If you think it's a good idea to allow a former POTUS to retroactively and implicitly declassify information he is caught with after leaving office, or to issue a sweeping declaration that any documents he takes out of the Oval Office are automatically declassified, I suspect you won't be as blasé when someone of the opposing political party does it.
Turns out the raid was conducted with respect to the words “marked classified,” and in response to a subpoena. To be clear, “marked classified” documents remain so, because the president doesn’t personally operate the declassification stamp, nor is there any formal process for declass if one holds the authority. Even this DoJ doesn’t want to engage such an obviously specious argument about classification status.
This is pure sophistry, and in addition it is factually incorrect. You should look carefully at the word 'authority' and diversify your information sources.
Varied, mostly practitioners. High value on non-partisans, demonstrated by inclination to make and entertain counterargument, and an extensive history of demonstrated preference. By the way, I cannot help but notice that your “former NSA counsel” remains anonymous. Susan Hennessey, nor anyone affiliated with Lawfare or Brookings meet the minimum criteria.
Glenn seems fair, and he appears to answer a legitimate question reasonably. He's staying within his lane, which is narrow, and responding to a lead question. Both articles are tortured with journalistic misinterpretation. Frankly, you have to be able to contextualize with broader experience. Nothing to do with Trump or SCOTUS. I would bet if you asked Glenn 'Are claims necessarily retroactive or invalid from the get-go,' he would say, 'Absolutely no.' If you have a chance, ask him.
Any ideas you have about the President having to follow any sort of official process regarding classification are nothing but illusions. The most you're going to get here is he's irresponsible in a way people don't like but is not criminal.
Even if I were to imagine he were technically breaking the law with some of these documents, look at it from a practical standpoint. At one point he could've done whatever he wanted to with any documents, including tweeting them publicly. He may or may not have taken some sensitive information and stored it in a building wholly owned (secured) by the secret service. There is not really any risk here, any crimes would be mere technicalities.
Of all the crimes every President in my lifetime has committed, including Trump, mishandling some secret documents in this way is a total nothingburger. It's almost certainly not a crime and even if it is a crime it's a paperwork technicality crime.
I could've written down the correct numbers for the lottery but I didn't, therefore I don't get to claim any winnings.
I think it's kind of ironic that - speaking generally - the "patriots" don't seem to care at all that a former president took state secrets after leaving office.
I wonder how big the "nothingburger" would be if it turns out he actually did leak them.
I doubt I will be disappointed by the outcome. I've already been enjoying popcorn while watching the show. I recommend you review the laws cited by the FBI in the search warrant, and note that they do not require the documents to be classified for the penalties to exist.
If you think it's a good idea to allow a former POTUS to retroactively and implicitly declassify information he is caught with after leaving office, or to issue a sweeping declaration that any documents he takes out of the Oval Office are automatically declassified, I suspect you won't be as blasé when someone of the opposing political party does it.