line?

Just curious because you seemed to have forgotten what you had stated just a few posts prior, and them stated you had never heard it before.

Having a bad day?

peace to you

I'm not asking you to defend Trump. I hope Trump doesn't need defended as the charges against him are trumped up political charges.

I am trying to weigh your discernment and critical thinking.

You seem to think that a President can think about information and declassify it. I'm asking how exactly that works.

What is the declassification category? How are the classification notifications changed?

You seem to be arguing something you believe to be childish, trying your best to follow a master group. It just doesn't make sense.

And no...I'm having a fantastic day. Had lunch with my son and took the dog for a long walk.