• ssu
    6.3k
    He's an isolationist and, as such, isn't opposed to foreign interventions on the ground of them being unjustified but rather on the ground of them being costly.Pierre-Normand
    Trump is basically just a populist, if there is to be found any trace of an ideology behind the man (as narcissism and lust for power isn't an ideology). Whatever his base thinks, he will think. And for populism (The evil elites are against the common people) isolationism fits well, but it doesn't have ideological background as what is referred to isolationism.

    He's just opposed to spending any of the money generated by those endeavors. All that money rightly belongs to the military-industrial complex and to the politicians (including himself) who accept their bribes, why spend any more of it?Pierre-Normand
    Uh...no. Trump was for the increase of the size of the military, so he isn't opposed to spending on the army.

    And of course when we are talking about Trump, he will first have had totally opposing views, but his loyal followers don't care about that, as usual.

    Just listen to this:
  • Pierre-Normand
    1.7k
    Uh...no. Trump was for the increase of the size of the military, so he isn't opposed to spending on the army.ssu

    I meant that after the money has been spent needlessly inflating the size of the army and stockpiling the armament, there is no need to make any use of it for peace missions or anything actual deployment. This would only increase the deficit without generating any more bribes or political support (or so Trump seems to think).

    And of course I agree that Trump doesn't have any motivating ideology; his isolationism is merely opportunistic. Even his populism is opportunistic and very much the only thing he can enact with some degree of success since shoveling BS on the destitute and the angry appears to be his only skill.
  • ssu
    6.3k
    I meant that after the money has been spent needlessly inflating the size of the army and stockpiling the armament, there is no need to make any use of it for peace missions or anything actual deployment. This would only increase the deficit without generating any more bribes or political support (or so Trump seems to think).Pierre-Normand
    But remember... that isn't the case when he feels like the mission is justified and he will look good.

    Trump was all eager to go after the IS. That's a classic "War on Terror" mission. And Trump got the Iranians to attack US bases with missiles as a response to his own actions (which btw. Trump didn't then respond to in fear of escalation). And lets not forget just how enthusiastic he was about telling Xi Jingping while eating dessert at Mar-a-Lago about the missile attack he made to Syria.

    Trump has no values other than looking good to his supporters. Trump is a president who would instantly use military force if otherwise not using the military he would look like a "weak dick" to his USA chanting supporters.
  • Michael
    11.8k
    This part in the court's ruling is very important:

    In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them.

    Trump's (and his supporters') "defence" that he declassified them is irrelevant. None of the statutes cited in the warrant concerned the classification status of the documents. Declassifying a document doesn't make it Trump's property. And declassifying a document doesn't make its contents no longer a matter of national security. Normally when a document is declassified it is done so because it is no longer an issue for its contents to be made public, but if we were to accept Trump's "standing order" to declassify documents when moved to Mar-a-Lago so that he could continue to work with them then presumably they are still a matter of national security and their public release would harm the United States, showing once again Trump's utter incompetency and the danger he posed as President.

    Also I like this little swipe at the district court:

    Here, the district court concluded that Plaintiff did not show that the United States acted in callous disregard of his constitutional rights. Doc. No. 64 at 9. No party contests the district court’s finding in this regard. The absence of this “indispensab[le]” factor in the Richey analysis is reason enough to conclude that the district court abused its discretion in exercising equitable jurisdiction here.
  • Michael
    11.8k
    Trump claims he can declassify top secret documents just ‘by thinking about it’

    There doesn’t have to be (a process), as I understand it. If you’re the president of the United States, you can declasify just by saying ‘it’s declassified’, even by thinking about it. Because you’re sending it to Mar-a-Lago or to wherever you’re sending it.

    Hmm, so where else did Donnie send classified documents? We already know of a classified folder at the Trump Tower. Maybe there are more documents there. And maybe also Bedminster. Who wants to bet on more search warrants?

    And on the issue of declassification, there was a court ruling in 2020:

    Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures.

    ...

    Because declassification, even by the President, must follow established procedures, that argument fails.
  • unenlightened
    7k
    Trump claims he can declassify top secret documents just ‘by thinking about it’Michael

    I bet he can bend spoons too, just by stroking them with his lovely little hands.
  • Michael
    11.8k


    "Do not try and read the classified documents—that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth."
    "What truth?"
    "There are no classified documents."
  • 180 Proof
    9.8k
    :up:

    "Do not try and read the classified documents—that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth."
    "What truth?"
    "There are no classified documents."
    Michael
    :clap: :cool:
  • NOS4A2
    6.2k


    The president can do whatever he wants with classified documents. He is ultimate authority.

    Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures.

    ...

    Because declassification, even by the President, must follow established procedures, that argument fails.

    “Established procedure” is that the president is the ultimate authority on classified materials and can declassify at will. Your ruling shows that the president cannot inadvertently declassify documents.
  • Michael
    11.8k
    “Established procedure” is that the president is the ultimate authority on classified materials and can declassify at will.NOS4A2

    As the ruling says, he must still follow a procedure. An employer has the right to fire someone at will, but simply thinking "John is fired" isn't actually firing someone. He'd need to actually tell John, remove him from the payrolls, etc.

    A footnote to that quote from the court ruling says "As explained above, Executive order 13,526 established the detailed process through which secret information can be appropriately declassified."

    The president can do whatever he wants with classified documents.NOS4A2

    He can set the classification status of a document. He cannot decide that it's his personal property and take it home with him when he's no longer President, or refuse to return it when the new administration requests it.

    To repeat the recent appeals court ruling, "In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them."

    And besides, his lawyers are refusing to assert that the documents have been declassified, so this is even more irrelevant.
  • NOS4A2
    6.2k


    The ruling says “we decline to hold that the judiciary may conclude that certain executive branch statements may trigger inadvertent declassification because such determinations encroach upon the President’s undisputedly broad authority in the realm of national security”. The judiciary has no say on this matter. The “procedure” is that the president is the highest authority on classification, has “undisputedly broad authority”, and can declassify anything at will. Trump is right. “You’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it”.
  • Michael
    11.8k
    Nothing from that quote supports your claim, whereas the quote saying "declassification, even by the President, must follow established procedures" supports mine.

    That someone has the authority to do something isn’t that they can do that something telepathically. Again, an employer cannot fire their employee just by thinking about it.
  • Fooloso4
    3.7k


    It is evident that you did not read the document or did not understand it.

    The statement you quote begins:

    Finally, as the district court recognized, the suggestion that courts can declassify information raises separation of powers concerns. In light of the executive branch’s “compelling interest” in preventing declassification of highly sensitive information ...

    What is at issue in this case was not Trump's ability to declassify simply by thinking about it, but, rather, whether his remarks on another occasion could be construed as "inadvertent declassification". It was the executive branch in this case attempting to prevent declassification, not Trump declassifying inadvertently or at will.

    More importantly, in the paragraph above this one states:

    Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures.

    and the footnote:

    As explained above, Executive order 13,526 [Order] established the detailed process through which secret information can be appropriately declassified.

    This detailed process is not satisfied by:

    declassify anything at willNOS4A2
  • Xtrix
    4.1k
    So Trump can now declassify documents with the power of his very-stable-genius brain.

    What are the odds that his defenders are engaging in elaborate satire?
  • NOS4A2
    6.2k


    I’m aware that the case has to do with the inadvertent declassification of documents, and said as much.

    “Your ruling shows that the president cannot inadvertently declassify documents.”

    “Designated officials” are those designated by the commander in chief, the president. The power to declassify at will is satisfied by article 2 of the US constitution. He is not obligated to follow any procedures other than those that he himself has prescribed.
  • Fooloso4
    3.7k
    I’m aware that the case has to do with the inadvertent declassification of documents, and said as much.NOS4A2

    It is what you didn't say that is important. Which is the more charitable conclusion, you did not read or understand the document or you willfully ignored and misrepresented what it says?

    The power to declassify at will is satisfied by article 2 of the US constitutionNOS4A2

    Article 2 says NOTHING about classified information.

    What article 2 does say is:
    ... he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed ...

    He is not obligated to follow any procedures other than those that he himself has prescribed.NOS4A2

    According to Executive order 13,526, which established the detailed process through which secret information can be appropriately declassified, he is obligated to follow procedure. Executive orders have the force of law. Only a subsequent executive order can overturn an executive order. Trump did not do that and could not do that by thinking it.
  • Michael
    11.8k
    Remember when Trump tweeted "I have fully authorized the total Declassification of any & all documents pertaining to the single greatest political CRIME in American History, the Russia Hoax. Likewise, the Hillary Clinton Email Scandal. No redactions!"

    Did that declassify all those documents?

    And let's imagine that Trump were to tell some relevant subordinate on record that some document is to be declassified and published but then privately thinks to himself that he's changed his mind and it isn't to be declassified. Would it be illegal for his subordinate to start the bureaucratic process to declassify and publish the document? According to NOS4A2's reasoning, yes. Which is absurd.
  • NOS4A2
    6.2k
    Michael’s reasoning attempts to make us believe that a President must follow “established procedures” as outlined by another president’s executive order, and that the lower courts get to decide what the leader of the entire American military can and cannot declassify.
  • Michael
    11.8k
    Michael’s reasoning attempts to make us believe that a President must follow “established procedures” as outlined by another president’s executive orderNOS4A2

    That's what the court said.

    and that the lower courts get to decide what the leader of the entire American military can and cannot declassifyNOS4A2

    I didn't say that.
  • Michael
    11.8k
    I have it on good authority that Biden reclassified everything at Mar-a-Lago just by thinking about it.
  • Benkei
    5.9k
    Biden classified what you had for dinner last week when his turd spelled an "M".
  • NOS4A2
    6.2k


    Article 2 says NOTHING about classified information.

    But the Supreme Court has long ago determined that his classification powers come from his authority under Article II of the Constitution.

    According to Executive order 13,526, which established the detailed process through which secret information can be appropriately declassified, he is obligated to follow procedure. Executive orders have the force of law. Only a subsequent executive order can overturn an executive order. Trump did not do that and could not do that by thinking it.

    As Lawfareblog determined:

    Let’s dispense with one easy rabbit hole that a lot of people are likely to go down this evening: the President did not “leak” classified information in violation of law. He is allowed to do what he did. If anyone other than the President disclosed codeword intelligence to the Russians in such fashion, he’d likely be facing a long prison term. But Nixon’s infamous comment that “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal” is actually true about some things. Classified information is one of them. The nature of the system is that the President gets to disclose what he wants.

    The reason is that the very purpose of the classification system is to protect information the President, usually through his subordinates, thinks sensitive. So the President determines the system of designating classified information through Executive Order, and he is entitled to depart from it at will. Currently, Executive Order 13526 governs national security information.

    The Supreme Court has stated in Department of the Navy v. Egan that “[the President’s] authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this Constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.” Because of his broad constitutional authority in this realm, the president can, at any time, either declassify information or decide whom to share it with.
  • Fooloso4
    3.7k
    Michael’s reasoning attempts to make us believe that a President must follow “established procedures” as outlined by another president’s executive order ...NOS4A2

    Once again, executive orders have the force of law and can only be overturned by another executive order.

    ...and that the lower courts get to decide what the leader of the entire American military can and cannot declassify.NOS4A2

    What is at issue is not what can and cannot be declassified. What is at issue is HOW documents can and cannot be declassified. A president can declassify by executive order, but Trump did not sign an executive order declassifying the documents in his possession.

    No doubt Trump has been told this, but when he goes on Hannity he is not making an argument that would hold up in a court of law. He is playing to that segment of the court of public opinion that watches Fox.

    As Lawfareblog determined:NOS4A2

    In typical fashion, you fail to read or cite crucial information in the article you cite that undermines your claims. From the article:

    There’s thus no reason why Congress couldn’t consider a grotesque violation of the President’s oath as a standalone basis for impeachment—a high crime and misdemeanor in and of itself. This is particularly plausible in a case like this ...

    In short, Lawfareblog determined that there was plausible evidence in that case to impeach.

    In addition, what is at issue here is not whether Trump was authorized to disclose information in that meeting in 2017, but rather his now having documents in his possession now that he is no longer the president. Documents bearing on national security. Documents that unless found to be otherwise remain a matter of national security. Documents that unless determined to be otherwise he as a private citizen should not have in his possession.
  • NOS4A2
    6.2k


    The question as to weather a president can declassify at will or has to follow a process are addressed in the quotes I cited, all of which contradicts your assertions saying otherwise. That you’d shift focus to their opinions on an impeachment strategy in order to avoid this accounting is obvious.

    “Different people say different things but as I understand it, if you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it. Because you’re sending it to Mar-a-Lago or wherever you’re sending it. There doesn’t have to be a process. There can be a process, but there doesn’t have to be.”

    Trump’s statement is true, and that’s probably why the phrase “by thinking about it” was torn from its context and served as fodder for those who fall for those sorts of efforts.
  • Fooloso4
    3.7k
    The question as to weather a president can declassify at will or has to follow a process are addressed in the quotes I cited, all of which contradicts your assertions saying otherwise.NOS4A2

    It is not my assertion, it is what is clearly stated in the executive order. What happens when a president disregards the procedures in place is not so clear cut.

    That you’d shift focus to their opinions on an impeachment strategy in order to avoid this accounting is obvious.NOS4A2

    A distinction must be made, and was made in the article you cited, between criminal law and high crimes and misdemeanors. This is why the authors of the article "shifted focus", or more accurately, moved to the actual focus of the article.

    The current case, however, does involve criminal law. From the NYT


    Can a president secretly declassify information without leaving a written record or telling anyone?

    That question, according to specialists in the law of government secrecy, is borderline incoherent.

    If there is no directive memorializing a decision to declassify information and conveying that decision to the rest of the government, the action would essentially have no consequence. Departments and agencies would continue to consider that information classified and so would continue to treat it as a closely held secret, restricting access to records containing it.

    “Hypothetical questions like ‘What if a president thinks to himself that something is declassified? Does that change its status?’ are so speculative that their practical meaning is negligible,” said Steven Aftergood, a secrecy specialist with the Federation of American Scientists.

    He added: “It’s a logical mess. The system is not meant to be deployed in such an arbitrary fashion.”

    What about obstruction and disobeying a subpoena?

    Even if evidence emerged that Mr. Trump technically deemed the documents declassified before leaving office, that would also not help him with other legal problems arising from his hoarding of government documents despite repeated efforts to retrieve them.

    The other two criminal laws cited in the search warrant affidavit — concealing or destroying government records, and concealing documents as part of an effort to obstruct an investigation or other official effort — do not have to involve national security secrets.

    In May, the Justice Department obtained a grand jury subpoena for all sensitive documents remaining in Mr. Trump’s possession. His representatives turned over a few while falsely saying that no others remained. Notably, it demanded all records “bearing classification markings” — not classified records — so the claim that the former president had technically declassified them would also seem to be irrelevant to whether he unlawfully defied the subpoena.

    So far neither Trump nor his lawyers have repeated in court his claims that he declassified everything.
  • 180 Proof
    9.8k
    Just another maga-is-fucked Monday in Murica :clap: :sweat:


    @NOS4A2
  • 180 Proof
    9.8k
    FUCK Individual-1 & the MAGA mob ...

    re: Letitia James & Fani Willis :fire:
    The sistas are in
    so check the frontline ...

    ... and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
  • creativesoul
    10.8k
    The sheer number of agents who were working with American government and have come up either missing or murdered since Trump left office hasn't been openly considered in the public domain. I wonder if there are any connected dots between those abnormalities and Mar-a-lago?
  • Changeling
    1.3k
    what are you insinuating?
  • creativesoul
    10.8k


    The question you ask presupposes that I meant something other than what I wrote. I did not. What I wrote is plainly understood exactly as it is written. Do you not understand it as it's written?
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.