CONFIRMED: As Gateway Pundit Reported — FBI Doctored Mar-a-Lago Photo

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher


Exec Priv docs and copies of declassified docs are not 'theft of government property'.

Documents subject to Executive Privilege are most certainly Government Property. And this doesn't have anything to do with classified or not classified or declassified.

Private documents are not government property, and are not subject to Executive Privilege, though.

If an executive document has been declassified or never classified in the first place it is still subject to Executive Privilege. If Executive Privilege has been asserted (by the sitting Executive) then it remains unavailable to the public until a sitting Executive chooses to let it be published. That said, some documents are closed according to laws which also set out a time limit, for example some documents may only be released after 30 years, or 50 years or whatever.

Yes, of course, you can possess copies of non-classified documents that have been released to the public.

Nor is posession of docs sent to you by gsa.

Unless they don't concern you and weren't sent by mistake.

You are quibbling about the mundane trivia of actually carrying on life now?

But yeah, you might get him on the value of the empty folders, those probably cost at least $0.19 to produce.

This is your argument now? He just grabbed a few empty folders out of the stationary cupboard so he could keep his recipes for McDonald's secret sauce, KFC secret herbs and spices, and the recipe for Dr. Pepper or whatever bilge water he drinks organized?

a reply to: rnaa


See section A, already posted here several times.

Only If ...

That means they don't meet the definition of 'presidential records' and are never 'government property'.



Perhaps you haven't noticed, democrats have recently removed thousands of documents from their claim and are now down to only 100.

They specifically removed all those where they had previously claimed that exec priv had expired and those that had been declassified.



You were saying?


Need a little help getting out from under that bus?

originally posted by: ANNED
It's illegal to photograph top secret documents, covers the same as the contents.

The cover page tells what is in the files and if you don't have clearance you can not open the files.

This means the FBI just illegally leaked photos of TS/SCI documents just to try to frame DT.

The photo was a crime scene photograph that was carefully redacted any identifying marks from those documents.

The redacted photo was approved for release in the court filling by the Director of National Intelligence.

The DNI is working with the FBI to secure the classified documents and determine what if any damage has been generated from the issue.

It has already been forecast that at the very minimum foreign countries will be more hesitant to share intelligence with us since it has been demonstrated that we have allowed this information to be mishandled. And HUMINT sources are being strongly discouraged from cooperating with us because of it also.

I know this because i was a federal security officer at a navy research base where they had people leave top secret documents out and leave the door unlocked, and we would find them in the middle of the night as we rattled door knobs.
Woo to the person in charge of that room.

Leaving the door unlocked is actually not the issue, except as you say, for the person in charge of the room.

Leaving the documents on the desk over night is the real issue. Desks are to be left bare and any classified documents still in possession are to be locked in the safe, or a security hardened drawer.

This is grounds for Immediate dismissal. No excuses. No appeal. I know of people who got into this situation completely by innocent mistake. Tough luck.

In any case, the documents are not to be stuck into personal drawers along with your passport (where are you taking those documents that you have them ready to grab them with your passport, eh?). Nor are they supposed to be 'stored' in a cardboard box along with you vanity magazine covers and the invoices from your attorneys that you aren't paying.

a reply to: rnaa

RED FLAG

Deep State scum and Liberal Media like DNI Avril Haines: www.cnn.com...

She is a Director of National Intelligence who should not be trusted in an America-First/MAGA society.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: rnaa

Hmmmm.....

Concerned that, for example, it has been reported that an unusual number of human sources have been killed since Trump was in the office. What was that he give Putin in the Oval Office.

Please give a link for this. You are trying to say 45 was removing HUMINT that could work to affect him?

No. I'm saying that the CIA has admitted in 2021 to the New York Times that an unusual number of Human Intelligence operatives (spies) have been killed or disappeared during Trumps term in office. Even Fox carried the story. So you know it isn't a lie right?

They attributed it to 'poor spycraft' and attempting to rebuild too quickly after the Cold War relaxation.

But it does make you wonder exactly what Trump was giving Putin during their Oval Office meeting.

And that idea deserves at least as much serious examination as 90% of the crap spewed by Fox and ONAN and all those other MAGAT bloviators on the web.

a reply to: rnaa


"The photo was a crime scene photograph that was carefully redacted any identifying marks from those documents"


The crime of possessing thousands of priv and declass docs or the 100 docs remaining in the doj 'case'?

Which they still refuse to describe to a judge or special master.

a reply to: rnaa

No. I'm saying that the CIA has admitted in 2021 to the New York Times

Orly

a reply to: MidnightWatcher

What are you talking about? What is 'Section A'?

Does it have anything to do with this: (source: Presidential Records (44 U.S.C. Chapter 22) § 2201. Definitions)

(2) The term "Presidential records" means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President. Such term--

(A) includes any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the President or members of the President’s staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President; but

(B) does not include any documentary materials that are (i) official records of an agency (as defined in section 552(e) of title 5, United States Code; (ii) personal records; (iii) stocks of publications and stationery; or (iv) extra copies of documents produced only for convenience of reference, when such copies are clearly so identified.

Or is it this one:

(3) The term "personal records" means all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President. Such term includes--

(A) diaries, journals, or other personal notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal which are not prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the course of, transacting Government business;

(B) materials relating to private political associations, and having no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President; and

(C) materials relating exclusively to the President’s own election to the office of the Presidency; and materials directly relating to the election of a particular individual or individuals to Federal, State, or local office, which have no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

Classified documents are NOT 'personal records'.
Campaign documents are NOT 'government records'.

Government documents are those records as defined above in 2201.2.A: any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the President or members of the President’s staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President - these records are exactly the Presidential records that NARA is attempting to recover.


Executive Privilege has nothing to do with 'personal records', and NARA is not interested in those documents.

The only reason the FBI might be interested in them is their physical location - classified documents in boxes mixed in with personal documents is evidence of intent to hide he documents and is certainly proof of mishandling of classified documents in direct violation of every security protocol in existence.

Accidental retention of mundane government records (not classified) can be forgiven if rectified as soon as they are noticed.

Mishandling of Classified documents is unforgivable under any circumstance.

If Trump had just returned the purloined documents this whole kerfuffle could have been avoided. Willfully hiding government records and giving a sworn statement that such records do not exist is evidence of THEFT. Even the classified stuff might have been overlooked if he had just come clean.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: rnaa

RED FLAG

Deep State scum and Liberal Media like DNI Avril Haines: www.cnn.com...

She is a Director of National Intelligence who should not be trusted in an America-First/MAGA society.

As special master?

Do they think everyone is THAT stoopid?

biden's own ODNI as 'impartial' special master?



I need more popcorn, this movie is hilarious!

a reply to: rnaa


The 'only if' part is what democrats absurdly claim expired on J20.

They aren't even arguing that priv was improperly asserted so you can drop that angle already.

They are claiming that priv expired on J20 and these docs suddenly became 'presidential records'.



That is they were claiming, deary, it seems doj has admitted this and only have 100 pieces of 'evidence' in their case now.

The Gateway Pundit is as truthful as Alex Jones or Hillary… so stop using it as a valid source ! a reply to: optimisticcontrarian

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
a reply to: rnaa


The 'only if' part is what democrats absurdly claim expired on J20.

They aren't even arguing that priv was improperly asserted so you can drop that angle already.

They are claiming that priv expired on J20 and these docs suddenly became 'presidential records'.

That is false interpretation.

The only thing that expired is Trump's term in office.

Executive Privilege 'belongs' to the office, NOT the person.

On January 20th, the prerogative to assert Executive Privilege passed on to the new office holder.

That is they were claiming, deary,

If someone is asserting otherwise they are, sadly, mistaken.

it seems doj has admitted this and only have 100 pieces of 'evidence' in their case now.

The DOJ is admitting no such thing.

I believe you are now referring to the motion to remove the (somewhere in the neighborhood of) 100 classified documents from the injunction to wait for the Special Master.

These documents and the mishandling of them must be immediately evaluated to determine what damage, if any, has been inflicted on the intelligence community and the security of the United States.

The DOJ is not, apparently objecting to the Special Master for the other documents at this time. That doesn't mean they don't still have an interest in them.

Focus on what is real, not what your Special Propaganda Masters pass on to you as talking points.

a reply to: rnaa


"Only If" has no expiration.

They are not 'presidential records', and that priv does not expire.

It's the exact reason Congress created the exec priv rules, to stop future nixons like biden and the current doj.

originally posted by: rnaa
rom the issue.

It has already been forecast that at the very minimum foreign countries will be more hesitant to share intelligence with us since it has been demonstrated that we have allowed this information to be mishandled.

And HUMINT sources are being strongly discouraged from cooperating with us because of it also.

That needs to stand on its own.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: rnaa
rom the issue.

It has already been forecast that at the very minimum foreign countries will be more hesitant to share intelligence with us since it has been demonstrated that we have allowed this information to be mishandled.

And HUMINT sources are being strongly discouraged from cooperating with us because of it also.

That needs to stand on its own.

What has been mishandled?

Dems won't even tell a judge or special master what those 100 documents are.



Ah, you referring to the repeated public leaks by democrats, in which case I agree completely.

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: rnaa
rom the issue.

It has already been forecast that at the very minimum foreign countries will be more hesitant to share intelligence with us since it has been demonstrated that we have allowed this information to be mishandled.

And HUMINT sources are being strongly discouraged from cooperating with us because of it also.

That needs to stand on its own.

What has been mishandled?

Dems won't even tell a judge or special master what those 100 documents are.



Ah, you referring to the repeated public leaks by democrats, in which case I agree completely.

Honestly, all the answers to your questions have been answered multiple times.

You just refuse to accept it.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: rnaa
rom the issue.

It has already been forecast that at the very minimum foreign countries will be more hesitant to share intelligence with us since it has been demonstrated that we have allowed this information to be mishandled.

And HUMINT sources are being strongly discouraged from cooperating with us because of it also.

That needs to stand on its own.

What has been mishandled?

Dems won't even tell a judge or special master what those 100 documents are.



Ah, you referring to the repeated public leaks by democrats, in which case I agree completely.

Honestly, all the answers to your questions have been answered multiple times.

You just refuse to accept it.

Can you point it out, or did you just make it up again?

Absurd, not even doj has said what the remaining 100 docs are, they just said that there is no priv or declassification controversy.

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
a reply to: rnaa


"Only If" has no expiration.

They are not 'presidential records', and that priv does not expire.

It's the exact reason Congress created the exec priv rules, to stop future nixons like biden and the current doj.

What in actual fck are you talking about.

What does "Only If" mean? "Only if" what?

The definition of what is a 'presidential record' is clearly and unambiguously set out in the PRA. I posted that definition above. Can you read? If English is your second language, I apologize for the snark, but maybe you really should not be engaging in a discussion like this.

originally posted by: rnaa

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
a reply to: rnaa


"Only If" has no expiration.

They are not 'presidential records', and that priv does not expire.

It's the exact reason Congress created the exec priv rules, to stop future nixons like biden and the current doj.

What in actual fck are you talking about.

What does "Only If" mean? "Only if" what?

The definition of what is a 'presidential record' is clearly and unambiguously set out in the PRA. I posted that definition above. Can you read? If English is your second language, I apologize for the snark, but maybe you really should not be engaging in a discussion like this.

A pretty important section of the 'presidential records' definition.

It defines (in a backwards kind of way) which types of documents are never 'presidential records' and are outside the scope of FRA and NARA.

Section A.

Let me know if you continue to have trouble finding it in your native English.

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher

What has been mishandled?

For an obvious starting point: the documents marked "TOP SECRET" that were found in his desk drawer along with his passports and other personal objects.

This is an extremely high level breech of security.

DOD Study Guide: Classified Storage Requirements

3. Storage by Classification Level

All classified material must be stored in a secure room, a GSA-approved storage
container, such as a cabinet or safe or a vault or modular vault, or a sensitive
compartmented information facility (SCIF). Each of these containers and facilities will be
described in more detail later in this Short, but for now, we're going to start by looking at
how they are used to store the types of classified material shown here.

a. Confidential
Confidential material may be stored in a secure room, a cabinet or safe, or a vault or modular vault. Confidential information may also be stored in a SCIF. No additional protection is required to store Confidential material in any of these containers or facilities.

b. Secret
Secret material may also be stored in a secure room, a cabinet or safe, a vault or modular vault, or a SCIF. However, if Secret material is stored in a secure room, then supplemental controls are required to ensure its protection. We'll look later at the specific supplemental controls required for Secret material.

c. Top Secret
Like the lower levels of classified material, Top Secret material may also be stored in a secure room, a cabinet or safe, a vault or modular vault, or a SCIF. However, regardless of whether it is stored in a secure room, a cabinet or safe, or a vault, Top Secret material always requires supplemental controls. We'll look later at the specific supplemental controls required for Top Secret material.

d. Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI)
There is only one acceptable place to store SCI, and that is in a SCIF. Although any type of classified material may also be stored in a SCIF, SCI may NOT be stored in anything other than a SCIF.

Nothing in those control requirements indicate that a desk drawer is acceptable, No idea what level those classified documents in his drawer were, but they should not have been there.

Others have remarked that in the photos they identified SCI rated documents. They should have been in a SCIF and there is no SCIF at Mar-a-Lago. Certainly the pool storage room is not a SKIF.

That is mishandling classified material, bunky, and according to 18 U.S. Code § 1924 you can get 5 years for it.

But again, you are focusing only on the classified documents. There were many more unclassified government owned documents found than classified ones.

Trumps denial that he had any government documents (classified or not) at all, and provided a sworn attestation of that claim, all the while knowingly hiding government documents in his private desk, demonstrates a willful and purposeful plan to steal those documents.

Nothing less.