Sidebar

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

That's not how this works.

Mike... he's fucked here.

There is no reason for him to have it.

It's the governments property and they asked for it back.

Had to execute a warrant to get it back.

He doesn't have the office to protect him anymore.

You have zero clue as does most everyone else, yet here you stand as expert once again:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2...ied-documents/

"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."

Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, told PolitiFact in 2017 that such authority gives the president the authority to "classify and declassify at will."

Robert F. Turner, associate director of the University of Virginia's Center for National Security Law, told us in 2017 that "if Congress were to enact a statute seeking to limit the president’s authority to classify or declassify national security information, or to prohibit him from sharing certain kinds of information … it would raise serious separation of powers constitutional issues."

The official documents governing classification and declassification stem from presidential executive orders. But even these executive orders aren’t necessarily binding on a 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."
.
.
.
However, experts cautioned that nothing is ordinary about the current situation involving Trump. In such an unusual and high-stakes scenario, it’s hard to be too certain about how the courts would rule.

"We’re in uncharted territory on the issue of criminally prosecuting a former president over mishandling classified documents," Moss said. "There is no legal precedent to look to for guidance. It raises all sorts of constitutional implications and it is anyone’s guess how it would play out."

WE GOT EM BOYS!

WE FINALLY GOT EM!