So you have no evidence other than the fact that Bill Barr doesn't agree with everything Trump says.
Any day now is today, Trumpers. Trump Indicted
- Thread starter exGOPer
- Start date
So you have no evidence other than the fact that Bill Barr doesn't agree with everything Trump says.
Bill Barr is twisting The Constitution and statutes to down Trump.
You need to understand that there was no crime committed by Trump in the documents "case"
You are the one claiming that an highly classified plan on attacking Iran is Trump's 'personal record'
And you are accusing others of twisting.
How is a document that details attacking Iran be Trump's personal record?
Because Clinton called his classified information personal records. The point is moot though as there is no punishment laid out for a violation of The PRA. You have been defeated----again----
Show me where Clinton claimed any defense department classified information as his.
The tapes contained copious amounts of classified information-----told to an historian no less.
Bradley Moss, a Washington-based lawyer who works on national security cases, said Trump’s allies have misconstrued the Clinton socks case.
The socks ruling addressed whether a private party — Judicial Watch — could get a court to order the archivist to determine whether Clinton had improperly designated the audiotapes recorded during his presidency as personal.
"The court concluded that the Presidential Records Act did not give the judiciary that authority to require that of the Archivist," Moss said in an email to PolitiFact. "This alternate dimension Mr. Trump thinks exists because of the case in which he can do whatever he wants with records from his presidency insulated from other statutory provisions like the Espionage Act is the stuff of lunacy."
Trump was indicted under a provision of the Espionage Act that prohibits unauthorized possession of information related to national defense that could be used to injure the U.S.
Jason R. Baron, former litigation director at the National Archives and Records Administration, also told PolitiFact that the Clinton recordings fit the definition of a "personal record."
"In contrast, the boxes of records taken to Mar-a-Lago appear to overwhelmingly contain records pertaining to the official business of the White House, and therefore should have been transferred immediately into the legal custody of NARA as presidential records," Baron said.
Baron said, "No prior case has held that a president has absolute discretion to designate official government records — classified or unclassified — as his own personal records."
Jackson’s ruling cited a prior appeals court opinion that said, "We did not hold (in a prior case) that the President could designate any material he wishes as presidential records, and thereby exercise virtually complete control over it notwithstanding the fact that the material does not meet the definition of ‘presidential records.’"
Baron said, "it would contravene the very reason Congress created the Presidential Records Act were a court to allow a president to designate official records as his own personal records to do with what he pleases."
There is no requirement that a subsequent federal district court judge must follow Jackson’s socks ruling. District court opinions are not binding on other district courts.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/jun/12/why-the-bill-clinton-sock-drawer-case-is-not-compa/
It's not even close to being the same, someone's PERSONAL tapes that MAY contain classified information is not same as a defense department document that has got NOTHING to do with Trump.
You fail again.
Biased article and meaningless. The fact is that Clinton was allowed to call classified information "personal" and yet Trump is not allowed to. FFS, The whole PRA came about because of Nixon trying to get rid of "personal" records.