The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Is the Mar-A-Lago Whoop-Tee-Doo About ... Memorabilia?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

After all these years, I don’t pay all that much attention to Trump, so I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio, but this caught my eye. Derek Thompson is a bright fellow:

Apparently, I hit a nerve:

 
Hide 278 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Derek Thompson (never heard of him) writes for The Atlantic, so I’m 99.9% sure he’s a complete brain-dead idiot. He then quotes Julitte Kayem, who I am 100% sure is a brain-dead idiot. So two idiots combine for a totally stupid idea, so stupid it’s not even wrong.

    The US can’t do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    Wut? That literally means nothing at all.

    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop. Oh and hey, guess what? Trump has an ongoing lawsuit against Hillary Clinton. Imagine! Hmmm, Trump said he declassified Russiagate records and other items potentially harmful to Ms. Clinton. Woops, now the FBI has gathered them up! How convenient!

    It’s not that difficult Steve. The FBI is like the Stasi. They do whatever they want, to whoever they want, for political reasons. Quaint notions like “the law” no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America. See how he “fundamentally changed” it?

    More about this exercise in sordid banana republic politics here.

    https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/a-different-sort-of-warrant/

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin, TWS
    • Replies: @Alden
    @peterike

    Judge Bruce Reinhardt worked as a defense attorney for several of Jeff Epstein’s woman pimps in the criminal trials in the early 2000’s. He worked in the prosecutors office . He quit and went to work for Epstein’s pimps taking with him a lot of prosecution evidence strategies etc. Being sued by Brad Edwards for violation of the federal crime victims act. . On the Board of Directors of his synagogue.

    Signed off on a warrant for “ all presidential papers obtained between January 20 2017 and January 20 2020.”

    Replies: @Emil Nikola Richard

    , @Hypnotoad666
    @peterike

    No conflict of interest of course in having the Biden/Democrat regime prosecute the guy who's simultaneously suing to expose their crimes. If they had an iota of ethics they would have to appoint a special counsel to investigate and prosecute Trump, which means they won't. BTW, here's the rogue's gallery of deep state criminals named in Trump's RICO suit:


    The Plaintiff, Donald J. Trump, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby serves his suit against the Defendants, Hillary R. Clinton, HFACC, Inc., the Democratic National Committee, DNC Services Corporation, Perkins Coie, LLC, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Halliday Dolan, Jr., Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robert E. Mook, Phillipe Reines, Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Ltd., Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar, Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith, Andrew McCabe,
     
    The MSM types are still befuddled about what is going on ("nuclear documents," "memorabilia," North Korean "love letters," Really?). More legally sophisticated observers like Robert Barns, Sundance at Conservative Treehouse, and Kunstler are quicker on the uptake. Per the Kunstler article you cite:

    The choice of going to federal magistrate Bruce Reinhart for the Mar-a-Lago warrant sure looks crude and desperate. Only weeks ago, he was presiding over the Trump v Clinton lawsuit. How did that even happen, given Mr. Reinhart’s role defending Jeffrey Epstein’s associates — many of them Clinton-connected — in the 2007 sex-trafficking case? And only after the spectacularly weird act of switching sides from the federal prosecution team to Epstein’s defense team. Not to mention Mr. Reinhart’s record of public statements denouncing Mr. Trump. There are twenty-five other magistrates who rotate their duties in the Southern District of Florida, why pick him?

    It all shapes up as a systematic effort to obstruct justice by the US Department of Justice. They’ve been doing it consistently since 2016 in all matters pertaining to Mr. Trump, and it is a big reason that the country is now viciously coming apart. This is just a continuation of the same seditious treachery that went on with James Comey releasing his classified interview memo concerning Mr. Trump to The New York Times via his attorney friend from Columbia University, Daniel Richman; and the ensuing dishonest Mueller investigation the leak provoked; and the Crossfire Hurricane operation run by Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, and Rod Rosenstein; and the illegal entrapment and prosecution of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn; and the serial misrepresentations to the FISA court; and the illegal coordinated maneuvers in impeachment #1 between Rep. Adam Schiff, ICIG Michael Atkinson, the National Security Council, and CIA-agent Eric Ciaramella posing as a “whistleblower”; and more recently, the mischief around the FBI’s conjured-up Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping scheme; and the FBI’s role in turning the January 6, 2020, election protests into a riot at the US Capitol.
     

    , @Prester John
    @peterike

    "Quaint notions like 'the law' no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America."

    It would be easy not to take these FBI Keystone Kops seriously, except they really ARE the functional equivalent of the Stasi (or, if you will, the Gestapo/KGB etc), but they're not as sophisticated.

    What is transpiring is eerily similar to 1789 France and 1917 Russia. In the case of "post-Obama" America, the ringleaders are bourgeois Bolsheviks.

    , @Anonymous
    @peterike


    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop.
     
    Bingo. It’s obvious the Feds were looking for anything to attack Trump to send a message to the rest of us.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @peterike

    Steve lives in a different time. Nice guy, very good on golf architecture. Otherwise, well ...

  2. We live in an age when any information can be easily replicated and distributed in mere seconds.

    The notion that there are important “documents” in only one location is bizarre–wrong century!

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldlan
    @Justvisiting

    Could there be some special document,of which there is only one, like ,say,Dick Cheney's diary?
    " Dear diary,well 9/11 went off without a hitch! I'm so relieved.
    Sally the intern gave me a look today. Is that...doable?
    I think my daughters a queer. Should not have thrown the ball around when she was a kid! Goddamn."

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    , @SaneClownPosse
    @Justvisiting

    "The notion that there are important “documents” in only one location is bizarre–wrong century! "

    It seems to be a theme for the 21st century.

    On September 11, 2001, supposedly the only documents relating to the Pentagram's missing 2.4T dollars were destroyed when WTC 7 spontaneously combusted and collapsed.

    Coincidentally that same morning, the ONI team at the Pentagon investigating the money trail was wiped out by a direct hit.

    All coordinated by OBL, hooked up to dialysis, with a satellite phone, in a cave in Afghanistan. OBL did Rummy a big favor. Or Rummy used OBL as cover.

  3. This appears to be hoax # 13 against Trump according to Scott Adams. It’s following the same pattern as the other hoaxes so this will amount to nothing except as another smear to discredit him.

    • Agree: Ron Mexico
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Jackpot

    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process. Since when does Trump adhere to the law on a regular basis? That’s why Sailer is playing coy here. He has been following the story and Trump for that matter as a supposed law and order/rule of law type of guy.

    Replies: @Alden, @PhysicistDave

  4. My fave is Never-Trumper “Allahpundit” at HotAir asserting that “Trump claims the FBI ‘stole’ his passports but Trump lies about a lot of things such as the election being stolen.”

    A couple days later from FBI HQ, “Oops, I guess we have the former president’s passports that we will get around to returning.”

    Tell me more about the lie that the election was stolen?

    • Agree: Ron Mexico, Gordo
  5. I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About … Memorabilia? Especially so, if they indict him. It would be extremely ridiculous to indict a former President, even as dysfunctional as Trump, unless a proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt can be established about harm to national security.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

  6. Obviously facts aren’t really clear, but what I’ve pasted together from various sources (take with grain of salt) is that before leaving office, Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, and those include documents regarding Hillary’s private server investigation and Russiagate. Right before Biden’s inauguration, (I mean the day before), the Archivist sent back an email stating that Archivist’s office would have to conduct some kind of review of the documents (essentially refusing the order to declassify). John Solomon reported on that:

    https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/mystery-solved-doj-secretly-thwarted-release-russia

    It looks like the Deep State is taking the Archivist’s side of this dispute that Trump’s declassification order was missing a jot or a tittle which I suppose in this theory works like having your fingers crossed behind your back when a President issues a declassification order. The Archivist pretends to obey the declassification order for a few weeks and then yells “SIKE!” the day before a new President is inaugurated and then it becomes a crime to possess the almost declassified documents at your very very nice home (the best). It’s not horseshoes or hand grenades – there’s no close enough!

    There’s the Ace of Spades blog run down (where I got the above link):

    https://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=400504

    • Replies: @Random Anonymous
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    You do know that's "PSYCH!", right?

    , @James B. Shearer
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    "... Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, .."

    This is just more Trump BS. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why. Then send a written order to the relevant departments and make this order public. Then make the documents public. But then you would be accountable for what you had done and Trump doesn't like being accountable for anything.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @peterike, @Curle

  7. It’s my impression that security classification is much moreso for cloaking waste, graft, fraud, inefficiency, and sundry other crimes and bad behavior than for its express purpose of keeping secrets from foreign powers.

    • Agree: Hypnotoad666, Polistra, Gordo
  8. I keep saying it but during his presidency Trump was treated like any other leader targeted for regime change. That’s why his hard line against Maduro always amused me. Best start sympathising with the Maduros of the world Donald, you’re one of them now.

    They also pretend it’s about anything other than the very popular policies of said leader that elections occasionally slip up on and allow the public to vote on and then replace said leader with somebody with all the (Alleged or real) faults except the popular policies that usually revolve around said country not being pushed around by the US or Israel or local oligarchs.

    What was simply unusual about it was that Trump was supporting policies in the national interest of the USA.

    In this process then the elites are revealed as deliberately anti-national. The tension between their desire to put the white working class in it’s place with pro-parasitic individualistic economic policy and shipping industrial jobs overseas and their desire to still be able to exploit the US and it’s military to enforce pro-Israel neocon policy is no clearer seen than with China. Their anti-social economic ideologies told them that shipping off industry to China was good because it hurt the poor in the US but it simultaneously built up the only entity capable of pushing the US off it’s hegemonic perch.

    And now they still can’t help their base instincts and have triggered a war in Ukraine and pushing Russia away from Western systems. But like Iran and North Korea before it, Russia has been forced by previous sanctions to build it’s autarky up and has weathered them well. And now they’ve been banished from the West there is nowhere for them to go but into a deeper alliance with China. We’re already seeing more cooperation between Russia, Iran, China and Syria. And so with it’s actions in Ukraine making it look foolish because it hasn’t hurt Russia enough Pelosi et al have been sent to stare down China to try and get some great power credibility back. But that backfired too with China casually going one step further to invasion of Taiwan and the US sitting back and watching. (Pelosi’s plane even did a kowtow by going the long way around the South China Sea, implicitly validating their claims there with their new military bases)

    They’re losing control and lashing out to anyone who notices how dangerous and thus how illegitimate they are. It’s like with all regimes of lies and coercion. They keep the public inline with unpopular policies through propaganda (“Diversity is our strength!”, “They’re just trying to find a better life!”, “Bro, companies exist to make profits bro! There’s nothing wrong with they’re doing!”) and then one day the bank breaks the population becomes not just aware of their interests but that they’re not alone in their thoughts. It always takes people like this by surprise. First slowly and then all at once.

    • Thanks: Old Prude, Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    @Altai

    "They're losing control ..."

    Wishful thinking. The raid was overwrought, but the managerial Obama clique can afford to be reckless: they control the domestic security services and appear to have the full cooperation of CIA and the Pentagon. We all know the role of the media. Look forward to weeks of strategic leaking from the Trump cache and the activation of astro-turf white nationalists just in time for the erection.

    , @John Derbyshire
    @Altai

    His, hers, ours, yours, theirs, its. How hard is it?

    Replies: @J.Ross

  9. One level of enforcement for Good People, and one for deplorables.

    • Replies: @Half Canadian
    @Redneck farmer

    Mercy for my friends and the law for my enemy.

  10. Whatever Trump’s motive, a large part of the FBI’s is Merrick Garland’s desire for revenge.

    By the way, what’s with the name Merrick? Does he have siblings named Wantagh and Syosset?

    “Garland” was once “Garfinkel”. Apparently the top Democratic politician with the surname Simon (Bill Jr is Republican) is Cosette Simon, the Pete Buttigieg of Fort Wayne.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosette_Simon

    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.

    • Replies: @bomag
    @Reg Cæsar


    Whatever Trump’s motive, a large part of the FBI’s is Merrick Garland’s desire for revenge.
     
    Yeah, the little potentates under the feeble Biden feel empowered to immanentize their bureaucratic fantasies.
    , @Pixo
    @Reg Cæsar

    Garland didn’t want to go after Trump because it was a loser case. He and Biden were relentlessly attacked by the Trump haters for not going after him.

    Replies: @Pierre de Craon

    , @Veteran Aryan
    @Reg Cæsar


    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.
     
    They will never defeat the duo of Al Franken and Jill Stein.

    Replies: @MEH 0910

    , @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    What did Trump do to Garland that Garland wants revenge?

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave

    , @Hibernian
    @Reg Cæsar

    What about the superficial sigh?

  11. We should ask Pete Rose for his take on all of this kerfuffle.

    • Replies: @Cutter
    @Ron Mexico

    Didn't Rose also work with the World Wrestling Federation at some point?

    Replies: @Ron Mexico

  12. There seems a suspicious absence of “leaks” (i.e. FBI/DOJ selective passing to allied “journalists”) of any actual details or facts of supposed classified info grabbed from Melania’s closet.

    Some early blab about “nuclear secrets” which were unsourced and lacking specificity. “Trust Us” leaks.

    Of course our sacred Secret Police can dole these details out at their leisure. But the silence is now deafening.

    The longer they wait the more guilty Garland & Goons appear to be.

    I am old enough to recall when “left liberals” actually questioned the FBI and other federal security organs. Something about “civil liberties” and all.

    I guess they all died out a decade or more ago. Comrade B. Sanders (D-Vermont Peoples Republic) has now regained complete trust in federal cops. The Comrades always did like the secret police in their hearts…

    • Agree: mc23
    • Thanks: Alden
    • Replies: @Inquiring Mind
    @Muggles

    NPR reported that the documents included nuclear secrets.

    That seals it. It has to be true!

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Muggles


    I am old enough to recall when “left liberals” actually questioned the FBI and other federal security organs. Something about “civil liberties” and all.
     
    I remember that too. Many liberals used to mistrust the FBI, and the CIA, and the Pentagon, and big chemical companies (like Pfeizer). Now they're foursquare behind them. They're all workin' for the Man.

    Replies: @Polistra

  13. It’s about keeping Trump in the news so the Dems don’t have to talk about things like inflation or crime.

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Technite78
    @Anon

    Yes, that... and I still think they're convinced that they can use Trump as an issue to improve their chances during the midterm by encouraging more turnout on the left.

    The MSM and Democrats have a huge blind spot over this... they can't see how keeping Trump and Jan. 6 in the news can possibly hurt them, no matter how many lines are crossed.

    Replies: @Technite78

  14. Leaving aside the obvious question of Hilary’s email server- the Deep State through its caramel-colored puppet decided to pardon Bradley Manning, the originator of the mother load of all national security leaks (thanks to which the illegitimacy of our Ukraine policy was known from the start to any with eyes) yet continues to try and kill Julian Assange, the man who merely published it. Manning was so rehabilitated that he was actually able to run for Congress, yet his act supposedly lead to the gruesome deaths of many US informants in Afghanistan, most of them I’d bet in the prime of life with many honors killings of daughters still ahead of them.

    • Agree: TWS
  15. @Reg Cæsar
    Whatever Trump's motive, a large part of the FBI's is Merrick Garland's desire for revenge.

    By the way, what's with the name Merrick? Does he have siblings named Wantagh and Syosset?

    "Garland" was once "Garfinkel". Apparently the top Democratic politician with the surname Simon (Bill Jr is Republican) is Cosette Simon, the Pete Buttigieg of Fort Wayne.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosette_Simon

    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.

    Replies: @bomag, @Pixo, @Veteran Aryan, @Alden, @Hibernian

    Whatever Trump’s motive, a large part of the FBI’s is Merrick Garland’s desire for revenge.

    Yeah, the little potentates under the feeble Biden feel empowered to immanentize their bureaucratic fantasies.

  16. Wouldn’t a raid.. I mean search of every Presidential library find the same kinda shyte?

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @travell lyte

    Obama still doesn't have his library done yet. Where are all his documents being kept until it is finished? Maybe the FBI should search them.

    Replies: @Alden

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @travell lyte

    What do you think is in Comey's, Clapper's and Brennan's office safes? You think they assiduously follow the impossibly vague law with regard to handling of sensitive materials? They're Class A citizens who get to do whatever the hell they want.

    They're feline, womanish men who have dirt on everyone else in government and know how to backstab call in favors, so to move against one of them is to risk the picture a honeypot hooker in Vegas took of you in a frilly teddy and garters snorting coke that one tome making it into the public domain.

    Replies: @Curle

  17. Being sane on Twitter is an unenviable task, Steve. But every once in a while getting a whiny child like this to practically Rumplestiltskin must be worth it.

  18. @travell lyte
    Wouldn't a raid.. I mean search of every Presidential library find the same kinda shyte?

    Replies: @Barnard, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    Obama still doesn’t have his library done yet. Where are all his documents being kept until it is finished? Maybe the FBI should search them.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Barnard

    Obama's 33 million documents are in a warehouse in Hoffman Estates Il near Chicago awaiting the building of the Obama library

  19. Nuclear secrets, hum…..aren’t nuclear weapons like a 75 year old technology? Now if he was compromising our FM radio secrets, that’s a whole nother thing.

  20. It’s about memorabilia only if you assume that the FBI has such fond nostalgic memories of illegally framing Trump in their Crossfire Hurricane program that those documents count as Deep State keepsakes. There may be other documents involved as a distraction. But what the FBI cares about are the documents Trump declassified in this January 19, 2021 Order:
    https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-declassification-certain-materials-related-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

    IMHO, The primary purpose of the raid is to create a legal dispute over the status of these documents that will keep them from ever being disclosed, based on the usual “ongoing investigation” and “national security” pretexts. If they hadn’t done this, Trump would have been able to introduce them in a privileged litigation context (that would shield him from liability) in the civil RICO case he filed against Hillary and the rest of the Russia-Gate team. (The whole purpose of which is to surface the facts in a public record proceeding). There is a motion to dismiss pending in that case and if it is denied, the parties would have to engage in discovery and the documents could potentially be introduced into the record (again, in a proceeding that is privileged and thus would immunize Trump from exposure to the inevitable “wrongful disclosure” claims that they would bring if he just posted them on the internet).

    In other words, the FBI/DOJ is more interested in covering up it’s own misconduct, rather than exposing Trump’s misconduct. However, putting Trump under yet another criminal liability cloud is certainly icing on the cake.

    Anyway, reasonable minds may differ, but that’s the theory that I believe best fits the timing and circumstances of everything that has happened. Feel free to devise your own conspiracy theory if you don’t like this one.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @Hypnotoad666

    I would favor this interpretation, except that it is difficult not to see the raid in the context of the J6 committee's political failure. One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again. The J6 route required political traction, which they did not get from their hearings. The DOJ route was a backup plan. This seems to be the interpretation Trump is pushing, calling the raid another form of election fraud.

    The DOJ's refusal of a Special Master is consistent with both your interpretation (they don't want anyone neutral looking at the contents of incriminating documents) or the other (they don't want to risk the possibility of a Special Master excepting the documents they want to use for their indictment).

    Replies: @Pixo

    , @Bill Jones
    @Hypnotoad666

    That's the "most likely" scenario I came up with too, so it must be right.

  21. Sailer:

    After all these years, I don’t pay all that much attention to Trump, so I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio…

    Oh yeah, sure.
    __________________________________
    [Let’s just examine that presumption for a moment: “… I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio…” Really now? An unprecedented raid on a former president’s residence, presumably to remove documents that are presumably part of a legal dispute — in a country where presidents have the highest authority to declassify information, and where commonly presidents have taken home all kinds of documents after serving in office, etc., etc., and on and on…! A public intellectual claims “… I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio…”]

    Nothing to see here folks. Move along to my latest post about immigration or my lawn.
    __________________________________

    Thompson (“a bright fellow”):

    … presidents are consumers of intelligence. The US can’t do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    Sailer:

    Is that what this is all about? Memorabilia?

    Really?

    [“Golly Gee Wilikers!’]

    Sailer:

    Apparently, I hit a nerve:

    [“Boy am I clever. I’m a clever outsider — in spite of the fact that I’ve had connections all my life and still have them and occasionally mention the fact. Honest, I have no agenda. I’m naive and completely uninvolved and more concerned with how green my lawn is. Don’t look at me! I haven’t thought about this at all!]

    Thompson:

    … a bunch of a top secret intelligence information…

    Sailer:

    … the Mar-A-Lago whoop-tee-doo is an intensification of last winter’s spat over Trump taking home memorabilia…

    … like “Dictator Kim’s Love Letters?”

    Har de har har!

    • Agree: Pierre de Craon, Kylie
    • Thanks: Corvinus
    • Replies: @Curle
    @Buzz Mohawk

    “The US can’t do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.”

    Does Trump have anything Israel doesn’t have?

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Intelligent Dasein

    , @Anon
    @Buzz Mohawk

    But people pay money for this. America - where anyone can make it!

    , @MEH 0910
    @Buzz Mohawk

    'He wrote me beautiful letters and we fell in love': Donald Trump on Kim Jong-un
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV6mVmAVQU4
    Sep 30, 2018

  22. @Reg Cæsar
    Whatever Trump's motive, a large part of the FBI's is Merrick Garland's desire for revenge.

    By the way, what's with the name Merrick? Does he have siblings named Wantagh and Syosset?

    "Garland" was once "Garfinkel". Apparently the top Democratic politician with the surname Simon (Bill Jr is Republican) is Cosette Simon, the Pete Buttigieg of Fort Wayne.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosette_Simon

    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.

    Replies: @bomag, @Pixo, @Veteran Aryan, @Alden, @Hibernian

    Garland didn’t want to go after Trump because it was a loser case. He and Biden were relentlessly attacked by the Trump haters for not going after him.

    • Replies: @Pierre de Craon
    @Pixo


    Garland didn’t want to go after Trump because it was a loser case.
     
    What's more, Garland is a churchgoing Presbyterian with ethical standards whose strictness would embarrass Calvin and Cromwell.*
    ________
    *FACETIOUSNESS ALERT!
  23. @Muggles
    There seems a suspicious absence of "leaks" (i.e. FBI/DOJ selective passing to allied "journalists") of any actual details or facts of supposed classified info grabbed from Melania's closet.

    Some early blab about "nuclear secrets" which were unsourced and lacking specificity. "Trust Us" leaks.

    Of course our sacred Secret Police can dole these details out at their leisure. But the silence is now deafening.

    The longer they wait the more guilty Garland & Goons appear to be.

    I am old enough to recall when "left liberals" actually questioned the FBI and other federal security organs. Something about "civil liberties" and all.

    I guess they all died out a decade or more ago. Comrade B. Sanders (D-Vermont Peoples Republic) has now regained complete trust in federal cops. The Comrades always did like the secret police in their hearts...

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @Mr. Anon

    NPR reported that the documents included nuclear secrets.

    That seals it. It has to be true!

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Inquiring Mind


    NPR reported that the documents included nuclear secrets.

    That seals it. It has to be true!
     
    https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/images/h_bomb_secret_0.gif
  24. @travell lyte
    Wouldn't a raid.. I mean search of every Presidential library find the same kinda shyte?

    Replies: @Barnard, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    What do you think is in Comey’s, Clapper’s and Brennan’s office safes? You think they assiduously follow the impossibly vague law with regard to handling of sensitive materials? They’re Class A citizens who get to do whatever the hell they want.

    They’re feline, womanish men who have dirt on everyone else in government and know how to backstab call in favors, so to move against one of them is to risk the picture a honeypot hooker in Vegas took of you in a frilly teddy and garters snorting coke that one tome making it into the public domain.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    But do they have deep throats?

  25. @Pixo
    @Reg Cæsar

    Garland didn’t want to go after Trump because it was a loser case. He and Biden were relentlessly attacked by the Trump haters for not going after him.

    Replies: @Pierre de Craon

    Garland didn’t want to go after Trump because it was a loser case.

    What’s more, Garland is a churchgoing Presbyterian with ethical standards whose strictness would embarrass Calvin and Cromwell.*
    ________
    *FACETIOUSNESS ALERT!

  26. @peterike
    Derek Thompson (never heard of him) writes for The Atlantic, so I'm 99.9% sure he's a complete brain-dead idiot. He then quotes Julitte Kayem, who I am 100% sure is a brain-dead idiot. So two idiots combine for a totally stupid idea, so stupid it's not even wrong.

    The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    Wut? That literally means nothing at all.

    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop. Oh and hey, guess what? Trump has an ongoing lawsuit against Hillary Clinton. Imagine! Hmmm, Trump said he declassified Russiagate records and other items potentially harmful to Ms. Clinton. Woops, now the FBI has gathered them up! How convenient!

    It's not that difficult Steve. The FBI is like the Stasi. They do whatever they want, to whoever they want, for political reasons. Quaint notions like "the law" no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America. See how he "fundamentally changed" it?

    More about this exercise in sordid banana republic politics here.

    https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/a-different-sort-of-warrant/

    Replies: @Alden, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John, @Anonymous, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    Judge Bruce Reinhardt worked as a defense attorney for several of Jeff Epstein’s woman pimps in the criminal trials in the early 2000’s. He worked in the prosecutors office . He quit and went to work for Epstein’s pimps taking with him a lot of prosecution evidence strategies etc. Being sued by Brad Edwards for violation of the federal crime victims act. . On the Board of Directors of his synagogue.

    Signed off on a warrant for “ all presidential papers obtained between January 20 2017 and January 20 2020.”

    • Replies: @Emil Nikola Richard
    @Alden

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDhfikCSRsk

  27. @Anon
    It's about keeping Trump in the news so the Dems don't have to talk about things like inflation or crime.

    Replies: @Technite78

    Yes, that… and I still think they’re convinced that they can use Trump as an issue to improve their chances during the midterm by encouraging more turnout on the left.

    The MSM and Democrats have a huge blind spot over this… they can’t see how keeping Trump and Jan. 6 in the news can possibly hurt them, no matter how many lines are crossed.

    • Replies: @Technite78
    @Technite78



    Why bother commenting when your comment is stuck in moderation so long that by the time it's visible, 20 or more later comments have been visible for hours?

    Replies: @Technite78

  28. Julie Kelly is predicting that Trump will be indicted for one thing or another. Interesting piece.

    https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/15/its-inevitable-trump-will-be-indicted/

    • Thanks: PhysicistDave
    • Replies: @epebble
    @Paleo Retiree

    If after disclosing that inventory, if there is no indictment, DOJ/FBI will look like Keystone Cops to the power of Barney Fife. And the Magistrate Judge should quit and take up a job at McDonalds and practice asking, "Do You Want Fries With That".

    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    @Paleo Retiree

    This is getting kind of important, as it's becoming clear that the crime is being a genuine Republican, and after that it's just a matter of finding the law. And the venue with the hostile judge and the vibrant jury pool. This is why we can't be in the same country with these people. DC, big cities, are enemy territory.

  29. He might be smart but that idea is pretty dumb.
    Actors re-enactment of the Twitter exchange:

  30. Lots of sensitive documents are mishandled/go missing.

    But only a select few are ever held accountable.

    This latest shitstorm is a great example of deep state’s arbitrary concerns about national security.

    Who/Whom.

  31. Nothing. The word you’re looking for is “nothing.” Same as the “what’s with” for Manafort, raiding elderly Stone before sunup, Carter Page, the entire Russia thing in all iterations, both impeachments, and everything else. The funny thing about the Russia hoax is that it wasn’t even a conspiracy theory. Not only was there never any evidence, there’s not really a coherent accusation. Our illegitimate government is made up of malignant morons who are capable only of invertebrate hostility toward the American people. They throw stuff at the wall and the lyingpress says it stuck.
    Isn’t it funny that our government, which is of course defending us from foreign threats like Russia, just happens to behave exactly like some gang of braindead office-worshipping title-collecting medal-awarding Chinese apparatchiks (or puppets of same), who are constantly launching the attacks a Chinese apparatchik would launch, and are reliably freshly surprised when those attacks utterly fail due to widely known American laws or cultural instititions? Witness the deeply and hilariously Soviet fake state body display of the Capitol police who died of heart attacks and suicides. Witness the behavior of Garland and the FBI during and after this illegitimate raid with its invisible and undefined warrant.

  32. @Paleo Retiree
    Julie Kelly is predicting that Trump will be indicted for one thing or another. Interesting piece.

    https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/15/its-inevitable-trump-will-be-indicted/

    Replies: @epebble, @The Anti-Gnostic

    If after disclosing that inventory, if there is no indictment, DOJ/FBI will look like Keystone Cops to the power of Barney Fife. And the Magistrate Judge should quit and take up a job at McDonalds and practice asking, “Do You Want Fries With That”.

  33. Did they find the invisible treasure map on the back of the Declaration of Independence?

  34. @Paleo Retiree
    Julie Kelly is predicting that Trump will be indicted for one thing or another. Interesting piece.

    https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/15/its-inevitable-trump-will-be-indicted/

    Replies: @epebble, @The Anti-Gnostic

    This is getting kind of important, as it’s becoming clear that the crime is being a genuine Republican, and after that it’s just a matter of finding the law. And the venue with the hostile judge and the vibrant jury pool. This is why we can’t be in the same country with these people. DC, big cities, are enemy territory.

    • Agree: Kylie
  35. @Buzz Mohawk
    Sailer:

    After all these years, I don’t pay all that much attention to Trump, so I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio...
     
    Oh yeah, sure.
    __________________________________
    [Let's just examine that presumption for a moment: "... I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio..." Really now? An unprecedented raid on a former president's residence, presumably to remove documents that are presumably part of a legal dispute -- in a country where presidents have the highest authority to declassify information, and where commonly presidents have taken home all kinds of documents after serving in office, etc., etc., and on and on...! A public intellectual claims "... I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio..."]

    Nothing to see here folks. Move along to my latest post about immigration or my lawn.
    __________________________________

    Thompson ("a bright fellow"):


    ... presidents are consumers of intelligence. The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.
     
    Sailer:

    Is that what this is all about? Memorabilia?

    Really?
     

    ["Golly Gee Wilikers!']

    Sailer:


    Apparently, I hit a nerve:
     
    ["Boy am I clever. I'm a clever outsider -- in spite of the fact that I've had connections all my life and still have them and occasionally mention the fact. Honest, I have no agenda. I'm naive and completely uninvolved and more concerned with how green my lawn is. Don't look at me! I haven't thought about this at all!]

    Thompson:


    ... a bunch of a top secret intelligence information...
     
    Sailer:

    ... the Mar-A-Lago whoop-tee-doo is an intensification of last winter's spat over Trump taking home memorabilia...
     

    ... like "Dictator Kim's Love Letters?"
     

    Har de har har!

    Replies: @Curle, @Anon, @MEH 0910

    “The US can’t do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.”

    Does Trump have anything Israel doesn’t have?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Curle

    Good question, but I raise China plus, thanks to the Awan brothers, Pakistan.

    , @Intelligent Dasein
    @Curle


    Does Trump have anything Israel doesn’t have?
     
    You'd have to ask Stormy Daniels.
  36. No, it is about US nuclear intelligence on Iran that the Trump White House gave to Israel. The Washington Post spelled it out but not a single other publication will say “Iran” much less “Israel.”

    Merrick Garland sure as hell won’t say “Israel.”

    https://bannedhipster.home.blog/2022/08/16/both-sides-on-script-re-fbi-trump-raid/

  37. This is scripted for the election cycle.

    Expect cockamamy indictments or wildly over-the-top accusations or ‘developments’ as we get closer, an October non-surprise. Democrats have nothing good to run on from the first half of Biden’s term, but they have the FBI, the CIA, the DOJ, and the rest of the admin state as well as the execrable legacy media, and that’s not nothing.

  38. I’ve long thought that instead of having a Presidential library, Trump should just take his memorabilia from the White House and put it up on the walls of the Trump Grill.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Dave Pinsen

    No President should hava a Presidential library. It's the modern equivalent of the Roman Senate declaring a former emperor to be a God and having temples consecrated to him. The deification of public officials is unseemly for a Republic of free men (which of course we aren't, but were supposed to be).

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Intelligent Dasein, @Art Deco

  39. • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Great. Now dox everyone in the chain of command between their squad supervisor and Christopher Wray.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  40. @Hypnotoad666
    It's about memorabilia only if you assume that the FBI has such fond nostalgic memories of illegally framing Trump in their Crossfire Hurricane program that those documents count as Deep State keepsakes. There may be other documents involved as a distraction. But what the FBI cares about are the documents Trump declassified in this January 19, 2021 Order:
    https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-declassification-certain-materials-related-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

    IMHO, The primary purpose of the raid is to create a legal dispute over the status of these documents that will keep them from ever being disclosed, based on the usual "ongoing investigation" and "national security" pretexts. If they hadn't done this, Trump would have been able to introduce them in a privileged litigation context (that would shield him from liability) in the civil RICO case he filed against Hillary and the rest of the Russia-Gate team. (The whole purpose of which is to surface the facts in a public record proceeding). There is a motion to dismiss pending in that case and if it is denied, the parties would have to engage in discovery and the documents could potentially be introduced into the record (again, in a proceeding that is privileged and thus would immunize Trump from exposure to the inevitable "wrongful disclosure" claims that they would bring if he just posted them on the internet).

    In other words, the FBI/DOJ is more interested in covering up it's own misconduct, rather than exposing Trump's misconduct. However, putting Trump under yet another criminal liability cloud is certainly icing on the cake.

    Anyway, reasonable minds may differ, but that's the theory that I believe best fits the timing and circumstances of everything that has happened. Feel free to devise your own conspiracy theory if you don't like this one.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Bill Jones

    I would favor this interpretation, except that it is difficult not to see the raid in the context of the J6 committee’s political failure. One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again. The J6 route required political traction, which they did not get from their hearings. The DOJ route was a backup plan. This seems to be the interpretation Trump is pushing, calling the raid another form of election fraud.

    The DOJ’s refusal of a Special Master is consistent with both your interpretation (they don’t want anyone neutral looking at the contents of incriminating documents) or the other (they don’t want to risk the possibility of a Special Master excepting the documents they want to use for their indictment).

    • Replies: @Pixo
    @Chrisnonymous

    “ One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again.”

    That’d be great if it happened. Trump is really old and partly damaged goods at this point. I’m ready for DeSantis, who I think will also be more effective in office.

    Trump circa 2016 unfortunately is gone, and will be even goner with another two years of aging.

    If we have a two demented geezer repeat race in 2024, Biden will likely win again given he has another 4 years of demographic browning to help him.

    The problem for DeSantis is he probably cannot beat Trump in a primary, and even if he pulled off a narrow win, Trump would be a sore loser and tank him in the general election.

    https://twitter.com/BJamie62/status/1552689249178320899

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/28/21/60812493-11058449-image-a-99_1659040634548.jpg

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Harry Baldwin, @Chrisnonymous, @JohnnyWalker123, @Midnights

  41. @Redneck farmer
    One level of enforcement for Good People, and one for deplorables.

    Replies: @Half Canadian

    Mercy for my friends and the law for my enemy.

    • Agree: kaganovitch
  42. @peterike
    Derek Thompson (never heard of him) writes for The Atlantic, so I'm 99.9% sure he's a complete brain-dead idiot. He then quotes Julitte Kayem, who I am 100% sure is a brain-dead idiot. So two idiots combine for a totally stupid idea, so stupid it's not even wrong.

    The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    Wut? That literally means nothing at all.

    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop. Oh and hey, guess what? Trump has an ongoing lawsuit against Hillary Clinton. Imagine! Hmmm, Trump said he declassified Russiagate records and other items potentially harmful to Ms. Clinton. Woops, now the FBI has gathered them up! How convenient!

    It's not that difficult Steve. The FBI is like the Stasi. They do whatever they want, to whoever they want, for political reasons. Quaint notions like "the law" no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America. See how he "fundamentally changed" it?

    More about this exercise in sordid banana republic politics here.

    https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/a-different-sort-of-warrant/

    Replies: @Alden, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John, @Anonymous, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    No conflict of interest of course in having the Biden/Democrat regime prosecute the guy who’s simultaneously suing to expose their crimes. If they had an iota of ethics they would have to appoint a special counsel to investigate and prosecute Trump, which means they won’t. BTW, here’s the rogue’s gallery of deep state criminals named in Trump’s RICO suit:

    The Plaintiff, Donald J. Trump, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby serves his suit against the Defendants, Hillary R. Clinton, HFACC, Inc., the Democratic National Committee, DNC Services Corporation, Perkins Coie, LLC, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Halliday Dolan, Jr., Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robert E. Mook, Phillipe Reines, Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Ltd., Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar, Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith, Andrew McCabe,

    The MSM types are still befuddled about what is going on (“nuclear documents,” “memorabilia,” North Korean “love letters,” Really?). More legally sophisticated observers like Robert Barns, Sundance at Conservative Treehouse, and Kunstler are quicker on the uptake. Per the Kunstler article you cite:

    The choice of going to federal magistrate Bruce Reinhart for the Mar-a-Lago warrant sure looks crude and desperate. Only weeks ago, he was presiding over the Trump v Clinton lawsuit. How did that even happen, given Mr. Reinhart’s role defending Jeffrey Epstein’s associates — many of them Clinton-connected — in the 2007 sex-trafficking case? And only after the spectacularly weird act of switching sides from the federal prosecution team to Epstein’s defense team. Not to mention Mr. Reinhart’s record of public statements denouncing Mr. Trump. There are twenty-five other magistrates who rotate their duties in the Southern District of Florida, why pick him?

    It all shapes up as a systematic effort to obstruct justice by the US Department of Justice. They’ve been doing it consistently since 2016 in all matters pertaining to Mr. Trump, and it is a big reason that the country is now viciously coming apart. This is just a continuation of the same seditious treachery that went on with James Comey releasing his classified interview memo concerning Mr. Trump to The New York Times via his attorney friend from Columbia University, Daniel Richman; and the ensuing dishonest Mueller investigation the leak provoked; and the Crossfire Hurricane operation run by Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, and Rod Rosenstein; and the illegal entrapment and prosecution of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn; and the serial misrepresentations to the FISA court; and the illegal coordinated maneuvers in impeachment #1 between Rep. Adam Schiff, ICIG Michael Atkinson, the National Security Council, and CIA-agent Eric Ciaramella posing as a “whistleblower”; and more recently, the mischief around the FBI’s conjured-up Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping scheme; and the FBI’s role in turning the January 6, 2020, election protests into a riot at the US Capitol.

    • Thanks: Polistra
  43. @Hypnotoad666
    It's about memorabilia only if you assume that the FBI has such fond nostalgic memories of illegally framing Trump in their Crossfire Hurricane program that those documents count as Deep State keepsakes. There may be other documents involved as a distraction. But what the FBI cares about are the documents Trump declassified in this January 19, 2021 Order:
    https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-declassification-certain-materials-related-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

    IMHO, The primary purpose of the raid is to create a legal dispute over the status of these documents that will keep them from ever being disclosed, based on the usual "ongoing investigation" and "national security" pretexts. If they hadn't done this, Trump would have been able to introduce them in a privileged litigation context (that would shield him from liability) in the civil RICO case he filed against Hillary and the rest of the Russia-Gate team. (The whole purpose of which is to surface the facts in a public record proceeding). There is a motion to dismiss pending in that case and if it is denied, the parties would have to engage in discovery and the documents could potentially be introduced into the record (again, in a proceeding that is privileged and thus would immunize Trump from exposure to the inevitable "wrongful disclosure" claims that they would bring if he just posted them on the internet).

    In other words, the FBI/DOJ is more interested in covering up it's own misconduct, rather than exposing Trump's misconduct. However, putting Trump under yet another criminal liability cloud is certainly icing on the cake.

    Anyway, reasonable minds may differ, but that's the theory that I believe best fits the timing and circumstances of everything that has happened. Feel free to devise your own conspiracy theory if you don't like this one.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Bill Jones

    That’s the “most likely” scenario I came up with too, so it must be right.

  44. @Justvisiting
    We live in an age when any information can be easily replicated and distributed in mere seconds.

    The notion that there are important "documents" in only one location is bizarre--wrong century!

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldlan, @SaneClownPosse

    Could there be some special document,of which there is only one, like ,say,Dick Cheney’s diary?
    ” Dear diary,well 9/11 went off without a hitch! I’m so relieved.
    Sally the intern gave me a look today. Is that…doable?
    I think my daughters a queer. Should not have thrown the ball around when she was a kid! Goddamn.”

    • LOL: bomag
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Bardon Kaldlan

    There's a secret note that's been passed down through every president, originating with George Washington. It's beautifully handwritten in quill ink on the finest parchment.

    The note says,

    "It's all a crock."

    It was never supposed to leave the succession of presidents.

  45. In other news, we have reached the singularity. The Turing test has been passed.
    A chess playing robot broke the finger of a young boy who may have been beating him.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/judgement-day-chess-robot-crushes-child-players-finger-during-tournament

  46. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    https://twitter.com/DetroitKid69/status/1558275515751997445

    Replies: @Art Deco

    Great. Now dox everyone in the chain of command between their squad supervisor and Christopher Wray.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Art Deco

    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House. He is just waiting to reveal its contents when his lawsuit against Democrats goes to trial. But I say why wait? Justice must not be denied. Trump promised to slay the Deep State dragon. And obviously the lawsuit will be thrown out, and then Hypnotoad and others will make up some other excuse why Trump won’t show all the dirt he has.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @PhysicistDave

  47. @epebble
    I think TS/SCI info and "nuclear weapons" would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About ... Memorabilia? Especially so, if they indict him. It would be extremely ridiculous to indict a former President, even as dysfunctional as Trump, unless a proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt can be established about harm to national security.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    epebble wrote:

    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About…

    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the ’80s and ’90s, so I actually do know something about this — unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government’s current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them — e.g., we don’t think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) — i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me…. well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me — they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn’t need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community’s reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President’s thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly’s current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    • Agree: Sean, TWS
    • Disagree: Corvinus
    • Thanks: ic1000, Gordo, Rob
    • Replies: @epebble
    @PhysicistDave

    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI. They prosecuted (and jailed for 9 months) a physicist who forgot to return his old hard drives that had computer simulation data of his own work after upgrading his computer. He had kept them under lock and key in a steel storage cabinet in Los Alamos National Laboratory.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @HallParvey

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @PhysicistDave

    Your insights are most appreciated, and you are a voice of reason here.

    What matters in this case is not the putative documents, but the following:

    1) The very fact that law enforcement controlled by political actors raided the home of a political opponent.

    2) The warrant was signed by a judge who is and has been a clear, vocal, outspoken opponent of the political opponent who was raided. A judge is a member of the judiciary branch in a government in which powers are supposed to be separated.

    3) The raid was essentially condoned and carried out by people working for a president who ran against the former president and may have to run against him again.

    4) Presidents have full authority over all classified information and can de-classify it and presumably do whatever they want with it, even take it home if they so choose, if they make that decision while they are the president.

    5) A president is elected by The People to have full executive power and must by necessity be able to exercise that power without fear of reprisal by successors if he is to be able to carry out his duties and the will of The People who elected him.

    This raid is completely wrong and would be wrong even if President Trump had decided to take home the secret formula for Coca-Cola. (Well, maybe THEN it would be called for. Some things are sacred.)

    BTW, I have difficulty imagining that every document that matters in this case does not have one or more copies somewhere still safe, including electronic, virtual copies. It is actually quite quaint to think that going in and taking some boxes of paper will make a difference, but what do I know?

    And again, it's not the documents that matter. This is another in the long line of phony moves that the powers that be have made against Trump since even while he was running the first time. This is an attempt, one way or another, to hobble him, so slander him, to tie him up so he cannot run or win or harm them.

    Also, the hypothesis is reasonable that this is really about documentation that proves the ratfucking that the FBI, CIA, powers that be, Clinton campaign, Obama administration, et. al. were doing. In fact, this raid is probably just a continuation of what the documents prove.

    And I don't even like Trump, though I voted for him. What other choice was there? What are our choices now, and do they even matter anymore? Did they ever really?

    Replies: @Luke Lea, @PhysicistDave

    , @Alden
    @PhysicistDave

    But the president of the United States can classify de classify and re classify any and all documents both while he is president and for the rest of his life. United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 and Obama’s December 29 2009 Executive Order 13526. Which iguves presidents and EX presidents the power to classify any and all documents however they wish.

    Neither the Civil Code nor executive orders give the president’s powers to give information to enemies and rivals of course. But that has nothing to do with the right to classify de classify and re classify information . And keep any and all documents he wishes after he leaves office.

    Obama's got 33 million documents in a warehouse in the Chicago suburb Hoffman Estates. His EO 13526 is the longest executive order I’ve ever read. It’s almost an entire new law.

    And presidents have always had the right and power to take whatever documents they wish out of the White House when their terms finish.

    The classification and security rules that apply to government workers contractors university researchers etc don’t apply to Presidents. That’s the law. Both statutory and common law of precedent going back to George Washington.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    , @Polistra
    @PhysicistDave


    I really do know more about this than almost everyone
     
    https://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Babies-Laughing-Dancing-in-High-Chairs.gif
    , @Ralph L
    @PhysicistDave

    You're not supposed to talk about a Black Fight Club. (Not that kind of black).

    , @Art Deco
    @PhysicistDave

    Dale Van Atta, who was on the staff of Jack Anderson, maintained that material marked 'Top Secret' usually had at least one hot item in it, but that designations 'confidential' and 'secret' seldom did and were commonly used to cover up bureaucratic bungling. It was his contention that the ocean of improperly classified material made federal employees less vigilant about protecting genuine state secrets.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    , @Emil Nikola Richard
    @PhysicistDave

    The first suicide girl turns 50 y.o. this year. It is top secret in the Trump white house that a huge project was underway to determine the lady(?)'s identity and the exact time and date of this aeonic transit. Also it was going to be a surprise.

    Biden caught wind and demanded the data for the October surprise.

    So we have this.

    Have you seen that site lately? They now have fatties. Barf. Bark. Sad.

  48. @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI. They prosecuted (and jailed for 9 months) a physicist who forgot to return his old hard drives that had computer simulation data of his own work after upgrading his computer. He had kept them under lock and key in a steel storage cabinet in Los Alamos National Laboratory.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote to me:


    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI.
     
    Yeah, although I would be very, very surprised if Trump did anything even that bad.

    It looks as if Trump did the same sort of thing that Obama and other Presidents did, which creates issues that are normally settled by amicable discussions with the Archives.

    Part of the problem is that we have so many laws nowadays, many of which are very broad and very vague, that we have to count on the authorities being "reasonable" as to how they enforce those laws.

    And therefore if the authorities hate your guts and decide not to be "reasonable," you are totally screwed, even if you behaved in a way that everyone else behaves.

    It's not the rule of law.
    , @HallParvey
    @epebble


    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI.
     
    Actually, whenever they are ordered to by their controllers, regardless of any connection to national security. Perhaps the operatives will all receive Lon Horiuchi medals for their bravery.
  49. If and when the American people regain control of our country every one of these people from Comey to Wray to Hillary to 0bama should be marched through the streets in neck shackles.

    • Agree: Kylie
  50. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    Obviously facts aren't really clear, but what I've pasted together from various sources (take with grain of salt) is that before leaving office, Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, and those include documents regarding Hillary's private server investigation and Russiagate. Right before Biden's inauguration, (I mean the day before), the Archivist sent back an email stating that Archivist's office would have to conduct some kind of review of the documents (essentially refusing the order to declassify). John Solomon reported on that:

    https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/mystery-solved-doj-secretly-thwarted-release-russia

    It looks like the Deep State is taking the Archivist's side of this dispute that Trump's declassification order was missing a jot or a tittle which I suppose in this theory works like having your fingers crossed behind your back when a President issues a declassification order. The Archivist pretends to obey the declassification order for a few weeks and then yells "SIKE!" the day before a new President is inaugurated and then it becomes a crime to possess the almost declassified documents at your very very nice home (the best). It's not horseshoes or hand grenades - there's no close enough!

    There's the Ace of Spades blog run down (where I got the above link):

    https://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=400504

    Replies: @Random Anonymous, @James B. Shearer

    You do know that’s “PSYCH!”, right?

  51. OT — BAYS (EYBA) — Since 1997, American politicians have gone out of their way to defend the School of Yoga of Buenos Aires from accusations of cult practices, abusive control, and child trafficking. The religio-ethnic group of the Master, Percowicz, probably had nothing to do with that. Now he’s arrested (Weinsteinishly affecting a cane), the police are displaying giant piles of gold and American dollars, victim stories are published in the press (standard cult stuff about loyalty to the priesthood disrupting loyalty to family and society), and yet still once again it comes out that sexualizimg children wasn’t a goal in itself but about entrapping major politicians (whose photographs at cult functions join photographs of orgies and rituals).
    https://www.unilad.com/news/cult-survivor-escuela-de-yoga-brings-down-sect-20220814

  52. @peterike
    Derek Thompson (never heard of him) writes for The Atlantic, so I'm 99.9% sure he's a complete brain-dead idiot. He then quotes Julitte Kayem, who I am 100% sure is a brain-dead idiot. So two idiots combine for a totally stupid idea, so stupid it's not even wrong.

    The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    Wut? That literally means nothing at all.

    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop. Oh and hey, guess what? Trump has an ongoing lawsuit against Hillary Clinton. Imagine! Hmmm, Trump said he declassified Russiagate records and other items potentially harmful to Ms. Clinton. Woops, now the FBI has gathered them up! How convenient!

    It's not that difficult Steve. The FBI is like the Stasi. They do whatever they want, to whoever they want, for political reasons. Quaint notions like "the law" no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America. See how he "fundamentally changed" it?

    More about this exercise in sordid banana republic politics here.

    https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/a-different-sort-of-warrant/

    Replies: @Alden, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John, @Anonymous, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    “Quaint notions like ‘the law’ no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America.”

    It would be easy not to take these FBI Keystone Kops seriously, except they really ARE the functional equivalent of the Stasi (or, if you will, the Gestapo/KGB etc), but they’re not as sophisticated.

    What is transpiring is eerily similar to 1789 France and 1917 Russia. In the case of “post-Obama” America, the ringleaders are bourgeois Bolsheviks.

  53. @Curle
    @Buzz Mohawk

    “The US can’t do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.”

    Does Trump have anything Israel doesn’t have?

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Intelligent Dasein

    Good question, but I raise China plus, thanks to the Awan brothers, Pakistan.

  54. @peterike
    Derek Thompson (never heard of him) writes for The Atlantic, so I'm 99.9% sure he's a complete brain-dead idiot. He then quotes Julitte Kayem, who I am 100% sure is a brain-dead idiot. So two idiots combine for a totally stupid idea, so stupid it's not even wrong.

    The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    Wut? That literally means nothing at all.

    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop. Oh and hey, guess what? Trump has an ongoing lawsuit against Hillary Clinton. Imagine! Hmmm, Trump said he declassified Russiagate records and other items potentially harmful to Ms. Clinton. Woops, now the FBI has gathered them up! How convenient!

    It's not that difficult Steve. The FBI is like the Stasi. They do whatever they want, to whoever they want, for political reasons. Quaint notions like "the law" no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America. See how he "fundamentally changed" it?

    More about this exercise in sordid banana republic politics here.

    https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/a-different-sort-of-warrant/

    Replies: @Alden, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John, @Anonymous, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop.

    Bingo. It’s obvious the Feds were looking for anything to attack Trump to send a message to the rest of us.

  55. What if the taint of Whiteness can never be removed?

    A Glimpse of a Future Without White People
    Mohsin Hamid’s The Last White Man is a book about race metamorphosis—and the seduction of power.

    WHITENESS IS A seduction.

    Stupid sexy Whiteness….

    Whiteness is also an illusion.

    …..unlike, say, Blackness…

    These are the twin motifs on which Pakistani writer Mohsin Hamid props up The Last White Man, his new novel about race metamorphosis and human morality. Anchored in the bare and elegiac prose Hamid has made his trademark style, the book springboards from a single unexplained incident. Anders, a white man, awakens one morning to a new reality: his skin has “turned a deep and undeniable brown.”

    But have his facial features and hair texture stayed the same? If Brad Pitt suddenly had James Brown’s complexion….

    And for the benefit of the guys in the back row, “Anders” means “man.” Get it? A novel with the title THE LAST WHITE MAN focuses on a character called “man”……Yeesh, that’s the kinda thing that I expect in a community college creative writing class…

    The transformation, of which Anders’ is the first—but not the only, and certainly not the last—elicits worthy exploration. What if whiteness were suddenly gone? Would the social order of life come undone? Would anything change?

    The first question in my mind is: What are BIPOCs gonna do? I mean, we’re talking about a Rachel Dolezal x 1,000,000,000- scale problem….I mean, if ya can’t eyeball YT, how are ya gonna keep the anti-YT coalition together….

    The sequence of events that follows plays into an ancient fear, that of The Other. (One’s need to estrange, Toni Morrison has said, is “a desperate attempt to confirm one’s own self as normal.”) For Anders, confusion bubbles. Panic swells. Initially, he flirts with thoughts of violence after realizing the transformation is irreversible. “He wanted to kill the colored man who confronted him here in his home,” Hamid writes, “to extinguish the life animating this other’s body, to leave nothing standing but himself, as he was before.”

    Lemme tell ya, YT is truly deranged….

    It’s understandable why those who benefit from a particular standing would do anything to preserve it. The conscious seduction of power, of understanding the privileges from which one benefits and the life it affords, is, in part, about the necessity of control. I’d probably be upset and a little sad if I lost all of that, too.

    See, Whiteness is nothing but an unholy combination of power and privilege….Unlike BIPOCness…

    “No one there at the bar looked entirely comfortable, not the bartender, and not the men huddled in the only occupied booth … not any of these dark people bathed in the bar-colored light, trying to find their footing in a situation so familiar and yet so strange,” Oona observes. Or “maybe everyone looked the same as they always did,” she thought. It is only after “the whiskey settles into her belly” that she realizes that “the difference was gone.”

    How drunk do you have to be in order to not see race? Blackout drunk?

    Whiteness physically recedes but it never vanishes completely.

    Maybe we need some kind of Jean-Jacques Dessalines-style solution to the Whiteness problem….

    It has a psychological grip; lest we forget, identity is more than a badge of flesh.

    Whiteness is more than skin deep; it goes all the way to the soul…

    The newly “dark people” of Hamid’s epic appear to embrace different outlooks but, really, what has happened is more of a costume swap than an adjustment of the soul. The characters operate in a kind of cultural drag, entombed in an unrecognizable self, a sort of living elegy of their former whiteness. What was once marked as difference is not understood anew; instead, they continue to see through white eyes, in spite of their brown skin.

    Maybe if we removed the eyes from every YT…

    https://www.wired.com/story/mohsin-hamid-the-last-white-man/

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @syonredux

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/mohsin-hamids-the-last-white-man-looks-forward-to-genocide-of-the-white-race/

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @syonredux

    "What if the taint of Whiteness can never be removed."

    It seems that Mr. Hamid is dabbling in genetic memory which is read by me to be a form of scientific reincarnation. I was once King Arthur, Fu Manchu, and Jodie Foster so I totally buy into the concept.

    , @Ralph L
    @syonredux

    The sequence of events that follows plays into an ancient fear, that of The Other.

    In German, anders means other. Martin Luther — 'Hier stehe Ich, Ich kann nicht anders. (Here I stand, I can do no other)' before he ate worms.

    Replies: @J.Ross

  56. @syonredux
    What if the taint of Whiteness can never be removed?

    A Glimpse of a Future Without White People
    Mohsin Hamid’s The Last White Man is a book about race metamorphosis—and the seduction of power.

    WHITENESS IS A seduction.
     
    Stupid sexy Whiteness....

    Whiteness is also an illusion.
     
    .....unlike, say, Blackness...

    These are the twin motifs on which Pakistani writer Mohsin Hamid props up The Last White Man, his new novel about race metamorphosis and human morality. Anchored in the bare and elegiac prose Hamid has made his trademark style, the book springboards from a single unexplained incident. Anders, a white man, awakens one morning to a new reality: his skin has “turned a deep and undeniable brown.”
     
    But have his facial features and hair texture stayed the same? If Brad Pitt suddenly had James Brown's complexion....

    And for the benefit of the guys in the back row, "Anders" means "man." Get it? A novel with the title THE LAST WHITE MAN focuses on a character called "man"......Yeesh, that's the kinda thing that I expect in a community college creative writing class...

    The transformation, of which Anders’ is the first—but not the only, and certainly not the last—elicits worthy exploration. What if whiteness were suddenly gone? Would the social order of life come undone? Would anything change?
     
    The first question in my mind is: What are BIPOCs gonna do? I mean, we're talking about a Rachel Dolezal x 1,000,000,000- scale problem....I mean, if ya can't eyeball YT, how are ya gonna keep the anti-YT coalition together....

    The sequence of events that follows plays into an ancient fear, that of The Other. (One’s need to estrange, Toni Morrison has said, is “a desperate attempt to confirm one’s own self as normal.”) For Anders, confusion bubbles. Panic swells. Initially, he flirts with thoughts of violence after realizing the transformation is irreversible. “He wanted to kill the colored man who confronted him here in his home,” Hamid writes, “to extinguish the life animating this other’s body, to leave nothing standing but himself, as he was before.”
     
    Lemme tell ya, YT is truly deranged....

    It’s understandable why those who benefit from a particular standing would do anything to preserve it. The conscious seduction of power, of understanding the privileges from which one benefits and the life it affords, is, in part, about the necessity of control. I’d probably be upset and a little sad if I lost all of that, too.
     
    See, Whiteness is nothing but an unholy combination of power and privilege....Unlike BIPOCness...

    “No one there at the bar looked entirely comfortable, not the bartender, and not the men huddled in the only occupied booth … not any of these dark people bathed in the bar-colored light, trying to find their footing in a situation so familiar and yet so strange,” Oona observes. Or “maybe everyone looked the same as they always did,” she thought. It is only after “the whiskey settles into her belly” that she realizes that “the difference was gone.”
     
    How drunk do you have to be in order to not see race? Blackout drunk?

    Whiteness physically recedes but it never vanishes completely.
     
    Maybe we need some kind of Jean-Jacques Dessalines-style solution to the Whiteness problem....

    It has a psychological grip; lest we forget, identity is more than a badge of flesh.
     
    Whiteness is more than skin deep; it goes all the way to the soul...

    The newly “dark people” of Hamid’s epic appear to embrace different outlooks but, really, what has happened is more of a costume swap than an adjustment of the soul. The characters operate in a kind of cultural drag, entombed in an unrecognizable self, a sort of living elegy of their former whiteness. What was once marked as difference is not understood anew; instead, they continue to see through white eyes, in spite of their brown skin.
     
    Maybe if we removed the eyes from every YT...




    https://www.wired.com/story/mohsin-hamid-the-last-white-man/

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @SunBakedSuburb, @Ralph L

  57. @Curle
    @Buzz Mohawk

    “The US can’t do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.”

    Does Trump have anything Israel doesn’t have?

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Intelligent Dasein

    Does Trump have anything Israel doesn’t have?

    You’d have to ask Stormy Daniels.

  58. Matt Vespa:
    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2022/08/16/latest-development-about-ag-merrick-garland-shreds-the-fbis-narrative-on-trump-r-n2611810

    • Replies: @Inquiring Mind
    @MEH 0910

    And to think that an old man from Kentucky who not many people around here like stood between Mr. Garland and a seat on the Supreme Court?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  59. @Technite78
    @Anon

    Yes, that... and I still think they're convinced that they can use Trump as an issue to improve their chances during the midterm by encouraging more turnout on the left.

    The MSM and Democrats have a huge blind spot over this... they can't see how keeping Trump and Jan. 6 in the news can possibly hurt them, no matter how many lines are crossed.

    Replies: @Technite78

    Why bother commenting when your comment is stuck in moderation so long that by the time it’s visible, 20 or more later comments have been visible for hours?

    • Replies: @Technite78
    @Technite78

    Jeez, Steve's Filipino/Malaysian/Indonesian/Thai moderation slave must have escaped, or is recovering from Monkeypox...

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

  60. @Altai
    I keep saying it but during his presidency Trump was treated like any other leader targeted for regime change. That's why his hard line against Maduro always amused me. Best start sympathising with the Maduros of the world Donald, you're one of them now.

    They also pretend it's about anything other than the very popular policies of said leader that elections occasionally slip up on and allow the public to vote on and then replace said leader with somebody with all the (Alleged or real) faults except the popular policies that usually revolve around said country not being pushed around by the US or Israel or local oligarchs.

    What was simply unusual about it was that Trump was supporting policies in the national interest of the USA.

    In this process then the elites are revealed as deliberately anti-national. The tension between their desire to put the white working class in it's place with pro-parasitic individualistic economic policy and shipping industrial jobs overseas and their desire to still be able to exploit the US and it's military to enforce pro-Israel neocon policy is no clearer seen than with China. Their anti-social economic ideologies told them that shipping off industry to China was good because it hurt the poor in the US but it simultaneously built up the only entity capable of pushing the US off it's hegemonic perch.

    And now they still can't help their base instincts and have triggered a war in Ukraine and pushing Russia away from Western systems. But like Iran and North Korea before it, Russia has been forced by previous sanctions to build it's autarky up and has weathered them well. And now they've been banished from the West there is nowhere for them to go but into a deeper alliance with China. We're already seeing more cooperation between Russia, Iran, China and Syria. And so with it's actions in Ukraine making it look foolish because it hasn't hurt Russia enough Pelosi et al have been sent to stare down China to try and get some great power credibility back. But that backfired too with China casually going one step further to invasion of Taiwan and the US sitting back and watching. (Pelosi's plane even did a kowtow by going the long way around the South China Sea, implicitly validating their claims there with their new military bases)

    They're losing control and lashing out to anyone who notices how dangerous and thus how illegitimate they are. It's like with all regimes of lies and coercion. They keep the public inline with unpopular policies through propaganda ("Diversity is our strength!", "They're just trying to find a better life!", "Bro, companies exist to make profits bro! There's nothing wrong with they're doing!") and then one day the bank breaks the population becomes not just aware of their interests but that they're not alone in their thoughts. It always takes people like this by surprise. First slowly and then all at once.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb, @John Derbyshire

    “They’re losing control …”

    Wishful thinking. The raid was overwrought, but the managerial Obama clique can afford to be reckless: they control the domestic security services and appear to have the full cooperation of CIA and the Pentagon. We all know the role of the media. Look forward to weeks of strategic leaking from the Trump cache and the activation of astro-turf white nationalists just in time for the erection.

    • Agree: Alden
  61. @Reg Cæsar
    Whatever Trump's motive, a large part of the FBI's is Merrick Garland's desire for revenge.

    By the way, what's with the name Merrick? Does he have siblings named Wantagh and Syosset?

    "Garland" was once "Garfinkel". Apparently the top Democratic politician with the surname Simon (Bill Jr is Republican) is Cosette Simon, the Pete Buttigieg of Fort Wayne.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosette_Simon

    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.

    Replies: @bomag, @Pixo, @Veteran Aryan, @Alden, @Hibernian

    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.

    They will never defeat the duo of Al Franken and Jill Stein.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @Veteran Aryan

    https://twitter.com/alfranken/status/1558498745951698945

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy

  62. So the FBI “seized” some documents from Trump. What if Trump already scanned the hard copies and the scans of the documents exist on servers and thumb drives elsewhere?

  63. @syonredux
    What if the taint of Whiteness can never be removed?

    A Glimpse of a Future Without White People
    Mohsin Hamid’s The Last White Man is a book about race metamorphosis—and the seduction of power.

    WHITENESS IS A seduction.
     
    Stupid sexy Whiteness....

    Whiteness is also an illusion.
     
    .....unlike, say, Blackness...

    These are the twin motifs on which Pakistani writer Mohsin Hamid props up The Last White Man, his new novel about race metamorphosis and human morality. Anchored in the bare and elegiac prose Hamid has made his trademark style, the book springboards from a single unexplained incident. Anders, a white man, awakens one morning to a new reality: his skin has “turned a deep and undeniable brown.”
     
    But have his facial features and hair texture stayed the same? If Brad Pitt suddenly had James Brown's complexion....

    And for the benefit of the guys in the back row, "Anders" means "man." Get it? A novel with the title THE LAST WHITE MAN focuses on a character called "man"......Yeesh, that's the kinda thing that I expect in a community college creative writing class...

    The transformation, of which Anders’ is the first—but not the only, and certainly not the last—elicits worthy exploration. What if whiteness were suddenly gone? Would the social order of life come undone? Would anything change?
     
    The first question in my mind is: What are BIPOCs gonna do? I mean, we're talking about a Rachel Dolezal x 1,000,000,000- scale problem....I mean, if ya can't eyeball YT, how are ya gonna keep the anti-YT coalition together....

    The sequence of events that follows plays into an ancient fear, that of The Other. (One’s need to estrange, Toni Morrison has said, is “a desperate attempt to confirm one’s own self as normal.”) For Anders, confusion bubbles. Panic swells. Initially, he flirts with thoughts of violence after realizing the transformation is irreversible. “He wanted to kill the colored man who confronted him here in his home,” Hamid writes, “to extinguish the life animating this other’s body, to leave nothing standing but himself, as he was before.”
     
    Lemme tell ya, YT is truly deranged....

    It’s understandable why those who benefit from a particular standing would do anything to preserve it. The conscious seduction of power, of understanding the privileges from which one benefits and the life it affords, is, in part, about the necessity of control. I’d probably be upset and a little sad if I lost all of that, too.
     
    See, Whiteness is nothing but an unholy combination of power and privilege....Unlike BIPOCness...

    “No one there at the bar looked entirely comfortable, not the bartender, and not the men huddled in the only occupied booth … not any of these dark people bathed in the bar-colored light, trying to find their footing in a situation so familiar and yet so strange,” Oona observes. Or “maybe everyone looked the same as they always did,” she thought. It is only after “the whiskey settles into her belly” that she realizes that “the difference was gone.”
     
    How drunk do you have to be in order to not see race? Blackout drunk?

    Whiteness physically recedes but it never vanishes completely.
     
    Maybe we need some kind of Jean-Jacques Dessalines-style solution to the Whiteness problem....

    It has a psychological grip; lest we forget, identity is more than a badge of flesh.
     
    Whiteness is more than skin deep; it goes all the way to the soul...

    The newly “dark people” of Hamid’s epic appear to embrace different outlooks but, really, what has happened is more of a costume swap than an adjustment of the soul. The characters operate in a kind of cultural drag, entombed in an unrecognizable self, a sort of living elegy of their former whiteness. What was once marked as difference is not understood anew; instead, they continue to see through white eyes, in spite of their brown skin.
     
    Maybe if we removed the eyes from every YT...




    https://www.wired.com/story/mohsin-hamid-the-last-white-man/

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @SunBakedSuburb, @Ralph L

    “What if the taint of Whiteness can never be removed.”

    It seems that Mr. Hamid is dabbling in genetic memory which is read by me to be a form of scientific reincarnation. I was once King Arthur, Fu Manchu, and Jodie Foster so I totally buy into the concept.

  64. @Art Deco
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Great. Now dox everyone in the chain of command between their squad supervisor and Christopher Wray.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House. He is just waiting to reveal its contents when his lawsuit against Democrats goes to trial. But I say why wait? Justice must not be denied. Trump promised to slay the Deep State dragon. And obviously the lawsuit will be thrown out, and then Hypnotoad and others will make up some other excuse why Trump won’t show all the dirt he has.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Inquiring Mind
    @Corvinus

    Is that you, Liz?

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Art Deco:


    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House.
     
    Corvy, old pal, the Donald has many virtues, but being well-organized and planning carefully for the future are not among them.

    In all likelihood, someone (maybe Trump, maybe not) told some GSA flunky, "Pack up all that junk and ship it to Mar-a-Lago."

    Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.

    Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump's passports.

    The ruling class is not very smart.

    But their hoodlums have guns. Lots of guns.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Harry Baldwin, @James B. Shearer

  65. @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

    Your insights are most appreciated, and you are a voice of reason here.

    What matters in this case is not the putative documents, but the following:

    1) The very fact that law enforcement controlled by political actors raided the home of a political opponent.

    2) The warrant was signed by a judge who is and has been a clear, vocal, outspoken opponent of the political opponent who was raided. A judge is a member of the judiciary branch in a government in which powers are supposed to be separated.

    3) The raid was essentially condoned and carried out by people working for a president who ran against the former president and may have to run against him again.

    4) Presidents have full authority over all classified information and can de-classify it and presumably do whatever they want with it, even take it home if they so choose, if they make that decision while they are the president.

    5) A president is elected by The People to have full executive power and must by necessity be able to exercise that power without fear of reprisal by successors if he is to be able to carry out his duties and the will of The People who elected him.

    This raid is completely wrong and would be wrong even if President Trump had decided to take home the secret formula for Coca-Cola. (Well, maybe THEN it would be called for. Some things are sacred.)

    BTW, I have difficulty imagining that every document that matters in this case does not have one or more copies somewhere still safe, including electronic, virtual copies. It is actually quite quaint to think that going in and taking some boxes of paper will make a difference, but what do I know?

    And again, it’s not the documents that matter. This is another in the long line of phony moves that the powers that be have made against Trump since even while he was running the first time. This is an attempt, one way or another, to hobble him, so slander him, to tie him up so he cannot run or win or harm them.

    Also, the hypothesis is reasonable that this is really about documentation that proves the ratfucking that the FBI, CIA, powers that be, Clinton campaign, Obama administration, et. al. were doing. In fact, this raid is probably just a continuation of what the documents prove.

    And I don’t even like Trump, though I voted for him. What other choice was there? What are our choices now, and do they even matter anymore? Did they ever really?

    • Replies: @Luke Lea
    @Buzz Mohawk

    About likely copies of those documents that were seized, where is WikiLeaks now when we need it?

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Buzz Mohawk wrote to me:


    And again, it’s not the documents that matter. This is another in the long line of phony moves that the powers that be have made against Trump since even while he was running the first time. This is an attempt, one way or another, to hobble him, so slander him, to tie him up so he cannot run or win or harm them.
     
    Yeah, the ruling class hates Trump so much that they are stressing the Constitutional order beyond its limits.

    As I told Alden, I've been thinking recently about the last century of the Roman Republic.

    All pretty fascinating for those of us who are students of history.

    Not so great for those of us who would like to preserve what is left of the American Republic.
  66. @Muggles
    There seems a suspicious absence of "leaks" (i.e. FBI/DOJ selective passing to allied "journalists") of any actual details or facts of supposed classified info grabbed from Melania's closet.

    Some early blab about "nuclear secrets" which were unsourced and lacking specificity. "Trust Us" leaks.

    Of course our sacred Secret Police can dole these details out at their leisure. But the silence is now deafening.

    The longer they wait the more guilty Garland & Goons appear to be.

    I am old enough to recall when "left liberals" actually questioned the FBI and other federal security organs. Something about "civil liberties" and all.

    I guess they all died out a decade or more ago. Comrade B. Sanders (D-Vermont Peoples Republic) has now regained complete trust in federal cops. The Comrades always did like the secret police in their hearts...

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @Mr. Anon

    I am old enough to recall when “left liberals” actually questioned the FBI and other federal security organs. Something about “civil liberties” and all.

    I remember that too. Many liberals used to mistrust the FBI, and the CIA, and the Pentagon, and big chemical companies (like Pfeizer). Now they’re foursquare behind them. They’re all workin’ for the Man.

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Mr. Anon

    https://i.ibb.co/jM4vXm3/b0966b181626d53ffc976bf23df7693e798b403e-14.jpg


    https://i.ibb.co/VjVQz1N/f76570071418e9807f6a68d4061080100f8fc185-14.jpg

  67. @Dave Pinsen
    I've long thought that instead of having a Presidential library, Trump should just take his memorabilia from the White House and put it up on the walls of the Trump Grill.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    No President should hava a Presidential library. It’s the modern equivalent of the Roman Senate declaring a former emperor to be a God and having temples consecrated to him. The deification of public officials is unseemly for a Republic of free men (which of course we aren’t, but were supposed to be).

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Mr. Anon

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven't looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president's archives in the library of a state college?

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @Reg Cæsar, @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @ScarletNumber, @Erroneus

    , @Intelligent Dasein
    @Mr. Anon


    No President should have a Presidential library. It’s the modern equivalent of the Roman Senate declaring a former emperor to be a God and having temples consecrated to him.
     
    I disagree. I rather like the idea of keeping a warts-and-all record of the president's activities in office and making it available o the public. It helps to bring scholarship to bear on his life and times, which helps to clarify the judgment of history, and this in turn is essential for maintaining liberty over the long haul. Like road signs and weights & measures, presidential libraries are one few instances of the government using our tax money to actually benefit us. We would be poorer without them.
    , @Art Deco
    @Mr. Anon

    Agreed. Build a modular records center in Kansas City to house the archival material of interest to historians and deed the physical plant and the gew gaws over to the county governments of the places they currently sit and let them decide what to do with them. A president leaves office, you add another module.

    While we're at it, we might recall that the Nixons gave up their security detail in 1986 and Mrs. Kennedy and her children had after 1975 no more protection than that offered by the doormen at their building. So why do we have Secret Service agents shlepping around after anyone who left office prior to 2010?

    We can add a law prohibiting corporations from concluding agreements with parties domiciled in other states or domiciled abroad which provide for the payment of honoraria if the honorarium in question exceeds x% of nominal personal income per capita. Cut the amount trade associations are paying George W. Bush by about 80% and the amount colleges and universities are paying Barack Obama by about 90%.

  68. @Jackpot
    This appears to be hoax # 13 against Trump according to Scott Adams. It's following the same pattern as the other hoaxes so this will amount to nothing except as another smear to discredit him.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process. Since when does Trump adhere to the law on a regular basis? That’s why Sailer is playing coy here. He has been following the story and Trump for that matter as a supposed law and order/rule of law type of guy.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Alden
    @Corvinus

    No it doesn’t.

    According to United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 and Obama’s EO 13526 and common law preceding and custom going back to George Washington; Presidents retain the power to classify de classify and re classify documents and information and take with them whatever documents they choose when they leave office.

    Read the statutes, precedents laws and EOs. Presidents aren’t GS 5 federal employees or military Lieutenants. Presidents have the power to do anything they choose with documents at all levels of classification. And keep them when they leave office. Trump’s Palm Beach storage room guarded by secret service 24/7 Obama’s warehouse in Illinois wherever the rest of the presidents keep documents. They gots da powah

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Jackpot:


    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process.
     
    Corvy, read this analysis in Politico -- and keep in mind that Politico is generally left-wing and hostile to Trump.

    As the article points out, numerous times Presidents have declassified info very, very informally, indeed, on the fly.

    What you call "the existing process" is only the "existing" process up to the moment some President chooses not to follow it. Then, it is the "past process."

    The current common process is just based on an Executive Order from Obama, and that EO is not binding on Obama's successors as President: later Presidents can do whatever they want.

    To be sure, Congress could pass a law trying to restrain the President.

    But, as the article suggests, that might well be unconstitutional: the Constitution makes the President "Commander-in-Chief," and, prima facie, that gives him control of classification relating to the national defense, regardless of what Congress might say.

    Don't get me wrong: I think Julie Kelly is probably right that the ruling elite will indict Trump, convict him, and send him to prison, simply because you and your friends in the parasitic overclass are no longer constrained by the rule of law.

    But that will lead to a Constitutional crisis.

    And perhaps civil war.

    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.

    Be careful what you wish for, Corvy!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @ic1000, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Prester John

  69. @Corvinus
    @Art Deco

    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House. He is just waiting to reveal its contents when his lawsuit against Democrats goes to trial. But I say why wait? Justice must not be denied. Trump promised to slay the Deep State dragon. And obviously the lawsuit will be thrown out, and then Hypnotoad and others will make up some other excuse why Trump won’t show all the dirt he has.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @PhysicistDave

    Is that you, Liz?

  70. @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

    But the president of the United States can classify de classify and re classify any and all documents both while he is president and for the rest of his life. United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 and Obama’s December 29 2009 Executive Order 13526. Which iguves presidents and EX presidents the power to classify any and all documents however they wish.

    Neither the Civil Code nor executive orders give the president’s powers to give information to enemies and rivals of course. But that has nothing to do with the right to classify de classify and re classify information . And keep any and all documents he wishes after he leaves office.

    Obama’s got 33 million documents in a warehouse in the Chicago suburb Hoffman Estates. His EO 13526 is the longest executive order I’ve ever read. It’s almost an entire new law.

    And presidents have always had the right and power to take whatever documents they wish out of the White House when their terms finish.

    The classification and security rules that apply to government workers contractors university researchers etc don’t apply to Presidents. That’s the law. Both statutory and common law of precedent going back to George Washington.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @Alden

    Alden wrote to me:


    But the president of the United States can classify de classify and re classify any and all documents both while he is president and for the rest of his life.
     
    I'm not sure former Presidents can, but a President certainly can while he is in office.

    Also, the media are claiming Trump had to follow certain procedures laid out in Obama's Executive Order. But of course that Executive Order only apples to people below the President: one President's Executive Orders do not bind a later President.

    Alden also wrote:

    And presidents have always had the right and power to take whatever documents they wish out of the White House when their terms finish.
     
    Within very broad (and very hazy) limits, yes.

    But the problem is that the law is sufficiently vague that I think they can get a grand-jury indictment -- as the old saying goes, a skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

    And then the case is tried in DC: DC is so anti-Trump, that I'm guessing they will convict, given the vagueness of the laws.

    And then you have a Constitutional crisis.

    There is ample precedent that someone can run for President even from behind bars (e.g., Eugene Debs).

    And if the Republicans in the House have the guts (which I doubt) they could simply refuse to fund the DoJ at all in retaliation -- Biden cannot veto that: just do not appropriate the funds.

    It can become very messy -- I am not sure the elite has thought this through.

    I've been thinking a lot recently about the Gracchi brothers...

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @Dr. DoomNGloom

  71. • Replies: @jsm
    @J1234

    You're welcome.

    , @epebble
    @J1234

    World on the Move...

    Far-right Italian leader Meloni rides popular wave in polls
    https://apnews.com/article/religion-rome-980572acc21fe377ede26eea46be5208

    Replies: @CCG

  72. @MEH 0910
    Matt Vespa:
    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2022/08/16/latest-development-about-ag-merrick-garland-shreds-the-fbis-narrative-on-trump-r-n2611810
    https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1559631236326465537

    https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1559343945582317571

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind

    And to think that an old man from Kentucky who not many people around here like stood between Mr. Garland and a seat on the Supreme Court?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Inquiring Mind


    And to think that an old man from Kentucky who not many people around here like stood between Mr. Garland and a seat on the Supreme Court?
     
    From time to time, Cocaine catches the train.


    https://i0.wp.com/publicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Cocaine-Mitch-photo-002_edited.jpg

  73. @Technite78
    @Technite78



    Why bother commenting when your comment is stuck in moderation so long that by the time it's visible, 20 or more later comments have been visible for hours?

    Replies: @Technite78

    Jeez, Steve’s Filipino/Malaysian/Indonesian/Thai moderation slave must have escaped, or is recovering from Monkeypox…

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @Technite78

    I think it's the dog. Chained to his laptop 23 hours a day.

  74. Under no circumstances may someone hold classified documents outside of an appropriate facility. Trump was holding such documents, refused to return them, hence the FBI action. Not a witch hunt, not weaponization of the DOJ, but the law being enforced.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Anon

    You are wrong. You are just speculating.

    In June if this year the FBI inspected the room in Maralago in which the records were kept. The FBI found that the documents were properly stored and secured by the on site secret service. The FBI did recommend a different lock on the door of the room. The secret service guards installed the new lock.

    As per United States Civil Code Title 18 and the December 29 2009 EO 13526 the president can take any and all documents with him when he leaves the White House in accordance with precedent and custom since George Washington,

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Ben tillman
    @Anon

    If he was holding them, they weren’t classified, ipso facto.

  75. London.

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Mr. Obese is really "struggling to understand" because he's not able to think straight about this thing called open borders.

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Oxford Street is like so many other British high streets - a shadow of its former self, with empty retail space occupied by (tax) dodgy stores run by (tax) dodgy people.

    In fact it's a bit of a metaphor for the whole UK.

    So the people being looted in the candy shops are themselves looters.

    https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2022/07/american-candy-shop-oxford-street/


    For a while now, visitors to Oxford Street have been asking the same question: What is it with all these American candy stores?

    From American Candy World to American Candy Land to Candy Surprise, the sight of Willy Wonka chocolate bars and Cheetos is now inescapable on the world’s most famous shopping street.

    And it’s making the UK’s premier shopping street look down at heel.

    M&S CEO Stuart Machin recently warned that Oxford Street risks becoming a “dinosaur district destined for extinction” as it’s on “its knees” and falling prey to a “growing proliferation of tacky candy stores”.

    Westminster City Council leader and councillor Adam Hug admits that he doesn’t know where all the sweet shops came from, but after an investigation last month that took in 30 Oxford Street candy and souvenir stores – as the two are often linked – found that business rates evasion was rife.

    In fact, it found that £7.9 million was owed in business rates. Westminister is the UK’s largest collector of business rates with the vast majority of funds redistributed to other local authorities around the country, therefore that lost income impacts all taxpayers.

    Westminister Council officers has also seized around £575,000 worth of counterfeit and illegal goods from American candy and souvenir stores. This includes counterfeit Wonka chocolate bars, vapes that contained excessive levels of nicotine and even fake Rolex watches.

    According to Westminster City Council, these candy shops are far from regular and legitimate businesses with very few serving sufficient customers to be commercially viable.

    Customers can often find themselves ripped off in such stores too. When Retail Gazette visited an American candy store on Oxford Street, it was selling overpriced snacks and sweets including a £4.99 pack of M&M’s and a pack of £9.99 crisps.

    Another candy shop displayed no prices. This is a common practice in such stores, which can leave shoppers facing huge bills at the till.

    Westminster Council believes that these properties are used to avoid business rate bills and possibly commit other offences.

    It explains that landlords are desperately seeking to rent out empty stores to avoid personal liability for business rates.

    Many property owners do not rent their premises directly to these candy stores. Landlords let their stores to an intermediary company or person, who in turn lets to the candy stores, usually on licences, for minimal rents.

    The tenants occupying on licences can avoid business rates by providing false occupation details or shell company names that quickly dissolve when the council tries to recover debt.

    Hug says: “The problem is that owners of buildings are turning a blind eye to those who sublet them as it means they are not liable for business rates. That’s why we have a rash of US candy stores in prestige locations.”

    “The people selling overpriced and often out-of-date sweets are cheating the UK taxpayer and very often swindling their customers into the bargain.”
     

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @J.Ross, @Ralph L

  76. @Corvinus
    @Jackpot

    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process. Since when does Trump adhere to the law on a regular basis? That’s why Sailer is playing coy here. He has been following the story and Trump for that matter as a supposed law and order/rule of law type of guy.

    Replies: @Alden, @PhysicistDave

    No it doesn’t.

    According to United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 and Obama’s EO 13526 and common law preceding and custom going back to George Washington; Presidents retain the power to classify de classify and re classify documents and information and take with them whatever documents they choose when they leave office.

    Read the statutes, precedents laws and EOs. Presidents aren’t GS 5 federal employees or military Lieutenants. Presidents have the power to do anything they choose with documents at all levels of classification. And keep them when they leave office. Trump’s Palm Beach storage room guarded by secret service 24/7 Obama’s warehouse in Illinois wherever the rest of the presidents keep documents. They gots da powah

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Alden

    According to a recent article by Bloomberg:

    There are laws governing how presidents are supposed to handle documents that, at least theoretically, can trigger prosecutions for failure to comply, chief among them the Presidential Records Act. But as with so much related to Trump’s time in office, the search appears to have landed investigators in uncharted territory.  

    It’s a law enacted by Congress in 1978 as one of several post-Watergate measures aimed at combating potential corruption in the White House. President Richard Nixon had challenged the legality of a predecessor to the PRA, which sought to prevent him from destroying any of 42 million page of documents and 880 tape recordings from his time in office, but the US Supreme Court said Congress had the authority to regulate presidential documents both for posterity and to ensure their availability for criminal prosecutions.

    Replies: @Alden

  77. @Buzz Mohawk
    @PhysicistDave

    Your insights are most appreciated, and you are a voice of reason here.

    What matters in this case is not the putative documents, but the following:

    1) The very fact that law enforcement controlled by political actors raided the home of a political opponent.

    2) The warrant was signed by a judge who is and has been a clear, vocal, outspoken opponent of the political opponent who was raided. A judge is a member of the judiciary branch in a government in which powers are supposed to be separated.

    3) The raid was essentially condoned and carried out by people working for a president who ran against the former president and may have to run against him again.

    4) Presidents have full authority over all classified information and can de-classify it and presumably do whatever they want with it, even take it home if they so choose, if they make that decision while they are the president.

    5) A president is elected by The People to have full executive power and must by necessity be able to exercise that power without fear of reprisal by successors if he is to be able to carry out his duties and the will of The People who elected him.

    This raid is completely wrong and would be wrong even if President Trump had decided to take home the secret formula for Coca-Cola. (Well, maybe THEN it would be called for. Some things are sacred.)

    BTW, I have difficulty imagining that every document that matters in this case does not have one or more copies somewhere still safe, including electronic, virtual copies. It is actually quite quaint to think that going in and taking some boxes of paper will make a difference, but what do I know?

    And again, it's not the documents that matter. This is another in the long line of phony moves that the powers that be have made against Trump since even while he was running the first time. This is an attempt, one way or another, to hobble him, so slander him, to tie him up so he cannot run or win or harm them.

    Also, the hypothesis is reasonable that this is really about documentation that proves the ratfucking that the FBI, CIA, powers that be, Clinton campaign, Obama administration, et. al. were doing. In fact, this raid is probably just a continuation of what the documents prove.

    And I don't even like Trump, though I voted for him. What other choice was there? What are our choices now, and do they even matter anymore? Did they ever really?

    Replies: @Luke Lea, @PhysicistDave

    About likely copies of those documents that were seized, where is WikiLeaks now when we need it?

  78. Is the Mar-A-Lago Whoop-Tee-Doo About … Memorabilia?

    A core it is about Trump.

    Trump running as soft-kinda-sorta-nationalist who did not buy the Washington-WallStreet consensus and wasn’t out to screw ordinary core Americans … and then won!

    That just enraged every minoritarian, every good-thinker and the deep state “swamp” jealous of its imperial privileges. We all saw it.

    They thought they had already basically “put a fork” in us boring flyover white guys and we starting to do their Great Replacement victory dances. And then Trump. He can never be forgiven. That he exists and has not been drawn and quartered is an afront. Dissent simply drives these people nuts.

    Honestly it is either separation or it’s us or them.

  79. If, as the administration’s spokesmoron claims, the president was not informed in advance of the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, shouldn’t Biden fire Merrick Garland? It’s unconscionable that an attorney general would sign off on such an unprecedented and divisive act without getting the Commander-in-Chief ‘s consent. C’mon, Joe–time to fire Merrick Garland! No joke!

    (I’ll entertain the possibility that Joe is lying. He has been known to do that.)

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    @Harry Baldwin

    Biden is in Stage 3 - 4 dementia. He's not even choosing his own clothes.

  80. @peterike
    Derek Thompson (never heard of him) writes for The Atlantic, so I'm 99.9% sure he's a complete brain-dead idiot. He then quotes Julitte Kayem, who I am 100% sure is a brain-dead idiot. So two idiots combine for a totally stupid idea, so stupid it's not even wrong.

    The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    Wut? That literally means nothing at all.

    The Trump raid, signed off by an uber-compromised judge, was an exercise in political intimidation, full stop. Oh and hey, guess what? Trump has an ongoing lawsuit against Hillary Clinton. Imagine! Hmmm, Trump said he declassified Russiagate records and other items potentially harmful to Ms. Clinton. Woops, now the FBI has gathered them up! How convenient!

    It's not that difficult Steve. The FBI is like the Stasi. They do whatever they want, to whoever they want, for political reasons. Quaint notions like "the law" no longer mean a thing in post-Obama America. See how he "fundamentally changed" it?

    More about this exercise in sordid banana republic politics here.

    https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/a-different-sort-of-warrant/

    Replies: @Alden, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John, @Anonymous, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    Steve lives in a different time. Nice guy, very good on golf architecture. Otherwise, well …

  81. @Harry Baldwin
    If, as the administration's spokesmoron claims, the president was not informed in advance of the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, shouldn't Biden fire Merrick Garland? It's unconscionable that an attorney general would sign off on such an unprecedented and divisive act without getting the Commander-in-Chief 's consent. C'mon, Joe--time to fire Merrick Garland! No joke!

    (I'll entertain the possibility that Joe is lying. He has been known to do that.)

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic

    Biden is in Stage 3 – 4 dementia. He’s not even choosing his own clothes.

  82. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    Obviously facts aren't really clear, but what I've pasted together from various sources (take with grain of salt) is that before leaving office, Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, and those include documents regarding Hillary's private server investigation and Russiagate. Right before Biden's inauguration, (I mean the day before), the Archivist sent back an email stating that Archivist's office would have to conduct some kind of review of the documents (essentially refusing the order to declassify). John Solomon reported on that:

    https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/mystery-solved-doj-secretly-thwarted-release-russia

    It looks like the Deep State is taking the Archivist's side of this dispute that Trump's declassification order was missing a jot or a tittle which I suppose in this theory works like having your fingers crossed behind your back when a President issues a declassification order. The Archivist pretends to obey the declassification order for a few weeks and then yells "SIKE!" the day before a new President is inaugurated and then it becomes a crime to possess the almost declassified documents at your very very nice home (the best). It's not horseshoes or hand grenades - there's no close enough!

    There's the Ace of Spades blog run down (where I got the above link):

    https://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=400504

    Replies: @Random Anonymous, @James B. Shearer

    “… Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, ..”

    This is just more Trump BS. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why. Then send a written order to the relevant departments and make this order public. Then make the documents public. But then you would be accountable for what you had done and Trump doesn’t like being accountable for anything.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @James B. Shearer


    “… Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, ..”

    This is just more Trump BS. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why. Then send a written order to the relevant departments and make this order public. Then make the documents public. But then you would be accountable for what you had done and Trump doesn’t like being accountable for anything.

     


     
    Indeed. If there's anyone who has maintained a stealthy public profile and entirely escaped scrutiny for his actions, it's Trump.
    , @peterike
    @James B. Shearer


    If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why.
     
    Oh a press conference. Or maybe something like Tweet about what you did to your tens of millions of followers, which is precisely what Trump did.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    , @Curle
    @James B. Shearer

    “. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. ”

    I’m sure the legal standard will work just fine. Happen to know what that is?

  83. @J1234
    OT: Cheney's out

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/rep-liz-cheney-loses-primary-wyoming-trump-backed-challenger-rcna43379?icid=election_results

    Replies: @jsm, @epebble

    You’re welcome.

  84. @Alden
    @Corvinus

    No it doesn’t.

    According to United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 and Obama’s EO 13526 and common law preceding and custom going back to George Washington; Presidents retain the power to classify de classify and re classify documents and information and take with them whatever documents they choose when they leave office.

    Read the statutes, precedents laws and EOs. Presidents aren’t GS 5 federal employees or military Lieutenants. Presidents have the power to do anything they choose with documents at all levels of classification. And keep them when they leave office. Trump’s Palm Beach storage room guarded by secret service 24/7 Obama’s warehouse in Illinois wherever the rest of the presidents keep documents. They gots da powah

    Replies: @Corvinus

    According to a recent article by Bloomberg:

    There are laws governing how presidents are supposed to handle documents that, at least theoretically, can trigger prosecutions for failure to comply, chief among them the Presidential Records Act. But as with so much related to Trump’s time in office, the search appears to have landed investigators in uncharted territory.  

    It’s a law enacted by Congress in 1978 as one of several post-Watergate measures aimed at combating potential corruption in the White House. President Richard Nixon had challenged the legality of a predecessor to the PRA, which sought to prevent him from destroying any of 42 million page of documents and 880 tape recordings from his time in office, but the US Supreme Court said Congress had the authority to regulate presidential documents both for posterity and to ensure their availability for criminal prosecutions.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Alden
    @Corvinus

    You’re absolutely wrong as usual And Obama’s 2009 EO 13526 supersedes the Nixon law enacted in 1978.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  85. @Veteran Aryan
    @Reg Cæsar


    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.
     
    They will never defeat the duo of Al Franken and Jill Stein.

    Replies: @MEH 0910

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    @MEH 0910

    Obviously this is not "The Al Franken Decade."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyoaOZW7rTo

  86. @Mr. Anon
    @Dave Pinsen

    No President should hava a Presidential library. It's the modern equivalent of the Roman Senate declaring a former emperor to be a God and having temples consecrated to him. The deification of public officials is unseemly for a Republic of free men (which of course we aren't, but were supposed to be).

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Intelligent Dasein, @Art Deco

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven’t looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president’s archives in the library of a state college?

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    @Harry Baldwin

    I imagine they function similar to foundations and other non-profits. Their main function is to employ family members and friends of family members trying to avoid real jobs.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Harry Baldwin


    Do presidential libraries become major attractions?
     
    A retired teacher and his wife here went on a trip to Arkansas and Texas to visit several presidential libraries, 700 to 1,100 miles away. I'm as bookish and nerdy as anyone, but that struck me as the weirdest vacation ever.

    Replies: @RAZ

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Harry Baldwin

    Presidential libraries have gotten bigger and bigger as recent generations of presidents have passed -- to the point that now they are massive ego mausoleums. Like the ribbons and medals on our military leaders, they have become more fantastic as the men have gotten smaller.

    , @J.Ross
    @Harry Baldwin

    A presidential library gets special legal privileges others can or have specified; also, in the case of Nixon's, it really becomes a symposium/club for party conservatives.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @ScarletNumber
    @Harry Baldwin


    Why not just house the president’s archives in the library of a state college?
     
    If it makes you feel better, LBJ and Bush 41 do exactly that, and JFK is right next to UMass-Boston
    , @Erroneus
    @Harry Baldwin

    I've been to the Reagan Library several times.

    Once for an Ann Coulter speech/book signing, and once for a display of post-Vesuvius artifacts from Pompeii.

    Very cool destination.

  87. @Harry Baldwin
    @Mr. Anon

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven't looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president's archives in the library of a state college?

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @Reg Cæsar, @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @ScarletNumber, @Erroneus

    I imagine they function similar to foundations and other non-profits. Their main function is to employ family members and friends of family members trying to avoid real jobs.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @The Anti-Gnostic


    @Harry Baldwin

    I imagine they function similar to foundations and other non-profits. Their main function is to employ family members and friends of family members trying to avoid real jobs.
     

    Exactly - they are little graft factories. And in Bill Clinton's case it serves as a f$#kpad*.

    *Clinton actually wanted to have a rooftop swimming pool built into his Presidential library:

    https://nypost.com/2016/10/02/inside-the-penthouse-shenanigans-at-bill-clintons-presidential-library/

  88. @J1234
    OT: Cheney's out

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/rep-liz-cheney-loses-primary-wyoming-trump-backed-challenger-rcna43379?icid=election_results

    Replies: @jsm, @epebble

    World on the Move…

    Far-right Italian leader Meloni rides popular wave in polls
    https://apnews.com/article/religion-rome-980572acc21fe377ede26eea46be5208

    • Replies: @CCG
    @epebble

    Another "Marine Le Pen" type. If her party really wants to win in Italy, they've to field a patriarchal Catholic man and stop supplication to all foreign countries (including Israel). Especially this:
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2018-12-11/ty-article/.premium/italys-salvini-faces-backlash-at-home-for-slamming-hezbollah-in-israel-visit/

    Also, Meloni's and Salvini's fake Catholicism is nauseating. Meloni hasn't married her live-in boyfriend in spite of having his child years ago, Salvini's personal life is a complete circus (not sure if he's really a Catholic given his easy divorce, illegitimate daughter with a mistress, etc.).

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @epebble

  89. @Inquiring Mind
    @Muggles

    NPR reported that the documents included nuclear secrets.

    That seals it. It has to be true!

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    NPR reported that the documents included nuclear secrets.

    That seals it. It has to be true!

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  90. @Chrisnonymous
    @Hypnotoad666

    I would favor this interpretation, except that it is difficult not to see the raid in the context of the J6 committee's political failure. One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again. The J6 route required political traction, which they did not get from their hearings. The DOJ route was a backup plan. This seems to be the interpretation Trump is pushing, calling the raid another form of election fraud.

    The DOJ's refusal of a Special Master is consistent with both your interpretation (they don't want anyone neutral looking at the contents of incriminating documents) or the other (they don't want to risk the possibility of a Special Master excepting the documents they want to use for their indictment).

    Replies: @Pixo

    “ One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again.”

    That’d be great if it happened. Trump is really old and partly damaged goods at this point. I’m ready for DeSantis, who I think will also be more effective in office.

    Trump circa 2016 unfortunately is gone, and will be even goner with another two years of aging.

    If we have a two demented geezer repeat race in 2024, Biden will likely win again given he has another 4 years of demographic browning to help him.

    The problem for DeSantis is he probably cannot beat Trump in a primary, and even if he pulled off a narrow win, Trump would be a sore loser and tank him in the general election.


    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    @Pixo


    Without makeup, Donald Trump blah blah blah
     
    Hilarious snark. Now let’s talk about Nancy Pelosi’s neck:

    https://i.ibb.co/xsYx0H2/FBA843-F6-A360-4-CB7-A74-A-95-C0-EC1-C9-D45.jpg

    No wonder she’s so fond of scarves.

    But, yeah, Trump isn’t getting any younger.

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Pixo

    He does look his age in these pictures and rather portly. I'd been hearing that he 'd lost weight since leaving office but it doesn't appear to be so.

    , @Chrisnonymous
    @Pixo

    I think those photos may have been altered, like with punched contrast. Look at the other colors. The red is too dark for the bright white of the lettering and t-shirts.

    Anyway, I am not a die-hard Trump fan. My ideal thing would be Trump-deSantis ticket running against a Harris-Warren ticket. Then they could article 25 Trump after he wins and deSantis would actually govern. Make Tulsi Gabbard his VP.

    Unfortunately, it's all fantasy. Also, I'm not sure deSantis is a dissident the way Trump is. He seems very happy to court the powers that be in the GOPe. Trump bucks make Trump independence.

    Replies: @Pixo

    , @JohnnyWalker123
    @Pixo

    Tucker Carlson 2024.

    , @Midnights
    @Pixo

    I've seen younger looking faces on money.

  91. @Harry Baldwin
    @Mr. Anon

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven't looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president's archives in the library of a state college?

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @Reg Cæsar, @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @ScarletNumber, @Erroneus

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions?

    A retired teacher and his wife here went on a trip to Arkansas and Texas to visit several presidential libraries, 700 to 1,100 miles away. I’m as bookish and nerdy as anyone, but that struck me as the weirdest vacation ever.

    • Replies: @RAZ
    @Reg Cæsar

    I wouldn't plan a trip around them but if you're into history and having just gone to Nixon's and having been to JFK's, I think they are worth a visits if you are near them.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  92. @Inquiring Mind
    @MEH 0910

    And to think that an old man from Kentucky who not many people around here like stood between Mr. Garland and a seat on the Supreme Court?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    And to think that an old man from Kentucky who not many people around here like stood between Mr. Garland and a seat on the Supreme Court?

    From time to time, Cocaine catches the train.

  93. @epebble
    @PhysicistDave

    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI. They prosecuted (and jailed for 9 months) a physicist who forgot to return his old hard drives that had computer simulation data of his own work after upgrading his computer. He had kept them under lock and key in a steel storage cabinet in Los Alamos National Laboratory.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @HallParvey

    epebble wrote to me:

    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI.

    Yeah, although I would be very, very surprised if Trump did anything even that bad.

    It looks as if Trump did the same sort of thing that Obama and other Presidents did, which creates issues that are normally settled by amicable discussions with the Archives.

    Part of the problem is that we have so many laws nowadays, many of which are very broad and very vague, that we have to count on the authorities being “reasonable” as to how they enforce those laws.

    And therefore if the authorities hate your guts and decide not to be “reasonable,” you are totally screwed, even if you behaved in a way that everyone else behaves.

    It’s not the rule of law.

  94. Right on time, FBI damage control (or positive publicity, or whatever you want to call it):

    FBI rescues more than 200 trafficking victims, including 84 children, in “Operation Cross Country

    Aww, the FBI is just a bunch of good guys saving kids. Funny how all of a sudden they saved them just now. Did they find any of them in Trump’s closet?

    (Sorry, but you can’t live in this country anymore without becoming an absolute cynic.)

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Buzz Mohawk

    One wouldn't be surprised if the FBI was somehow instigating and facilitating the trafficking themselves. Setting it up, so the speak, the way they set up domestic "terrorists." Anything is plausible after all the other crap they've pulled.

    Have Americans lost faith in their institutions? You're damn right we have.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @Ben tillman
    @Buzz Mohawk

    It’s fitting that the FBI responded to criticism of its lawlessness by lawlessly imprisoning Adam Bies for a crime the arrest warrant affidavit conclusively proves he did not commit.

  95. @Ron Mexico
    We should ask Pete Rose for his take on all of this kerfuffle.

    Replies: @Cutter

    Didn’t Rose also work with the World Wrestling Federation at some point?

    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    @Cutter

    Yes. Rose has also made a post-MLB living off of memorabilia sales.
    https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/02/08/politics/donald-trump-pete-rose-hall-of-fame-trnd/index.html

  96. @Buzz Mohawk
    Right on time, FBI damage control (or positive publicity, or whatever you want to call it):

    FBI rescues more than 200 trafficking victims, including 84 children, in "Operation Cross Country

    Aww, the FBI is just a bunch of good guys saving kids. Funny how all of a sudden they saved them just now. Did they find any of them in Trump's closet?

    (Sorry, but you can't live in this country anymore without becoming an absolute cynic.)

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ben tillman

    One wouldn’t be surprised if the FBI was somehow instigating and facilitating the trafficking themselves. Setting it up, so the speak, the way they set up domestic “terrorists.” Anything is plausible after all the other crap they’ve pulled.

    Have Americans lost faith in their institutions? You’re damn right we have.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Have Americans lost faith in their institutions? You’re damn right we have.
     
    I haven't lost faith in the FBI. I never had any. They were rotten almost right from the start - Gay Edgar Hoover ran the FBI as his own private Gestapo for nearly a half a century. They routinely screw up criminal investigations and they serve as hired muscle for the Government, covering up their crimes and scandals. In trustworthiness, I rank the FBI a couple of rungs below the Mexican Highway Patrol.
  97. @Alden
    @PhysicistDave

    But the president of the United States can classify de classify and re classify any and all documents both while he is president and for the rest of his life. United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 and Obama’s December 29 2009 Executive Order 13526. Which iguves presidents and EX presidents the power to classify any and all documents however they wish.

    Neither the Civil Code nor executive orders give the president’s powers to give information to enemies and rivals of course. But that has nothing to do with the right to classify de classify and re classify information . And keep any and all documents he wishes after he leaves office.

    Obama's got 33 million documents in a warehouse in the Chicago suburb Hoffman Estates. His EO 13526 is the longest executive order I’ve ever read. It’s almost an entire new law.

    And presidents have always had the right and power to take whatever documents they wish out of the White House when their terms finish.

    The classification and security rules that apply to government workers contractors university researchers etc don’t apply to Presidents. That’s the law. Both statutory and common law of precedent going back to George Washington.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    Alden wrote to me:

    But the president of the United States can classify de classify and re classify any and all documents both while he is president and for the rest of his life.

    I’m not sure former Presidents can, but a President certainly can while he is in office.

    Also, the media are claiming Trump had to follow certain procedures laid out in Obama’s Executive Order. But of course that Executive Order only apples to people below the President: one President’s Executive Orders do not bind a later President.

    Alden also wrote:

    And presidents have always had the right and power to take whatever documents they wish out of the White House when their terms finish.

    Within very broad (and very hazy) limits, yes.

    But the problem is that the law is sufficiently vague that I think they can get a grand-jury indictment — as the old saying goes, a skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

    And then the case is tried in DC: DC is so anti-Trump, that I’m guessing they will convict, given the vagueness of the laws.

    And then you have a Constitutional crisis.

    There is ample precedent that someone can run for President even from behind bars (e.g., Eugene Debs).

    And if the Republicans in the House have the guts (which I doubt) they could simply refuse to fund the DoJ at all in retaliation — Biden cannot veto that: just do not appropriate the funds.

    It can become very messy — I am not sure the elite has thought this through.

    I’ve been thinking a lot recently about the Gracchi brothers…

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    @PhysicistDave

    At least the Optimates can't produce a Sulla...

    , @Dr. DoomNGloom
    @PhysicistDave

    This.


    But the problem is that the law is sufficiently vague that I think they can get a grand-jury indictment — as the old saying goes, a skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.
     
    The rest of the analysis, BTW, is reasonable and sound. Only someone who has worked in a classified environment is aware of both the explicit rules and the tacit behavior norms. For example, much of the technical TS-SCI information can be found in public sources. TS-SCI may even be linked (Wiki-leaks), It is still classified. The law is "don't look at it", and the behavioral norm is don't verify anything, so don't talk about it. Yes, one could lose clearance for browsing Wiki-leaks.

    More on the legal technical.
    Where the law isn't vague, the classification is. The label on a document or box must be at the highest level of any of the contents. That label also applies to anything taken from that document. Even if the sensitive information is removed, an authorized classifier is required to change the label or to extract anything from that document at a lower classification.

    This is all perfectly reasonable, the declassification should not be done casually by just anyone (often without deep knowledge of why this is classified). However, it allows for technical violations subject to prosecution discretion.

    It does appear this incident is consistent with being the latest attempt in ongoing effort to find or manufacture something, anything, to indict. Having failed at every turn, some technical violation seems like a last resort. I do believe just about anyone can be found in technical violation of our vast, vague, and sometimes contradictory laws.

    That they have spent this much time and effort on Trump and not yet found anything that sticks seems pretty remarkable.

    Replies: @Alden

  98. @Buzz Mohawk
    @PhysicistDave

    Your insights are most appreciated, and you are a voice of reason here.

    What matters in this case is not the putative documents, but the following:

    1) The very fact that law enforcement controlled by political actors raided the home of a political opponent.

    2) The warrant was signed by a judge who is and has been a clear, vocal, outspoken opponent of the political opponent who was raided. A judge is a member of the judiciary branch in a government in which powers are supposed to be separated.

    3) The raid was essentially condoned and carried out by people working for a president who ran against the former president and may have to run against him again.

    4) Presidents have full authority over all classified information and can de-classify it and presumably do whatever they want with it, even take it home if they so choose, if they make that decision while they are the president.

    5) A president is elected by The People to have full executive power and must by necessity be able to exercise that power without fear of reprisal by successors if he is to be able to carry out his duties and the will of The People who elected him.

    This raid is completely wrong and would be wrong even if President Trump had decided to take home the secret formula for Coca-Cola. (Well, maybe THEN it would be called for. Some things are sacred.)

    BTW, I have difficulty imagining that every document that matters in this case does not have one or more copies somewhere still safe, including electronic, virtual copies. It is actually quite quaint to think that going in and taking some boxes of paper will make a difference, but what do I know?

    And again, it's not the documents that matter. This is another in the long line of phony moves that the powers that be have made against Trump since even while he was running the first time. This is an attempt, one way or another, to hobble him, so slander him, to tie him up so he cannot run or win or harm them.

    Also, the hypothesis is reasonable that this is really about documentation that proves the ratfucking that the FBI, CIA, powers that be, Clinton campaign, Obama administration, et. al. were doing. In fact, this raid is probably just a continuation of what the documents prove.

    And I don't even like Trump, though I voted for him. What other choice was there? What are our choices now, and do they even matter anymore? Did they ever really?

    Replies: @Luke Lea, @PhysicistDave

    Buzz Mohawk wrote to me:

    And again, it’s not the documents that matter. This is another in the long line of phony moves that the powers that be have made against Trump since even while he was running the first time. This is an attempt, one way or another, to hobble him, so slander him, to tie him up so he cannot run or win or harm them.

    Yeah, the ruling class hates Trump so much that they are stressing the Constitutional order beyond its limits.

    As I told Alden, I’ve been thinking recently about the last century of the Roman Republic.

    All pretty fascinating for those of us who are students of history.

    Not so great for those of us who would like to preserve what is left of the American Republic.

  99. @Barnard
    @travell lyte

    Obama still doesn't have his library done yet. Where are all his documents being kept until it is finished? Maybe the FBI should search them.

    Replies: @Alden

    Obama’s 33 million documents are in a warehouse in Hoffman Estates Il near Chicago awaiting the building of the Obama library

  100. @Bardon Kaldlan
    @Justvisiting

    Could there be some special document,of which there is only one, like ,say,Dick Cheney's diary?
    " Dear diary,well 9/11 went off without a hitch! I'm so relieved.
    Sally the intern gave me a look today. Is that...doable?
    I think my daughters a queer. Should not have thrown the ball around when she was a kid! Goddamn."

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    There’s a secret note that’s been passed down through every president, originating with George Washington. It’s beautifully handwritten in quill ink on the finest parchment.

    The note says,

    “It’s all a crock.”

    It was never supposed to leave the succession of presidents.

  101. @Anon
    Under no circumstances may someone hold classified documents outside of an appropriate facility. Trump was holding such documents, refused to return them, hence the FBI action. Not a witch hunt, not weaponization of the DOJ, but the law being enforced.

    Replies: @Alden, @Ben tillman

    You are wrong. You are just speculating.

    In June if this year the FBI inspected the room in Maralago in which the records were kept. The FBI found that the documents were properly stored and secured by the on site secret service. The FBI did recommend a different lock on the door of the room. The secret service guards installed the new lock.

    As per United States Civil Code Title 18 and the December 29 2009 EO 13526 the president can take any and all documents with him when he leaves the White House in accordance with precedent and custom since George Washington,

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Alden

    "In June if this year the FBI inspected the room in Maralago in which the records were kept. The FBI found that the documents were properly stored and secured by the on site secret service. The FBI did recommend a different lock on the door of the room. The secret service guards installed the new lock."

    You're not providing the complete story.

    https://www.kcra.com/article/mar-a-lago-trump-doj-criminal-inquiry-timeline/40851458#

    Feb. 9, 2022
    News outlets report that NARA asked the Justice Department to investigate Trump's handling of White House records and whether he violated the Presidential Records Act and other laws related to classified information. The Presidential Records Act requires all records created by a sitting president to be turned over to the National Archives at the end of their administration.

    May 12, 2022
    News outlets report that investigators subpoenaed NARA for access to the classified documents retrieved from Mar-a-Lago. The subpoena, which is part of the process to allow investigators to take possession of the documents from the NARA, is the first public indication of the Justice Department using a grand jury in its investigation.

    June 3, 2022
    Four investigators, including a top Justice Department counterintelligence official, visit Mar-a-Lago seeking more information about classified material that had been taken to Florida. The four investigators meet with Trump's attorneys and look around the basement room where the documents are being stored. Trump briefly stops by the meeting to say hello to the officials, but he does not answer any questions. During the meeting, the federal officials serve a grand jury subpoena for some of the sensitive national security documents on the premises, and they take away the subpoenaed documents.

    June 8, 2022
    Trump's attorneys receive a letter from federal investigators, asking them to further secure the room where documents are being stored. In response, Trump aides add a padlock to the room in the basement of Mar-a-Lago.

    In other words, investigators know there are records on the premises. They have an idea what they may contain, but are handling this situation with kid gloves. But the FBI got more information about exactly what was missing from one of Trump's aides, thus providing them with probable cause and hence the search warrant.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Alden

  102. @Corvinus
    @Alden

    According to a recent article by Bloomberg:

    There are laws governing how presidents are supposed to handle documents that, at least theoretically, can trigger prosecutions for failure to comply, chief among them the Presidential Records Act. But as with so much related to Trump’s time in office, the search appears to have landed investigators in uncharted territory.  

    It’s a law enacted by Congress in 1978 as one of several post-Watergate measures aimed at combating potential corruption in the White House. President Richard Nixon had challenged the legality of a predecessor to the PRA, which sought to prevent him from destroying any of 42 million page of documents and 880 tape recordings from his time in office, but the US Supreme Court said Congress had the authority to regulate presidential documents both for posterity and to ensure their availability for criminal prosecutions.

    Replies: @Alden

    You’re absolutely wrong as usual And Obama’s 2009 EO 13526 supersedes the Nixon law enacted in 1978.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Alden

    What we do know is that for the first time in our history a federal magistrate found probable cause to believe an ex president was illegally in possession of classified/top secret documents which he had refused to return voluntarily. The affidavit is being kept sealed to protect the source of the probable cause information, as well as the innocent until proven guilty subject of the search warrant. So yes, it tells us a lot: that the AG and the DOJ are acting within the law.

    EO 13526 restated the authorized list of designees who can originate classification, in effect rescinding any previous designations made by officials or agency heads to subordinates. A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Ben tillman, @Curle

  103. @The Anti-Gnostic
    @Harry Baldwin

    I imagine they function similar to foundations and other non-profits. Their main function is to employ family members and friends of family members trying to avoid real jobs.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    I imagine they function similar to foundations and other non-profits. Their main function is to employ family members and friends of family members trying to avoid real jobs.

    Exactly – they are little graft factories. And in Bill Clinton’s case it serves as a f\$#kpad*.

    *Clinton actually wanted to have a rooftop swimming pool built into his Presidential library:

    https://nypost.com/2016/10/02/inside-the-penthouse-shenanigans-at-bill-clintons-presidential-library/

  104. @PhysicistDave
    @Alden

    Alden wrote to me:


    But the president of the United States can classify de classify and re classify any and all documents both while he is president and for the rest of his life.
     
    I'm not sure former Presidents can, but a President certainly can while he is in office.

    Also, the media are claiming Trump had to follow certain procedures laid out in Obama's Executive Order. But of course that Executive Order only apples to people below the President: one President's Executive Orders do not bind a later President.

    Alden also wrote:

    And presidents have always had the right and power to take whatever documents they wish out of the White House when their terms finish.
     
    Within very broad (and very hazy) limits, yes.

    But the problem is that the law is sufficiently vague that I think they can get a grand-jury indictment -- as the old saying goes, a skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

    And then the case is tried in DC: DC is so anti-Trump, that I'm guessing they will convict, given the vagueness of the laws.

    And then you have a Constitutional crisis.

    There is ample precedent that someone can run for President even from behind bars (e.g., Eugene Debs).

    And if the Republicans in the House have the guts (which I doubt) they could simply refuse to fund the DoJ at all in retaliation -- Biden cannot veto that: just do not appropriate the funds.

    It can become very messy -- I am not sure the elite has thought this through.

    I've been thinking a lot recently about the Gracchi brothers...

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @Dr. DoomNGloom

    At least the Optimates can’t produce a Sulla…

  105. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Buzz Mohawk

    One wouldn't be surprised if the FBI was somehow instigating and facilitating the trafficking themselves. Setting it up, so the speak, the way they set up domestic "terrorists." Anything is plausible after all the other crap they've pulled.

    Have Americans lost faith in their institutions? You're damn right we have.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Have Americans lost faith in their institutions? You’re damn right we have.

    I haven’t lost faith in the FBI. I never had any. They were rotten almost right from the start – Gay Edgar Hoover ran the FBI as his own private Gestapo for nearly a half a century. They routinely screw up criminal investigations and they serve as hired muscle for the Government, covering up their crimes and scandals. In trustworthiness, I rank the FBI a couple of rungs below the Mexican Highway Patrol.

    • Agree: PhysicistDave
  106. I’m sure that the powers that be are really concerned about classified documents that are actually unclassified and that have been in Trump’s possession for a few years now. This is all about creating a scandal before mid-terms, trying to find anything at all to keep Trump from running, and trying to distract everyone from the Biden administration’s failures.

    It’s also a scary-as-Hell big move in the further weaponizing of the FBI against us. The Left’s capture of the FBI, CIA, IRS with its tens of thousands of new and armed agents, the military — this can’t stand. I think we’re in big heap trouble with all this.

  107. @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

    I really do know more about this than almost everyone

    • LOL: PhysicistDave
  108. @Mr. Anon
    @Muggles


    I am old enough to recall when “left liberals” actually questioned the FBI and other federal security organs. Something about “civil liberties” and all.
     
    I remember that too. Many liberals used to mistrust the FBI, and the CIA, and the Pentagon, and big chemical companies (like Pfeizer). Now they're foursquare behind them. They're all workin' for the Man.

    Replies: @Polistra

  109. @MEH 0910
    @Veteran Aryan

    https://twitter.com/alfranken/status/1558498745951698945

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy

    Obviously this is not “The Al Franken Decade.”

  110. @Harry Baldwin
    @Mr. Anon

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven't looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president's archives in the library of a state college?

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @Reg Cæsar, @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @ScarletNumber, @Erroneus

    Presidential libraries have gotten bigger and bigger as recent generations of presidents have passed — to the point that now they are massive ego mausoleums. Like the ribbons and medals on our military leaders, they have become more fantastic as the men have gotten smaller.

    • Agree: Mr. Anon
  111. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://twitter.com/BenObeseJecty/status/1558921101631279104

    London.

    Replies: @Polistra, @YetAnotherAnon

    Mr. Obese is really “struggling to understand” because he’s not able to think straight about this thing called open borders.

  112. @epebble
    @J1234

    World on the Move...

    Far-right Italian leader Meloni rides popular wave in polls
    https://apnews.com/article/religion-rome-980572acc21fe377ede26eea46be5208

    Replies: @CCG

    Another “Marine Le Pen” type. If her party really wants to win in Italy, they’ve to field a patriarchal Catholic man and stop supplication to all foreign countries (including Israel). Especially this:
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2018-12-11/ty-article/.premium/italys-salvini-faces-backlash-at-home-for-slamming-hezbollah-in-israel-visit/

    Also, Meloni’s and Salvini’s fake Catholicism is nauseating. Meloni hasn’t married her live-in boyfriend in spite of having his child years ago, Salvini’s personal life is a complete circus (not sure if he’s really a Catholic given his easy divorce, illegitimate daughter with a mistress, etc.).

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @CCG

    "illegitimate daughter with a mistress" sounds pretty Catholic.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @CCG, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    , @epebble
    @CCG

    Meloni hasn’t married her live-in boyfriend in spite of having his child years ago

    That seems like among the weakest of reasons to condemn her. She was born in 1977. Clinton and Trump did far worse but are deified by their respective devotees. Having just one partner in life makes her a saint in comparison.

    Replies: @CCG

  113. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://twitter.com/BenObeseJecty/status/1558921101631279104

    London.

    Replies: @Polistra, @YetAnotherAnon

    Oxford Street is like so many other British high streets – a shadow of its former self, with empty retail space occupied by (tax) dodgy stores run by (tax) dodgy people.

    In fact it’s a bit of a metaphor for the whole UK.

    So the people being looted in the candy shops are themselves looters.

    https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2022/07/american-candy-shop-oxford-street/

    For a while now, visitors to Oxford Street have been asking the same question: What is it with all these American candy stores?

    From American Candy World to American Candy Land to Candy Surprise, the sight of Willy Wonka chocolate bars and Cheetos is now inescapable on the world’s most famous shopping street.

    And it’s making the UK’s premier shopping street look down at heel.

    M&S CEO Stuart Machin recently warned that Oxford Street risks becoming a “dinosaur district destined for extinction” as it’s on “its knees” and falling prey to a “growing proliferation of tacky candy stores”.

    Westminster City Council leader and councillor Adam Hug admits that he doesn’t know where all the sweet shops came from, but after an investigation last month that took in 30 Oxford Street candy and souvenir stores – as the two are often linked – found that business rates evasion was rife.

    In fact, it found that £7.9 million was owed in business rates. Westminister is the UK’s largest collector of business rates with the vast majority of funds redistributed to other local authorities around the country, therefore that lost income impacts all taxpayers.

    Westminister Council officers has also seized around £575,000 worth of counterfeit and illegal goods from American candy and souvenir stores. This includes counterfeit Wonka chocolate bars, vapes that contained excessive levels of nicotine and even fake Rolex watches.

    According to Westminster City Council, these candy shops are far from regular and legitimate businesses with very few serving sufficient customers to be commercially viable.

    Customers can often find themselves ripped off in such stores too. When Retail Gazette visited an American candy store on Oxford Street, it was selling overpriced snacks and sweets including a £4.99 pack of M&M’s and a pack of £9.99 crisps.

    Another candy shop displayed no prices. This is a common practice in such stores, which can leave shoppers facing huge bills at the till.

    Westminster Council believes that these properties are used to avoid business rate bills and possibly commit other offences.

    It explains that landlords are desperately seeking to rent out empty stores to avoid personal liability for business rates.

    Many property owners do not rent their premises directly to these candy stores. Landlords let their stores to an intermediary company or person, who in turn lets to the candy stores, usually on licences, for minimal rents.

    The tenants occupying on licences can avoid business rates by providing false occupation details or shell company names that quickly dissolve when the council tries to recover debt.

    Hug says: “The problem is that owners of buildings are turning a blind eye to those who sublet them as it means they are not liable for business rates. That’s why we have a rash of US candy stores in prestige locations.”

    “The people selling overpriced and often out-of-date sweets are cheating the UK taxpayer and very often swindling their customers into the bargain.”

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @YetAnotherAnon

    "In fact it’s a bit of a metaphor for the whole UK."

    This guy is Chancellor Of The Exchequer.

    https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2013/06/27/21/Nadhim-Zahawi-gtv3.jpg


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/10/nadhim-zahawi-admits-taxpayers-electricity-stables


    A Tory MP has apologised and promised to repay part of a £5,822.27 expenses claim for his energy bills after it emerged taxpayers were paying for the electricity supply to his stables.

    Nadhim Zahawi, a founder of the market research firm YouGov, said he was "mortified" to discover the error, which came to light after he was among politicians criticised over subsidised energy bills.

    The Stratford-on-Avon MP claimed the most, with a bill totalling £5,822.27 to cover electricity and heating oil for his estate in Warwickshire.

    In a statement posted on his website, he said: "Since last week's coverage of my energy bills I have been looking into them further and can confirm that all claims for heating fuel relate purely to my second home.

    "However I have made a mistake with my electricity claims."
     
    , @J.Ross
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Selling American candy in Britain (or pretending to) is asking for police attention because British and European candy is normally far superior. I'm not aware of any popular clamor for American candy from the great British public, and in fact there's a certain number of Brits who never tire of pointing out that Hershey's chocolate allegedly tastes like vomit.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Anonymous

    , @Ralph L
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Where's the profit in this scheme? Are the owners just parking the money waiting for real estate appreciation like oligarchs buying luxury NYC condos they don't occupy or rent?

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

  114. @Corvinus
    @Art Deco

    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House. He is just waiting to reveal its contents when his lawsuit against Democrats goes to trial. But I say why wait? Justice must not be denied. Trump promised to slay the Deep State dragon. And obviously the lawsuit will be thrown out, and then Hypnotoad and others will make up some other excuse why Trump won’t show all the dirt he has.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @PhysicistDave

    Corvinus wrote to Art Deco:

    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House.

    Corvy, old pal, the Donald has many virtues, but being well-organized and planning carefully for the future are not among them.

    In all likelihood, someone (maybe Trump, maybe not) told some GSA flunky, “Pack up all that junk and ship it to Mar-a-Lago.”

    Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.

    Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump’s passports.

    The ruling class is not very smart.

    But their hoodlums have guns. Lots of guns.

    • Agree: Kylie
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @PhysicistDave

    "Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes."

    Almost certainly Trump and his aides knew precisely what they decided to keep, and without going through the stated process. It would not be surprising that they made photocopies.

    "Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump’s passports."

    Almost certainly the FBI, based on probable cause from one of Trump's own officials, that they had sensitive material. Remember, one of Trump's lawyers signed a letter in June asserting that there was no more classified information stored Trump's Florida home. Furthermore, two of his hand-picked officials, former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone and his deputy Patrick Philbin, were questioned about how boxes of White House documents came to be stored at Trump's residence. The National Archives contacted Philbin when it became aware of missing documents.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @PhysicistDave

    Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.

    I heard Bill O'Reilly interviewed on the Mark Simone show this week. O'Reilly knows Trump well. He said he can't imagine the man sifting through papers deciding what he wants and what he doesn't. As O'Reilly said, he doesn't have the attention span for that sort of task. Whatever is in those boxes is what was put there by the person assigned to handle the task.

    , @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes."

    Kind of dumb for Trump to get into a pointless fight over them then.

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave

  115. @YetAnotherAnon
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Oxford Street is like so many other British high streets - a shadow of its former self, with empty retail space occupied by (tax) dodgy stores run by (tax) dodgy people.

    In fact it's a bit of a metaphor for the whole UK.

    So the people being looted in the candy shops are themselves looters.

    https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2022/07/american-candy-shop-oxford-street/


    For a while now, visitors to Oxford Street have been asking the same question: What is it with all these American candy stores?

    From American Candy World to American Candy Land to Candy Surprise, the sight of Willy Wonka chocolate bars and Cheetos is now inescapable on the world’s most famous shopping street.

    And it’s making the UK’s premier shopping street look down at heel.

    M&S CEO Stuart Machin recently warned that Oxford Street risks becoming a “dinosaur district destined for extinction” as it’s on “its knees” and falling prey to a “growing proliferation of tacky candy stores”.

    Westminster City Council leader and councillor Adam Hug admits that he doesn’t know where all the sweet shops came from, but after an investigation last month that took in 30 Oxford Street candy and souvenir stores – as the two are often linked – found that business rates evasion was rife.

    In fact, it found that £7.9 million was owed in business rates. Westminister is the UK’s largest collector of business rates with the vast majority of funds redistributed to other local authorities around the country, therefore that lost income impacts all taxpayers.

    Westminister Council officers has also seized around £575,000 worth of counterfeit and illegal goods from American candy and souvenir stores. This includes counterfeit Wonka chocolate bars, vapes that contained excessive levels of nicotine and even fake Rolex watches.

    According to Westminster City Council, these candy shops are far from regular and legitimate businesses with very few serving sufficient customers to be commercially viable.

    Customers can often find themselves ripped off in such stores too. When Retail Gazette visited an American candy store on Oxford Street, it was selling overpriced snacks and sweets including a £4.99 pack of M&M’s and a pack of £9.99 crisps.

    Another candy shop displayed no prices. This is a common practice in such stores, which can leave shoppers facing huge bills at the till.

    Westminster Council believes that these properties are used to avoid business rate bills and possibly commit other offences.

    It explains that landlords are desperately seeking to rent out empty stores to avoid personal liability for business rates.

    Many property owners do not rent their premises directly to these candy stores. Landlords let their stores to an intermediary company or person, who in turn lets to the candy stores, usually on licences, for minimal rents.

    The tenants occupying on licences can avoid business rates by providing false occupation details or shell company names that quickly dissolve when the council tries to recover debt.

    Hug says: “The problem is that owners of buildings are turning a blind eye to those who sublet them as it means they are not liable for business rates. That’s why we have a rash of US candy stores in prestige locations.”

    “The people selling overpriced and often out-of-date sweets are cheating the UK taxpayer and very often swindling their customers into the bargain.”
     

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @J.Ross, @Ralph L

    “In fact it’s a bit of a metaphor for the whole UK.”

    This guy is Chancellor Of The Exchequer.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/10/nadhim-zahawi-admits-taxpayers-electricity-stables

    A Tory MP has apologised and promised to repay part of a £5,822.27 expenses claim for his energy bills after it emerged taxpayers were paying for the electricity supply to his stables.

    Nadhim Zahawi, a founder of the market research firm YouGov, said he was “mortified” to discover the error, which came to light after he was among politicians criticised over subsidised energy bills.

    The Stratford-on-Avon MP claimed the most, with a bill totalling £5,822.27 to cover electricity and heating oil for his estate in Warwickshire.

    In a statement posted on his website, he said: “Since last week’s coverage of my energy bills I have been looking into them further and can confirm that all claims for heating fuel relate purely to my second home.

    “However I have made a mistake with my electricity claims.”

  116. @Corvinus
    @Jackpot

    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process. Since when does Trump adhere to the law on a regular basis? That’s why Sailer is playing coy here. He has been following the story and Trump for that matter as a supposed law and order/rule of law type of guy.

    Replies: @Alden, @PhysicistDave

    Corvinus wrote to Jackpot:

    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process.

    Corvy, read this analysis in Politico — and keep in mind that Politico is generally left-wing and hostile to Trump.

    As the article points out, numerous times Presidents have declassified info very, very informally, indeed, on the fly.

    What you call “the existing process” is only the “existing” process up to the moment some President chooses not to follow it. Then, it is the “past process.”

    The current common process is just based on an Executive Order from Obama, and that EO is not binding on Obama’s successors as President: later Presidents can do whatever they want.

    To be sure, Congress could pass a law trying to restrain the President.

    But, as the article suggests, that might well be unconstitutional: the Constitution makes the President “Commander-in-Chief,” and, prima facie, that gives him control of classification relating to the national defense, regardless of what Congress might say.

    Don’t get me wrong: I think Julie Kelly is probably right that the ruling elite will indict Trump, convict him, and send him to prison, simply because you and your friends in the parasitic overclass are no longer constrained by the rule of law.

    But that will lead to a Constitutional crisis.

    And perhaps civil war.

    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.

    Be careful what you wish for, Corvy!

    • Disagree: ic1000
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @PhysicistDave

    Why feed the troll, PD? I gave up years ago.

    , @ic1000
    @PhysicistDave

    Sawdust in the oatmeal -- an analogy that Jack D brought up a few days ago, and that you're doubtlessly familiar with. To what extent can a food processor cut their product before people turn away from it?

    Some regular contributors seem to disagree with the core concept of a Comments Thread, where informed parties add value by building on Sailer's remarks on a given topic -- and by intelligent dissent from them.

    Such people appear to have the meta-objective of making these threads less legible, especially to less-knowledgable readers who might find their way here.

    Hence my Disagreement. IMO, sawdust comments don't merit a response unless they were likely made in naive good faith.

    Replies: @Kylie

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @PhysicistDave


    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.
     
    I think it'd look more like Northern Ireland during the troubles or Latin American civil wars during the last century.

    Did you see the two cops in Cincinnati who were called by a homeowner when an ATF agent arrived at his door asking to take a look at his guns? They drew on him, he blew them off with a proclamation "I'm a Federal Agent," and told them they're "making a big mistake" but they took him down, tased him, and cuffed him anyway. He was incredulous the whole time because he is a "Federal Agent!" I'd expect to see things like that a lot more in the near future. State and municipal police arresting Federal Agents would be a likely way to kick off Civil War II.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @scrivener3

    , @Prester John
    @PhysicistDave

    They may indict. Who knows? They may even get a conviction. Nevertheless, I just don't see Trump ever going to prison in light of the very scenarios which you have yourself outlined (as well as a few others that I can think of offhand). Trump remains enormously popular in this country--and for good reason (whether one likes him or not). I don't think that the "ruling class" would want to risk opening Pandora's Box. As always, time will tell.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

  117. @syonredux
    What if the taint of Whiteness can never be removed?

    A Glimpse of a Future Without White People
    Mohsin Hamid’s The Last White Man is a book about race metamorphosis—and the seduction of power.

    WHITENESS IS A seduction.
     
    Stupid sexy Whiteness....

    Whiteness is also an illusion.
     
    .....unlike, say, Blackness...

    These are the twin motifs on which Pakistani writer Mohsin Hamid props up The Last White Man, his new novel about race metamorphosis and human morality. Anchored in the bare and elegiac prose Hamid has made his trademark style, the book springboards from a single unexplained incident. Anders, a white man, awakens one morning to a new reality: his skin has “turned a deep and undeniable brown.”
     
    But have his facial features and hair texture stayed the same? If Brad Pitt suddenly had James Brown's complexion....

    And for the benefit of the guys in the back row, "Anders" means "man." Get it? A novel with the title THE LAST WHITE MAN focuses on a character called "man"......Yeesh, that's the kinda thing that I expect in a community college creative writing class...

    The transformation, of which Anders’ is the first—but not the only, and certainly not the last—elicits worthy exploration. What if whiteness were suddenly gone? Would the social order of life come undone? Would anything change?
     
    The first question in my mind is: What are BIPOCs gonna do? I mean, we're talking about a Rachel Dolezal x 1,000,000,000- scale problem....I mean, if ya can't eyeball YT, how are ya gonna keep the anti-YT coalition together....

    The sequence of events that follows plays into an ancient fear, that of The Other. (One’s need to estrange, Toni Morrison has said, is “a desperate attempt to confirm one’s own self as normal.”) For Anders, confusion bubbles. Panic swells. Initially, he flirts with thoughts of violence after realizing the transformation is irreversible. “He wanted to kill the colored man who confronted him here in his home,” Hamid writes, “to extinguish the life animating this other’s body, to leave nothing standing but himself, as he was before.”
     
    Lemme tell ya, YT is truly deranged....

    It’s understandable why those who benefit from a particular standing would do anything to preserve it. The conscious seduction of power, of understanding the privileges from which one benefits and the life it affords, is, in part, about the necessity of control. I’d probably be upset and a little sad if I lost all of that, too.
     
    See, Whiteness is nothing but an unholy combination of power and privilege....Unlike BIPOCness...

    “No one there at the bar looked entirely comfortable, not the bartender, and not the men huddled in the only occupied booth … not any of these dark people bathed in the bar-colored light, trying to find their footing in a situation so familiar and yet so strange,” Oona observes. Or “maybe everyone looked the same as they always did,” she thought. It is only after “the whiskey settles into her belly” that she realizes that “the difference was gone.”
     
    How drunk do you have to be in order to not see race? Blackout drunk?

    Whiteness physically recedes but it never vanishes completely.
     
    Maybe we need some kind of Jean-Jacques Dessalines-style solution to the Whiteness problem....

    It has a psychological grip; lest we forget, identity is more than a badge of flesh.
     
    Whiteness is more than skin deep; it goes all the way to the soul...

    The newly “dark people” of Hamid’s epic appear to embrace different outlooks but, really, what has happened is more of a costume swap than an adjustment of the soul. The characters operate in a kind of cultural drag, entombed in an unrecognizable self, a sort of living elegy of their former whiteness. What was once marked as difference is not understood anew; instead, they continue to see through white eyes, in spite of their brown skin.
     
    Maybe if we removed the eyes from every YT...




    https://www.wired.com/story/mohsin-hamid-the-last-white-man/

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @SunBakedSuburb, @Ralph L

    The sequence of events that follows plays into an ancient fear, that of The Other.

    In German, anders means other. Martin Luther — ‘Hier stehe Ich, Ich kann nicht anders. (Here I stand, I can do no other)’ before he ate worms.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Ralph L

    But the Germanic given name Anders comes from Greek, right? They're not naming their kids Hans, Bettina, and Other?

  118. @CCG
    @epebble

    Another "Marine Le Pen" type. If her party really wants to win in Italy, they've to field a patriarchal Catholic man and stop supplication to all foreign countries (including Israel). Especially this:
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2018-12-11/ty-article/.premium/italys-salvini-faces-backlash-at-home-for-slamming-hezbollah-in-israel-visit/

    Also, Meloni's and Salvini's fake Catholicism is nauseating. Meloni hasn't married her live-in boyfriend in spite of having his child years ago, Salvini's personal life is a complete circus (not sure if he's really a Catholic given his easy divorce, illegitimate daughter with a mistress, etc.).

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @epebble

    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Steve Sailer


    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.
     
    I know a Korean immigrant whose wife is white but who has a second, simultaneous family with a Korean woman. He's fully assimilated to North America.

    But in this one aspect, the assimilation was to Mexico!

    , @CCG
    @Steve Sailer

    Not really. The behaviour of Salvini's ex-wife and his mistresses (they broke up with him, not the other way around) gives the impression that he's also a loser who can't keep any woman and has little to no influence on his offspring.

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.
     
    Anglophone Catholics tend to be legalistic in their practice of their faith, reflecting the legalism spread by Britain to its colonies. So American Catholics, or Australian Catholics or whatnot tend to want to change the "rules" so that the "rules" conform to their preferred practices. Many American Catholics in particular seem to think that the Church should be responsive to democratic influences - if we can't live without hormonal birth control and public opinion polls show that most American Catholic women think birth control is good, then the President of the Church (the Pope) should change the official rules that hormonal birth control is good. It bothers Anglophones and Americans in particular more that the authority has decreed that what they do in practice is bad enough to want to change what the authority decrees.

    Continental Catholics, particularly the Latin-influenced cultures (Spain/France/Italy) seem to be more at home with the idea that they're sinners who fall short daily and don't get so worked up about conforming the rules to their behavior. You're tempted, you try however halfheartedly, you fail, you ask forgiveness, and so forth. Having a mistress is too tempting for those who can. You may feel bad about it sometimes, but you're not going to lobby the Pope to bless your illicit affair.

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Anonymous, @epebble

  119. @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

    You’re not supposed to talk about a Black Fight Club. (Not that kind of black).

  120. @YetAnotherAnon
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Oxford Street is like so many other British high streets - a shadow of its former self, with empty retail space occupied by (tax) dodgy stores run by (tax) dodgy people.

    In fact it's a bit of a metaphor for the whole UK.

    So the people being looted in the candy shops are themselves looters.

    https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2022/07/american-candy-shop-oxford-street/


    For a while now, visitors to Oxford Street have been asking the same question: What is it with all these American candy stores?

    From American Candy World to American Candy Land to Candy Surprise, the sight of Willy Wonka chocolate bars and Cheetos is now inescapable on the world’s most famous shopping street.

    And it’s making the UK’s premier shopping street look down at heel.

    M&S CEO Stuart Machin recently warned that Oxford Street risks becoming a “dinosaur district destined for extinction” as it’s on “its knees” and falling prey to a “growing proliferation of tacky candy stores”.

    Westminster City Council leader and councillor Adam Hug admits that he doesn’t know where all the sweet shops came from, but after an investigation last month that took in 30 Oxford Street candy and souvenir stores – as the two are often linked – found that business rates evasion was rife.

    In fact, it found that £7.9 million was owed in business rates. Westminister is the UK’s largest collector of business rates with the vast majority of funds redistributed to other local authorities around the country, therefore that lost income impacts all taxpayers.

    Westminister Council officers has also seized around £575,000 worth of counterfeit and illegal goods from American candy and souvenir stores. This includes counterfeit Wonka chocolate bars, vapes that contained excessive levels of nicotine and even fake Rolex watches.

    According to Westminster City Council, these candy shops are far from regular and legitimate businesses with very few serving sufficient customers to be commercially viable.

    Customers can often find themselves ripped off in such stores too. When Retail Gazette visited an American candy store on Oxford Street, it was selling overpriced snacks and sweets including a £4.99 pack of M&M’s and a pack of £9.99 crisps.

    Another candy shop displayed no prices. This is a common practice in such stores, which can leave shoppers facing huge bills at the till.

    Westminster Council believes that these properties are used to avoid business rate bills and possibly commit other offences.

    It explains that landlords are desperately seeking to rent out empty stores to avoid personal liability for business rates.

    Many property owners do not rent their premises directly to these candy stores. Landlords let their stores to an intermediary company or person, who in turn lets to the candy stores, usually on licences, for minimal rents.

    The tenants occupying on licences can avoid business rates by providing false occupation details or shell company names that quickly dissolve when the council tries to recover debt.

    Hug says: “The problem is that owners of buildings are turning a blind eye to those who sublet them as it means they are not liable for business rates. That’s why we have a rash of US candy stores in prestige locations.”

    “The people selling overpriced and often out-of-date sweets are cheating the UK taxpayer and very often swindling their customers into the bargain.”
     

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @J.Ross, @Ralph L

    Selling American candy in Britain (or pretending to) is asking for police attention because British and European candy is normally far superior. I’m not aware of any popular clamor for American candy from the great British public, and in fact there’s a certain number of Brits who never tire of pointing out that Hershey’s chocolate allegedly tastes like vomit.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @J.Ross

    When we visit friends in the States we always bring as much British chocolate as we can, though since Kraft Foods took over Cadbury's in 2009 I keep finding the stuff tastes of processed cheese ;-)

    , @Anonymous
    @J.Ross

    Almost certainly fronts for other businesses that want to use the prestigious "Oxford Street" address.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Anonymous

  121. @Steve Sailer
    @CCG

    "illegitimate daughter with a mistress" sounds pretty Catholic.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @CCG, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.

    I know a Korean immigrant whose wife is white but who has a second, simultaneous family with a Korean woman. He’s fully assimilated to North America.

    But in this one aspect, the assimilation was to Mexico!

  122. @Harry Baldwin
    @Mr. Anon

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven't looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president's archives in the library of a state college?

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @Reg Cæsar, @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @ScarletNumber, @Erroneus

    A presidential library gets special legal privileges others can or have specified; also, in the case of Nixon’s, it really becomes a symposium/club for party conservatives.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @J.Ross

    I went to a wedding reception at the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, CA last year. It was a very nice place for a wedding party. They built a reproduction of the East Room of the White House for hosting receptions. It was a big hit among attendees.

    Replies: @RAZ, @Corvinus, @Buzz Mohawk

  123. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Jackpot:


    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process.
     
    Corvy, read this analysis in Politico -- and keep in mind that Politico is generally left-wing and hostile to Trump.

    As the article points out, numerous times Presidents have declassified info very, very informally, indeed, on the fly.

    What you call "the existing process" is only the "existing" process up to the moment some President chooses not to follow it. Then, it is the "past process."

    The current common process is just based on an Executive Order from Obama, and that EO is not binding on Obama's successors as President: later Presidents can do whatever they want.

    To be sure, Congress could pass a law trying to restrain the President.

    But, as the article suggests, that might well be unconstitutional: the Constitution makes the President "Commander-in-Chief," and, prima facie, that gives him control of classification relating to the national defense, regardless of what Congress might say.

    Don't get me wrong: I think Julie Kelly is probably right that the ruling elite will indict Trump, convict him, and send him to prison, simply because you and your friends in the parasitic overclass are no longer constrained by the rule of law.

    But that will lead to a Constitutional crisis.

    And perhaps civil war.

    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.

    Be careful what you wish for, Corvy!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @ic1000, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Prester John

    Why feed the troll, PD? I gave up years ago.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  124. @J.Ross
    @Harry Baldwin

    A presidential library gets special legal privileges others can or have specified; also, in the case of Nixon's, it really becomes a symposium/club for party conservatives.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    I went to a wedding reception at the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, CA last year. It was a very nice place for a wedding party. They built a reproduction of the East Room of the White House for hosting receptions. It was a big hit among attendees.

    • Replies: @RAZ
    @Steve Sailer

    In my family some of the liberal members would probably not attend a wedding there on principle. Too bad, they'd gain some useful nuance if they did. I've been reading the Nixon chapter in Kissinger's new book lately so it was an interesting time to visit the library a couple of weeks ago.

    , @Corvinus
    @Steve Sailer

    “After all these years, I don’t pay all that much attention to Trump…”

    You do, otherwise you wouldn’t have made this post or responded on Twitter about what is taking place.

    You’re a rule of law/law and order guy, right?

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Steve Sailer

    Sounds tacky. Then again, I don't like going to weddings because it means I have to pretend the happy couple will probably live happily ever after, and I have to buy a gift.

  125. @Steve Sailer
    @CCG

    "illegitimate daughter with a mistress" sounds pretty Catholic.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @CCG, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    Not really. The behaviour of Salvini’s ex-wife and his mistresses (they broke up with him, not the other way around) gives the impression that he’s also a loser who can’t keep any woman and has little to no influence on his offspring.

  126. @YetAnotherAnon
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Oxford Street is like so many other British high streets - a shadow of its former self, with empty retail space occupied by (tax) dodgy stores run by (tax) dodgy people.

    In fact it's a bit of a metaphor for the whole UK.

    So the people being looted in the candy shops are themselves looters.

    https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2022/07/american-candy-shop-oxford-street/


    For a while now, visitors to Oxford Street have been asking the same question: What is it with all these American candy stores?

    From American Candy World to American Candy Land to Candy Surprise, the sight of Willy Wonka chocolate bars and Cheetos is now inescapable on the world’s most famous shopping street.

    And it’s making the UK’s premier shopping street look down at heel.

    M&S CEO Stuart Machin recently warned that Oxford Street risks becoming a “dinosaur district destined for extinction” as it’s on “its knees” and falling prey to a “growing proliferation of tacky candy stores”.

    Westminster City Council leader and councillor Adam Hug admits that he doesn’t know where all the sweet shops came from, but after an investigation last month that took in 30 Oxford Street candy and souvenir stores – as the two are often linked – found that business rates evasion was rife.

    In fact, it found that £7.9 million was owed in business rates. Westminister is the UK’s largest collector of business rates with the vast majority of funds redistributed to other local authorities around the country, therefore that lost income impacts all taxpayers.

    Westminister Council officers has also seized around £575,000 worth of counterfeit and illegal goods from American candy and souvenir stores. This includes counterfeit Wonka chocolate bars, vapes that contained excessive levels of nicotine and even fake Rolex watches.

    According to Westminster City Council, these candy shops are far from regular and legitimate businesses with very few serving sufficient customers to be commercially viable.

    Customers can often find themselves ripped off in such stores too. When Retail Gazette visited an American candy store on Oxford Street, it was selling overpriced snacks and sweets including a £4.99 pack of M&M’s and a pack of £9.99 crisps.

    Another candy shop displayed no prices. This is a common practice in such stores, which can leave shoppers facing huge bills at the till.

    Westminster Council believes that these properties are used to avoid business rate bills and possibly commit other offences.

    It explains that landlords are desperately seeking to rent out empty stores to avoid personal liability for business rates.

    Many property owners do not rent their premises directly to these candy stores. Landlords let their stores to an intermediary company or person, who in turn lets to the candy stores, usually on licences, for minimal rents.

    The tenants occupying on licences can avoid business rates by providing false occupation details or shell company names that quickly dissolve when the council tries to recover debt.

    Hug says: “The problem is that owners of buildings are turning a blind eye to those who sublet them as it means they are not liable for business rates. That’s why we have a rash of US candy stores in prestige locations.”

    “The people selling overpriced and often out-of-date sweets are cheating the UK taxpayer and very often swindling their customers into the bargain.”
     

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @J.Ross, @Ralph L

    Where’s the profit in this scheme? Are the owners just parking the money waiting for real estate appreciation like oligarchs buying luxury NYC condos they don’t occupy or rent?

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @Ralph L

    Who knows? Money laundering, drug front perhaps ?

    Business rates (i.e. taxes - in UK you pay tax on income, but "rates" on property) will be so high there that the actual owners want pretty much any tenant, who will then be responsible for paying them.

    The owners use intermediary agents so they don't have to rub shoulders with the dodgy characters who are actually operating the shops.

    I don't know about real estate appreciation, IMHO that ship has sailed for Oxford Street, people I know use Covent Garden instead.

    Applies to whole cities as well - who goes to Paris any more to run the gauntlet of "youths" at Gare du Nord when you can go to Budapest?

  127. @Harry Baldwin
    @Mr. Anon

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven't looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president's archives in the library of a state college?

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @Reg Cæsar, @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @ScarletNumber, @Erroneus

    Why not just house the president’s archives in the library of a state college?

    If it makes you feel better, LBJ and Bush 41 do exactly that, and JFK is right next to UMass-Boston

    • Thanks: Harry Baldwin
  128. Trump is, whatever you may think of him, winning …

    https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/16/politics/wyoming-alaska-primary-election-takeaways/index.html

    Six takeaways from primaries in Wyoming and Alaska
    ……………………………….
    But in most open-seat races, Trump’s candidates triumphed. And on Tuesday in Wyoming, Trump, who had endorsed Hageman on the day she entered the race against Cheney, claimed his biggest victory yet.

  129. @Cutter
    @Ron Mexico

    Didn't Rose also work with the World Wrestling Federation at some point?

    Replies: @Ron Mexico

    Yes. Rose has also made a post-MLB living off of memorabilia sales.
    https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/02/08/politics/donald-trump-pete-rose-hall-of-fame-trnd/index.html

  130. @Ralph L
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Where's the profit in this scheme? Are the owners just parking the money waiting for real estate appreciation like oligarchs buying luxury NYC condos they don't occupy or rent?

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

    Who knows? Money laundering, drug front perhaps ?

    Business rates (i.e. taxes – in UK you pay tax on income, but “rates” on property) will be so high there that the actual owners want pretty much any tenant, who will then be responsible for paying them.

    The owners use intermediary agents so they don’t have to rub shoulders with the dodgy characters who are actually operating the shops.

    I don’t know about real estate appreciation, IMHO that ship has sailed for Oxford Street, people I know use Covent Garden instead.

    Applies to whole cities as well – who goes to Paris any more to run the gauntlet of “youths” at Gare du Nord when you can go to Budapest?

  131. @J.Ross
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Selling American candy in Britain (or pretending to) is asking for police attention because British and European candy is normally far superior. I'm not aware of any popular clamor for American candy from the great British public, and in fact there's a certain number of Brits who never tire of pointing out that Hershey's chocolate allegedly tastes like vomit.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Anonymous

    When we visit friends in the States we always bring as much British chocolate as we can, though since Kraft Foods took over Cadbury’s in 2009 I keep finding the stuff tastes of processed cheese 😉

  132. @Alden
    @Corvinus

    You’re absolutely wrong as usual And Obama’s 2009 EO 13526 supersedes the Nixon law enacted in 1978.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    What we do know is that for the first time in our history a federal magistrate found probable cause to believe an ex president was illegally in possession of classified/top secret documents which he had refused to return voluntarily. The affidavit is being kept sealed to protect the source of the probable cause information, as well as the innocent until proven guilty subject of the search warrant. So yes, it tells us a lot: that the AG and the DOJ are acting within the law.

    EO 13526 restated the authorized list of designees who can originate classification, in effect rescinding any previous designations made by officials or agency heads to subordinates. A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified

    • Agree: Peter Akuleyev
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    What we do know is that for the first time in our history a federal magistrate found probable cause to believe an ex president was illegally in possession of classified/top secret documents which he had refused to return voluntarily. The affidavit is being kept sealed to protect the source of the probable cause information, as well as the innocent until proven guilty subject of the search warrant. So yes, it tells us a lot: that the AG and the DOJ are acting within the law.

     

    What we know is that for the first time in our history an Attorney General has sought a warrant to search the homes, papers, and effects of a former President of the United States.

    A warrant application is an ex parte proceeding in which the government can say whatever it wants as justification for a search and seizure. The warrant is tantamount to a "general warrant," which was not discrete in its scope; "general warrants" were one of the Crown's abuses which led to the Revolution, and the corrective was the Fourth Amendment which required specificity in warrants with regards to the materials sought and the places to be searched.

    We've all seen this "ongoing investigation" and "classified materials" gambit before in seasons 1 through 5 of Get Trump! Garland gave his ridiculous press conference, and before the sun set on that day DOJ had already leaked to the Washington Post the "nuclear secrets" nonsense. This alone justifies the unsealing and publication of the Affidavit of Probable cause.

    EO 13526 restated the authorized list of designees who can originate classification, in effect rescinding any previous designations made by officials or agency heads to subordinates. A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified
     
    Mr. Trump was the President of the United States and Commander in Chief. Inherent in the Office were Constitutionally prescribed powers, including the plenary power with regard to classification. Some bureaucratic red tape doesn't diminish the President's Constitutional powers. No one in his right mind is going to credit some archival pipsqueak in an argument with the President and criminalize the President's position in such a dispute and if you think this is a reasonable position to take your more far gone than you know.
    , @Ben tillman
    @Corvinus

    The magistrate did not find what you claim he found.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Curle
    @Corvinus

    How about you cite to the article you lifted this from rather than engage the pretense that these are your thoughts, much less within your scope of knowledge.

  133. @Ralph L
    @syonredux

    The sequence of events that follows plays into an ancient fear, that of The Other.

    In German, anders means other. Martin Luther — 'Hier stehe Ich, Ich kann nicht anders. (Here I stand, I can do no other)' before he ate worms.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    But the Germanic given name Anders comes from Greek, right? They’re not naming their kids Hans, Bettina, and Other?

  134. @James B. Shearer
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    "... Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, .."

    This is just more Trump BS. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why. Then send a written order to the relevant departments and make this order public. Then make the documents public. But then you would be accountable for what you had done and Trump doesn't like being accountable for anything.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @peterike, @Curle

    “… Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, ..”

    This is just more Trump BS. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why. Then send a written order to the relevant departments and make this order public. Then make the documents public. But then you would be accountable for what you had done and Trump doesn’t like being accountable for anything.

    Indeed. If there’s anyone who has maintained a stealthy public profile and entirely escaped scrutiny for his actions, it’s Trump.

  135. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Jackpot:


    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process.
     
    Corvy, read this analysis in Politico -- and keep in mind that Politico is generally left-wing and hostile to Trump.

    As the article points out, numerous times Presidents have declassified info very, very informally, indeed, on the fly.

    What you call "the existing process" is only the "existing" process up to the moment some President chooses not to follow it. Then, it is the "past process."

    The current common process is just based on an Executive Order from Obama, and that EO is not binding on Obama's successors as President: later Presidents can do whatever they want.

    To be sure, Congress could pass a law trying to restrain the President.

    But, as the article suggests, that might well be unconstitutional: the Constitution makes the President "Commander-in-Chief," and, prima facie, that gives him control of classification relating to the national defense, regardless of what Congress might say.

    Don't get me wrong: I think Julie Kelly is probably right that the ruling elite will indict Trump, convict him, and send him to prison, simply because you and your friends in the parasitic overclass are no longer constrained by the rule of law.

    But that will lead to a Constitutional crisis.

    And perhaps civil war.

    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.

    Be careful what you wish for, Corvy!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @ic1000, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Prester John

    Sawdust in the oatmeal — an analogy that Jack D brought up a few days ago, and that you’re doubtlessly familiar with. To what extent can a food processor cut their product before people turn away from it?

    Some regular contributors seem to disagree with the core concept of a Comments Thread, where informed parties add value by building on Sailer’s remarks on a given topic — and by intelligent dissent from them.

    Such people appear to have the meta-objective of making these threads less legible, especially to less-knowledgable readers who might find their way here.

    Hence my Disagreement. IMO, sawdust comments don’t merit a response unless they were likely made in naive good faith.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @ic1000

    "Some regular contributors seem to disagree with the core concept of a Comments Thread, where informed parties add value by building on Sailer’s remarks on a given topic — and by intelligent dissent from them."

    Indeed. So well said, thank you.

    I'm dismayed to see Steve routinely allowing these regular contributors to post dissenting comments that are frivolously provocative, dishonest and hostile. Over the years, I have reluctantly concluded that while Steve is apparently serious about his posts, he isn't at all serious about his comment threads.

    N.B. I'm not at all opposed to seeing comments--even lots of them--which with I disagree. (Yes, Jack D, I mean you.) But as long as those comments are part of a genuine argument, rather than incessant needling, I'm fine with them.

    Replies: @ic1000

  136. @Pixo
    @Chrisnonymous

    “ One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again.”

    That’d be great if it happened. Trump is really old and partly damaged goods at this point. I’m ready for DeSantis, who I think will also be more effective in office.

    Trump circa 2016 unfortunately is gone, and will be even goner with another two years of aging.

    If we have a two demented geezer repeat race in 2024, Biden will likely win again given he has another 4 years of demographic browning to help him.

    The problem for DeSantis is he probably cannot beat Trump in a primary, and even if he pulled off a narrow win, Trump would be a sore loser and tank him in the general election.

    https://twitter.com/BJamie62/status/1552689249178320899

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/28/21/60812493-11058449-image-a-99_1659040634548.jpg

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Harry Baldwin, @Chrisnonymous, @JohnnyWalker123, @Midnights

    Without makeup, Donald Trump blah blah blah

    Hilarious snark. Now let’s talk about Nancy Pelosi’s neck:

    No wonder she’s so fond of scarves.

    But, yeah, Trump isn’t getting any younger.

  137. @Corvinus
    @Alden

    What we do know is that for the first time in our history a federal magistrate found probable cause to believe an ex president was illegally in possession of classified/top secret documents which he had refused to return voluntarily. The affidavit is being kept sealed to protect the source of the probable cause information, as well as the innocent until proven guilty subject of the search warrant. So yes, it tells us a lot: that the AG and the DOJ are acting within the law.

    EO 13526 restated the authorized list of designees who can originate classification, in effect rescinding any previous designations made by officials or agency heads to subordinates. A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Ben tillman, @Curle

    What we do know is that for the first time in our history a federal magistrate found probable cause to believe an ex president was illegally in possession of classified/top secret documents which he had refused to return voluntarily. The affidavit is being kept sealed to protect the source of the probable cause information, as well as the innocent until proven guilty subject of the search warrant. So yes, it tells us a lot: that the AG and the DOJ are acting within the law.

    What we know is that for the first time in our history an Attorney General has sought a warrant to search the homes, papers, and effects of a former President of the United States.

    A warrant application is an ex parte proceeding in which the government can say whatever it wants as justification for a search and seizure. The warrant is tantamount to a “general warrant,” which was not discrete in its scope; “general warrants” were one of the Crown’s abuses which led to the Revolution, and the corrective was the Fourth Amendment which required specificity in warrants with regards to the materials sought and the places to be searched.

    We’ve all seen this “ongoing investigation” and “classified materials” gambit before in seasons 1 through 5 of Get Trump! Garland gave his ridiculous press conference, and before the sun set on that day DOJ had already leaked to the Washington Post the “nuclear secrets” nonsense. This alone justifies the unsealing and publication of the Affidavit of Probable cause.

    EO 13526 restated the authorized list of designees who can originate classification, in effect rescinding any previous designations made by officials or agency heads to subordinates. A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified

    Mr. Trump was the President of the United States and Commander in Chief. Inherent in the Office were Constitutionally prescribed powers, including the plenary power with regard to classification. Some bureaucratic red tape doesn’t diminish the President’s Constitutional powers. No one in his right mind is going to credit some archival pipsqueak in an argument with the President and criminalize the President’s position in such a dispute and if you think this is a reasonable position to take your more far gone than you know.

    • Agree: bomag
  138. @Anon
    Under no circumstances may someone hold classified documents outside of an appropriate facility. Trump was holding such documents, refused to return them, hence the FBI action. Not a witch hunt, not weaponization of the DOJ, but the law being enforced.

    Replies: @Alden, @Ben tillman

    If he was holding them, they weren’t classified, ipso facto.

  139. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Art Deco:


    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House.
     
    Corvy, old pal, the Donald has many virtues, but being well-organized and planning carefully for the future are not among them.

    In all likelihood, someone (maybe Trump, maybe not) told some GSA flunky, "Pack up all that junk and ship it to Mar-a-Lago."

    Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.

    Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump's passports.

    The ruling class is not very smart.

    But their hoodlums have guns. Lots of guns.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Harry Baldwin, @James B. Shearer

    “Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.”

    Almost certainly Trump and his aides knew precisely what they decided to keep, and without going through the stated process. It would not be surprising that they made photocopies.

    “Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump’s passports.”

    Almost certainly the FBI, based on probable cause from one of Trump’s own officials, that they had sensitive material. Remember, one of Trump’s lawyers signed a letter in June asserting that there was no more classified information stored Trump’s Florida home. Furthermore, two of his hand-picked officials, former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone and his deputy Patrick Philbin, were questioned about how boxes of White House documents came to be stored at Trump’s residence. The National Archives contacted Philbin when it became aware of missing documents.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to me:


    Almost certainly the FBI, based on probable cause from one of Trump’s own officials, that they had sensitive material.
     
    Why would one of Trump's own associates rat him out on what is almost certainly, at most, an innocent error?

    Okay, you would because that is the kind of person you are. Most people aren't like that.

    News reports say that it was a Secret Service goon. Quite likely.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  140. @Buzz Mohawk
    Right on time, FBI damage control (or positive publicity, or whatever you want to call it):

    FBI rescues more than 200 trafficking victims, including 84 children, in "Operation Cross Country

    Aww, the FBI is just a bunch of good guys saving kids. Funny how all of a sudden they saved them just now. Did they find any of them in Trump's closet?

    (Sorry, but you can't live in this country anymore without becoming an absolute cynic.)

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ben tillman

    It’s fitting that the FBI responded to criticism of its lawlessness by lawlessly imprisoning Adam Bies for a crime the arrest warrant affidavit conclusively proves he did not commit.

  141. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Jackpot:


    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process.
     
    Corvy, read this analysis in Politico -- and keep in mind that Politico is generally left-wing and hostile to Trump.

    As the article points out, numerous times Presidents have declassified info very, very informally, indeed, on the fly.

    What you call "the existing process" is only the "existing" process up to the moment some President chooses not to follow it. Then, it is the "past process."

    The current common process is just based on an Executive Order from Obama, and that EO is not binding on Obama's successors as President: later Presidents can do whatever they want.

    To be sure, Congress could pass a law trying to restrain the President.

    But, as the article suggests, that might well be unconstitutional: the Constitution makes the President "Commander-in-Chief," and, prima facie, that gives him control of classification relating to the national defense, regardless of what Congress might say.

    Don't get me wrong: I think Julie Kelly is probably right that the ruling elite will indict Trump, convict him, and send him to prison, simply because you and your friends in the parasitic overclass are no longer constrained by the rule of law.

    But that will lead to a Constitutional crisis.

    And perhaps civil war.

    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.

    Be careful what you wish for, Corvy!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @ic1000, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Prester John

    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.

    I think it’d look more like Northern Ireland during the troubles or Latin American civil wars during the last century.

    Did you see the two cops in Cincinnati who were called by a homeowner when an ATF agent arrived at his door asking to take a look at his guns? They drew on him, he blew them off with a proclamation “I’m a Federal Agent,” and told them they’re “making a big mistake” but they took him down, tased him, and cuffed him anyway. He was incredulous the whole time because he is a “Federal Agent!” I’d expect to see things like that a lot more in the near future. State and municipal police arresting Federal Agents would be a likely way to kick off Civil War II.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    Liberal states have been defying federal law for decades now with their 'sanctuary cities'. If one party gets to pick and choose which federal laws it obeys, which shouldn't the other do the same?

    This applies to 'election fortification' too. If one party is allowed to expel the election observers of the other from its vote counts, why shouldn't the excluded party start doing the same?

    , @scrivener3
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    The reason our descent into authoritarian police state is so slow is the genius of the designers of the American republic.

    A Federal Government of enumerated powers put many roadblocks and delays in the consolidation of all power in Washington. (Lochner era)

    The tripartite structure of the Federal government often limited the actions of one branch be it Congress, POTUS or the USSC.

    The explicit Bill of Rights were a fallback tower to defend the diminishing freedoms.

    And now with the actions of Florida (defying the coved lockdown directives from the bureaucracy), and other States attempting to reform voting in at least their jurisdiction, show the power of dual sovereigns.

    The administrative state was a big mistake unconstrained by the checks and balances.

    No people ever voted themselves out of the situation we are now in. But the State governments are much more powerful and might challenge the hegemony of Washington. They don't need to taser fed agents. Much of what Washington does is without legal justification and the States can force the issue.

  142. Just because they have classification markings does not mean the documents are still classified. Collectible is another story.

  143. … presidents are consumers of intelligence. The US can’t do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.

    All ex-Presidents have the right to continue receiving CIA briefings. Somehow this does not prevent the US doing diplomacy.

    • Replies: @James B. Shearer
    @James N. Kennett

    "All ex-Presidents have the right to continue receiving CIA briefings. .."

    IIRC this is a courtesy not a right.

  144. @Corvinus
    @Alden

    What we do know is that for the first time in our history a federal magistrate found probable cause to believe an ex president was illegally in possession of classified/top secret documents which he had refused to return voluntarily. The affidavit is being kept sealed to protect the source of the probable cause information, as well as the innocent until proven guilty subject of the search warrant. So yes, it tells us a lot: that the AG and the DOJ are acting within the law.

    EO 13526 restated the authorized list of designees who can originate classification, in effect rescinding any previous designations made by officials or agency heads to subordinates. A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Ben tillman, @Curle

    The magistrate did not find what you claim he found.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Ben tillman

    "The magistrate did not find what you claim he found."

    And you know this how?

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

  145. @Alden
    @Anon

    You are wrong. You are just speculating.

    In June if this year the FBI inspected the room in Maralago in which the records were kept. The FBI found that the documents were properly stored and secured by the on site secret service. The FBI did recommend a different lock on the door of the room. The secret service guards installed the new lock.

    As per United States Civil Code Title 18 and the December 29 2009 EO 13526 the president can take any and all documents with him when he leaves the White House in accordance with precedent and custom since George Washington,

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “In June if this year the FBI inspected the room in Maralago in which the records were kept. The FBI found that the documents were properly stored and secured by the on site secret service. The FBI did recommend a different lock on the door of the room. The secret service guards installed the new lock.”

    You’re not providing the complete story.

    https://www.kcra.com/article/mar-a-lago-trump-doj-criminal-inquiry-timeline/40851458#

    Feb. 9, 2022
    News outlets report that NARA asked the Justice Department to investigate Trump’s handling of White House records and whether he violated the Presidential Records Act and other laws related to classified information. The Presidential Records Act requires all records created by a sitting president to be turned over to the National Archives at the end of their administration.

    May 12, 2022
    News outlets report that investigators subpoenaed NARA for access to the classified documents retrieved from Mar-a-Lago. The subpoena, which is part of the process to allow investigators to take possession of the documents from the NARA, is the first public indication of the Justice Department using a grand jury in its investigation.

    June 3, 2022
    Four investigators, including a top Justice Department counterintelligence official, visit Mar-a-Lago seeking more information about classified material that had been taken to Florida. The four investigators meet with Trump’s attorneys and look around the basement room where the documents are being stored. Trump briefly stops by the meeting to say hello to the officials, but he does not answer any questions. During the meeting, the federal officials serve a grand jury subpoena for some of the sensitive national security documents on the premises, and they take away the subpoenaed documents.

    June 8, 2022
    Trump’s attorneys receive a letter from federal investigators, asking them to further secure the room where documents are being stored. In response, Trump aides add a padlock to the room in the basement of Mar-a-Lago.

    In other words, investigators know there are records on the premises. They have an idea what they may contain, but are handling this situation with kid gloves. But the FBI got more information about exactly what was missing from one of Trump’s aides, thus providing them with probable cause and hence the search warrant.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus

    So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President's home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat's position and claiming that the dispute from the President's position is criminal?

    That's what this is all about? Really?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Alden
    @Corvinus

    Instead of quotes from anti Trump Democrat party TV programs such as MSNBC CNN NPR PBS you need to read the applicable laws and EOs. In academic circles it’s called original sources I believe.

    I doubt those FBI agents who visited and later raided Mar a logo had the super dooper top secret clearance to handle extra top top top secret documents. So charge them with mishandling of documents.

  146. @Ben tillman
    @Corvinus

    The magistrate did not find what you claim he found.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “The magistrate did not find what you claim he found.”

    And you know this how?

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    “The magistrate did not find what you claim he found.”

    And you know this how?

     


     
    Likely the same source as your comment in number 139:

    But the FBI got more information about exactly what was missing from one of Trump’s aides, thus providing them with probable cause and hence the search warrant.
     
  147. @Reg Cæsar
    @Harry Baldwin


    Do presidential libraries become major attractions?
     
    A retired teacher and his wife here went on a trip to Arkansas and Texas to visit several presidential libraries, 700 to 1,100 miles away. I'm as bookish and nerdy as anyone, but that struck me as the weirdest vacation ever.

    Replies: @RAZ

    I wouldn’t plan a trip around them but if you’re into history and having just gone to Nixon’s and having been to JFK’s, I think they are worth a visits if you are near them.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @RAZ

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn't tell me.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Ralph L, @Stan Adams, @RAZ, @Curle

  148. @Buzz Mohawk
    Sailer:

    After all these years, I don’t pay all that much attention to Trump, so I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio...
     
    Oh yeah, sure.
    __________________________________
    [Let's just examine that presumption for a moment: "... I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio..." Really now? An unprecedented raid on a former president's residence, presumably to remove documents that are presumably part of a legal dispute -- in a country where presidents have the highest authority to declassify information, and where commonly presidents have taken home all kinds of documents after serving in office, etc., etc., and on and on...! A public intellectual claims "... I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio..."]

    Nothing to see here folks. Move along to my latest post about immigration or my lawn.
    __________________________________

    Thompson ("a bright fellow"):


    ... presidents are consumers of intelligence. The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.
     
    Sailer:

    Is that what this is all about? Memorabilia?

    Really?
     

    ["Golly Gee Wilikers!']

    Sailer:


    Apparently, I hit a nerve:
     
    ["Boy am I clever. I'm a clever outsider -- in spite of the fact that I've had connections all my life and still have them and occasionally mention the fact. Honest, I have no agenda. I'm naive and completely uninvolved and more concerned with how green my lawn is. Don't look at me! I haven't thought about this at all!]

    Thompson:


    ... a bunch of a top secret intelligence information...
     
    Sailer:

    ... the Mar-A-Lago whoop-tee-doo is an intensification of last winter's spat over Trump taking home memorabilia...
     

    ... like "Dictator Kim's Love Letters?"
     

    Har de har har!

    Replies: @Curle, @Anon, @MEH 0910

    But people pay money for this. America – where anyone can make it!

  149. @PhysicistDave
    @Alden

    Alden wrote to me:


    But the president of the United States can classify de classify and re classify any and all documents both while he is president and for the rest of his life.
     
    I'm not sure former Presidents can, but a President certainly can while he is in office.

    Also, the media are claiming Trump had to follow certain procedures laid out in Obama's Executive Order. But of course that Executive Order only apples to people below the President: one President's Executive Orders do not bind a later President.

    Alden also wrote:

    And presidents have always had the right and power to take whatever documents they wish out of the White House when their terms finish.
     
    Within very broad (and very hazy) limits, yes.

    But the problem is that the law is sufficiently vague that I think they can get a grand-jury indictment -- as the old saying goes, a skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

    And then the case is tried in DC: DC is so anti-Trump, that I'm guessing they will convict, given the vagueness of the laws.

    And then you have a Constitutional crisis.

    There is ample precedent that someone can run for President even from behind bars (e.g., Eugene Debs).

    And if the Republicans in the House have the guts (which I doubt) they could simply refuse to fund the DoJ at all in retaliation -- Biden cannot veto that: just do not appropriate the funds.

    It can become very messy -- I am not sure the elite has thought this through.

    I've been thinking a lot recently about the Gracchi brothers...

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @Dr. DoomNGloom

    This.

    But the problem is that the law is sufficiently vague that I think they can get a grand-jury indictment — as the old saying goes, a skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

    The rest of the analysis, BTW, is reasonable and sound. Only someone who has worked in a classified environment is aware of both the explicit rules and the tacit behavior norms. For example, much of the technical TS-SCI information can be found in public sources. TS-SCI may even be linked (Wiki-leaks), It is still classified. The law is “don’t look at it”, and the behavioral norm is don’t verify anything, so don’t talk about it. Yes, one could lose clearance for browsing Wiki-leaks.

    More on the legal technical.
    Where the law isn’t vague, the classification is. The label on a document or box must be at the highest level of any of the contents. That label also applies to anything taken from that document. Even if the sensitive information is removed, an authorized classifier is required to change the label or to extract anything from that document at a lower classification.

    This is all perfectly reasonable, the declassification should not be done casually by just anyone (often without deep knowledge of why this is classified). However, it allows for technical violations subject to prosecution discretion.

    It does appear this incident is consistent with being the latest attempt in ongoing effort to find or manufacture something, anything, to indict. Having failed at every turn, some technical violation seems like a last resort. I do believe just about anyone can be found in technical violation of our vast, vague, and sometimes contradictory laws.

    That they have spent this much time and effort on Trump and not yet found anything that sticks seems pretty remarkable.

    • Thanks: PhysicistDave
    • Replies: @Alden
    @Dr. DoomNGloom

    The President and EX presidents are way above the level of other government workers and federal contractors and employees of federal contractors .

    They are exempt from those rules procedures and protocols . They can see anything and classify re classify and de classify any document. So posting rules and procedures for other than presidents and EX presidents is ridiculous, asinine and makes you look ignorant and stupid.

    Replies: @Dr. DoomNGloom

  150. @Steve Sailer
    @J.Ross

    I went to a wedding reception at the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, CA last year. It was a very nice place for a wedding party. They built a reproduction of the East Room of the White House for hosting receptions. It was a big hit among attendees.

    Replies: @RAZ, @Corvinus, @Buzz Mohawk

    In my family some of the liberal members would probably not attend a wedding there on principle. Too bad, they’d gain some useful nuance if they did. I’ve been reading the Nixon chapter in Kissinger’s new book lately so it was an interesting time to visit the library a couple of weeks ago.

  151. @Pixo
    @Chrisnonymous

    “ One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again.”

    That’d be great if it happened. Trump is really old and partly damaged goods at this point. I’m ready for DeSantis, who I think will also be more effective in office.

    Trump circa 2016 unfortunately is gone, and will be even goner with another two years of aging.

    If we have a two demented geezer repeat race in 2024, Biden will likely win again given he has another 4 years of demographic browning to help him.

    The problem for DeSantis is he probably cannot beat Trump in a primary, and even if he pulled off a narrow win, Trump would be a sore loser and tank him in the general election.

    https://twitter.com/BJamie62/status/1552689249178320899

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/28/21/60812493-11058449-image-a-99_1659040634548.jpg

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Harry Baldwin, @Chrisnonymous, @JohnnyWalker123, @Midnights

    He does look his age in these pictures and rather portly. I’d been hearing that he ‘d lost weight since leaving office but it doesn’t appear to be so.

  152. @Mr. Anon
    @Dave Pinsen

    No President should hava a Presidential library. It's the modern equivalent of the Roman Senate declaring a former emperor to be a God and having temples consecrated to him. The deification of public officials is unseemly for a Republic of free men (which of course we aren't, but were supposed to be).

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Intelligent Dasein, @Art Deco

    No President should have a Presidential library. It’s the modern equivalent of the Roman Senate declaring a former emperor to be a God and having temples consecrated to him.

    I disagree. I rather like the idea of keeping a warts-and-all record of the president’s activities in office and making it available o the public. It helps to bring scholarship to bear on his life and times, which helps to clarify the judgment of history, and this in turn is essential for maintaining liberty over the long haul. Like road signs and weights & measures, presidential libraries are one few instances of the government using our tax money to actually benefit us. We would be poorer without them.

  153. @Altai
    I keep saying it but during his presidency Trump was treated like any other leader targeted for regime change. That's why his hard line against Maduro always amused me. Best start sympathising with the Maduros of the world Donald, you're one of them now.

    They also pretend it's about anything other than the very popular policies of said leader that elections occasionally slip up on and allow the public to vote on and then replace said leader with somebody with all the (Alleged or real) faults except the popular policies that usually revolve around said country not being pushed around by the US or Israel or local oligarchs.

    What was simply unusual about it was that Trump was supporting policies in the national interest of the USA.

    In this process then the elites are revealed as deliberately anti-national. The tension between their desire to put the white working class in it's place with pro-parasitic individualistic economic policy and shipping industrial jobs overseas and their desire to still be able to exploit the US and it's military to enforce pro-Israel neocon policy is no clearer seen than with China. Their anti-social economic ideologies told them that shipping off industry to China was good because it hurt the poor in the US but it simultaneously built up the only entity capable of pushing the US off it's hegemonic perch.

    And now they still can't help their base instincts and have triggered a war in Ukraine and pushing Russia away from Western systems. But like Iran and North Korea before it, Russia has been forced by previous sanctions to build it's autarky up and has weathered them well. And now they've been banished from the West there is nowhere for them to go but into a deeper alliance with China. We're already seeing more cooperation between Russia, Iran, China and Syria. And so with it's actions in Ukraine making it look foolish because it hasn't hurt Russia enough Pelosi et al have been sent to stare down China to try and get some great power credibility back. But that backfired too with China casually going one step further to invasion of Taiwan and the US sitting back and watching. (Pelosi's plane even did a kowtow by going the long way around the South China Sea, implicitly validating their claims there with their new military bases)

    They're losing control and lashing out to anyone who notices how dangerous and thus how illegitimate they are. It's like with all regimes of lies and coercion. They keep the public inline with unpopular policies through propaganda ("Diversity is our strength!", "They're just trying to find a better life!", "Bro, companies exist to make profits bro! There's nothing wrong with they're doing!") and then one day the bank breaks the population becomes not just aware of their interests but that they're not alone in their thoughts. It always takes people like this by surprise. First slowly and then all at once.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb, @John Derbyshire

    His, hers, ours, yours, theirs, its. How hard is it?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @John Derbyshire

    No, he's saying that we are a perch, and the budgie that stands on us is the government.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  154. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Art Deco:


    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House.
     
    Corvy, old pal, the Donald has many virtues, but being well-organized and planning carefully for the future are not among them.

    In all likelihood, someone (maybe Trump, maybe not) told some GSA flunky, "Pack up all that junk and ship it to Mar-a-Lago."

    Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.

    Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump's passports.

    The ruling class is not very smart.

    But their hoodlums have guns. Lots of guns.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Harry Baldwin, @James B. Shearer

    Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.

    I heard Bill O’Reilly interviewed on the Mark Simone show this week. O’Reilly knows Trump well. He said he can’t imagine the man sifting through papers deciding what he wants and what he doesn’t. As O’Reilly said, he doesn’t have the attention span for that sort of task. Whatever is in those boxes is what was put there by the person assigned to handle the task.

  155. @Corvinus
    @Ben tillman

    "The magistrate did not find what you claim he found."

    And you know this how?

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “The magistrate did not find what you claim he found.”

    And you know this how?

    Likely the same source as your comment in number 139:

    But the FBI got more information about exactly what was missing from one of Trump’s aides, thus providing them with probable cause and hence the search warrant.

  156. @James B. Shearer
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    "... Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, .."

    This is just more Trump BS. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why. Then send a written order to the relevant departments and make this order public. Then make the documents public. But then you would be accountable for what you had done and Trump doesn't like being accountable for anything.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @peterike, @Curle

    If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why.

    Oh a press conference. Or maybe something like Tweet about what you did to your tens of millions of followers, which is precisely what Trump did.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @peterike



    If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why.
     
    Oh a press conference. Or maybe something like Tweet about what you did to your tens of millions of followers, which is precisely what Trump did.

     

    I'm sorry but a tweet does not conform to the requirements of comment 6 to archival regulation § 5467.2, which requires that a President's declassification requests be submitted in the pre-printed triplicate form 67A for time stamp and review (yellow page is the Archivist's copy). The proper triplicate forms may be requested by mail to the archivist's office including a cover letter and self-enclosed, postage pre-paid return envelope. Due to budgetary constraints, a maximum of five (5) pre-printed forms 67A may be requested under a single cover letter.

    Unfortunately, the non-observance of this necessary requirement and the retention of classified materials means that the former President must spend the remainder of his life in Federal Prison. No one is above the law!

    Replies: @James B. Shearer, @epebble

  157. @Corvinus
    @Alden

    "In June if this year the FBI inspected the room in Maralago in which the records were kept. The FBI found that the documents were properly stored and secured by the on site secret service. The FBI did recommend a different lock on the door of the room. The secret service guards installed the new lock."

    You're not providing the complete story.

    https://www.kcra.com/article/mar-a-lago-trump-doj-criminal-inquiry-timeline/40851458#

    Feb. 9, 2022
    News outlets report that NARA asked the Justice Department to investigate Trump's handling of White House records and whether he violated the Presidential Records Act and other laws related to classified information. The Presidential Records Act requires all records created by a sitting president to be turned over to the National Archives at the end of their administration.

    May 12, 2022
    News outlets report that investigators subpoenaed NARA for access to the classified documents retrieved from Mar-a-Lago. The subpoena, which is part of the process to allow investigators to take possession of the documents from the NARA, is the first public indication of the Justice Department using a grand jury in its investigation.

    June 3, 2022
    Four investigators, including a top Justice Department counterintelligence official, visit Mar-a-Lago seeking more information about classified material that had been taken to Florida. The four investigators meet with Trump's attorneys and look around the basement room where the documents are being stored. Trump briefly stops by the meeting to say hello to the officials, but he does not answer any questions. During the meeting, the federal officials serve a grand jury subpoena for some of the sensitive national security documents on the premises, and they take away the subpoenaed documents.

    June 8, 2022
    Trump's attorneys receive a letter from federal investigators, asking them to further secure the room where documents are being stored. In response, Trump aides add a padlock to the room in the basement of Mar-a-Lago.

    In other words, investigators know there are records on the premises. They have an idea what they may contain, but are handling this situation with kid gloves. But the FBI got more information about exactly what was missing from one of Trump's aides, thus providing them with probable cause and hence the search warrant.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Alden

    So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President’s home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat’s position and claiming that the dispute from the President’s position is criminal?

    That’s what this is all about? Really?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President’s home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat’s position and claiming that the dispute from the President’s position is criminal? That’s what this is all about? Really?”

    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?

    Replies: @Alden, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle

  158. Anonymous[209] • Disclaimer says:
    @J.Ross
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Selling American candy in Britain (or pretending to) is asking for police attention because British and European candy is normally far superior. I'm not aware of any popular clamor for American candy from the great British public, and in fact there's a certain number of Brits who never tire of pointing out that Hershey's chocolate allegedly tastes like vomit.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Anonymous

    Almost certainly fronts for other businesses that want to use the prestigious “Oxford Street” address.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Anonymous

    Right but my point was that this was a Simpsonsishly bad choice of pretext.
    Joke: they're all Asians, why hadn't they said they were test prep centers. Or better: Islamic schools. The police would leave them alone and investigate anyone who bothered them.

    , @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    I once visited the "corporate headquarters" of a company that had an address in a famous/prestigious locale like this. The "office" consisted of a tiny room just big enough for a secretary with a computer and telephone. The whole building was like this. I assume it was originally residential apartments, but had at some time been subdivided into hundreds of these tiny single-room "offices", each rented to a company that just wanted to be able to put the address on its stationery.

  159. @Mr. Anon
    @Dave Pinsen

    No President should hava a Presidential library. It's the modern equivalent of the Roman Senate declaring a former emperor to be a God and having temples consecrated to him. The deification of public officials is unseemly for a Republic of free men (which of course we aren't, but were supposed to be).

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Intelligent Dasein, @Art Deco

    Agreed. Build a modular records center in Kansas City to house the archival material of interest to historians and deed the physical plant and the gew gaws over to the county governments of the places they currently sit and let them decide what to do with them. A president leaves office, you add another module.

    While we’re at it, we might recall that the Nixons gave up their security detail in 1986 and Mrs. Kennedy and her children had after 1975 no more protection than that offered by the doormen at their building. So why do we have Secret Service agents shlepping around after anyone who left office prior to 2010?

    We can add a law prohibiting corporations from concluding agreements with parties domiciled in other states or domiciled abroad which provide for the payment of honoraria if the honorarium in question exceeds x% of nominal personal income per capita. Cut the amount trade associations are paying George W. Bush by about 80% and the amount colleges and universities are paying Barack Obama by about 90%.

  160. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Jackpot:


    One problem for Trump is that he’s no longer president and his possession of tangible copies of apparently sensitive national security records opens the door to a host of legal entanglements. Why does he have those records in the first place, given that his own lawyers said all documents were given back. His “standing order” is simply his interpretation of what he is able to unilaterally declassify, and is most likely an effort to circumvent the existing process.
     
    Corvy, read this analysis in Politico -- and keep in mind that Politico is generally left-wing and hostile to Trump.

    As the article points out, numerous times Presidents have declassified info very, very informally, indeed, on the fly.

    What you call "the existing process" is only the "existing" process up to the moment some President chooses not to follow it. Then, it is the "past process."

    The current common process is just based on an Executive Order from Obama, and that EO is not binding on Obama's successors as President: later Presidents can do whatever they want.

    To be sure, Congress could pass a law trying to restrain the President.

    But, as the article suggests, that might well be unconstitutional: the Constitution makes the President "Commander-in-Chief," and, prima facie, that gives him control of classification relating to the national defense, regardless of what Congress might say.

    Don't get me wrong: I think Julie Kelly is probably right that the ruling elite will indict Trump, convict him, and send him to prison, simply because you and your friends in the parasitic overclass are no longer constrained by the rule of law.

    But that will lead to a Constitutional crisis.

    And perhaps civil war.

    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.

    Be careful what you wish for, Corvy!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @ic1000, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Prester John

    They may indict. Who knows? They may even get a conviction. Nevertheless, I just don’t see Trump ever going to prison in light of the very scenarios which you have yourself outlined (as well as a few others that I can think of offhand). Trump remains enormously popular in this country–and for good reason (whether one likes him or not). I don’t think that the “ruling class” would want to risk opening Pandora’s Box. As always, time will tell.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Prester John


    They may indict. Who knows? They may even get a conviction. Nevertheless, I just don’t see Trump ever going to prison in light of the very scenarios which you have yourself outlined (as well as a few others that I can think of offhand). Trump remains enormously popular in this country–and for good reason (whether one likes him or not). I don’t think that the “ruling class” would want to risk opening Pandora’s Box. As always, time will tell.
     
    I think it's likely that there will be a criminal indictment out of D.C.

    If they can indict, try, convict and jail a former President - I mean if they can physically conclude this chain of events resulting in the former President behind bars without someone stopping them by force if necessary - it will confirm that they are all powerful and can do whatever they want without limit. No one who is not their hand-picked boy will ever even want to be President in the future.

    Replies: @epebble, @Ralph L

  161. @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

    Dale Van Atta, who was on the staff of Jack Anderson, maintained that material marked ‘Top Secret’ usually had at least one hot item in it, but that designations ‘confidential’ and ‘secret’ seldom did and were commonly used to cover up bureaucratic bungling. It was his contention that the ocean of improperly classified material made federal employees less vigilant about protecting genuine state secrets.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @Art Deco

    Art Deco wrote to me:


    Dale Van Atta, who was on the staff of Jack Anderson, maintained that material marked ‘Top Secret’ usually had at least one hot item in it, but that designations ‘confidential’ and ‘secret’ seldom did and were commonly used to cover up bureaucratic bungling.
     
    Yeah. The general impression among people dealing with classified information was that "Confidential" and "Secret" meant next to nothing. I mean, if you tried to sell that stuff to the Soviets, you'd go to jail, but otherwise...

    What really, really mattered was the SCI stuff. At least in terms of technology, that was serious.

    I was present at one (and only one) security breach of SCI material: I shut it down immediately, and I was in fact rather shaken: everyone present cooperated with dealing with the breach. (No, I cannot, for obvious reasons, go into details. I will say two things: it was so long ago that the material is probably irrelevant by now, and also I still wonder if it was really a breach or just a test by the security guys to see how we would deal with it. Regardless, I am not going into details.)

    AD also wrote:

    It was his contention that the ocean of improperly classified material made federal employees less vigilant about protecting genuine state secrets.
     
    Yes and no. All of us tech people were really very careful with regard to truly key technical stuff.
  162. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus

    So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President's home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat's position and claiming that the dispute from the President's position is criminal?

    That's what this is all about? Really?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President’s home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat’s position and claiming that the dispute from the President’s position is criminal? That’s what this is all about? Really?”

    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Corvinus

    United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 plus Obama’s Executive Order 13536 December 2009. Plus more than 200 years of custom and precedent.

    There are no documents that a former president cannot keep. So stop lying you ugly old crow🦅🦅🦅

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?
     
    The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. "Protocols" contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.

    If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn't use the secret magic words so the "Declassificus Immediatis!" spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument. Imprison him for that and you'll never, ever put this country back together again.

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?
     
    I have no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government. They'll claim that any release of documents that Trump declassified but that they don't recognize as having been declassified is "obstruction of justice." The DOJ, of course, can leak whatever it wants illegally without consequence. Again, we've seen this season of Get Trump! before.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Curle
    @Corvinus

    “who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences”

    Whose opinion are you passing on here as your own?

  163. Anonymous[209] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @PhysicistDave


    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.
     
    I think it'd look more like Northern Ireland during the troubles or Latin American civil wars during the last century.

    Did you see the two cops in Cincinnati who were called by a homeowner when an ATF agent arrived at his door asking to take a look at his guns? They drew on him, he blew them off with a proclamation "I'm a Federal Agent," and told them they're "making a big mistake" but they took him down, tased him, and cuffed him anyway. He was incredulous the whole time because he is a "Federal Agent!" I'd expect to see things like that a lot more in the near future. State and municipal police arresting Federal Agents would be a likely way to kick off Civil War II.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @scrivener3

    Liberal states have been defying federal law for decades now with their ‘sanctuary cities’. If one party gets to pick and choose which federal laws it obeys, which shouldn’t the other do the same?

    This applies to ‘election fortification’ too. If one party is allowed to expel the election observers of the other from its vote counts, why shouldn’t the excluded party start doing the same?

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  164. @Steve Sailer
    @CCG

    "illegitimate daughter with a mistress" sounds pretty Catholic.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @CCG, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.

    Anglophone Catholics tend to be legalistic in their practice of their faith, reflecting the legalism spread by Britain to its colonies. So American Catholics, or Australian Catholics or whatnot tend to want to change the “rules” so that the “rules” conform to their preferred practices. Many American Catholics in particular seem to think that the Church should be responsive to democratic influences – if we can’t live without hormonal birth control and public opinion polls show that most American Catholic women think birth control is good, then the President of the Church (the Pope) should change the official rules that hormonal birth control is good. It bothers Anglophones and Americans in particular more that the authority has decreed that what they do in practice is bad enough to want to change what the authority decrees.

    Continental Catholics, particularly the Latin-influenced cultures (Spain/France/Italy) seem to be more at home with the idea that they’re sinners who fall short daily and don’t get so worked up about conforming the rules to their behavior. You’re tempted, you try however halfheartedly, you fail, you ask forgiveness, and so forth. Having a mistress is too tempting for those who can. You may feel bad about it sometimes, but you’re not going to lobby the Pope to bless your illicit affair.

    • Agree: kaganovitch
    • Thanks: epebble
    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    Continental Catholics, particularly the Latin-influenced cultures (Spain/France/Italy) seem to be more at home with the idea that they’re sinners who fall short daily and don’t get so worked up about conforming the rules to their behavior.

    There is an analogous dynamic with regard to Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews. Ashkenazi Jews have a drive towards self justification so they tend to want to change the “rules” so that the “rules” conform to their preferred practices as you put it. Hence the proliferation of schism in the Ashkenazi synagogue - Orthodox, Conservative , Reform etc. Sephardim on the other hand will cheerfully concede they don't measure up to the ideal but that's no reason to change the rules. Sephardic congregations can have a membership that ranges from the meticulously observant to those that keep almost nothing; not the Sabbath , not kosher law etc. But they nevertheless can co-exist in a single congregation. By the same token there is almost no schism in Sephardic Jewry.

    As an example, I remember around a decade ago there was an Israeli Orthodox Moroccan high school girl, Ophir Ben Shitrit that entered the Israeli version of American Idol (Kochav Nolad = A Star is Born). This was a no-no in the Orthodox high school she attended and she was expelled. It made all the Israeli papers and became a cause célèbre for feminists , Orthodox and otherwise. At the time JOFA the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance was very engaged with this issue and brought the girl to the USA, sponsored a concert for her , media interviews etc. in order to smite patriarchy a mighty blow. When the JOFA journalist was interviewing her for JOFA's magazine she asked the girl to describe her resentment at the insensitivity of the Rabbis at her school who were trying to crush her dreams and so on and so forth. To which she replied to the utter bewilderment of the interviewer "The Rabbis were completely right. It is prohibited by the Halakha(Jewish law). I saw a great opportunity for myself and couldn't resist the opportunity/temptation but that's no reason to change the law." It's almost inconceivable that an Ashkenazia in that position would say anything of the sort. The tendency to self justification is just too strong.

    , @Anonymous
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    That reminds me of "traditionalist Catholic" Mel Gibson with his divorce. If this kind of "traditionalist Catholicism" had been around in Henry VIII's day it would have saved the world a lot of trouble.

    , @epebble
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    That is an interesting analysis. Is there a similar pattern for other denominations too? (Anglophone vs. Continental Protestants, Orthodox Christians etc.,).

  165. @peterike
    @James B. Shearer


    If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why.
     
    Oh a press conference. Or maybe something like Tweet about what you did to your tens of millions of followers, which is precisely what Trump did.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why.

    Oh a press conference. Or maybe something like Tweet about what you did to your tens of millions of followers, which is precisely what Trump did.

    I’m sorry but a tweet does not conform to the requirements of comment 6 to archival regulation § 5467.2, which requires that a President’s declassification requests be submitted in the pre-printed triplicate form 67A for time stamp and review (yellow page is the Archivist’s copy). The proper triplicate forms may be requested by mail to the archivist’s office including a cover letter and self-enclosed, postage pre-paid return envelope. Due to budgetary constraints, a maximum of five (5) pre-printed forms 67A may be requested under a single cover letter.

    Unfortunately, the non-observance of this necessary requirement and the retention of classified materials means that the former President must spend the remainder of his life in Federal Prison. No one is above the law!

    • LOL: PhysicistDave
    • Replies: @James B. Shearer
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    "I’m sorry but a tweet does not conform .."

    You think Trump wrote or even approved everything that appeared on his twitter account? If he later found some tweet awkward he would likely claim some intern wrote it.

    , @epebble
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    Former Trump officials say his claim of 'standing order' to declassify is nonsense

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/18/politics/trump-claim-standing-order-declassify-nonsense-patently-false-former-officials/index.html

    Replies: @Curle

  166. @Reg Cæsar
    Whatever Trump's motive, a large part of the FBI's is Merrick Garland's desire for revenge.

    By the way, what's with the name Merrick? Does he have siblings named Wantagh and Syosset?

    "Garland" was once "Garfinkel". Apparently the top Democratic politician with the surname Simon (Bill Jr is Republican) is Cosette Simon, the Pete Buttigieg of Fort Wayne.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosette_Simon

    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.

    Replies: @bomag, @Pixo, @Veteran Aryan, @Alden, @Hibernian

    What did Trump do to Garland that Garland wants revenge?

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Alden

    He’s German?

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Alden

    Alden asked Reg Cæsar:


    What did Trump do to Garland that Garland wants revenge?
     
    BHO appointed Garland to the High Court. McConnell kept him off, and then Trump appointed someone else to the seat.

    Not hard to think that Garland is angry at Trump over this, even though it was actually McConnell's doing. After all, it is at least plausible that McConnell consulted with Trump on the matter.

    People have committed murder for less.

  167. @Prester John
    @PhysicistDave

    They may indict. Who knows? They may even get a conviction. Nevertheless, I just don't see Trump ever going to prison in light of the very scenarios which you have yourself outlined (as well as a few others that I can think of offhand). Trump remains enormously popular in this country--and for good reason (whether one likes him or not). I don't think that the "ruling class" would want to risk opening Pandora's Box. As always, time will tell.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    They may indict. Who knows? They may even get a conviction. Nevertheless, I just don’t see Trump ever going to prison in light of the very scenarios which you have yourself outlined (as well as a few others that I can think of offhand). Trump remains enormously popular in this country–and for good reason (whether one likes him or not). I don’t think that the “ruling class” would want to risk opening Pandora’s Box. As always, time will tell.

    I think it’s likely that there will be a criminal indictment out of D.C.

    If they can indict, try, convict and jail a former President – I mean if they can physically conclude this chain of events resulting in the former President behind bars without someone stopping them by force if necessary – it will confirm that they are all powerful and can do whatever they want without limit. No one who is not their hand-picked boy will ever even want to be President in the future.

    • Replies: @epebble
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    After indictment (which seems likely considering the seriousness of alleged crimes), if there is a trial and conviction, I think the natural course of action will be governed by the 1974 Nixon precedent. Biden will make this speech:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/ford-pardons-nixon-in-1974/2017/07/21/c83efd54-6e3b-11e7-abbc-a53480672286_video.html

    Two birds with one stone. Nobody is above the law withheld and accusation of banana republic forestalled.

    , @Ralph L
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    someone stopping them by force if necessary

    This explains why they grossly overreacted to Jan 6--to discourage future protests by the wrong people.

  168. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President’s home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat’s position and claiming that the dispute from the President’s position is criminal? That’s what this is all about? Really?”

    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?

    Replies: @Alden, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle

    United States Civil Code Titles 22 and 18 plus Obama’s Executive Order 13536 December 2009. Plus more than 200 years of custom and precedent.

    There are no documents that a former president cannot keep. So stop lying you ugly old crow🦅🦅🦅

  169. @Corvinus
    @Alden

    "In June if this year the FBI inspected the room in Maralago in which the records were kept. The FBI found that the documents were properly stored and secured by the on site secret service. The FBI did recommend a different lock on the door of the room. The secret service guards installed the new lock."

    You're not providing the complete story.

    https://www.kcra.com/article/mar-a-lago-trump-doj-criminal-inquiry-timeline/40851458#

    Feb. 9, 2022
    News outlets report that NARA asked the Justice Department to investigate Trump's handling of White House records and whether he violated the Presidential Records Act and other laws related to classified information. The Presidential Records Act requires all records created by a sitting president to be turned over to the National Archives at the end of their administration.

    May 12, 2022
    News outlets report that investigators subpoenaed NARA for access to the classified documents retrieved from Mar-a-Lago. The subpoena, which is part of the process to allow investigators to take possession of the documents from the NARA, is the first public indication of the Justice Department using a grand jury in its investigation.

    June 3, 2022
    Four investigators, including a top Justice Department counterintelligence official, visit Mar-a-Lago seeking more information about classified material that had been taken to Florida. The four investigators meet with Trump's attorneys and look around the basement room where the documents are being stored. Trump briefly stops by the meeting to say hello to the officials, but he does not answer any questions. During the meeting, the federal officials serve a grand jury subpoena for some of the sensitive national security documents on the premises, and they take away the subpoenaed documents.

    June 8, 2022
    Trump's attorneys receive a letter from federal investigators, asking them to further secure the room where documents are being stored. In response, Trump aides add a padlock to the room in the basement of Mar-a-Lago.

    In other words, investigators know there are records on the premises. They have an idea what they may contain, but are handling this situation with kid gloves. But the FBI got more information about exactly what was missing from one of Trump's aides, thus providing them with probable cause and hence the search warrant.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Alden

    Instead of quotes from anti Trump Democrat party TV programs such as MSNBC CNN NPR PBS you need to read the applicable laws and EOs. In academic circles it’s called original sources I believe.

    I doubt those FBI agents who visited and later raided Mar a logo had the super dooper top secret clearance to handle extra top top top secret documents. So charge them with mishandling of documents.

  170. @CCG
    @epebble

    Another "Marine Le Pen" type. If her party really wants to win in Italy, they've to field a patriarchal Catholic man and stop supplication to all foreign countries (including Israel). Especially this:
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2018-12-11/ty-article/.premium/italys-salvini-faces-backlash-at-home-for-slamming-hezbollah-in-israel-visit/

    Also, Meloni's and Salvini's fake Catholicism is nauseating. Meloni hasn't married her live-in boyfriend in spite of having his child years ago, Salvini's personal life is a complete circus (not sure if he's really a Catholic given his easy divorce, illegitimate daughter with a mistress, etc.).

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @epebble

    Meloni hasn’t married her live-in boyfriend in spite of having his child years ago

    That seems like among the weakest of reasons to condemn her. She was born in 1977. Clinton and Trump did far worse but are deified by their respective devotees. Having just one partner in life makes her a saint in comparison.

    • Replies: @CCG
    @epebble

    You're speaking from an American perspective, Italian culture is still based. Then again, Meloni herself might not be Catholic. Her Communist father walked out on the family when she was 12 years old and she hasn't seen him since.
    https://web.archive.org/web/20141105033643/http://cinquantamila.corriere.it/storyTellerThread.php?threadId=MELONI+Giorgia

  171. @Justvisiting
    We live in an age when any information can be easily replicated and distributed in mere seconds.

    The notion that there are important "documents" in only one location is bizarre--wrong century!

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldlan, @SaneClownPosse

    “The notion that there are important “documents” in only one location is bizarre–wrong century! ”

    It seems to be a theme for the 21st century.

    On September 11, 2001, supposedly the only documents relating to the Pentagram’s missing 2.4T dollars were destroyed when WTC 7 spontaneously combusted and collapsed.

    Coincidentally that same morning, the ONI team at the Pentagon investigating the money trail was wiped out by a direct hit.

    All coordinated by OBL, hooked up to dialysis, with a satellite phone, in a cave in Afghanistan. OBL did Rummy a big favor. Or Rummy used OBL as cover.

  172. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President’s home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat’s position and claiming that the dispute from the President’s position is criminal? That’s what this is all about? Really?”

    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?

    Replies: @Alden, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle

    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?

    The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. “Protocols” contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.

    If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn’t use the secret magic words so the “Declassificus Immediatis!” spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument. Imprison him for that and you’ll never, ever put this country back together again.

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?

    I have no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government. They’ll claim that any release of documents that Trump declassified but that they don’t recognize as having been declassified is “obstruction of justice.” The DOJ, of course, can leak whatever it wants illegally without consequence. Again, we’ve seen this season of Get Trump! before.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. “Protocols” contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.”

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.

    “If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn’t use the secret magic words so the “Declassificus Immediatis!” spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument.”

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.

    “Imprison him for that and you’ll never, ever put this country back together again”

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    “I no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government”

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @Curle, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr Mox

  173. @Dr. DoomNGloom
    @PhysicistDave

    This.


    But the problem is that the law is sufficiently vague that I think they can get a grand-jury indictment — as the old saying goes, a skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.
     
    The rest of the analysis, BTW, is reasonable and sound. Only someone who has worked in a classified environment is aware of both the explicit rules and the tacit behavior norms. For example, much of the technical TS-SCI information can be found in public sources. TS-SCI may even be linked (Wiki-leaks), It is still classified. The law is "don't look at it", and the behavioral norm is don't verify anything, so don't talk about it. Yes, one could lose clearance for browsing Wiki-leaks.

    More on the legal technical.
    Where the law isn't vague, the classification is. The label on a document or box must be at the highest level of any of the contents. That label also applies to anything taken from that document. Even if the sensitive information is removed, an authorized classifier is required to change the label or to extract anything from that document at a lower classification.

    This is all perfectly reasonable, the declassification should not be done casually by just anyone (often without deep knowledge of why this is classified). However, it allows for technical violations subject to prosecution discretion.

    It does appear this incident is consistent with being the latest attempt in ongoing effort to find or manufacture something, anything, to indict. Having failed at every turn, some technical violation seems like a last resort. I do believe just about anyone can be found in technical violation of our vast, vague, and sometimes contradictory laws.

    That they have spent this much time and effort on Trump and not yet found anything that sticks seems pretty remarkable.

    Replies: @Alden

    The President and EX presidents are way above the level of other government workers and federal contractors and employees of federal contractors .

    They are exempt from those rules procedures and protocols . They can see anything and classify re classify and de classify any document. So posting rules and procedures for other than presidents and EX presidents is ridiculous, asinine and makes you look ignorant and stupid.

    • Replies: @Dr. DoomNGloom
    @Alden

    I am mystified at why you think explanation of the rules is asinine. I never implied a president didn't have classification authority. I merely observed that just because something was labeled TS-SCI does not imply that it really is at that level. The broader point is that those who haven't handled these documents don't appreciate what goes on.

    Of course, a large portion of many classified documents are overclassified.

    Under normal circumstances, the original would be shredded and a replacement printed with new and appropriate markings. The obsolete markings and informal procedure could potentially be used as a technical violation by an overly aggressive prosecutor in a jurisdiction like DC.

    Replies: @Alden

  174. @Corvinus
    @Alden

    What we do know is that for the first time in our history a federal magistrate found probable cause to believe an ex president was illegally in possession of classified/top secret documents which he had refused to return voluntarily. The affidavit is being kept sealed to protect the source of the probable cause information, as well as the innocent until proven guilty subject of the search warrant. So yes, it tells us a lot: that the AG and the DOJ are acting within the law.

    EO 13526 restated the authorized list of designees who can originate classification, in effect rescinding any previous designations made by officials or agency heads to subordinates. A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Ben tillman, @Curle

    How about you cite to the article you lifted this from rather than engage the pretense that these are your thoughts, much less within your scope of knowledge.

    • Agree: bomag
  175. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “So a bureaucratic nerd with an axe to grind propelled the DOJ to apply for a general warrant to search the President’s home, offices and effects over a classification dispute, and the DOJ is taking the bureaucrat’s position and claiming that the dispute from the President’s position is criminal? That’s what this is all about? Really?”

    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?

    Replies: @Alden, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle

    “who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences”

    Whose opinion are you passing on here as your own?

    • Thanks: Kylie
  176. @Anonymous
    @J.Ross

    Almost certainly fronts for other businesses that want to use the prestigious "Oxford Street" address.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Anonymous

    Right but my point was that this was a Simpsonsishly bad choice of pretext.
    Joke: they’re all Asians, why hadn’t they said they were test prep centers. Or better: Islamic schools. The police would leave them alone and investigate anyone who bothered them.

  177. @John Derbyshire
    @Altai

    His, hers, ours, yours, theirs, its. How hard is it?

    Replies: @J.Ross

    No, he’s saying that we are a perch, and the budgie that stands on us is the government.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @J.Ross


    No, he’s saying that we are a perch...
     
    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/W4-STZIrxzo/maxresdefault.jpg
  178. @Steve Sailer
    @J.Ross

    I went to a wedding reception at the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, CA last year. It was a very nice place for a wedding party. They built a reproduction of the East Room of the White House for hosting receptions. It was a big hit among attendees.

    Replies: @RAZ, @Corvinus, @Buzz Mohawk

    “After all these years, I don’t pay all that much attention to Trump…”

    You do, otherwise you wouldn’t have made this post or responded on Twitter about what is taking place.

    You’re a rule of law/law and order guy, right?

  179. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @travell lyte

    What do you think is in Comey's, Clapper's and Brennan's office safes? You think they assiduously follow the impossibly vague law with regard to handling of sensitive materials? They're Class A citizens who get to do whatever the hell they want.

    They're feline, womanish men who have dirt on everyone else in government and know how to backstab call in favors, so to move against one of them is to risk the picture a honeypot hooker in Vegas took of you in a frilly teddy and garters snorting coke that one tome making it into the public domain.

    Replies: @Curle

    But do they have deep throats?

  180. @Alden
    @Dr. DoomNGloom

    The President and EX presidents are way above the level of other government workers and federal contractors and employees of federal contractors .

    They are exempt from those rules procedures and protocols . They can see anything and classify re classify and de classify any document. So posting rules and procedures for other than presidents and EX presidents is ridiculous, asinine and makes you look ignorant and stupid.

    Replies: @Dr. DoomNGloom

    I am mystified at why you think explanation of the rules is asinine. I never implied a president didn’t have classification authority. I merely observed that just because something was labeled TS-SCI does not imply that it really is at that level. The broader point is that those who haven’t handled these documents don’t appreciate what goes on.

    Of course, a large portion of many classified documents are overclassified.

    Under normal circumstances, the original would be shredded and a replacement printed with new and appropriate markings. The obsolete markings and informal procedure could potentially be used as a technical violation by an overly aggressive prosecutor in a jurisdiction like DC.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Dr. DoomNGloom

    Sorry about the words asinine and ridiculous. The point is that the president has total absolute complete powers over classification. He truly is above and beyond any procedures protocols ruled that apply to everyone else.

    So all this blah blah about the rules that apply to non presidents is irrelevant.

    Here’s a thought. Garland isn’t even a federal judge. He’s a federal magistrate judge. Basically an assistant judge. Presided over motions hearings etc. Now, to authorize the warrant, Garland would have to read the “ compelling” reasons for the warrant as described in the affidavit requesting the warrant.

    Which means that Garland committed dastardly violations of security when he read read the affidavit. And so did the FBI agents who wrote the affidavit. Because the affidavit would describe in detail the top secret secret and confidential documents the FBI was looking for.

    And warrants and affidavits are matters of public record available in the clerk’s office. So now anyone can request copies of the affidavit. And both the warrant and supporting affidavits have been read and handled by very low level clerks in the Florida Federal Judiciary District.

    Point is, presidents are not bound by the procedures other federal employees military personnel federal contractors and contractor’s employees are. US Civil Code Title 18 and 22.

  181. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Prester John


    They may indict. Who knows? They may even get a conviction. Nevertheless, I just don’t see Trump ever going to prison in light of the very scenarios which you have yourself outlined (as well as a few others that I can think of offhand). Trump remains enormously popular in this country–and for good reason (whether one likes him or not). I don’t think that the “ruling class” would want to risk opening Pandora’s Box. As always, time will tell.
     
    I think it's likely that there will be a criminal indictment out of D.C.

    If they can indict, try, convict and jail a former President - I mean if they can physically conclude this chain of events resulting in the former President behind bars without someone stopping them by force if necessary - it will confirm that they are all powerful and can do whatever they want without limit. No one who is not their hand-picked boy will ever even want to be President in the future.

    Replies: @epebble, @Ralph L

    After indictment (which seems likely considering the seriousness of alleged crimes), if there is a trial and conviction, I think the natural course of action will be governed by the 1974 Nixon precedent. Biden will make this speech:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/ford-pardons-nixon-in-1974/2017/07/21/c83efd54-6e3b-11e7-abbc-a53480672286_video.html

    Two birds with one stone. Nobody is above the law withheld and accusation of banana republic forestalled.

  182. @RAZ
    @Reg Cæsar

    I wouldn't plan a trip around them but if you're into history and having just gone to Nixon's and having been to JFK's, I think they are worth a visits if you are near them.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn’t tell me.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Reg Cæsar

    He wouldn't have been eligible to vote under the common standards of the time until 1 October 1945, unless the State of Georgia had a lower age threshold.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Reg Cæsar

    , @Ralph L
    @Reg Cæsar

    Carter was born in '24, so '48 was his first presidential election. Do you think he voted Dixiecrat? With his mother going into the Peace Corps later, I doubt it. Not a segregationist family, or it would have come up.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Curle

    , @Stan Adams
    @Reg Cæsar

    https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bill-moyers-public-broadcasting-services-usa-people-and-politics


    The first time I ever voted was in 1948. I was in submarine school. All the other officers there voted for Dewey. I voted for Truman. He's still my favorite President.
     

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Hibernian

    , @RAZ
    @Reg Cæsar


    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn’t tell me.
     
    Don't know who Carter voted for but Reagan was a Democrat when he was young so he probably voted for Roosevelt in the 30's and 40's.
    , @Curle
    @Reg Cæsar

    What were you hoping to glean from this information?

  183. @J.Ross
    @John Derbyshire

    No, he's saying that we are a perch, and the budgie that stands on us is the government.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    No, he’s saying that we are a perch…

  184. This is off-topic for Orange Man Bad for Populism, but is SARS-CoV-2 ever off-topic for iSteve?

    Remember when the ever-morphing Double-Barrel Zoonotic Infection at Market theory of COVID included snakes as either the ultimate origin or an intermediate host in SARS-CoV-2’s epic journey through the Asian animal pantheon before two different SARS-CoV-2 crossed over into people, likely within hours of each other? A whirlwind tour of animals that left no evidence?

    Here’s how snakes and Huanan(?), the “seafood” market that the “gee, a coronavirus hundreds of miles from the nearest animal reservoir, with an inserted furin cleavage site, just the sort of thing researchers at that lab wanted to do? That’s just a coincidence” playing dumb theory (autism theory? the opposite of a conspiracy theory, an autism theory proposes that there is no way any group of people ever worked together out of the public eye)

    Ok, so, the wet market had snakes for sale. Snakes prefer (maybe will only eat?) live prey. Even live mice get expensive if you’re keeping a bunch of snakes 24/7. So, someone at the Wuhan Institute of Virology sold leftover mice to wet market snake dealers. These were mice post-experiment or just used for passaging viruses, mice that should have been euthanized and incinerated. Some of those mice had proto-COVID.

    So, the chain of transmission would look something like this: cave bats to mice to snakes to ? to people or snakes directly to people.

    This theory has the ring of truth. People don’t eat many bats anywhere. People only eat mice if they are very hungry. WIV had mice. I recall hearing about other animals, but Google is very unhelpful in answering “what kinds of lab animals did the Wuhan Institute of Virology use.” So unhelpful that it gives multiple, “COVID started in the wet market. This is scientific consensus. Are you unhappy, Citizen?” sites. Ok, that’s interesting, I guess, but what does that have to do with what animals the lab experimented on?

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @Rob


    Here’s how snakes and Huanan(?), the “seafood” market that the “gee, a coronavirus hundreds of miles from the nearest animal reservoir, with an inserted furin cleavage site, just the sort of thing researchers at that lab wanted to do? That’s just a coincidence”...

    ...This theory has the ring of truth.
     
    As I wrote the other day to another commenter, yes, your theory is very good as far as theories go. Congratulations on coming up with something clever and interesting. It's like a nice piece of art that merits you to stop and admire it.

    I don't think it's true, however. And the reason I don't think it's true is because the close mental association between Covid and Wuhan is spurious; Covid did not begin in Wuhan. There is ample evidence that demonstrates that Covid was circulating in human populations for months if not years before the Wuhan outbreak, so the theory that it escaped from the lab there, while tempting to consider, is entirely unmotivated.

    Your third paragraph (the one I quoted first) is a bit too rhetorical. When you drop a bunch of key assertions (e.g. no available animal hosts, furan cleavage site, etc.) in a rhythmic and tubthumping manner, it is not so much an argument anymore as it is a team cheer. It's like the 9/11 Truthers with their chants about "a steel frame structure collapsing from fire at freefall speed into its own footprint" and so forth.

    Never mind that everything predicated here is false. The Twin Towers did not collapse "from fire," they had a massive jet smash into them. They did not fall at "freefall speed," but took nearly twice as long to fully crumble. Of course, the debris that had been thrown clear of the collapsing heap did fall "at freefall speed" because it was FREELY FALLING, but this in turn means that the towers did not collapse "into their own footprint." Every time I hear a Truther talking about "the laws of physics," I want to beat my head against a desk.

    Likewise, there was no need for local animal hosts. Bats don't fly from Cambodia to Wuhan, but people fly from Wuhan to Cambodia all the time. And there was no inserted "furan cleavage site." The 19 base pairs that make the supposed fingerprint could easily have come from anywhere.
  185. @Dr. DoomNGloom
    @Alden

    I am mystified at why you think explanation of the rules is asinine. I never implied a president didn't have classification authority. I merely observed that just because something was labeled TS-SCI does not imply that it really is at that level. The broader point is that those who haven't handled these documents don't appreciate what goes on.

    Of course, a large portion of many classified documents are overclassified.

    Under normal circumstances, the original would be shredded and a replacement printed with new and appropriate markings. The obsolete markings and informal procedure could potentially be used as a technical violation by an overly aggressive prosecutor in a jurisdiction like DC.

    Replies: @Alden

    Sorry about the words asinine and ridiculous. The point is that the president has total absolute complete powers over classification. He truly is above and beyond any procedures protocols ruled that apply to everyone else.

    So all this blah blah about the rules that apply to non presidents is irrelevant.

    Here’s a thought. Garland isn’t even a federal judge. He’s a federal magistrate judge. Basically an assistant judge. Presided over motions hearings etc. Now, to authorize the warrant, Garland would have to read the “ compelling” reasons for the warrant as described in the affidavit requesting the warrant.

    Which means that Garland committed dastardly violations of security when he read read the affidavit. And so did the FBI agents who wrote the affidavit. Because the affidavit would describe in detail the top secret secret and confidential documents the FBI was looking for.

    And warrants and affidavits are matters of public record available in the clerk’s office. So now anyone can request copies of the affidavit. And both the warrant and supporting affidavits have been read and handled by very low level clerks in the Florida Federal Judiciary District.

    Point is, presidents are not bound by the procedures other federal employees military personnel federal contractors and contractor’s employees are. US Civil Code Title 18 and 22.

  186. @Reg Cæsar
    @RAZ

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn't tell me.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Ralph L, @Stan Adams, @RAZ, @Curle

    He wouldn’t have been eligible to vote under the common standards of the time until 1 October 1945, unless the State of Georgia had a lower age threshold.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Art Deco


    unless the State of Georgia had a lower age threshold.
     
    They did.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Art Deco

    https://ballotpedia.org/Georgia_Age_Requirements_for_Voting,_Amendment_6_(1943)

  187. @Pixo
    @Chrisnonymous

    “ One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again.”

    That’d be great if it happened. Trump is really old and partly damaged goods at this point. I’m ready for DeSantis, who I think will also be more effective in office.

    Trump circa 2016 unfortunately is gone, and will be even goner with another two years of aging.

    If we have a two demented geezer repeat race in 2024, Biden will likely win again given he has another 4 years of demographic browning to help him.

    The problem for DeSantis is he probably cannot beat Trump in a primary, and even if he pulled off a narrow win, Trump would be a sore loser and tank him in the general election.

    https://twitter.com/BJamie62/status/1552689249178320899

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/28/21/60812493-11058449-image-a-99_1659040634548.jpg

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Harry Baldwin, @Chrisnonymous, @JohnnyWalker123, @Midnights

    I think those photos may have been altered, like with punched contrast. Look at the other colors. The red is too dark for the bright white of the lettering and t-shirts.

    Anyway, I am not a die-hard Trump fan. My ideal thing would be Trump-deSantis ticket running against a Harris-Warren ticket. Then they could article 25 Trump after he wins and deSantis would actually govern. Make Tulsi Gabbard his VP.

    Unfortunately, it’s all fantasy. Also, I’m not sure deSantis is a dissident the way Trump is. He seems very happy to court the powers that be in the GOPe. Trump bucks make Trump independence.

    • Replies: @Pixo
    @Chrisnonymous

    DeSantis I can’t think of a single negative thing. He’s just awesome IMO.

    The pics are from fairly pro Trump Daily Mail. Jared and Ivanka look fine.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11058449/Trump-tees-son-Eric-pros-Bryson-DeChambeau-Dustin-Johnson-LIV-series.html

    Here he is looking like crap with Mx. Jenner.

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/28/07/60781421-11056691-Caitlyn_Jenner_herself_a_keen_golf_player_shakes_hands_with_the_-a-23_1658988360522.jpg

    Biden is getting worse fast too. But unlike the Dems, we have a great young heir apparent. He’d also be our first Southern European-American president. Could that give him a little boost?

  188. @Technite78
    @Technite78

    Jeez, Steve's Filipino/Malaysian/Indonesian/Thai moderation slave must have escaped, or is recovering from Monkeypox...

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    I think it’s the dog. Chained to his laptop 23 hours a day.

  189. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @PhysicistDave


    You might want to read about the century of civil war that brought down the Roman Republic.
     
    I think it'd look more like Northern Ireland during the troubles or Latin American civil wars during the last century.

    Did you see the two cops in Cincinnati who were called by a homeowner when an ATF agent arrived at his door asking to take a look at his guns? They drew on him, he blew them off with a proclamation "I'm a Federal Agent," and told them they're "making a big mistake" but they took him down, tased him, and cuffed him anyway. He was incredulous the whole time because he is a "Federal Agent!" I'd expect to see things like that a lot more in the near future. State and municipal police arresting Federal Agents would be a likely way to kick off Civil War II.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @scrivener3

    The reason our descent into authoritarian police state is so slow is the genius of the designers of the American republic.

    A Federal Government of enumerated powers put many roadblocks and delays in the consolidation of all power in Washington. (Lochner era)

    The tripartite structure of the Federal government often limited the actions of one branch be it Congress, POTUS or the USSC.

    The explicit Bill of Rights were a fallback tower to defend the diminishing freedoms.

    And now with the actions of Florida (defying the coved lockdown directives from the bureaucracy), and other States attempting to reform voting in at least their jurisdiction, show the power of dual sovereigns.

    The administrative state was a big mistake unconstrained by the checks and balances.

    No people ever voted themselves out of the situation we are now in. But the State governments are much more powerful and might challenge the hegemony of Washington. They don’t need to taser fed agents. Much of what Washington does is without legal justification and the States can force the issue.

  190. @Reg Cæsar
    @RAZ

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn't tell me.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Ralph L, @Stan Adams, @RAZ, @Curle

    Carter was born in ’24, so ’48 was his first presidential election. Do you think he voted Dixiecrat? With his mother going into the Peace Corps later, I doubt it. Not a segregationist family, or it would have come up.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Ralph L

    Some years ago I encountered a volume of polling results which included questions taken in different era. It included surveys taken in 1938.

    One question was on residential segregation. In 1938, those in favor of residential integration amounted to all of 14% of the surveyed respondents of a national sample. It's a reasonable wager that > 90% of the white population in 1938 favored residential segregation though not necessarily strict, legal-formal residential segregation. Other manifestation of segregation would not have received that level of support, but this one did.

    Another was a more generic question on whether the menu of rights available to people on one side of the color bar should match those available on the other. That's a fuzzy question, because different people will interpret what is a 'right' differently. That having been said, north of 60% of the respondents answered 'no', and, one might guess, did somewhere around 70% of the white respondents. Again, that was a national sample.

    If Carter's family in Sumter County, Ga was not segregationist in some measure, they were a very odd family.

    Replies: @Ralph L

    , @Curle
    @Ralph L

    “or it would have come up.”

    You mean in the ‘76 primary? Who would have risked losing the sizable anti-busing vote by pointing it out? And how would it be verified?

  191. @ic1000
    @PhysicistDave

    Sawdust in the oatmeal -- an analogy that Jack D brought up a few days ago, and that you're doubtlessly familiar with. To what extent can a food processor cut their product before people turn away from it?

    Some regular contributors seem to disagree with the core concept of a Comments Thread, where informed parties add value by building on Sailer's remarks on a given topic -- and by intelligent dissent from them.

    Such people appear to have the meta-objective of making these threads less legible, especially to less-knowledgable readers who might find their way here.

    Hence my Disagreement. IMO, sawdust comments don't merit a response unless they were likely made in naive good faith.

    Replies: @Kylie

    “Some regular contributors seem to disagree with the core concept of a Comments Thread, where informed parties add value by building on Sailer’s remarks on a given topic — and by intelligent dissent from them.”

    Indeed. So well said, thank you.

    I’m dismayed to see Steve routinely allowing these regular contributors to post dissenting comments that are frivolously provocative, dishonest and hostile. Over the years, I have reluctantly concluded that while Steve is apparently serious about his posts, he isn’t at all serious about his comment threads.

    N.B. I’m not at all opposed to seeing comments–even lots of them–which with I disagree. (Yes, Jack D, I mean you.) But as long as those comments are part of a genuine argument, rather than incessant needling, I’m fine with them.

    • Agree: William Badwhite
    • Thanks: ic1000
    • Replies: @ic1000
    @Kylie

    > I’m dismayed to see Steve routinely allowing these regular contributors to post dissenting comments that are frivolously provocative, dishonest and hostile.

    Kylie, long ago, I did a spell as a volunteer moderator at a group blog. That makes me more sympathetic to Steve, who has to actually make a living at this gig. It was a never ending and mostly thankless time sink, where you're either "too lax" or "too strict."

    I imagine that Sailer wants well-reasoned and insightful dissenting comments. And he gets some. However... well, each of us could finish this sentence in our own way.

    I assume Sailer does a fair amount of trimming as it is. The frivolous, dishonest, motte/bailey, strawman, and stupid entries do degrade the threads, but the S/N ratio is still often high enough to justify scanning. So I take that as a small win.

    Replies: @Curle, @Harry Baldwin

  192. @Kylie
    @ic1000

    "Some regular contributors seem to disagree with the core concept of a Comments Thread, where informed parties add value by building on Sailer’s remarks on a given topic — and by intelligent dissent from them."

    Indeed. So well said, thank you.

    I'm dismayed to see Steve routinely allowing these regular contributors to post dissenting comments that are frivolously provocative, dishonest and hostile. Over the years, I have reluctantly concluded that while Steve is apparently serious about his posts, he isn't at all serious about his comment threads.

    N.B. I'm not at all opposed to seeing comments--even lots of them--which with I disagree. (Yes, Jack D, I mean you.) But as long as those comments are part of a genuine argument, rather than incessant needling, I'm fine with them.

    Replies: @ic1000

    > I’m dismayed to see Steve routinely allowing these regular contributors to post dissenting comments that are frivolously provocative, dishonest and hostile.

    Kylie, long ago, I did a spell as a volunteer moderator at a group blog. That makes me more sympathetic to Steve, who has to actually make a living at this gig. It was a never ending and mostly thankless time sink, where you’re either “too lax” or “too strict.”

    I imagine that Sailer wants well-reasoned and insightful dissenting comments. And he gets some. However… well, each of us could finish this sentence in our own way.

    I assume Sailer does a fair amount of trimming as it is. The frivolous, dishonest, motte/bailey, strawman, and stupid entries do degrade the threads, but the S/N ratio is still often high enough to justify scanning. So I take that as a small win.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @ic1000

    As long as non-lawyers or complete dilettantes as regards the law feel comfortable making legal claims online or repeating statements of others made without attribution this problem will persist.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @ic1000

    The frivolous, dishonest, motte/bailey, strawman, and stupid entries do degrade the threads

    Thank goodness there is a "Commenters to Ignore" option. I don't have to read Corvinus's or Tiny Duck's blather, but I do have to read all the responses to them.

  193. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Prester John


    They may indict. Who knows? They may even get a conviction. Nevertheless, I just don’t see Trump ever going to prison in light of the very scenarios which you have yourself outlined (as well as a few others that I can think of offhand). Trump remains enormously popular in this country–and for good reason (whether one likes him or not). I don’t think that the “ruling class” would want to risk opening Pandora’s Box. As always, time will tell.
     
    I think it's likely that there will be a criminal indictment out of D.C.

    If they can indict, try, convict and jail a former President - I mean if they can physically conclude this chain of events resulting in the former President behind bars without someone stopping them by force if necessary - it will confirm that they are all powerful and can do whatever they want without limit. No one who is not their hand-picked boy will ever even want to be President in the future.

    Replies: @epebble, @Ralph L

    someone stopping them by force if necessary

    This explains why they grossly overreacted to Jan 6–to discourage future protests by the wrong people.

  194. @ic1000
    @Kylie

    > I’m dismayed to see Steve routinely allowing these regular contributors to post dissenting comments that are frivolously provocative, dishonest and hostile.

    Kylie, long ago, I did a spell as a volunteer moderator at a group blog. That makes me more sympathetic to Steve, who has to actually make a living at this gig. It was a never ending and mostly thankless time sink, where you're either "too lax" or "too strict."

    I imagine that Sailer wants well-reasoned and insightful dissenting comments. And he gets some. However... well, each of us could finish this sentence in our own way.

    I assume Sailer does a fair amount of trimming as it is. The frivolous, dishonest, motte/bailey, strawman, and stupid entries do degrade the threads, but the S/N ratio is still often high enough to justify scanning. So I take that as a small win.

    Replies: @Curle, @Harry Baldwin

    As long as non-lawyers or complete dilettantes as regards the law feel comfortable making legal claims online or repeating statements of others made without attribution this problem will persist.

    • Agree: Kylie
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Curle

    Are you a lawyer?

  195. @Reg Cæsar
    Whatever Trump's motive, a large part of the FBI's is Merrick Garland's desire for revenge.

    By the way, what's with the name Merrick? Does he have siblings named Wantagh and Syosset?

    "Garland" was once "Garfinkel". Apparently the top Democratic politician with the surname Simon (Bill Jr is Republican) is Cosette Simon, the Pete Buttigieg of Fort Wayne.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosette_Simon

    They should seriously consider running as a ticket in 2024. They would make a valuable contribution to the dangling conversation that is US politics today.

    Replies: @bomag, @Pixo, @Veteran Aryan, @Alden, @Hibernian

    What about the superficial sigh?

  196. @Steve Sailer
    @J.Ross

    I went to a wedding reception at the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, CA last year. It was a very nice place for a wedding party. They built a reproduction of the East Room of the White House for hosting receptions. It was a big hit among attendees.

    Replies: @RAZ, @Corvinus, @Buzz Mohawk

    Sounds tacky. Then again, I don’t like going to weddings because it means I have to pretend the happy couple will probably live happily ever after, and I have to buy a gift.

    • LOL: Curle
  197. @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    What did Trump do to Garland that Garland wants revenge?

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave

    He’s German?

    • LOL: Alden
  198. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Art Deco:


    According to Hypnotoad, Trump has the goods on the Deep State. His aides undoubtedly made copies of what he took from the White House.
     
    Corvy, old pal, the Donald has many virtues, but being well-organized and planning carefully for the future are not among them.

    In all likelihood, someone (maybe Trump, maybe not) told some GSA flunky, "Pack up all that junk and ship it to Mar-a-Lago."

    Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.

    Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump's passports.

    The ruling class is not very smart.

    But their hoodlums have guns. Lots of guns.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Harry Baldwin, @James B. Shearer

    “Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.”

    Kind of dumb for Trump to get into a pointless fight over them then.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @James B. Shearer

    Assuming he’s not playing 4 D chess, there’s something he wants to keep from the Feds, from being destroyed or to use as leverage.

    , @PhysicistDave
    @James B. Shearer

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:


    ]Dave]“Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.”

    [JBS] Kind of dumb for Trump to get into a pointless fight over them then.
     
    The actual contents don't matter. The ruling class had absolutely nothing on Russia-gate. But they just went with it anyway.

    A skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. And a DC jury would convict Trump for being the incarnation of Beelzebub, if DoJ accused him of that.

    The actual documents do not matter.

    They're gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop.

    These thugs have no honesty or integrity at all.

    Kinda like Corvinus.

    Or Jonathan Mason.

    Or HA.

    Replies: @James B. Shearer

  199. @James N. Kennett


    ... presidents are consumers of intelligence. The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.
     

     
    All ex-Presidents have the right to continue receiving CIA briefings. Somehow this does not prevent the US doing diplomacy.

    Replies: @James B. Shearer

    “All ex-Presidents have the right to continue receiving CIA briefings. ..”

    IIRC this is a courtesy not a right.

  200. @Art Deco
    @Reg Cæsar

    He wouldn't have been eligible to vote under the common standards of the time until 1 October 1945, unless the State of Georgia had a lower age threshold.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Reg Cæsar

    unless the State of Georgia had a lower age threshold.

    They did.

  201. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    No, it’s about a career scofflaw and grifter who purposely went against established protocols, which has legal consequences, despite his own assurances to the contrary, and possessed sensitive materials he was not supposed to have as a former President. Why did he need them in the first place? What ultimately purpose do they serve?
     
    The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. "Protocols" contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.

    If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn't use the secret magic words so the "Declassificus Immediatis!" spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument. Imprison him for that and you'll never, ever put this country back together again.

    Well, he allegedly has dirt on the Deep State. He or his team made copies of the documents. Why not just burn it all down? What is he waiting for? He made a promise to drain the swamp, right?
     
    I have no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government. They'll claim that any release of documents that Trump declassified but that they don't recognize as having been declassified is "obstruction of justice." The DOJ, of course, can leak whatever it wants illegally without consequence. Again, we've seen this season of Get Trump! before.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. “Protocols” contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.”

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.

    “If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn’t use the secret magic words so the “Declassificus Immediatis!” spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument.”

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.

    “Imprison him for that and you’ll never, ever put this country back together again”

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    “I no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government”

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    • Troll: Curle
    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Alec Leamas (working from home):


    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive.
     
    You've just conceded Alec's point.

    "There is a patent expectation to honor them."

    Your expectation. CNN's expectation.

    But not my expectation. And not tens of millions of people's expectation.

    And, most importantly, not the law.

    You've finally come out of the closet, Corvinus: whatever you and your political cronies want counts as a "patent expectation," and the citizens of the United States have to bow down before your "patent expectation."

    Or else.

    Corvinus also wrote:

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?
     
    Yeah, as a matter of fact, a lot of us will be: millions of us are willing to fight, and, if necessary, die in defense of the American Republic.

    I know you do not believe that. Because you never would.

    But, yeah, a lot of us will.

    We're calling your bluff, Corvinus.

    No more bowing down before your rules or norms or expectations.

    We're gonna tear it all down, Corvinus.

    We hate and despise you and people like you.

    We intend to restore the Constitutional Republic and the rule of law. Not norms or rules or expectations. Just the Constitution of the United States.

    And if your response is that that will mean civil war... well, bring it on, little weenie, bring it on!

    "When in the course of human events...

    "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

    It's hard for you to believe that they actually meant it.

    But they did.

    They actually risked everything for those principles.

    And so will we.
    , @Curle
    @Corvinus

    Here’s how Corvinus would be treated in an courtroom:

    “You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs.”

    Argumentative.

    “The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII.”

    Irrelevant.

    “There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive.”

    Failure to provide authority and failure to make a claim.

    “Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.”

    Failure to provide authority and failure to make a claim.

    “His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case.”

    Failure to make a claim.

    “A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. ”

    Failure to state a claim.

    “The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.”

    Redundant.

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.
     
    Neither an Archivist, a law of Congress, nor a "protocol" of a former President can diminish the President's Article II powers. Try again.

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.
     
    It's almost certain that the "dispute" is over whether the President's declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn't want what the President declassified to be declassified.

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?
     
    Don't Fedpost here, Corvy.

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?
     
    It's not speculation if it fits a prior pattern of deception on the part of the government when it comes to the person of Trump and anyone in his orbit.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Mr Mox
    @Corvinus

    Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    A nothingburger, perhaps, but it appears someone was taking it seriously.

    From Newsweek, no less:


    The FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago last Monday was specifically intended to recover Donald Trump's personal "stash" of hidden documents, two high-level U.S. intelligence officials tell Newsweek.

    To justify the unprecedented raid on a former president's residence and protect the source who revealed the existence of Trump's private hoard, agents went into Trump's residence on the pretext that they were seeking all government documents, says one official who has been involved in the investigation. But the true target was this private stash, which Justice Department officials feared Donald Trump might weaponize.
     
    https://www.newsweek.com/fbi-sought-documents-trump-hoarded-years-including-about-russiagate-1734280

    Replies: @Justvisiting, @Corvinus

  202. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @peterike



    If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why.
     
    Oh a press conference. Or maybe something like Tweet about what you did to your tens of millions of followers, which is precisely what Trump did.

     

    I'm sorry but a tweet does not conform to the requirements of comment 6 to archival regulation § 5467.2, which requires that a President's declassification requests be submitted in the pre-printed triplicate form 67A for time stamp and review (yellow page is the Archivist's copy). The proper triplicate forms may be requested by mail to the archivist's office including a cover letter and self-enclosed, postage pre-paid return envelope. Due to budgetary constraints, a maximum of five (5) pre-printed forms 67A may be requested under a single cover letter.

    Unfortunately, the non-observance of this necessary requirement and the retention of classified materials means that the former President must spend the remainder of his life in Federal Prison. No one is above the law!

    Replies: @James B. Shearer, @epebble

    “I’m sorry but a tweet does not conform ..”

    You think Trump wrote or even approved everything that appeared on his twitter account? If he later found some tweet awkward he would likely claim some intern wrote it.

  203. @Ralph L
    @Reg Cæsar

    Carter was born in '24, so '48 was his first presidential election. Do you think he voted Dixiecrat? With his mother going into the Peace Corps later, I doubt it. Not a segregationist family, or it would have come up.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Curle

    Some years ago I encountered a volume of polling results which included questions taken in different era. It included surveys taken in 1938.

    One question was on residential segregation. In 1938, those in favor of residential integration amounted to all of 14% of the surveyed respondents of a national sample. It’s a reasonable wager that > 90% of the white population in 1938 favored residential segregation though not necessarily strict, legal-formal residential segregation. Other manifestation of segregation would not have received that level of support, but this one did.

    Another was a more generic question on whether the menu of rights available to people on one side of the color bar should match those available on the other. That’s a fuzzy question, because different people will interpret what is a ‘right’ differently. That having been said, north of 60% of the respondents answered ‘no’, and, one might guess, did somewhere around 70% of the white respondents. Again, that was a national sample.

    If Carter’s family in Sumter County, Ga was not segregationist in some measure, they were a very odd family.

    • Replies: @Ralph L
    @Art Deco

    The Carters were a very odd family.

    In contrast, I'm told my grandfather, a Democrat county clerk of court (and judge of juvenile court) in NC, who'd probably voted for him, said of JFK's assassination, "He got what he deserved" for trying to interfere in the Southern states.

  204. @epebble
    @CCG

    Meloni hasn’t married her live-in boyfriend in spite of having his child years ago

    That seems like among the weakest of reasons to condemn her. She was born in 1977. Clinton and Trump did far worse but are deified by their respective devotees. Having just one partner in life makes her a saint in comparison.

    Replies: @CCG

    You’re speaking from an American perspective, Italian culture is still based. Then again, Meloni herself might not be Catholic. Her Communist father walked out on the family when she was 12 years old and she hasn’t seen him since.
    https://web.archive.org/web/20141105033643/http://cinquantamila.corriere.it/storyTellerThread.php?threadId=MELONI+Giorgia

  205. @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes."

    Kind of dumb for Trump to get into a pointless fight over them then.

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave

    Assuming he’s not playing 4 D chess, there’s something he wants to keep from the Feds, from being destroyed or to use as leverage.

  206. @Reg Cæsar
    @RAZ

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn't tell me.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Ralph L, @Stan Adams, @RAZ, @Curle

    https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bill-moyers-public-broadcasting-services-usa-people-and-politics

    The first time I ever voted was in 1948. I was in submarine school. All the other officers there voted for Dewey. I voted for Truman. He’s still my favorite President.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Stan Adams

    Thanks. I was about to ask Jimmy himself.

    Carter was eligible to vote in 1944 under Georgia's new statute. He was at the Naval Academy that year. Only some seniors-- and all the Georgians but some plebes-- were old enough to vote, but all of those would still have had to do it absentee. The Navy was preoccupied and no help.

    In Presidential Lottery, James Michener tells a long, involved, and funny story about how he, while an officer in the South Pacific, got caught up in the Navy's WWII voter registration policy. It was pure CYA: they preferred that sailors did not vote, but they made damned sure any sailor who wanted to was able to do so with no hassle. Why?

    Angry parents! Letters to Congressmen!

    , @Hibernian
    @Stan Adams

    Almost certainly at least one of them voted for Thurmond. Possibly at least one for Wallace too.

  207. @Art Deco
    @PhysicistDave

    Dale Van Atta, who was on the staff of Jack Anderson, maintained that material marked 'Top Secret' usually had at least one hot item in it, but that designations 'confidential' and 'secret' seldom did and were commonly used to cover up bureaucratic bungling. It was his contention that the ocean of improperly classified material made federal employees less vigilant about protecting genuine state secrets.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    Art Deco wrote to me:

    Dale Van Atta, who was on the staff of Jack Anderson, maintained that material marked ‘Top Secret’ usually had at least one hot item in it, but that designations ‘confidential’ and ‘secret’ seldom did and were commonly used to cover up bureaucratic bungling.

    Yeah. The general impression among people dealing with classified information was that “Confidential” and “Secret” meant next to nothing. I mean, if you tried to sell that stuff to the Soviets, you’d go to jail, but otherwise…

    What really, really mattered was the SCI stuff. At least in terms of technology, that was serious.

    I was present at one (and only one) security breach of SCI material: I shut it down immediately, and I was in fact rather shaken: everyone present cooperated with dealing with the breach. (No, I cannot, for obvious reasons, go into details. I will say two things: it was so long ago that the material is probably irrelevant by now, and also I still wonder if it was really a breach or just a test by the security guys to see how we would deal with it. Regardless, I am not going into details.)

    AD also wrote:

    It was his contention that the ocean of improperly classified material made federal employees less vigilant about protecting genuine state secrets.

    Yes and no. All of us tech people were really very careful with regard to truly key technical stuff.

  208. @Chrisnonymous
    @Pixo

    I think those photos may have been altered, like with punched contrast. Look at the other colors. The red is too dark for the bright white of the lettering and t-shirts.

    Anyway, I am not a die-hard Trump fan. My ideal thing would be Trump-deSantis ticket running against a Harris-Warren ticket. Then they could article 25 Trump after he wins and deSantis would actually govern. Make Tulsi Gabbard his VP.

    Unfortunately, it's all fantasy. Also, I'm not sure deSantis is a dissident the way Trump is. He seems very happy to court the powers that be in the GOPe. Trump bucks make Trump independence.

    Replies: @Pixo

    DeSantis I can’t think of a single negative thing. He’s just awesome IMO.

    The pics are from fairly pro Trump Daily Mail. Jared and Ivanka look fine.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11058449/Trump-tees-son-Eric-pros-Bryson-DeChambeau-Dustin-Johnson-LIV-series.html

    Here he is looking like crap with Mx. Jenner.

    Biden is getting worse fast too. But unlike the Dems, we have a great young heir apparent. He’d also be our first Southern European-American president. Could that give him a little boost?

  209. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. “Protocols” contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.”

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.

    “If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn’t use the secret magic words so the “Declassificus Immediatis!” spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument.”

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.

    “Imprison him for that and you’ll never, ever put this country back together again”

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    “I no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government”

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @Curle, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr Mox

    Corvinus wrote to Alec Leamas (working from home):

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive.

    You’ve just conceded Alec’s point.

    “There is a patent expectation to honor them.”

    Your expectation. CNN’s expectation.

    But not my expectation. And not tens of millions of people’s expectation.

    And, most importantly, not the law.

    You’ve finally come out of the closet, Corvinus: whatever you and your political cronies want counts as a “patent expectation,” and the citizens of the United States have to bow down before your “patent expectation.”

    Or else.

    Corvinus also wrote:

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    Yeah, as a matter of fact, a lot of us will be: millions of us are willing to fight, and, if necessary, die in defense of the American Republic.

    I know you do not believe that. Because you never would.

    But, yeah, a lot of us will.

    We’re calling your bluff, Corvinus.

    No more bowing down before your rules or norms or expectations.

    We’re gonna tear it all down, Corvinus.

    We hate and despise you and people like you.

    We intend to restore the Constitutional Republic and the rule of law. Not norms or rules or expectations. Just the Constitution of the United States.

    And if your response is that that will mean civil war… well, bring it on, little weenie, bring it on!

    “When in the course of human events…

    “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

    It’s hard for you to believe that they actually meant it.

    But they did.

    They actually risked everything for those principles.

    And so will we.

    • Thanks: Coemgen
    • LOL: Corvinus
  210. @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes."

    Kind of dumb for Trump to get into a pointless fight over them then.

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:

    ]Dave]“Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.”

    [JBS] Kind of dumb for Trump to get into a pointless fight over them then.

    The actual contents don’t matter. The ruling class had absolutely nothing on Russia-gate. But they just went with it anyway.

    A skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. And a DC jury would convict Trump for being the incarnation of Beelzebub, if DoJ accused him of that.

    The actual documents do not matter.

    They’re gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop.

    These thugs have no honesty or integrity at all.

    Kinda like Corvinus.

    Or Jonathan Mason.

    Or HA.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "They’re gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop."

    So why give them the opportunity?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

  211. Trump was friends with the late JFK Jr. He promised years ago to declassify all the papers on the JFK assassination but was dissuaded. Recently Biden kicked the can down the road again.

    There are people in Washington who know who killed Kennedy and they’ve been running cover for the killers for 6 decades. Now after all this time all the people immediately involved are surely dead. But some entities never die. If you’re thinking the CIA, you’re probably wrong, even though they helped cover it up. I think it was a nation involved and they aren’t covering it up because it’s an enemy, but because it’s an ally. The greatest, bestest ally America ever had, namely, Israel. You can search here at Unz to find out why Kennedy was literally an existential threat to Israel.

    If this theory is true and Trump released the incriminating evidence, it would turn DC upside down and begin a process that would truly make America great again.

  212. @Harry Baldwin
    @Mr. Anon

    Do presidential libraries become major attractions? I haven't looked into it, but I doubt it. Why not just house the president's archives in the library of a state college?

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @Reg Cæsar, @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @ScarletNumber, @Erroneus

    I’ve been to the Reagan Library several times.

    Once for an Ann Coulter speech/book signing, and once for a display of post-Vesuvius artifacts from Pompeii.

    Very cool destination.

  213. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. “Protocols” contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.”

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.

    “If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn’t use the secret magic words so the “Declassificus Immediatis!” spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument.”

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.

    “Imprison him for that and you’ll never, ever put this country back together again”

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    “I no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government”

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @Curle, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr Mox

    Here’s how Corvinus would be treated in an courtroom:

    “You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs.”

    Argumentative.

    “The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII.”

    Irrelevant.

    “There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive.”

    Failure to provide authority and failure to make a claim.

    “Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.”

    Failure to provide authority and failure to make a claim.

    “His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case.”

    Failure to make a claim.

    “A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. ”

    Failure to state a claim.

    “The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.”

    Redundant.

  214. @Art Deco
    @Reg Cæsar

    He wouldn't have been eligible to vote under the common standards of the time until 1 October 1945, unless the State of Georgia had a lower age threshold.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Reg Cæsar

  215. @PhysicistDave
    @James B. Shearer

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:


    ]Dave]“Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes.”

    [JBS] Kind of dumb for Trump to get into a pointless fight over them then.
     
    The actual contents don't matter. The ruling class had absolutely nothing on Russia-gate. But they just went with it anyway.

    A skilled prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. And a DC jury would convict Trump for being the incarnation of Beelzebub, if DoJ accused him of that.

    The actual documents do not matter.

    They're gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop.

    These thugs have no honesty or integrity at all.

    Kinda like Corvinus.

    Or Jonathan Mason.

    Or HA.

    Replies: @James B. Shearer

    “They’re gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop.”

    So why give them the opportunity?

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @James B. Shearer

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:


    [Dave] “They’re gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop.”

    [JBS] So why give them the opportunity?
     

    Huh????

    What on earth are you talking about????

    The "opportunity" came as soon as the federal thugs seized the boxes.

    How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this "opportunity"?

    By having a shoot-out with the FBI?

    What you called a "pointless fight" is not giving them the "opportunity."

    What you call a "pointless fight" is helping to delegitimize the federal thugs, and, with some luck, it may make it a bit harder for them to put him in jail.

    The fight is not "pointless," though it may well fail.

    As to why Trump took the boxes of documents with him:

    A) All Presidents seem to do this (at least, Obama did).

    B) Once again, Trump failed to realize how evil the FBI is.

    C) Merrick Garland has a personal beef with Trump, since little baby Garland is not on the Supreme Court as he hoped to be: Trump did not foresee this. (Unfortunately, baby Garland will probably not end up in jail, where he needs to be.)

    Replies: @James B. Shearer

  216. @Stan Adams
    @Reg Cæsar

    https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bill-moyers-public-broadcasting-services-usa-people-and-politics


    The first time I ever voted was in 1948. I was in submarine school. All the other officers there voted for Dewey. I voted for Truman. He's still my favorite President.
     

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Hibernian

    Thanks. I was about to ask Jimmy himself.

    Carter was eligible to vote in 1944 under Georgia’s new statute. He was at the Naval Academy that year. Only some seniors– and all the Georgians but some plebes– were old enough to vote, but all of those would still have had to do it absentee. The Navy was preoccupied and no help.

    In Presidential Lottery, James Michener tells a long, involved, and funny story about how he, while an officer in the South Pacific, got caught up in the Navy’s WWII voter registration policy. It was pure CYA: they preferred that sailors did not vote, but they made damned sure any sailor who wanted to was able to do so with no hassle. Why?

    Angry parents! Letters to Congressmen!

  217. @James B. Shearer
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    "... Trump claims to have issued a standing Order that certain records are declassified, .."

    This is just more Trump BS. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why. Then send a written order to the relevant departments and make this order public. Then make the documents public. But then you would be accountable for what you had done and Trump doesn't like being accountable for anything.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @peterike, @Curle

    “. If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. ”

    I’m sure the legal standard will work just fine. Happen to know what that is?

  218. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.
     
    Anglophone Catholics tend to be legalistic in their practice of their faith, reflecting the legalism spread by Britain to its colonies. So American Catholics, or Australian Catholics or whatnot tend to want to change the "rules" so that the "rules" conform to their preferred practices. Many American Catholics in particular seem to think that the Church should be responsive to democratic influences - if we can't live without hormonal birth control and public opinion polls show that most American Catholic women think birth control is good, then the President of the Church (the Pope) should change the official rules that hormonal birth control is good. It bothers Anglophones and Americans in particular more that the authority has decreed that what they do in practice is bad enough to want to change what the authority decrees.

    Continental Catholics, particularly the Latin-influenced cultures (Spain/France/Italy) seem to be more at home with the idea that they're sinners who fall short daily and don't get so worked up about conforming the rules to their behavior. You're tempted, you try however halfheartedly, you fail, you ask forgiveness, and so forth. Having a mistress is too tempting for those who can. You may feel bad about it sometimes, but you're not going to lobby the Pope to bless your illicit affair.

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Anonymous, @epebble

    Continental Catholics, particularly the Latin-influenced cultures (Spain/France/Italy) seem to be more at home with the idea that they’re sinners who fall short daily and don’t get so worked up about conforming the rules to their behavior.

    There is an analogous dynamic with regard to Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews. Ashkenazi Jews have a drive towards self justification so they tend to want to change the “rules” so that the “rules” conform to their preferred practices as you put it. Hence the proliferation of schism in the Ashkenazi synagogue – Orthodox, Conservative , Reform etc. Sephardim on the other hand will cheerfully concede they don’t measure up to the ideal but that’s no reason to change the rules. Sephardic congregations can have a membership that ranges from the meticulously observant to those that keep almost nothing; not the Sabbath , not kosher law etc. But they nevertheless can co-exist in a single congregation. By the same token there is almost no schism in Sephardic Jewry.

    As an example, I remember around a decade ago there was an Israeli Orthodox Moroccan high school girl, Ophir Ben Shitrit that entered the Israeli version of American Idol (Kochav Nolad = A Star is Born). This was a no-no in the Orthodox high school she attended and she was expelled. It made all the Israeli papers and became a cause célèbre for feminists , Orthodox and otherwise. At the time JOFA the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance was very engaged with this issue and brought the girl to the USA, sponsored a concert for her , media interviews etc. in order to smite patriarchy a mighty blow. When the JOFA journalist was interviewing her for JOFA’s magazine she asked the girl to describe her resentment at the insensitivity of the Rabbis at her school who were trying to crush her dreams and so on and so forth. To which she replied to the utter bewilderment of the interviewer “The Rabbis were completely right. It is prohibited by the Halakha(Jewish law). I saw a great opportunity for myself and couldn’t resist the opportunity/temptation but that’s no reason to change the law.” It’s almost inconceivable that an Ashkenazia in that position would say anything of the sort. The tendency to self justification is just too strong.

    • Thanks: epebble
  219. @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "They’re gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop."

    So why give them the opportunity?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:

    [Dave] “They’re gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop.”

    [JBS] So why give them the opportunity?

    Huh????

    What on earth are you talking about????

    The “opportunity” came as soon as the federal thugs seized the boxes.

    How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?

    By having a shoot-out with the FBI?

    What you called a “pointless fight” is not giving them the “opportunity.”

    What you call a “pointless fight” is helping to delegitimize the federal thugs, and, with some luck, it may make it a bit harder for them to put him in jail.

    The fight is not “pointless,” though it may well fail.

    As to why Trump took the boxes of documents with him:

    A) All Presidents seem to do this (at least, Obama did).

    B) Once again, Trump failed to realize how evil the FBI is.

    C) Merrick Garland has a personal beef with Trump, since little baby Garland is not on the Supreme Court as he hoped to be: Trump did not foresee this. (Unfortunately, baby Garland will probably not end up in jail, where he needs to be.)

    • Replies: @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?"

    By not walking off with a bunch of stuff and not refusing to return it.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @PhysicistDave

  220. @Corvinus
    @PhysicistDave

    "Almost certainly neither Trump nor any of his aides knew precisely what was in those boxes."

    Almost certainly Trump and his aides knew precisely what they decided to keep, and without going through the stated process. It would not be surprising that they made photocopies.

    "Same for the Gestapo Bozos who raided Mar-a-Lago: almost certainly they just accidentally scooped up Trump’s passports."

    Almost certainly the FBI, based on probable cause from one of Trump's own officials, that they had sensitive material. Remember, one of Trump's lawyers signed a letter in June asserting that there was no more classified information stored Trump's Florida home. Furthermore, two of his hand-picked officials, former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone and his deputy Patrick Philbin, were questioned about how boxes of White House documents came to be stored at Trump's residence. The National Archives contacted Philbin when it became aware of missing documents.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    Corvinus wrote to me:

    Almost certainly the FBI, based on probable cause from one of Trump’s own officials, that they had sensitive material.

    Why would one of Trump’s own associates rat him out on what is almost certainly, at most, an innocent error?

    Okay, you would because that is the kind of person you are. Most people aren’t like that.

    News reports say that it was a Secret Service goon. Quite likely.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @PhysicistDave

    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle, @Alden, @PhysicistDave

  221. @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    What did Trump do to Garland that Garland wants revenge?

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave

    Alden asked Reg Cæsar:

    What did Trump do to Garland that Garland wants revenge?

    BHO appointed Garland to the High Court. McConnell kept him off, and then Trump appointed someone else to the seat.

    Not hard to think that Garland is angry at Trump over this, even though it was actually McConnell’s doing. After all, it is at least plausible that McConnell consulted with Trump on the matter.

    People have committed murder for less.

  222. @Rob
    This is off-topic for Orange Man Bad for Populism, but is SARS-CoV-2 ever off-topic for iSteve?

    Remember when the ever-morphing Double-Barrel Zoonotic Infection at Market theory of COVID included snakes as either the ultimate origin or an intermediate host in SARS-CoV-2’s epic journey through the Asian animal pantheon before two different SARS-CoV-2 crossed over into people, likely within hours of each other? A whirlwind tour of animals that left no evidence?

    Here’s how snakes and Huanan(?), the “seafood” market that the “gee, a coronavirus hundreds of miles from the nearest animal reservoir, with an inserted furin cleavage site, just the sort of thing researchers at that lab wanted to do? That’s just a coincidence” playing dumb theory (autism theory? the opposite of a conspiracy theory, an autism theory proposes that there is no way any group of people ever worked together out of the public eye)

    Ok, so, the wet market had snakes for sale. Snakes prefer (maybe will only eat?) live prey. Even live mice get expensive if you're keeping a bunch of snakes 24/7. So, someone at the Wuhan Institute of Virology sold leftover mice to wet market snake dealers. These were mice post-experiment or just used for passaging viruses, mice that should have been euthanized and incinerated. Some of those mice had proto-COVID.

    So, the chain of transmission would look something like this: cave bats to mice to snakes to ? to people or snakes directly to people.

    This theory has the ring of truth. People don’t eat many bats anywhere. People only eat mice if they are very hungry. WIV had mice. I recall hearing about other animals, but Google is very unhelpful in answering “what kinds of lab animals did the Wuhan Institute of Virology use.” So unhelpful that it gives multiple, “COVID started in the wet market. This is scientific consensus. Are you unhappy, Citizen?” sites. Ok, that’s interesting, I guess, but what does that have to do with what animals the lab experimented on?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    Here’s how snakes and Huanan(?), the “seafood” market that the “gee, a coronavirus hundreds of miles from the nearest animal reservoir, with an inserted furin cleavage site, just the sort of thing researchers at that lab wanted to do? That’s just a coincidence”…

    …This theory has the ring of truth.

    As I wrote the other day to another commenter, yes, your theory is very good as far as theories go. Congratulations on coming up with something clever and interesting. It’s like a nice piece of art that merits you to stop and admire it.

    I don’t think it’s true, however. And the reason I don’t think it’s true is because the close mental association between Covid and Wuhan is spurious; Covid did not begin in Wuhan. There is ample evidence that demonstrates that Covid was circulating in human populations for months if not years before the Wuhan outbreak, so the theory that it escaped from the lab there, while tempting to consider, is entirely unmotivated.

    Your third paragraph (the one I quoted first) is a bit too rhetorical. When you drop a bunch of key assertions (e.g. no available animal hosts, furan cleavage site, etc.) in a rhythmic and tubthumping manner, it is not so much an argument anymore as it is a team cheer. It’s like the 9/11 Truthers with their chants about “a steel frame structure collapsing from fire at freefall speed into its own footprint” and so forth.

    Never mind that everything predicated here is false. The Twin Towers did not collapse “from fire,” they had a massive jet smash into them. They did not fall at “freefall speed,” but took nearly twice as long to fully crumble. Of course, the debris that had been thrown clear of the collapsing heap did fall “at freefall speed” because it was FREELY FALLING, but this in turn means that the towers did not collapse “into their own footprint.” Every time I hear a Truther talking about “the laws of physics,” I want to beat my head against a desk.

    Likewise, there was no need for local animal hosts. Bats don’t fly from Cambodia to Wuhan, but people fly from Wuhan to Cambodia all the time. And there was no inserted “furan cleavage site.” The 19 base pairs that make the supposed fingerprint could easily have come from anywhere.

  223. Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    Foaming At The Mouth For Trump’s Arrest! (Rob Reiner)
    https://rumble.com/v1g5t8h-1-foaming-at-the-mouth-for-trumps-arrest.html

  224. @PhysicistDave
    @epebble

    epebble wrote:


    I think TS/SCI info and “nuclear weapons” would make them more than Whoop-Tee-Doo About...
     
    Trump probably did have documents at Mar-a-Lago that were once classified.

    But I think it helps to have clarity about the various different kinds of documents that get classified: as I have mentioned before, I did technical work for the US intelligence Community in the '80s and '90s, so I actually do know something about this -- unlike most commenters in the media and online.

    Different sorts of documents get classified:

    1) Summaries of the US government's current take on world events and their current plans on how to deal with them -- e.g., we don't think Baby Kim will move against South Korea this month; if the PRC moves against Taiwan, here are our military options; etc.

    2) Details on our human intelligence gathering: e.g., Colonel Yuri Ivanov, who is a CIA asset, tells us that Putin is seriously ill; our spy Colonel Kim tells us that Baby Kim is not ill; etc.

    3) Technical details of our intelligence gathering technology, our military communications systems, our weapons systems, etc. that would enable adversaries to subvert or counter those system: e.g., here is the encryption/decryption codes we use to communicate with our nuclear sub fleet; here are self-destruct codes for our missiles; etc.

    Items under category (1) are very hot at the time. But they grow stale. What the US Intel Community thought about Baby Kim or Putin is 2018 is now of only historical interest: it is of little value to our adversaries.

    Items under category (2) could get people killed (Colonels Ivanov and Kim in my examples): these remain critical for many decades.

    Items under category (3) could get us all killed: this, at least in my experience, is the bulk of the SCI classified material.

    Now, the key point is that, as President, Trump had no reason to know or care or have an interest in anything in category (3) -- i.e., the technical details of our weapons, intelligence-gathering, or communications technology.

    The Donald is a real-estate developer: show him the schematics for our nuclear weapons, our spy satellites, or our military comm systems, and those design documents would be completely meaningless to Trump. Show them to me.... well, I am a physicist with experience in the defense industry: give me enough time with such documents, and I can tell you a lot!

    And the Russians and Chinese have lots of people like me -- they would love to get such documents, which is why they are very highly classified.

    But Trump almost certainly never had such documents in his possession:
    he didn't need to see them, and he would have had no interest in them.

    Similarly, for documents in category (2) that give the actual names of overseas spies, etc.: Trump needed to know that Putin was sick, but Trump neither needed to know nor did he care that such data came from Colonel Ivanov, or Dr. Glazov, or some maid in the Kremlin named Masha.

    Which leaves category (1). And I bet Trump did have some category (1) documents at Mar-a-Lago: i.e., summaries of US intelligence evaluations of what was going on in the world back in 2017 or 2019 or whatever.

    But such summaries are now so stale as to be basically irrelevant.

    A little secret that is rarely mentioned: a lot of US Intel analysts are basically frustrated academics who work for the CIA, DIA, or whatever. Much of their output is classified, but academics at, say, Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown produce similar studies that are, of course, not classified.

    In fact, the most secret fact about the Intel Community's reports to the President is that this is what is influencing the President's thinking right now.

    Again it becomes stale in a very short time: most of it really should be declassified within a few years.

    I think Julie Kelly's current column is correct: they are going to indict Trump over this.

    But I am pretty sure they will be indicting him over documents in category (1), which contain information that is now no more critical than what you could get by reading old copies of Foreign Affairs or the Economist.

    Again, I have professional experience working in an environment where lots of stuff was classified: I really do know more about this than almost everyone now commenting publicly .

    Replies: @epebble, @Buzz Mohawk, @Alden, @Polistra, @Ralph L, @Art Deco, @Emil Nikola Richard

    The first suicide girl turns 50 y.o. this year. It is top secret in the Trump white house that a huge project was underway to determine the lady(?)’s identity and the exact time and date of this aeonic transit. Also it was going to be a surprise.

    Biden caught wind and demanded the data for the October surprise.

    So we have this.

    Have you seen that site lately? They now have fatties. Barf. Bark. Sad.

  225. The nuclear secret is that the wiser heads decided long ago that Pax Americana, such as it is, is non-negotiable, even with the electorate, because necessary if not sufficient (though close as they can get) for non-proliferation.

    Trump leveraged the sense of the electorate that maybe the Monroe Doctrine would be a more feasible fit fiscally with the resources provided by the Mississippi River Basin.

  226. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.
     
    Anglophone Catholics tend to be legalistic in their practice of their faith, reflecting the legalism spread by Britain to its colonies. So American Catholics, or Australian Catholics or whatnot tend to want to change the "rules" so that the "rules" conform to their preferred practices. Many American Catholics in particular seem to think that the Church should be responsive to democratic influences - if we can't live without hormonal birth control and public opinion polls show that most American Catholic women think birth control is good, then the President of the Church (the Pope) should change the official rules that hormonal birth control is good. It bothers Anglophones and Americans in particular more that the authority has decreed that what they do in practice is bad enough to want to change what the authority decrees.

    Continental Catholics, particularly the Latin-influenced cultures (Spain/France/Italy) seem to be more at home with the idea that they're sinners who fall short daily and don't get so worked up about conforming the rules to their behavior. You're tempted, you try however halfheartedly, you fail, you ask forgiveness, and so forth. Having a mistress is too tempting for those who can. You may feel bad about it sometimes, but you're not going to lobby the Pope to bless your illicit affair.

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Anonymous, @epebble

    That reminds me of “traditionalist Catholic” Mel Gibson with his divorce. If this kind of “traditionalist Catholicism” had been around in Henry VIII’s day it would have saved the world a lot of trouble.

    • LOL: Hibernian
  227. Anonymous[206] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    @J.Ross

    Almost certainly fronts for other businesses that want to use the prestigious "Oxford Street" address.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Anonymous

    I once visited the “corporate headquarters” of a company that had an address in a famous/prestigious locale like this. The “office” consisted of a tiny room just big enough for a secretary with a computer and telephone. The whole building was like this. I assume it was originally residential apartments, but had at some time been subdivided into hundreds of these tiny single-room “offices”, each rented to a company that just wanted to be able to put the address on its stationery.

  228. Anonymous[413] • Disclaimer says:

    If they can indict, try, convict and jail a former President – I mean if they can physically conclude this chain of events resulting in the former President behind bars without someone stopping them by force if necessary – it will confirm that they are all powerful and can do whatever they want without limit.

    Indeed. And the probable loss of the Ukraine/Russian war, most likely through defection of Europe, when added to consequential de-globalization, will confirm that they have enough power to be actively dangerous to the US population.
    The danger is in this form: the US Federal Government will become unable to fund life in urban areas and will attempt to enforce a command economy that will further reduce goods and services produced by the United States. This will provoke even harsher methods, increasing the threat to the US population. Eventually, as in the Stalinist USSR, survivors simply say “enough” and the government shifts back to passive caretaker. (See movie “The Death of Stalin” for a sanitized picture of how this works.)

    One amazing thing about force is how little can be done with it. Napoleon: “You can do anything with bayonets except sit on them”. If you want a metaphor, think of a farmer trying to grow corn with only a bayoneted shotgun.

    “Power without limit” has only one end, and it isn’t a good one.

  229. @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to me:


    Almost certainly the FBI, based on probable cause from one of Trump’s own officials, that they had sensitive material.
     
    Why would one of Trump's own associates rat him out on what is almost certainly, at most, an innocent error?

    Okay, you would because that is the kind of person you are. Most people aren't like that.

    News reports say that it was a Secret Service goon. Quite likely.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.
     
    You're privy to the undisclosed "committee" testimony, Corv? You wouldn't be, what is the word? - speculating here, would you?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Curle
    @Corvinus

    “Quote likely is . . .”

    Try to be coherent.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Alden
    @Corvinus

    Circumvent means overcoming an obstacle. That’s all. Nothing illegal about the act of circumventing anything.

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to me:


    Quote [sic] likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides [that accused Trump of wrongly having classified materials]...
     
    Of course, it would be an extremely serious violation of attorney-client privilege if Trump's own lawyers did this: as I indicated in my reply to Jimbo above, established case law says the former President decides on this stuff.

    Trump's lawyers were representing him on a matter in which case law provides him with a very strong defense.

    If, despite that, his lawyers were working with the other side... well, that would, at the very least, be cause for disbarment.

    Of course, we no longer live under the rule of law -- we live in a dictatorship, run bey people like you.

    For now.

    So, it may well be his attorneys, as you suggest.

    I am glad to see though that you are now publicly admitting the deep corruption in our institutions, such as the legal profession.

    Even someone like you so deeply enmeshed in evil can be redeemed, Corvy.

    It's a start.
  230. @Art Deco
    @Ralph L

    Some years ago I encountered a volume of polling results which included questions taken in different era. It included surveys taken in 1938.

    One question was on residential segregation. In 1938, those in favor of residential integration amounted to all of 14% of the surveyed respondents of a national sample. It's a reasonable wager that > 90% of the white population in 1938 favored residential segregation though not necessarily strict, legal-formal residential segregation. Other manifestation of segregation would not have received that level of support, but this one did.

    Another was a more generic question on whether the menu of rights available to people on one side of the color bar should match those available on the other. That's a fuzzy question, because different people will interpret what is a 'right' differently. That having been said, north of 60% of the respondents answered 'no', and, one might guess, did somewhere around 70% of the white respondents. Again, that was a national sample.

    If Carter's family in Sumter County, Ga was not segregationist in some measure, they were a very odd family.

    Replies: @Ralph L

    The Carters were a very odd family.

    In contrast, I’m told my grandfather, a Democrat county clerk of court (and judge of juvenile court) in NC, who’d probably voted for him, said of JFK’s assassination, “He got what he deserved” for trying to interfere in the Southern states.

  231. @Curle
    @ic1000

    As long as non-lawyers or complete dilettantes as regards the law feel comfortable making legal claims online or repeating statements of others made without attribution this problem will persist.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Are you a lawyer?

    • Troll: Curle
  232. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. “Protocols” contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.”

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.

    “If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn’t use the secret magic words so the “Declassificus Immediatis!” spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument.”

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.

    “Imprison him for that and you’ll never, ever put this country back together again”

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    “I no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government”

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @Curle, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr Mox

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.

    Neither an Archivist, a law of Congress, nor a “protocol” of a former President can diminish the President’s Article II powers. Try again.

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.

    It’s almost certain that the “dispute” is over whether the President’s declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn’t want what the President declassified to be declassified.

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    Don’t Fedpost here, Corvy.

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    It’s not speculation if it fits a prior pattern of deception on the part of the government when it comes to the person of Trump and anyone in his orbit.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “It almost certain that the “dispute” is over whether the President’s declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn’t want what the President declassified to be declassified.“

    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
    As with any act of declassification is communicating the intent to ALL parties involved. That means across the federal agencies who have direct access and relevance to those documents being requested to be declassified. Why? In order to ensure that sources and national security interests are protected. That’s how it works.

    Again, if Trump is hellbent on destroying the Deep State once and for all, why isn’t he releasing his copies to his media allies? What is he waiting for?

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave, @Not Raul

  233. @Corvinus
    @PhysicistDave

    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle, @Alden, @PhysicistDave

    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.

    You’re privy to the undisclosed “committee” testimony, Corv? You wouldn’t be, what is the word? – speculating here, would you?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    It’s been well established per the nationally televised hearings and a myriad of media reports that a cadre of former Trump officials have testified about alleged malfeasance. It’s been confirmed that one of his own staff members gave DOJ and the FBI information that Trump has documents he was not supposed to have, which led to the warrant. He or she has not been revealed. The name has been redacted. But leave it one of Trump’s aides to have doxxed the FBI agents who served the warrant and searched his house. Hooray!

    Replies: @Curle

  234. @ic1000
    @Kylie

    > I’m dismayed to see Steve routinely allowing these regular contributors to post dissenting comments that are frivolously provocative, dishonest and hostile.

    Kylie, long ago, I did a spell as a volunteer moderator at a group blog. That makes me more sympathetic to Steve, who has to actually make a living at this gig. It was a never ending and mostly thankless time sink, where you're either "too lax" or "too strict."

    I imagine that Sailer wants well-reasoned and insightful dissenting comments. And he gets some. However... well, each of us could finish this sentence in our own way.

    I assume Sailer does a fair amount of trimming as it is. The frivolous, dishonest, motte/bailey, strawman, and stupid entries do degrade the threads, but the S/N ratio is still often high enough to justify scanning. So I take that as a small win.

    Replies: @Curle, @Harry Baldwin

    The frivolous, dishonest, motte/bailey, strawman, and stupid entries do degrade the threads

    Thank goodness there is a “Commenters to Ignore” option. I don’t have to read Corvinus’s or Tiny Duck’s blather, but I do have to read all the responses to them.

    • Agree: Coemgen
  235. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “The entirety of Article II Constitutional powers reside in the President. “Protocols” contrary to or limiting his Constitutionally prescribed powers do not bind the President.”

    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.

    “If he declassified the documents while President but some passive-aggressive partisan nerd is pretending that Trump didn’t use the secret magic words so the “Declassificus Immediatis!” spell was ineffective I think the President has the better of the argument.”

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.

    “Imprison him for that and you’ll never, ever put this country back together again”

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?

    “I no doubt that a tacit reason for the raid is at least in part to obstruct the discovery of malfeasance and criminality by elements of the Federal government”

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @Curle, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr Mox

    Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    A nothingburger, perhaps, but it appears someone was taking it seriously.

    From Newsweek, no less:

    The FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago last Monday was specifically intended to recover Donald Trump’s personal “stash” of hidden documents, two high-level U.S. intelligence officials tell Newsweek.

    To justify the unprecedented raid on a former president’s residence and protect the source who revealed the existence of Trump’s private hoard, agents went into Trump’s residence on the pretext that they were seeking all government documents, says one official who has been involved in the investigation. But the true target was this private stash, which Justice Department officials feared Donald Trump might weaponize.

    https://www.newsweek.com/fbi-sought-documents-trump-hoarded-years-including-about-russiagate-1734280

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
    @Mr Mox

    Newsweek:


    to recover Donald Trump’s personal “stash” of hidden documents
     
    Remember--no duplicates exist anywhere.

    What a stupid joke.
    , @Corvinus
    @Mr Mox

    Great! Weaponize it. He made copies no doubt. Why is he waiting to take down the Deep State? He has the dirt, so use it, right? That’s the promise he made.

    Furthermore, from your source…

    —But in the course of its investigation, the FBI and Justice became aware of Trump's private collection. As Newsweek previously reported, a confidential human source revealed that the former president wasn't planning to divulge that he had possession of some of his own documents and that he did not intend to return them.

    Trump administration officials, including former national security advisor John Bolton, have described how the president regularly tore out pages from intelligence reports, or took away documents which interested him to his White House residence. Most of those documents had the potential to reveal U.S. intelligence "sources and methods," as Newsweek reported.

    The Washington Post reported that those documents dealt with nuclear weapons, adding on Tuesday, "People familiar with the investigation did not offer additional details, such as whether the documents being sought involved weapons belonging to the United States or another nation."—

    To be clear, Trump didn’t adhere to well established procedures, and he had in possession as an ex-President certain materials he was not supposed to have. Even one of his own lawyers indicated they were all given back to the National Archives. That’s just par for the course with this joker.

    Replies: @Curle, @Alden

  236. @Corvinus
    @PhysicistDave

    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle, @Alden, @PhysicistDave

    “Quote likely is . . .”

    Try to be coherent.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Curle

    So you’re not a lawyer. But you badger like one.

  237. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    “illegitimate daughter with a mistress” sounds pretty Catholic.
     
    Anglophone Catholics tend to be legalistic in their practice of their faith, reflecting the legalism spread by Britain to its colonies. So American Catholics, or Australian Catholics or whatnot tend to want to change the "rules" so that the "rules" conform to their preferred practices. Many American Catholics in particular seem to think that the Church should be responsive to democratic influences - if we can't live without hormonal birth control and public opinion polls show that most American Catholic women think birth control is good, then the President of the Church (the Pope) should change the official rules that hormonal birth control is good. It bothers Anglophones and Americans in particular more that the authority has decreed that what they do in practice is bad enough to want to change what the authority decrees.

    Continental Catholics, particularly the Latin-influenced cultures (Spain/France/Italy) seem to be more at home with the idea that they're sinners who fall short daily and don't get so worked up about conforming the rules to their behavior. You're tempted, you try however halfheartedly, you fail, you ask forgiveness, and so forth. Having a mistress is too tempting for those who can. You may feel bad about it sometimes, but you're not going to lobby the Pope to bless your illicit affair.

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Anonymous, @epebble

    That is an interesting analysis. Is there a similar pattern for other denominations too? (Anglophone vs. Continental Protestants, Orthodox Christians etc.,).

  238. @Mr Mox
    @Corvinus

    Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    A nothingburger, perhaps, but it appears someone was taking it seriously.

    From Newsweek, no less:


    The FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago last Monday was specifically intended to recover Donald Trump's personal "stash" of hidden documents, two high-level U.S. intelligence officials tell Newsweek.

    To justify the unprecedented raid on a former president's residence and protect the source who revealed the existence of Trump's private hoard, agents went into Trump's residence on the pretext that they were seeking all government documents, says one official who has been involved in the investigation. But the true target was this private stash, which Justice Department officials feared Donald Trump might weaponize.
     
    https://www.newsweek.com/fbi-sought-documents-trump-hoarded-years-including-about-russiagate-1734280

    Replies: @Justvisiting, @Corvinus

    Newsweek:

    to recover Donald Trump’s personal “stash” of hidden documents

    Remember–no duplicates exist anywhere.

    What a stupid joke.

  239. @Curle
    @Corvinus

    “Quote likely is . . .”

    Try to be coherent.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    So you’re not a lawyer. But you badger like one.

    • Troll: Curle
  240. @Mr Mox
    @Corvinus

    Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?

    A nothingburger, perhaps, but it appears someone was taking it seriously.

    From Newsweek, no less:


    The FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago last Monday was specifically intended to recover Donald Trump's personal "stash" of hidden documents, two high-level U.S. intelligence officials tell Newsweek.

    To justify the unprecedented raid on a former president's residence and protect the source who revealed the existence of Trump's private hoard, agents went into Trump's residence on the pretext that they were seeking all government documents, says one official who has been involved in the investigation. But the true target was this private stash, which Justice Department officials feared Donald Trump might weaponize.
     
    https://www.newsweek.com/fbi-sought-documents-trump-hoarded-years-including-about-russiagate-1734280

    Replies: @Justvisiting, @Corvinus

    Great! Weaponize it. He made copies no doubt. Why is he waiting to take down the Deep State? He has the dirt, so use it, right? That’s the promise he made.

    Furthermore, from your source…

    —But in the course of its investigation, the FBI and Justice became aware of Trump’s private collection. As Newsweek previously reported, a confidential human source revealed that the former president wasn’t planning to divulge that he had possession of some of his own documents and that he did not intend to return them.

    Trump administration officials, including former national security advisor John Bolton, have described how the president regularly tore out pages from intelligence reports, or took away documents which interested him to his White House residence. Most of those documents had the potential to reveal U.S. intelligence “sources and methods,” as Newsweek reported.

    The Washington Post reported that those documents dealt with nuclear weapons, adding on Tuesday, “People familiar with the investigation did not offer additional details, such as whether the documents being sought involved weapons belonging to the United States or another nation.”—

    To be clear, Trump didn’t adhere to well established procedures, and he had in possession as an ex-President certain materials he was not supposed to have. Even one of his own lawyers indicated they were all given back to the National Archives. That’s just par for the course with this joker.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Corvinus

    “To be clear, Trump didn’t adhere to well established procedures,”

    Facts not offered , by you, into evidence.

    “and he had in possession as an ex-President certain materials he was not supposed to have.”

    Facts not in evidence. Failure to state a claim.

    Even one of his own lawyers indicated they were all given back to the National Archives.

    Argumentative.

    That’s just par for the course with this joker.”

    Argumentative.

    , @Alden
    @Corvinus

    “Circumventing the law “. And other high crimes and misdemeanors. OMG and Trump even kept his own documents !!!!!!!!
    I can just picture you typing away constantly clicking in the thesaurus for bigger and more confusing words.

  241. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.
     
    You're privy to the undisclosed "committee" testimony, Corv? You wouldn't be, what is the word? - speculating here, would you?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    It’s been well established per the nationally televised hearings and a myriad of media reports that a cadre of former Trump officials have testified about alleged malfeasance. It’s been confirmed that one of his own staff members gave DOJ and the FBI information that Trump has documents he was not supposed to have, which led to the warrant. He or she has not been revealed. The name has been redacted. But leave it one of Trump’s aides to have doxxed the FBI agents who served the warrant and searched his house. Hooray!

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Corvinus

    “It’s been well established”

    Stating an conclusion. Argumentative.

    “per the nationally televised hearings and a myriad of media reports”

    Not finders of law or fact. Not statements under oath. Expertise not established. Cannot be introduced into evidence.

    “that a cadre of former Trump officials have testified about alleged malfeasance.”

    Relevance not established.

    “It’s been confirmed that one of his own staff members gave DOJ and the FBI information”

    “that Trump has documents he was not supposed to have,”

    Argumentative. Argues an conclusion.

    “ which led to the warrant.”

    Facts not in evidence.

    “He or she has not been revealed.”

    See above.

    “The name has been redacted.”

    “But leave it one of Trump’s aides to have doxxed the FBI agents who served the warrant and searched his house.”

    Irrelevant.

    “ Hooray!”

  242. @Corvinus
    @Mr Mox

    Great! Weaponize it. He made copies no doubt. Why is he waiting to take down the Deep State? He has the dirt, so use it, right? That’s the promise he made.

    Furthermore, from your source…

    —But in the course of its investigation, the FBI and Justice became aware of Trump's private collection. As Newsweek previously reported, a confidential human source revealed that the former president wasn't planning to divulge that he had possession of some of his own documents and that he did not intend to return them.

    Trump administration officials, including former national security advisor John Bolton, have described how the president regularly tore out pages from intelligence reports, or took away documents which interested him to his White House residence. Most of those documents had the potential to reveal U.S. intelligence "sources and methods," as Newsweek reported.

    The Washington Post reported that those documents dealt with nuclear weapons, adding on Tuesday, "People familiar with the investigation did not offer additional details, such as whether the documents being sought involved weapons belonging to the United States or another nation."—

    To be clear, Trump didn’t adhere to well established procedures, and he had in possession as an ex-President certain materials he was not supposed to have. Even one of his own lawyers indicated they were all given back to the National Archives. That’s just par for the course with this joker.

    Replies: @Curle, @Alden

    “To be clear, Trump didn’t adhere to well established procedures,”

    Facts not offered , by you, into evidence.

    “and he had in possession as an ex-President certain materials he was not supposed to have.”

    Facts not in evidence. Failure to state a claim.

    Even one of his own lawyers indicated they were all given back to the National Archives.

    Argumentative.

    That’s just par for the course with this joker.”

    Argumentative.

  243. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    It’s been well established per the nationally televised hearings and a myriad of media reports that a cadre of former Trump officials have testified about alleged malfeasance. It’s been confirmed that one of his own staff members gave DOJ and the FBI information that Trump has documents he was not supposed to have, which led to the warrant. He or she has not been revealed. The name has been redacted. But leave it one of Trump’s aides to have doxxed the FBI agents who served the warrant and searched his house. Hooray!

    Replies: @Curle

    “It’s been well established”

    Stating an conclusion. Argumentative.

    “per the nationally televised hearings and a myriad of media reports”

    Not finders of law or fact. Not statements under oath. Expertise not established. Cannot be introduced into evidence.

    “that a cadre of former Trump officials have testified about alleged malfeasance.”

    Relevance not established.

    “It’s been confirmed that one of his own staff members gave DOJ and the FBI information”

    “that Trump has documents he was not supposed to have,”

    Argumentative. Argues an conclusion.

    “ which led to the warrant.”

    Facts not in evidence.

    “He or she has not been revealed.”

    See above.

    “The name has been redacted.”

    “But leave it one of Trump’s aides to have doxxed the FBI agents who served the warrant and searched his house.”

    Irrelevant.

    “ Hooray!”

  244. @Pixo
    @Chrisnonymous

    “ One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again.”

    That’d be great if it happened. Trump is really old and partly damaged goods at this point. I’m ready for DeSantis, who I think will also be more effective in office.

    Trump circa 2016 unfortunately is gone, and will be even goner with another two years of aging.

    If we have a two demented geezer repeat race in 2024, Biden will likely win again given he has another 4 years of demographic browning to help him.

    The problem for DeSantis is he probably cannot beat Trump in a primary, and even if he pulled off a narrow win, Trump would be a sore loser and tank him in the general election.

    https://twitter.com/BJamie62/status/1552689249178320899

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/28/21/60812493-11058449-image-a-99_1659040634548.jpg

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Harry Baldwin, @Chrisnonymous, @JohnnyWalker123, @Midnights

    Tucker Carlson 2024.

  245. @Reg Cæsar
    @RAZ

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn't tell me.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Ralph L, @Stan Adams, @RAZ, @Curle

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn’t tell me.

    Don’t know who Carter voted for but Reagan was a Democrat when he was young so he probably voted for Roosevelt in the 30’s and 40’s.

  246. @PhysicistDave
    @James B. Shearer

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:


    [Dave] “They’re gonna fake it, and they will find some document to use as a (largely irrelevant) prop.”

    [JBS] So why give them the opportunity?
     

    Huh????

    What on earth are you talking about????

    The "opportunity" came as soon as the federal thugs seized the boxes.

    How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this "opportunity"?

    By having a shoot-out with the FBI?

    What you called a "pointless fight" is not giving them the "opportunity."

    What you call a "pointless fight" is helping to delegitimize the federal thugs, and, with some luck, it may make it a bit harder for them to put him in jail.

    The fight is not "pointless," though it may well fail.

    As to why Trump took the boxes of documents with him:

    A) All Presidents seem to do this (at least, Obama did).

    B) Once again, Trump failed to realize how evil the FBI is.

    C) Merrick Garland has a personal beef with Trump, since little baby Garland is not on the Supreme Court as he hoped to be: Trump did not foresee this. (Unfortunately, baby Garland will probably not end up in jail, where he needs to be.)

    Replies: @James B. Shearer

    “How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?”

    By not walking off with a bunch of stuff and not refusing to return it.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @James B. Shearer

    He has a franchise, codified in statutory law and confirmed in judicial opinions, to sort office papers and declassify with standing orders. They all do and the salient judicial opinions were issued in 2012 in re Bill Clinton. He also allowed the FBI to examine his papers and put a second lock on the storage room at their request. He co-operated fully with them. By the way, we're talking about 15 bankers' boxes worth of material, not some huge trove. And its exceedingly unlikely his passports were stored in those boxes. They out-and-out stole them.

    , @PhysicistDave
    @James B. Shearer

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:


    [Dave] “How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?”

    [Jimbo] By not walking off with a bunch of stuff and not refusing to return it.
     
    You are just being silly.

    All the recent Presidents walked off with a bunch of stuff, specifically Obama did.

    They had a right to: a lot of it was very clearly their stuff. If you sister sends you a postcard while you are President, you get to keep the postcard. And the former President himself gets to decide which is which.

    This is established case law.

    As investigative journalist John Solomon reported a few days ago, there was a case involving Clinton, where the court held:

    "Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President's term and in his sole discretion," Jackson wrote in her March 2012 decision, which was never appealed.

    "Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records," she added.
     
    Will that protect Trump?

    Of course not!

    Because we no longer live in a republic., We live in a dictatorship. And Trump is a threat to the dictatorship.

    And you yourself have confessed to the crime of having voted for the current dictator -- Biden.

    When we no longer have the rule of law, disputes end up being settled by other means.

    Replies: @James B. Shearer

  247. @Corvinus
    @Mr Mox

    Great! Weaponize it. He made copies no doubt. Why is he waiting to take down the Deep State? He has the dirt, so use it, right? That’s the promise he made.

    Furthermore, from your source…

    —But in the course of its investigation, the FBI and Justice became aware of Trump's private collection. As Newsweek previously reported, a confidential human source revealed that the former president wasn't planning to divulge that he had possession of some of his own documents and that he did not intend to return them.

    Trump administration officials, including former national security advisor John Bolton, have described how the president regularly tore out pages from intelligence reports, or took away documents which interested him to his White House residence. Most of those documents had the potential to reveal U.S. intelligence "sources and methods," as Newsweek reported.

    The Washington Post reported that those documents dealt with nuclear weapons, adding on Tuesday, "People familiar with the investigation did not offer additional details, such as whether the documents being sought involved weapons belonging to the United States or another nation."—

    To be clear, Trump didn’t adhere to well established procedures, and he had in possession as an ex-President certain materials he was not supposed to have. Even one of his own lawyers indicated they were all given back to the National Archives. That’s just par for the course with this joker.

    Replies: @Curle, @Alden

    “Circumventing the law “. And other high crimes and misdemeanors. OMG and Trump even kept his own documents !!!!!!!!
    I can just picture you typing away constantly clicking in the thesaurus for bigger and more confusing words.

  248. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @peterike



    If you are President and you wish to order certain records be declassified it is easy to do so in a way that can not be questioned later. Like give a press conference in which you explain what you are doing and why.
     
    Oh a press conference. Or maybe something like Tweet about what you did to your tens of millions of followers, which is precisely what Trump did.

     

    I'm sorry but a tweet does not conform to the requirements of comment 6 to archival regulation § 5467.2, which requires that a President's declassification requests be submitted in the pre-printed triplicate form 67A for time stamp and review (yellow page is the Archivist's copy). The proper triplicate forms may be requested by mail to the archivist's office including a cover letter and self-enclosed, postage pre-paid return envelope. Due to budgetary constraints, a maximum of five (5) pre-printed forms 67A may be requested under a single cover letter.

    Unfortunately, the non-observance of this necessary requirement and the retention of classified materials means that the former President must spend the remainder of his life in Federal Prison. No one is above the law!

    Replies: @James B. Shearer, @epebble

    Former Trump officials say his claim of ‘standing order’ to declassify is nonsense

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/18/politics/trump-claim-standing-order-declassify-nonsense-patently-false-former-officials/index.html

    • Replies: @Curle
    @epebble

    You cherry picked:

    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration -- and also one of the former president's designees to the Archives -- also said on Fox last week that Trump "issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions."

    Replies: @epebble, @HallParvey

  249. @Ralph L
    @Reg Cæsar

    Carter was born in '24, so '48 was his first presidential election. Do you think he voted Dixiecrat? With his mother going into the Peace Corps later, I doubt it. Not a segregationist family, or it would have come up.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Curle

    “or it would have come up.”

    You mean in the ‘76 primary? Who would have risked losing the sizable anti-busing vote by pointing it out? And how would it be verified?

  250. @Reg Cæsar
    @RAZ

    I always wondered if Jimmy Carter voted in the 1944 election. (Yes, he was old enough.) I wonder if his library would have a clue. His biographer couldn't tell me.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @Ralph L, @Stan Adams, @RAZ, @Curle

    What were you hoping to glean from this information?

  251. @epebble
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    Former Trump officials say his claim of 'standing order' to declassify is nonsense

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/18/politics/trump-claim-standing-order-declassify-nonsense-patently-false-former-officials/index.html

    Replies: @Curle

    You cherry picked:

    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration — and also one of the former president’s designees to the Archives — also said on Fox last week that Trump “issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions.”

    • Replies: @epebble
    @Curle

    Well, it is Mr. Patel vs. "18 former top Trump administration officials".

    Replies: @Curle

    , @HallParvey
    @Curle


    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration — and also one of the former president’s designees to the Archives — also said on Fox last week that Trump “issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions.”
     
    Those have all been rescinded. They are all Top Secret again. Especially the stuff about Russian Conspiracies.

    Replies: @Curle, @Alden

  252. @Curle
    @epebble

    You cherry picked:

    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration -- and also one of the former president's designees to the Archives -- also said on Fox last week that Trump "issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions."

    Replies: @epebble, @HallParvey

    Well, it is Mr. Patel vs. “18 former top Trump administration officials”.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @epebble

    Direct quotes unambiguously contradicting? Probably not. This is now an time worn Corvinus type exercise. If you want, go back and find two quotes that contradict on the same set of facts/specific event, otherwise I’ll assume it was an broad characterization of statements by an reporter up against an direct quote by one official. Reading comprehension is an important skill.

    If you find someone directly contradicting Patel regarding the same event ONLY THEN would there be an disagreement worth mentioning.

    Replies: @epebble

  253. @Buzz Mohawk
    Sailer:

    After all these years, I don’t pay all that much attention to Trump, so I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio...
     
    Oh yeah, sure.
    __________________________________
    [Let's just examine that presumption for a moment: "... I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio..." Really now? An unprecedented raid on a former president's residence, presumably to remove documents that are presumably part of a legal dispute -- in a country where presidents have the highest authority to declassify information, and where commonly presidents have taken home all kinds of documents after serving in office, etc., etc., and on and on...! A public intellectual claims "... I’ve hadn’t much of an opinion on the latest imbroglio..."]

    Nothing to see here folks. Move along to my latest post about immigration or my lawn.
    __________________________________

    Thompson ("a bright fellow"):


    ... presidents are consumers of intelligence. The US can't do diplomacy if ex-POTUS is also a stealth private collector.
     
    Sailer:

    Is that what this is all about? Memorabilia?

    Really?
     

    ["Golly Gee Wilikers!']

    Sailer:


    Apparently, I hit a nerve:
     
    ["Boy am I clever. I'm a clever outsider -- in spite of the fact that I've had connections all my life and still have them and occasionally mention the fact. Honest, I have no agenda. I'm naive and completely uninvolved and more concerned with how green my lawn is. Don't look at me! I haven't thought about this at all!]

    Thompson:


    ... a bunch of a top secret intelligence information...
     
    Sailer:

    ... the Mar-A-Lago whoop-tee-doo is an intensification of last winter's spat over Trump taking home memorabilia...
     

    ... like "Dictator Kim's Love Letters?"
     

    Har de har har!

    Replies: @Curle, @Anon, @MEH 0910

    ‘He wrote me beautiful letters and we fell in love’: Donald Trump on Kim Jong-un

    Sep 30, 2018

  254. @Pixo
    @Chrisnonymous

    “ One interpretation of both js that the Democrats are looking for some legal way to stop Trump from running again.”

    That’d be great if it happened. Trump is really old and partly damaged goods at this point. I’m ready for DeSantis, who I think will also be more effective in office.

    Trump circa 2016 unfortunately is gone, and will be even goner with another two years of aging.

    If we have a two demented geezer repeat race in 2024, Biden will likely win again given he has another 4 years of demographic browning to help him.

    The problem for DeSantis is he probably cannot beat Trump in a primary, and even if he pulled off a narrow win, Trump would be a sore loser and tank him in the general election.

    https://twitter.com/BJamie62/status/1552689249178320899

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/28/21/60812493-11058449-image-a-99_1659040634548.jpg

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Harry Baldwin, @Chrisnonymous, @JohnnyWalker123, @Midnights

    I’ve seen younger looking faces on money.

  255. @Alden
    @peterike

    Judge Bruce Reinhardt worked as a defense attorney for several of Jeff Epstein’s woman pimps in the criminal trials in the early 2000’s. He worked in the prosecutors office . He quit and went to work for Epstein’s pimps taking with him a lot of prosecution evidence strategies etc. Being sued by Brad Edwards for violation of the federal crime victims act. . On the Board of Directors of his synagogue.

    Signed off on a warrant for “ all presidential papers obtained between January 20 2017 and January 20 2020.”

    Replies: @Emil Nikola Richard

  256. @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?"

    By not walking off with a bunch of stuff and not refusing to return it.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @PhysicistDave

    He has a franchise, codified in statutory law and confirmed in judicial opinions, to sort office papers and declassify with standing orders. They all do and the salient judicial opinions were issued in 2012 in re Bill Clinton. He also allowed the FBI to examine his papers and put a second lock on the storage room at their request. He co-operated fully with them. By the way, we’re talking about 15 bankers’ boxes worth of material, not some huge trove. And its exceedingly unlikely his passports were stored in those boxes. They out-and-out stole them.

  257. @epebble
    @PhysicistDave

    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI. They prosecuted (and jailed for 9 months) a physicist who forgot to return his old hard drives that had computer simulation data of his own work after upgrading his computer. He had kept them under lock and key in a steel storage cabinet in Los Alamos National Laboratory.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave, @HallParvey

    I think your analysis is quite logical. However, FBI/DOJ can be very enthusiastic (some may say overenthusiastic) in prosecuting even slightest non-crimes when it concerns TS/SCI.

    Actually, whenever they are ordered to by their controllers, regardless of any connection to national security. Perhaps the operatives will all receive Lon Horiuchi medals for their bravery.

  258. @Curle
    @epebble

    You cherry picked:

    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration -- and also one of the former president's designees to the Archives -- also said on Fox last week that Trump "issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions."

    Replies: @epebble, @HallParvey

    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration — and also one of the former president’s designees to the Archives — also said on Fox last week that Trump “issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions.”

    Those have all been rescinded. They are all Top Secret again. Especially the stuff about Russian Conspiracies.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @HallParvey

    What question do you think your response disposes of?

    , @Alden
    @HallParvey

    Who rescinded Trump’s de classification orders? And when? And how? What exactly did that person do to re classify those documents?

  259. @epebble
    @Curle

    Well, it is Mr. Patel vs. "18 former top Trump administration officials".

    Replies: @Curle

    Direct quotes unambiguously contradicting? Probably not. This is now an time worn Corvinus type exercise. If you want, go back and find two quotes that contradict on the same set of facts/specific event, otherwise I’ll assume it was an broad characterization of statements by an reporter up against an direct quote by one official. Reading comprehension is an important skill.

    If you find someone directly contradicting Patel regarding the same event ONLY THEN would there be an disagreement worth mentioning.

    • Replies: @epebble
    @Curle

    Direct quotes unambiguously contradicting


    "Nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given," said John Kelly, who served as Trump's chief of staff for 17 months from 2017 to 2019. "And I can't imagine anyone that worked at the White House after me that would have simply shrugged their shoulders and allowed that order to go forward without dying in the ditch trying to stop it."
     
    Kelly is a highly decorated 4 Star General.

    Mick Mulvaney, who succeeded Kelly as acting White House chief of staff, also dismissed the idea and told CNN he was "not aware of a general standing order" during his tenure.
     
    Mulvaney is an attorney, Congressman, Director of OMB

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Curle

  260. @Curle
    @epebble

    Direct quotes unambiguously contradicting? Probably not. This is now an time worn Corvinus type exercise. If you want, go back and find two quotes that contradict on the same set of facts/specific event, otherwise I’ll assume it was an broad characterization of statements by an reporter up against an direct quote by one official. Reading comprehension is an important skill.

    If you find someone directly contradicting Patel regarding the same event ONLY THEN would there be an disagreement worth mentioning.

    Replies: @epebble

    Direct quotes unambiguously contradicting

    “Nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given,” said John Kelly, who served as Trump’s chief of staff for 17 months from 2017 to 2019. “And I can’t imagine anyone that worked at the White House after me that would have simply shrugged their shoulders and allowed that order to go forward without dying in the ditch trying to stop it.”

    Kelly is a highly decorated 4 Star General.

    Mick Mulvaney, who succeeded Kelly as acting White House chief of staff, also dismissed the idea and told CNN he was “not aware of a general standing order” during his tenure.

    Mulvaney is an attorney, Congressman, Director of OMB

    • Thanks: Corvinus
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @epebble

    “Except you quoted Deep State assets”, says Curle. “Thus, we can’t trust them”, quips Alden. “And you’re appealing to authoritarians”, both exclaim.

    I’ll just preempt one of their many excuses.

    Replies: @Curle

    , @Curle
    @epebble

    “And I can’t imagine”

    “not aware of a general standing order” during his tenure.”

    In other words, no direct conflict.

  261. @epebble
    @Curle

    Direct quotes unambiguously contradicting


    "Nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given," said John Kelly, who served as Trump's chief of staff for 17 months from 2017 to 2019. "And I can't imagine anyone that worked at the White House after me that would have simply shrugged their shoulders and allowed that order to go forward without dying in the ditch trying to stop it."
     
    Kelly is a highly decorated 4 Star General.

    Mick Mulvaney, who succeeded Kelly as acting White House chief of staff, also dismissed the idea and told CNN he was "not aware of a general standing order" during his tenure.
     
    Mulvaney is an attorney, Congressman, Director of OMB

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Curle

    “Except you quoted Deep State assets”, says Curle. “Thus, we can’t trust them”, quips Alden. “And you’re appealing to authoritarians”, both exclaim.

    I’ll just preempt one of their many excuses.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Corvinus

    You’ve promoted nothing because you understand nothing.

    Two speculations and one declarative statement. Speculation doesn’t overrule direct testimony. The Patel comment is subject to admission into evidence if he swears to personal knowledge of it. Knowing what Mulvaney and Kelly would be surprised to learn is meaningless.

    As was pointed out “Mulvaney is an attorney.” Which is why he gave an conditional response. He knows the limits of his own knowledge. You can’t even grasp the nature of limited statements made by others.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  262. @HallParvey
    @Curle


    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration — and also one of the former president’s designees to the Archives — also said on Fox last week that Trump “issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions.”
     
    Those have all been rescinded. They are all Top Secret again. Especially the stuff about Russian Conspiracies.

    Replies: @Curle, @Alden

    What question do you think your response disposes of?

  263. @epebble
    @Curle

    Direct quotes unambiguously contradicting


    "Nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given," said John Kelly, who served as Trump's chief of staff for 17 months from 2017 to 2019. "And I can't imagine anyone that worked at the White House after me that would have simply shrugged their shoulders and allowed that order to go forward without dying in the ditch trying to stop it."
     
    Kelly is a highly decorated 4 Star General.

    Mick Mulvaney, who succeeded Kelly as acting White House chief of staff, also dismissed the idea and told CNN he was "not aware of a general standing order" during his tenure.
     
    Mulvaney is an attorney, Congressman, Director of OMB

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Curle

    “And I can’t imagine”

    “not aware of a general standing order” during his tenure.”

    In other words, no direct conflict.

  264. @Corvinus
    @epebble

    “Except you quoted Deep State assets”, says Curle. “Thus, we can’t trust them”, quips Alden. “And you’re appealing to authoritarians”, both exclaim.

    I’ll just preempt one of their many excuses.

    Replies: @Curle

    You’ve promoted nothing because you understand nothing.

    Two speculations and one declarative statement. Speculation doesn’t overrule direct testimony. The Patel comment is subject to admission into evidence if he swears to personal knowledge of it. Knowing what Mulvaney and Kelly would be surprised to learn is meaningless.

    As was pointed out “Mulvaney is an attorney.” Which is why he gave an conditional response. He knows the limits of his own knowledge. You can’t even grasp the nature of limited statements made by others.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Curle

    They know decidely more than you about the circumstances. The fact of the matter is that Trump didn’t adhere to established protocols. Time and time again people in the know have made factual statements and direct testimony about what has taken place and you shamefully dismiss them.

    Replies: @Curle

  265. @Curle
    @Corvinus

    You’ve promoted nothing because you understand nothing.

    Two speculations and one declarative statement. Speculation doesn’t overrule direct testimony. The Patel comment is subject to admission into evidence if he swears to personal knowledge of it. Knowing what Mulvaney and Kelly would be surprised to learn is meaningless.

    As was pointed out “Mulvaney is an attorney.” Which is why he gave an conditional response. He knows the limits of his own knowledge. You can’t even grasp the nature of limited statements made by others.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    They know decidely more than you about the circumstances. The fact of the matter is that Trump didn’t adhere to established protocols. Time and time again people in the know have made factual statements and direct testimony about what has taken place and you shamefully dismiss them.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Corvinus

    “They know decidely more than you about the circumstances.”

    But not enough to mean anything.

    “The fact of the matter is that Trump didn’t adhere to established protocols.”

    You have no idea whether this is true or not. You should: a) improve your reading comprehension; and 2) learn to avoid making conclusions based on determinations of law and fact beyond your comprehension.

    “Time and time again people in the know have made factual statements and direct testimony about what has taken place and you shamefully dismiss them.”

    You don’t know what ‘direct testimony’ means.

    You don’t know what ‘in the know’ means relative to legal matters.

    You don’t understand the meaning of relevance.

  266. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Corvinus


    You sound just like an elitist who is trying to skirt the rules for their own designs. The protocols (no parentheses needed) have been crafted by presidents since WWII. There is a patent expectation to honor them. That is the duty of the chief executive. Moreover, since the National Archives are also involved in the process, Congressional law is in play here regarding the storage and possession of sensitive materials post presidency.
     
    Neither an Archivist, a law of Congress, nor a "protocol" of a former President can diminish the President's Article II powers. Try again.

    But that did not happen. His own lawyer stated all documents were given back to the National Archives. Clearly that was not the case. A Trump official provided information to DOJ and the FBI about the nature of those materials. In response, there was a search warrant issued. The rule of law applies to an ex President, especially to a man who has the propensity to flout it repeatedly.
     
    It's almost certain that the "dispute" is over whether the President's declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn't want what the President declassified to be declassified.

    Are you going to be on the frontlines if and when that occurs?
     
    Don't Fedpost here, Corvy.

    So you are speculating here. Of course it depends exactly what are those documents and why he required them in the first place. Let us assume he has the goods on the Deep State. Why not once and for all show them for the entire world to see? What does he have to lose? Or maybe, just maybe, the dirt he says he possesses is just a big nothingburger. Where is you buddy QAnon when you need him?
     
    It's not speculation if it fits a prior pattern of deception on the part of the government when it comes to the person of Trump and anyone in his orbit.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “It almost certain that the “dispute” is over whether the President’s declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn’t want what the President declassified to be declassified.“

    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
    As with any act of declassification is communicating the intent to ALL parties involved. That means across the federal agencies who have direct access and relevance to those documents being requested to be declassified. Why? In order to ensure that sources and national security interests are protected. That’s how it works.

    Again, if Trump is hellbent on destroying the Deep State once and for all, why isn’t he releasing his copies to his media allies? What is he waiting for?

    • Agree: Not Raul
    • Replies: @Curle
    @Corvinus

    “No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.”

    How would you know what it is ‘about?’

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus wrote to Alec Leamas (working from home):


    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
     
    You're losing your touch, Corvy.

    The "proper channels" were laid out in Executive Orders by previous Presidents. But one President cannot bind a future President. Trump could and did ignore them.

    As was appropriate.

    Don't get me wrong: people like you who support the current dictatorship will put Trump in jail. You do not have the law, but you have the raw physical force.

    For now,

    But be careful what you wish for: you will reap the whirlwind.

    You are starting a civil war.
    , @Not Raul
    @Corvinus


    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
    As with any act of declassification is communicating the intent to ALL parties involved. That means across the federal agencies who have direct access and relevance to those documents being requested to be declassified.
     
    Exactly.

    And nobody can provide a paper trail.

    Several of Trump’s West Wing officials have said that they had never heard of this standing order.

    Unless people are willing to testify under oath that such an order existed, and was communicated to relevant parties, Trump could be in significant legal jeopardy.
  267. @Corvinus
    @Curle

    They know decidely more than you about the circumstances. The fact of the matter is that Trump didn’t adhere to established protocols. Time and time again people in the know have made factual statements and direct testimony about what has taken place and you shamefully dismiss them.

    Replies: @Curle

    “They know decidely more than you about the circumstances.”

    But not enough to mean anything.

    “The fact of the matter is that Trump didn’t adhere to established protocols.”

    You have no idea whether this is true or not. You should: a) improve your reading comprehension; and 2) learn to avoid making conclusions based on determinations of law and fact beyond your comprehension.

    “Time and time again people in the know have made factual statements and direct testimony about what has taken place and you shamefully dismiss them.”

    You don’t know what ‘direct testimony’ means.

    You don’t know what ‘in the know’ means relative to legal matters.

    You don’t understand the meaning of relevance.

    • Agree: PhysicistDave
  268. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “It almost certain that the “dispute” is over whether the President’s declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn’t want what the President declassified to be declassified.“

    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
    As with any act of declassification is communicating the intent to ALL parties involved. That means across the federal agencies who have direct access and relevance to those documents being requested to be declassified. Why? In order to ensure that sources and national security interests are protected. That’s how it works.

    Again, if Trump is hellbent on destroying the Deep State once and for all, why isn’t he releasing his copies to his media allies? What is he waiting for?

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave, @Not Raul

    “No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.”

    How would you know what it is ‘about?’

  269. @HallParvey
    @Curle


    Kash Patel, a Trump ally and former national security official in the Trump administration — and also one of the former president’s designees to the Archives — also said on Fox last week that Trump “issued sweeping declassification orders on multiple occasions.”
     
    Those have all been rescinded. They are all Top Secret again. Especially the stuff about Russian Conspiracies.

    Replies: @Curle, @Alden

    Who rescinded Trump’s de classification orders? And when? And how? What exactly did that person do to re classify those documents?

  270. @Corvinus
    @PhysicistDave

    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle, @Alden, @PhysicistDave

    Circumvent means overcoming an obstacle. That’s all. Nothing illegal about the act of circumventing anything.

  271. @Stan Adams
    @Reg Cæsar

    https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bill-moyers-public-broadcasting-services-usa-people-and-politics


    The first time I ever voted was in 1948. I was in submarine school. All the other officers there voted for Dewey. I voted for Truman. He's still my favorite President.
     

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Hibernian

    Almost certainly at least one of them voted for Thurmond. Possibly at least one for Wallace too.

  272. @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?"

    By not walking off with a bunch of stuff and not refusing to return it.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @PhysicistDave

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:

    [Dave] “How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?”

    [Jimbo] By not walking off with a bunch of stuff and not refusing to return it.

    You are just being silly.

    All the recent Presidents walked off with a bunch of stuff, specifically Obama did.

    They had a right to: a lot of it was very clearly their stuff. If you sister sends you a postcard while you are President, you get to keep the postcard. And the former President himself gets to decide which is which.

    This is established case law.

    As investigative journalist John Solomon reported a few days ago, there was a case involving Clinton, where the court held:

    “Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President’s term and in his sole discretion,” Jackson wrote in her March 2012 decision, which was never appealed.

    “Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records,” she added.

    Will that protect Trump?

    Of course not!

    Because we no longer live in a republic., We live in a dictatorship. And Trump is a threat to the dictatorship.

    And you yourself have confessed to the crime of having voted for the current dictator — Biden.

    When we no longer have the rule of law, disputes end up being settled by other means.

    • Replies: @James B. Shearer
    @PhysicistDave

    "...If you sister sends you a postcard while you are President, you get to keep the postcard. .."

    For some reason I don't get sent a lot of top secret postcards.

  273. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “It almost certain that the “dispute” is over whether the President’s declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn’t want what the President declassified to be declassified.“

    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
    As with any act of declassification is communicating the intent to ALL parties involved. That means across the federal agencies who have direct access and relevance to those documents being requested to be declassified. Why? In order to ensure that sources and national security interests are protected. That’s how it works.

    Again, if Trump is hellbent on destroying the Deep State once and for all, why isn’t he releasing his copies to his media allies? What is he waiting for?

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave, @Not Raul

    Corvinus wrote to Alec Leamas (working from home):

    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.

    You’re losing your touch, Corvy.

    The “proper channels” were laid out in Executive Orders by previous Presidents. But one President cannot bind a future President. Trump could and did ignore them.

    As was appropriate.

    Don’t get me wrong: people like you who support the current dictatorship will put Trump in jail. You do not have the law, but you have the raw physical force.

    For now,

    But be careful what you wish for: you will reap the whirlwind.

    You are starting a civil war.

  274. @Corvinus
    @PhysicistDave

    Quote likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides, some of whom have testified under oath in the January 6 inquiry, thought that he, as a known liar and scofflaw, was circumventing the law and chief executive protocols and traditions once again, so they decided to inform DOJ and the FBI of potential malfeasance.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Curle, @Alden, @PhysicistDave

    Corvinus wrote to me:

    Quote [sic] likely is that Trump’s own lawyers and aides [that accused Trump of wrongly having classified materials]…

    Of course, it would be an extremely serious violation of attorney-client privilege if Trump’s own lawyers did this: as I indicated in my reply to Jimbo above, established case law says the former President decides on this stuff.

    Trump’s lawyers were representing him on a matter in which case law provides him with a very strong defense.

    If, despite that, his lawyers were working with the other side… well, that would, at the very least, be cause for disbarment.

    Of course, we no longer live under the rule of law — we live in a dictatorship, run bey people like you.

    For now.

    So, it may well be his attorneys, as you suggest.

    I am glad to see though that you are now publicly admitting the deep corruption in our institutions, such as the legal profession.

    Even someone like you so deeply enmeshed in evil can be redeemed, Corvy.

    It’s a start.

    • Thanks: epebble
  275. @PhysicistDave
    @James B. Shearer

    James B. Shearer wrote to me:


    [Dave] “How was Trump supposed to prevent them from getting this “opportunity”?”

    [Jimbo] By not walking off with a bunch of stuff and not refusing to return it.
     
    You are just being silly.

    All the recent Presidents walked off with a bunch of stuff, specifically Obama did.

    They had a right to: a lot of it was very clearly their stuff. If you sister sends you a postcard while you are President, you get to keep the postcard. And the former President himself gets to decide which is which.

    This is established case law.

    As investigative journalist John Solomon reported a few days ago, there was a case involving Clinton, where the court held:

    "Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President's term and in his sole discretion," Jackson wrote in her March 2012 decision, which was never appealed.

    "Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records," she added.
     
    Will that protect Trump?

    Of course not!

    Because we no longer live in a republic., We live in a dictatorship. And Trump is a threat to the dictatorship.

    And you yourself have confessed to the crime of having voted for the current dictator -- Biden.

    When we no longer have the rule of law, disputes end up being settled by other means.

    Replies: @James B. Shearer

    “…If you sister sends you a postcard while you are President, you get to keep the postcard. ..”

    For some reason I don’t get sent a lot of top secret postcards.

    • Agree: Not Raul
  276. @Corvinus
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    “It almost certain that the “dispute” is over whether the President’s declassification order was effective because the Archivist and others didn’t want what the President declassified to be declassified.“

    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
    As with any act of declassification is communicating the intent to ALL parties involved. That means across the federal agencies who have direct access and relevance to those documents being requested to be declassified. Why? In order to ensure that sources and national security interests are protected. That’s how it works.

    Again, if Trump is hellbent on destroying the Deep State once and for all, why isn’t he releasing his copies to his media allies? What is he waiting for?

    Replies: @Curle, @PhysicistDave, @Not Raul

    No, it’s over whether his request went through the proper channels regarding sensitive material.
    As with any act of declassification is communicating the intent to ALL parties involved. That means across the federal agencies who have direct access and relevance to those documents being requested to be declassified.

    Exactly.

    And nobody can provide a paper trail.

    Several of Trump’s West Wing officials have said that they had never heard of this standing order.

    Unless people are willing to testify under oath that such an order existed, and was communicated to relevant parties, Trump could be in significant legal jeopardy.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
How America was neoconned into World War IV
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement