The Trump Card...

[RLENT]

Biden: maga Republicans are a threat to democracy.......
we are the new Jews to be persecuted by our very own Hitler.....
I wonder how soon detainment camps and the ovens will be built.

It's commentary like that which is quoted above that causes sane, non cognitively-impaired Americans to consider MAGA's to be utterly deranged.

And then MAGA's are astonished as to how anyone could even imagine such a thing.

Absolutely no self-awareness whatsoever.

SMH.

 

[Turtle]

If courts ruled only from a place of bias, Trump would win at the Supreme Court because of a pro-Trump bias. But that is not happening, is it?

My point isn't that courts rule from a place of bias (although we've seen many cases where that has happened). My point is Activist Judges routinely set aside the law and/or interpret the law not in an Originalist or Textualist or Strict Constructionist manner, but rather as a guideline that can be molded to fit whatever they want the law to mean, despite what it actually says.

One recent example is the SCOTUS decision which struck down the New York law strictly regulating the use of firearms outside the home. Justice Bryer began his dissent not by referring to the Second Amendment, but rather by noting that 45,222 Americans were killed by guns in 2020.

“In my view, when courts interpret the second amendment, it is constitutionally proper, indeed often necessary, for them to consider the serious dangers and consequences of gun violence that lead states to regulate firearms,” Breyer wrote.

So the law and what it literally said didn't matter. "The right of the People... Shall not be infringed," became irrelevant in light of the number of gun deaths. That's Judicial Activism where feelings and emotions, and rationalization for a desired interpretation and ruling, is more important.

 

[RLENT]

So what? The tweets were making public that he was declassifying the documents. Months before he left office.

Wrong.

Read the NYPost article ... or even better, read the actual court filing itself.

“The President indicated to me that his statements on Twitter were not self-executing declassification orders and do not require the declassification or release of any particular documents, including the FD-302 reports of witness interviews prepared by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in connection with the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, III,”

... "require" being a key word there.

“Instead, the President’s statements related to the authorization he had provided the Attorney General to declassify documents as part of his ongoing review of intelligence activities relating to the 2016 Presidential election and certain related matters,” Meadows wrote.

“The President’s statements do not require altering any redactions on any record at issue in these or any other cases, including, but not limited to, any redactions taken pursuant to any FOIA exemptions.”

So it was an authorization Trump provided to Barr to allow Barr to declassify.

It would seem that Trump delegated the decision to Barr and left it to Barr's discretion as to what should be declassified.

If that is the case - and it appears to be so - then it may make Barr's testimony relevant to what actually occurred regarding any declassification.

Wanna hazard a guess as to how that testimony will go ?

 

[RLENT]

Oh, that’s right. The woke librarian retired back in April and after whining about Trump.

Awww ... was somebody mean to the poor little Trumpy Bear ?

#SAD

 

[RLENT]

The distinct process of a President is merely saying these documents are declassified.

Basically the Kash Patel "Magic Words" then ?

Is that what you're going with ?

He was just stating publicly in his tweets what he was doing to declassify the documents. Not that the tweets were his official declaration.
Notice the image of the wording in his tweet. It says “I have”, meaning he already did.

Might wanna get an English lesson there:

He's saying he authorized it - which seems to imply process - not that he did it and it was actually done.

Contrast that with the following construction:

"I have declassified ..."

Now feel free to twist yourself up in knots ...

 

[muttly]

Wrong.

Read the NYPost article ... or even better, read the actual court filing itself.



... "require" being a key word there.



So it was an authorization Trump provided to Barr to allow Barr to declassify.

It would seem that Trump delegated the decision to Barr and left it to Barr's discretion as to what should be declassified.

If that is the case - and it appears to be so - then it may make Barr's testimony relevant to what actually occurred regarding any declassification.

Wanna hazard a guess as to how that testimony will go ?

There is that pesky memo too:

 

[muttly]

Awww ... was somebody mean to the poor little Trumpy Bear ?

#SAD

The woke librarian should have tried to be more accommodating instead of having a hissy fit over an “overdue” library book. He was with Obama.

Records Suggest A Bureaucrat Hack's Gripe Spurred Trump Raid

The purpose of the grand jury investigation and raid on Mar-a-Lago was to get Donald Trump, not documents.

thefederalist.com

 

[danthewolf00]

Impeachment 4.0 that's all this raid is.

 

[ATeam]

More About The Courts

Just an additional thought about the courts. One of the reasons we have the courts at all is because it is not always clear how the law applies. A current example is crypto. Crypto is a new form of currency, made possible by technology the nation's founders could not have imagined back in their day. At present, regulators are trying to apply old laws and assumptions to this new currency. These actions are being taken to court where the decisions of judges are literally making new law in this area. Since the law itself is silent on crypto, the courts set the rules with their decisions. Over time, a consensus will emerge about what crypto is and how it should or should not be regulated, and laws will be passed to define that. But until then, the courts exist to give people a place to take and resolve their disputes.

The courts themselves may come up with conflicting opinions, in which case the higher courts take up the matter, or the legislative branch if they make new law first.

 

[ATeam]

The distinct process of a President is merely saying these documents are declassified .

Did the documents actually become declassified? Do they now exist in the public domain in unredacted form?

 

[ATeam]

My point isn't that courts rule from a place of bias (although we've seen many cases where that has happened). My point is Activist Judges routinely set aside the law and/or interpret the law not in an Originalist or Textualist or Strict Constructionist manner, but rather as a guideline that can be molded to fit whatever they want the law to mean, despite what it actually says.

One recent example is the SCOTUS decision which struck down the New York law strictly regulating the use of firearms outside the home. Justice Bryer began his dissent not by referring to the Second Amendment, but rather by noting that 45,222 Americans were killed by guns in 2020.

“In my view, when courts interpret the second amendment, it is constitutionally proper, indeed often necessary, for them to consider the serious dangers and consequences of gun violence that lead states to regulate firearms,” Breyer wrote.

So the law and what it literally said didn't matter. "The right of the People... Shall not be infringed," became irrelevant in light of the number of gun deaths. That's Judicial Activism where feelings and emotions, and rationalization for a desired interpretation and ruling, is more important.

You make your point well. I'm not going to fully agree with you about the role of orignialism, but the Bryer "argument" you share above is not a legal argument at all.

 

[muttly]

Did the documents actually become declassified? Do they now exist in the public domain in unredacted form?

They should be. The President ordered it per his constitutional power to declassify, which he maintained until around noon on January 20, 2021.

 

[coalminer]

They should be. The President ordered it per his constitutional power to declassify, which he maintained until around noon on January 20, 2021.

Is there a process that goes along with declassification? There should be a paper trail to prove it. I highly doubt its one of those, because I say its declassified it is. I know Trump is used to being God in a boardroom, but there are rules he needed to follow as president.

 

[muttly]

Is there a process that goes along with declassification? There should be a paper trail to prove it. I highly doubt its one of those, because I say its declassified it is. I know Trump is used to being God in a boardroom, but there are rules he needed to follow as president.

The President is the ultimate authority on declassification of documents.
Also. Supreme Court decision ruled on it. Dept.of Navy vs Egan.

 

[ATeam]

They should be. The President ordered it per his constitutional power to declassify, which he maintained until around noon on January 20, 2021.

I think it is helpful to distinguish between wishful thinking and actual deeds.

If my house is burning, I can imagine calling the fire department. I can even say to myself and others I called the fire department. But the fire department is a real entity in the real world and it does not know what I am thinking. It will not come if not actually called.

If my house is burning, I can tweet a request for the fire department to come, but since the fire department does not monitor Twitter for calls, it will not know I want them to come and they will not respond.

If I decide I want the fire department to come in the real world, I use the real-world mechanisms to prompt their response; which in this case is a 911 telephone call.

If I am the president and I want to go to Camp David for the weekend, I tell my staff that and they will arrange transportation. If I want to go to Camp David and only imagine I told them, I should not be surprised to not find Marine 1 waiting for me when I expect to see it. If I tweet the next day that I told my staff to have Marine 1 ready to take me to Camp David yesterday, it will be unsettling to them because they know that is not true.

Simply saying I want something done or I did something does not make it real in the real world. You have to say it in a way that people outside your imagination believe and act upon. Saying something about it on Twitter when in fact it was not said in the real world in a way that prompts others to respond does not make it so.

You can say the president has the authority do declassify and reasonable people will agree. But to be effective, to actually produce a result in the real world, that authority must be exercised in a real way, not an imaginary way and not in a historically revisionist way.

 

[muttly]

I think it is helpful to distinguish between wishful thinking and actual deeds.

If my house is burning, I can imagine calling the fire department. I can even say to myself and others I called the fire department. But the fire department is a real entity in the real world and it does not know what I am thinking. It will not come if not actually called.

If my house is burning, I can tweet a request for the fire department to come, but since the fire department does not monitor Twitter for calls, it will not respond.

If I decide I want the fire department to come in the real world, I use the real-world mechanisms to prompt their response; which in this case is a 911 telephone call. If I am the president and I want to go to Camp David for the weekend, I tell my staff that and they will arrange transportation. If I want to go to Camp David and only imagine I told them, I should not be surprised to not find Marine 1 waiting for me when I expect to see it.

Simply saying I want something done or I did something does not make it real in the real world. You have to say it in a way that people outside your imagination believe and act upon. Saying something about it on Twitter when in fact it was not said in the real world in a way that prompts others to respond does not make it so.

Presidential order regarding declassification is final. Are you saying it’s ok for subordinates to disobey that order? Interesting theory…

 

[Ragman]

Biden: maga Republicans are a threat to democracy.......
we are the new Jews to be persecuted by our very own Hitler.....
I wonder how soon detainment camps and the ovens will be built.

It's bad enough that we have posts like this allowed to continue, but that those that I may disagree with but still respect continue to support this nonsense.

 

[danthewolf00]

It's bad enough that we have posts like this allowed to continue, but that those that I may disagree with but still respect continue to support this nonsense.

No Biden really did say in his speech the other night that maga Republicans are a threat to democracy.

 

[ATeam]

Presidential order regarding declassification is final. Are you saying it’s ok for subordinates to disobey that order? Interesting theory…

When I was an infantry officer, if I wanted an order to be obeyed, I gave it in a way that it would be received and understood. So too the the president. When you expect other people to act on your orders and make happen what you want to happen, you can't just think stuff up and call it good. I had 200 men under my command and they stood ready to move on my order. But if I tweet the order and none of them are on Twitter, it matters not what I say on Twitter. I can tweet "move, move, move" all day long, and they'll stand fast.

Yes, I had the absolute authority to tell them to move. They knew that. I knew that. Everyone knew that. But that don't mean s__t if the order is not properly given.

 

[Ragman]

No Biden really did say in his speech the other night that maga Republicans are a threat to democracy.

I'm referring to the Jew and detainment camp comment and you know that!

Posting that kind of crap is the lowest of lows.