Trump: ‘I’m Allowed to Do Whatever I Want’ With Classified Info
Trump: ‘I’m Allowed to Do Whatever I Want’ With Classified Info
The former president told Hugh Hewitt that he “absolutely” would testify in the federal government’s probe of his handling of sensitive material
DONALD TRUMP SAID he “absolutely” plans to testify in the federal government’s case against him regarding classified documents he removed from the White House. “I’m allowed to do whatever I want … I’m allowed to do everything I did,” the former president told conservative podcast host Hugh Hewitt.
In an interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show” that dropped Wednesday, the host asked Trump, “Did you direct anyone to move the boxes, Mr. President? Did you tell anyone to move the boxes?” referring to the boxes of more than 300 classified documents the federal government seized last year from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
“I don’t talk about anything. You know why? Because I’m allowed to do whatever I want. I come under the Presidential Records Act,” Trump replied, while also taking a quick detour to bash Hewitt. “I’m not telling you. You know, every time I talk to you, ‘Oh, I have a breaking story.’ You don’t have any story. I come under the Presidential Records Act. I’m allowed to do everything I did.”
You're viewing a single thread.
Let the courts sort out his stupidity.
Can he sit in prison while he awaits his trial?
Presidents do generally have ultimate authority on what is and is not classified. The act of them just waving their hand and saying, "this is declassified" is generally enough to make it unclassified. This has been established through courts before. I think where they are trying to get him is where he previously said "I did not declassify these before getting out of office" and now that he isn't the president he no longer has declassification authority. Some constitution lawyers still argue he can't be prosecuted for anything he grabbed as president. The supreme court will likely have to decide and given that they are a super conservative majority they will likely side with him in the matter.
It's not a strong case and never was.
My understanding from briefly covering this in law school and reading some technical articles about it over the past year, is that classification falls under congressional powers, and the only reason the executive branch has any say in the matter as to documents is because Congress passed laws delegating some of that authority to the executive branch. In no circumstance under the law, can the president simply state that a document is declassified and make it so because no such exists under the statute.
The president has authority to initiate the process to declassify any documentwith the exception of nuclear secrets.
The president could read a classified non-nuclear document publicly, and the subject matter would lose its classification, but not the document itself, until it went through the applicable agency's legal procedure for declassification.
Trump had not initiated such processes and had not declassified the subject matter publicly while president.
The entirety of the above statement are irrelevant to two things as far as Trump's crimes: any of Trump's actions after the lawful end of his tenure and nuclear secrets, to which none of the above applies, as Congress delegated classification of nuclear secrets to our nuclear energy regulators.
Trump also lied repeatedly to the public and law enforcement, and engaged in an open conspiracy to illegally destroy evidence and tamper with witnesses.
By the time this is over, I won't be surprised if it's revealed he sold nuclear secrets to the Saudis, Russia, or China. Dude had been a foreign agent since the 80's.
Sounds like you don't have much understanding tbh. Keep reading.
He admitted on tape he did not declassify the documents while president and no longer can now that he isn't. That torpedoes any bullshit mind-link declassification powers he asserts he had. He literally admitted it. Literally. I mean in the classic sense of the word literally. He literally already admitted he did not declassify them when being interviewed for a potential book deal.
This is actually the only good argument anyone has made in all these comments. Everything else is "orange man bad hopium". And is the only reason i'm not 100% sure he won't be
chargedconvicted. But i'm still 99% sure he's good to go. Just will have to sit through years of court battles over it.Brother you need to improve your reading comprehension. What about the whole 'declassification is not done only by the president but its actually a whole process that goes through congress' argument?
Tell you what, come back here after it's over and if he's convicted I'll send you 10$ of Bitcoin and you do the same.
He was already charged.
You got me, found a gotcha. I mean convicted.
Sounds like you don't have much understanding tbh.
As opposed to "he just needs to think it and it is so?"
Hmm who do I trust? Special counsel with years experience in government or anon who just hand waved his entire case.
Better go with anon because it would be horrible if anon were right and myself, another anon, would know it.
What a great example of the appeal to authority fallacy . I'm sure everyone here will appreciate the opportunity learn about logical fallacies through your example.
What?
How is the special console not a qualified expert in the matter? I don't think you know what you are talking about, and you seem to keep providing examples that you don't know what you're talking about.
Example of a biased expert
That's just incorrect.
If you think the government doesn't want more paperwork and documentation that something is declassified, then you have an inflated view of government efficiency. Not to mention the actual importance of a paper trail and approvals.
It's only incorrect if the supreme court says it's incorrect. And i'm like 99.99% sure they will agree with this hot take.
Do you really think SCOTUS would be willing to give Biden the ability to do after his presidency what Trump did?
Do you trust the current SCOTUS to not play GOP politics and apply rules for thee not for me?
I could easily see the poor mental gymnastics that would be pulled for protecting trump and then later flipping and condemning the act if done by a non GOP president
Yes I do. Did you forget that he has classified documents at his house from when he was vp? https://www.npr.org/2023/01/21/1150617734/the-doj-searched-bidens-home-and-found-more-classified-documents
Which is objectively illegal. Honestly I think they will give him and Obama the power to retroactively declassify it. Or say Obama said it was declassified. It's a absolute authority of the president. This court has been pretty consistent in respecting executive authority. They've sided with Biden over vaccine mandates for Soldiers who have religious exceptions for example. Even though they are a pretty religious group.
He didn't refuse to comply with investigators. Did you forget that?
Before I disagree with that statement, is that the law he is charged with breaking? I don't think so.
So because Biden supposedly answered the phone more when he breaks the law it doesn't count? Where is your logic at? Show me laws, court cases, constitutional arguments not abc links.
What are you even talking about?
"Show me precedent in a case that's never happened before" he screams into the void.
This is absolutely not true, but I’ll allow you to try and come up with some example to support your fantastic assertions?
I don't suggest anyone use polififact for any type of fact checking as they are clearly political biased but they do quote some decent sources here https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/may/16/james-risch/does-president-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/
"The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’" according to Article II of the Constitution, the court’s majority wrote. "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."
Basically, classification and declassification are extensions of the executive branches power. The argument is that you can't use the presidents power to arrest the president. Classification exist for the president so he can't really break any rules with it.
Ultimately a court will decide and I'm betting on the president getting to keep ultimate authority on what is and is not classified. Regardless if he told someone else it is declassified.
Yeah, no.
This buffoon would never be able to get cleared for even a generic TS for normal government work. I think our commander in chief should be able to obtain a TS as a requirement to running for office. Then there's Jared...
Having political power doesn't imply you can do whatever you want with it. Abuse of power is a crime.
This has been established through courts before
Cite a court case that establishes this. I bet you $500 USD you can't.
Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)
"The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’" according to Article II of the Constitution, the court’s majority wrote. "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."
It's been generally accepted that the president is not subject to his own executive orders because he can change them at will
The official documents governing classification and declassification stem from executive orders. But even these executive orders aren’t necessarily binding on the president. The president is not "obliged to follow any procedures other than those that he himself has prescribed," Aftergood said. "And he can change those."
As Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy wrote.
I will take my $500 in bitcoin thank you.
So what your saying is that an ex president can refuse to turn over classified documents that he himself acknowledges he did not declassify, and share that information with people that do not have clearences or precedent to know that information.
If your right, then it isn't a strong case. If you're wrong, that case seems pretty fucking damning.
Theoretically the president can indeed forget that he ever declassified them. By being in his possession any requirements were satisfied because he himself defined those requirements.
Hey, that’s pretty neat! Let me try:
The New York Times, et al., v. Central Intelligence Agency (2020)
Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures. Moreover, courts cannot “simply assume, over the well-documented and specific affidavits of the CIA to the contrary,” that disclosure is required simply because the information has already been made public.
The Shiner affidavits, in addition to justifying the two FOIA exemptions, expressly stated that no declassification procedures had been followed with respect to any documents pertaining to the alleged covert program.
Moreover, the Times cites no authority that stand for the proposition that the President can inadvertently declassify information and we are aware of none. Because declassification, even by the President, must follow established procedures, that argument fails.
Pretty cool!!
That case has no presidential implications. It's not relevant at all. It establishes no precedent for a president.
Lol THAT’S your response? Just, “nuh-uh, doesn’t count because I said!!”
Okay bud.
It's like saying because dogs don't go to jail for eating bones trump must be convicted. So yes I reject it as a relevant example
Permanently Deleted
It's not trolling these are the exact arguments trumps lawyers are making.
I was under the impression that it didn't matter whether or not the documents were classified. After a president leaves office all presidential documents need to go to the National Archives. Trump took a bunch of boxes to Mar-a-Lago that should have went to the archives. That's what he did wrong. Doesn't matter if it was a McDonalds lunch order on a napkin or nuclear launch codes. He didn't have the authority to take documents out of the white house. Full stop.
And what law are you referring to? From who's authority is it made?
And in case you want a primary source
It was an act of congress in 1978. Basically after a president leaves office all presidential documents belong to the public. No president has the authority to take presidential documents to their private property after they leave office.
Supreme court has already established Congress has no authority over the president and his use of classified documents.
And what evidence do you have that the supreme court effectively nullified the Presidential Records Act?
I already linked the case
You linked a case stating the president has the authority to classify or declassify documents as they see fit. Which again, isn't what he's being charged for. He took documents to Mar-a-Lago and kept them there once he was no longer president. This violates the Presidential Records Act as those documents became public property once he was no longer president. It again does not matter at all whether or not they were classified.
This violates the Presidential Records Act as those documents became public property once he was no longer president. It again does not matter at all whether or not they were classified.
Not if he declassified them first. Which is what people are saying. He has broad presidential immunity. None of these are going to stand unless you change the makeup of the supreme court
Yes. Even if he declassified them first. Because, again, the classification status of the documents does not matter. They are not his property to do with as he pleases even after he declassified them. Once he was no longer president all presidential documents regardless of classification status needed to be relinquished to The National Archives for archival purposes. This was not done.
This all being said I'm merely arguing whether or not he broke the law. Which he very clearly did and should, imo, face consequences for it. If only for how alarming it is that he stole documents pertaining to US nuclear capabilites and military plans. Even if you argue that he CAN declassify them I don't think it should be controversial to say that he absolutely should not have done so.
Now whether or not he'll actually go down for it is a whole other discussion entirely. And I'm not intimately enough aware of the case to predict one outcome or another. But he absolutely should go down for it.
It’s not a strong case and never was.
Laughable. ETA: You are.