Bull-crap. The warrant listed every possible record there could be during Trump's tenure, and they have no right to those records at this time.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
You're familiar with Presidential records act of 1978? If so, then what is @randman1 saying that isn't factual? TIA.
These guys say the statutes listed in the warrant do not apply.
"Messrs. Rivkin and Casey practice appellate and constitutional law in Washington. They served at the Justice Department and the White House Counsel’s Office in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations."
Damn, I must have missed that. Please point out in which section of the Presidential Records Act I can find that baloney.
Seems you know a lot about what happened with the raid and the info that Trump had that makes Trump look bad. Stuff that makes the FBI look bad you are a little fuzzy on.
Read this. The NPR article is full of lies such as claiming previous presidents turned over everything right away at the archivist's request.
"
The PRA lays out detailed requirements for how the archivist is to administer the records, handle privilege claims, make the records public, and impose restrictions on access. Notably, it doesn’t address the process by which a former president’s records are physically to be turned over to the archivist, or set any deadline, leaving this matter to be negotiated between the archivist and the former president.
The PRA explicitly guarantees a former president continuing access to his papers. Those papers must ultimately be made public, but in the meantime—unlike with all other government documents, which are available 24/7 to currently serving executive-branch officials—the PRA establishes restrictions on access to a former president’s records, including a five-year restriction on access applicable to everyone (including the sitting president, absent a showing of need), which can be extended until the records have been properly reviewed and processed. Before leaving office, a president can restrict access to certain materials for up to 12 years."
Opinion | The Trump Warrant Had No Legal Basis
A former president’s rights under the Presidential Records Act trump the statutes the FBI cited to justify the Mar-a-Lago raid.
www.wsj.com
Of course they say it, along with so many Republican Congressmen with law degrees. It goes to show how politicians can bend their words around the law to support their feckless argument. That's why you have such leaders like Jim Jordan, Lindsey Graham, and Kevin McCarthy who still whole-heartedly support Trump despite his record of utter dishonesty.
Typical BS from NPR.Furthermore:
For the first two centuries of U.S. history, outgoing presidents simply took their documents with them when they left the White House. The materials were considered their personal property.
But for the past four decades, every presidential document — from notebook doodles to top-secret security plans — is supposed to go directly to the National Archives as the material is considered the property of the American people.
So when former President Donald Trump left office on Jan. 20, 2021, all his records should have traveled from the White House to the National Archives, according to Jason R. Baron, who served as director of litigation at the National Archives for 13 years.
The reason why presidents can't keep their White House records dates back to Nixon
Congress changed the law in the 1970s when President Nixon prepared to leave with his documents — and infamous tape recordings.www.npr.org
" Before Trump, outgoing presidents have been described as fully cooperative with the records process, experts told NPR. "
Really?
" In the middle of directing the difficult task of transferring the historically important records of the Obama administration into the National Archives, the archivist in charge, David Ferriero, ran into a serious problem: A lot of key records are missing."
There's absolutely no chance you're going to remove yourself from rand's lap, so there is no point in going through everything he posted.
It's actually kinda sad, because I know you aren't dumb, so you should be laughing at all the things he's posted on here. For whatever reason you aren't. Maybe it's because you just want it to be true or maybe you are just trolling. Hopefully the latter. Now go ahead and respond with something like saying he's right because you didn't refute it or something like that.
Well, what happened with the raid is public information. I'm not sure what you mean by what makes the FBI look bad. Are you referring to the timing? If so, I can see why people say it looks bad, but I'm not sure when the timing would be right. No matter when it was done people were going to complain.
I'm unfamiliar with the Presidential records act of 1978. You apparently are well-versed. I was hoping you'd share your wealth of knowledge on the subject and point me directly to the false statements of his.
FFS, you're touchy.
What's sad is you thinking he should laugh at facts, and even sadder but typical of libs, is that you believe you represent majority opinion, and sound opinion and are informed.
Most Americans agree with me actually in most of what I share here. As far as the law, most Americans are ignorant of nuances of law and understandably so.
The writers I quoted from their Wall Street Journal op-ed are not.
§ 2203. Management and custody of Presidential records
(g)(1) Upon the conclusion of a President’s term of office, or if a President serves consecutive terms upon the conclusion of the last term, the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President.
And you think you grasp what that means legally? LOL. Specifically how that works.
Look, the authors of the op-ed from the WSJ aren't partisan media types.
" Messrs. Rivkin and Casey practice appellate and constitutional law in Washington. They served at the Justice Department and the White House Counsel’s Office in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations."
Just in case I cannot, why don't you explain it? I would love to hear your interpretation.
The definition of heir is a person who is legally entitled to inherit something upon death, or someone who inherits something and then carries on the legacy or tradition. Fuhrer is german for leader. Did you mean Herr Fuhrer?
Already did in the quotes, but there is another important thing to note, which I haven't seen mentioned. This from the text of the Act itself defining what is a presidential record that must be turned over to the archivist.
"(B) does not include any documentary materials that are
(i) official records of an agency (as defined in section 552(e)
of title 5, United States Code); (ii) personal records; (iii)
stocks of publications and stationery; or (iv) extra copies
of documents produced only for convenience of reference,
when such copies are clearly so identified."
Official records of an agency are not presidential records. So this idea these classified docs are presidential records is likely bs anyway.
They are declassified agency records, not presidential records.
All he's doing is copying and pasting from what he thinks are "news" sources. He knows just as much about it as you do.
I'm definitely not touchy. It's just sad that you've moved into his crazy world. You're a good poster and given what you do for a living, seem like a decent person. There's no reason you should follow him.
Play on words. Biden is stepping into Herr Fuhrer's legacy or at least presented himself that way last night.
Here's the relevant pic.
I thought you said communist. Nazis are not commies, heir furrier.Play on words. Biden is stepping into Herr Fuhrer's legacy or at least presented himself that way last night.
Here's the relevant pic.
If you've been around long enough, you would know I'm not a liberal, so saying that alone makes you have no credibility. I will admit that the majority of my votes go to libertarian candidates. I guess that means I'm not your version of whatever you think you are. As far as who agrees with what you're saying, it's not most Americans. Maybe most conservatives.
The woke folks are a blend of Maoists and Naziism; hence the hyphen.
Uh huh? You offer no facts, no substance, nada except insults.
I gave you the legal opinion of 2 highly respected Constitutional lawyers who also worked for the DOJ in prior times, and you dismissed that as not factual, offering no facts.
You look like a phony to me. Otherwise, man up and apologize for mischaracterizing my serious arguments backed up by very knowledgeable and respected Constitutional law experts.
lol
Ok. Let's pretend @randman1 isn't here. I'm asking YOU to educate me, since I know nothing and you're the board expert on the Presidential records act of 1978. You keep dodging that opportunity only to keep throwing shade at someone who is providing information. Granted, you don't seem to trust his information but you're not telling any of us why.
And yes, I'm a tremendous poaster and person. Thanks for your support.
Sometimes, there just aren't enough bread crumbs. It's like being a devout southern Baptist AND an atheist.
Last edited:
Well, at least you have randman's endorsement for whatever that's worth. 🤣
which of these does not belong in this group?; a) moron b) idiot c) imbecile d) @prlyles e) the planet Neptune
McCabe Says Biden Wasn’t Forceful Enough In Speech Bashing Republicans
Former FBI Acting Director Andy McCabe said Thursday night on CNN that President Joe Biden's speech that largely trashed Republican voters didn't go far enough
dailycaller.com
It's clear the Democrats just want people to fall in line.
you voluntarily sign up for them to install their thermostat, but they don't necessarily come right out and tell you what they intend to do with it...and even if they do, they don't necessarily tell you to what extent they might manipulate it.
I know this because the power provider tried to talk me into one at my office; and not because they volunteered the details but because I knew what questions to ask, they stopped trying to convince me. No thank you please.
How sloppy can you get, randy?! That is NOT from the text of the Presidential Records Act, you moron. Instead it is from USLegal.com, a website that offers "convenient, affordable legal help" to private citizens.
LOL. You calling someone a moron. Hilarious.How sloppy can you get, randy?! That is NOT from the text of the Presidential Records Act, you moron. Instead it is from USLegal.com, a website that offers "convenient, affordable legal help" to private citizens.
🤣
No, it's not from that link. It's copied and pasted from the text as shown on this link.
Text of H.R. 13500 (95th): Presidential Records Act (Passed Congress version) - GovTrack.us
Text of H.R. 13500 (95th): Presidential Records Act as of Nov 4, 1978 (Passed Congress version). H.R. 13500 (95th): Presidential Records Act
www.govtrack.us
What do you think "documentary material" is exactly? Maybe the classified documents recovered at Mar-a-Lago a full year and a half after they were illegally taken from the White House?LOL. You calling someone a moron. Hilarious.
No, it's not from that link. It's copied and pasted from the text as shown on this link.
Text of H.R. 13500 (95th): Presidential Records Act (Passed Congress version) - GovTrack.us
Text of H.R. 13500 (95th): Presidential Records Act as of Nov 4, 1978 (Passed Congress version). H.R. 13500 (95th): Presidential Records Act
Indeed. That guy has Dick/dick on his mind more than he doesn't.
I fully believe that a large portion of our adult population is hip to the notion that when a dem makes an accusation, it's the dems who are actually guilty of what the accusation is about. They are desperate and throwing subtlety out the window, and the less subtle they are, the more obvious their desperation. Biden is merely a talking head at this point (if you can call that talking), a mouthpiece for the party that really wants to control and manipulate people contrary to the intent of democratic power.Biden is disgusting. At least some on the Left pointed this out. He or rather whomever controls him are the real fascists/commies.
" CNN's Brianna Keilar joined in the criticism as well saying the positioning of Marines behind Biden for a speech like Thursday night's "flies in the face" of the idea that America's military is "supposed to be apolitical."
The disgusting use of Marines as props for political hate-mongering should turn the stomachs of all Americans. Not the illusory non-Americans of @strummingram's fantasies, but the real ones that @gunslingerdick refers to.
Yeah and the Steele dossier was authentic. How stupid can you get?
The president cannot be guilty of mishandling classified materials if he declassified them, and he can do that anytime. Even just by himself.
However, he clearly and publicly declassified the docs.
Moreover, he didn't box this stuff up himself. The reason you see a mix of all sorts of things is all of them were looked at to see if they met the criteria and boxed up for him based on that.
Similar threads
