President-Elect Trump Picks Indian-American KASHYAP P. PATEL for F.B.I. Director.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut
there is no law against having an e-mail server.

Actually, there is. Certain high positions within the Government do not have the luxury of private servers. Everything Hillary and the team produced on paper, email, tape recording, or even written on toilet paper is owned by the people.

Surely it is entirely contradictory to have information which 'the people' are expressly forbidden to have access to, in their care? Custodianship must remain with those who are authorized until the information is declassified.

That is what got Nixon in the end.

Actually, the fact that Nixon authorized the break-in was the crime. The cover-up only added to that.

Interestingly, Nixon was popularly elected AFTER his Watergate involvement came to light. Surprising that he couldn't just pardon himself, I mean, he was the President, right, and Presidents are immune from prosecution of anything they do that is "official duty"?

She was running an unsecured private server with classified documents on it. She then destroyed hard evidence that she was told to hand over.

No, she didn't destroy data on her private server, and it wasn't her private server that was hacked.

The data that was destroyed was on the official DNC e-mail server/s and she didn't do the deletion, or order it.

It was normal data security policy to periodically purge personal e-mail archives or exports (.pst files) from the official servers, but the technician had not done so regularly, and this allowed a lot of those .pst files to be exfiltrated during the hacks (the actual mail store database files were too large to exfiltrate and were also locked by the running Exchange process having exclusive access).

Normally, to work on a mail store in Exchange one must dismount the store from Exchange, which means that the only file access to the emails is normally via Microsoft Exchange, or if someone has saved a personal archives (.pst exports).

It was these personal .PST files that were small enough to exfiltrate, and that were later wiped and overwritten.

The images of the servers and several encrypted backups were handed over to the FBI and they contained all historical e-mails (even the ones marked as deleted).

Forcing the purging e-mails from the mail store is quite a long involved and unusual process, and it was not done with the DNC servers (MS Exchange conforms to a 7 year retention policy by default, but this can be extended by setting a 'legal hold' flag).

She finally lied to the FBI, but that is OK since they made sure she wasn't under oath.

What did she lie about? It looked to me that she really didn't have a clue and was letting others do the technical stuff.

The difference between Trump and Hillary is Trump being the President is above all classification.

Placing one individual above the law is the pinnacle of corruption.

In truth, the most highly classified documents in the USA use 'two-person integrity' where there are two people authorized to ensure document security at all times.

He can classify or declassify at will, Hillary had no power to do anything,

Each agency has been authorized to manage classification of its own documents. As Secretary of State, Clinton had sufficient power to create, classify and declassify information (or to prevent declassification) of anything under her purview.

and that part is a big deal in comparing the two. Trump also wasn't hacked by everyone and their brother. Finally, him having the documents were not kept in secret as Hillary was trying to do.

Trump and his government had been hacked several times:

Trump campaign says it has been hacked

The Trump campaign says its emails were hacked and suggests Iran may be to blame

Chinese hackers targeted Trump and Vance’s phone data

Iranian hackers sent stolen Trump campaign information to people associated with Biden campaign

Trump Twitter ‘hack’: Police accept attacker's claim

Trump campaign website hacked

Trump also failed to mention that his own hotel chain was hacked in 2014 and 15, and again between 2016 and 17.

Donald Trump has golf scores hacked on handicap account

Hackers Compromised the Trump Organization 4 Years Ago—and the Company Never Noticed

Trump administration has known for weeks that Iran, Russia hacked local governments, officials say

Russia Hacked U.S. Power Grid — So What Will The Trump Administration Do About It?

Law Firm Hackers Claim to Have Dirt on Donald Trump, Up Data Ransom to $42M

Anonymous says it hacked Donald Trump and leaked his social security number

a reply to: chr0naut

ordering a break in of the FBI is NOT covered by presidential immunity.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: hangedman13

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: WeMustCare

Didn't he own the Kwik-e-Mart in the Simpsons?

It always comes out, consistently the biggest racists and bigots.

Love this pick!!

The mention of an ethnicity isn't racism. Racism is where such mentions are a put-down implied to all of similar ethnicity. This is why the humour of the Simpsons is comedy and observations of the quirks of the human condition, and is not a target of civil liberties organizations.

When someone implies that an ethnic group of families and individuals trying to escape from poverty and oppression are drug dealing murdering rapist cartel members, that is racism.

NOPE. What you typed was "racially insensitive"! Please keep up with the current trends. Remember Biden got lots of blowback for a very similar comment, something about them at 7 eleven's. Just the fact that was your opening statement spoke volumes.

The far-right which has a very strong historical white-supremacist background, and historically has persued that racism to the extent of murder and attempted genocide, often tries to whitewash itself by implying that any vague mention of ethnicity is racist.

Southern trees bear a strange fruit
Blood on the leaves and blood at the root
Black bodies swinging in the Southern breeze
Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees

Pastoral scene of the gallant south
The bulging eyes and the twisted mouth
Scent of magnolias, sweet and fresh
Then the sudden smell of burning flesh

Here is a fruit for the crows to pluck
For the rain to gather, for the wind to suck
For the sun to rot, for the tree to drop
Here is a strange and bitter crop

wildly off topic, but your revisionist history is sad and weak, like you. Or are republicans and conservatives of today, just the democrats of yesterday? Don't ever change. You provide hours of enjoyment.

Some of those that perpetrated these crimes were probably Democrats. But all of them were right-wing and white supremacist.

Democrats in the US are LEFT WINGERS historically.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Surely it is entirely contradictory to have information which 'the people' are expressly forbidden to have access to, in their care? Custodianship must remain with those who are authorized until the information is declassified.

Not when it is a secret server, silly rabbit... She broke so many rules on that alone. Kind of like she wanted to do things outside of the government's privity.

Actually, the fact that Nixon authorized the break-in was the crime. The cover-up only added to that.

Once again you are wrong... He didn't authorize it, didn't even know about it, but he lied to protect the people who did it. He won by a massive 110 electoral votes. He didn't need it and knew he was going to smash the Democrats. The interesting part is when we compare that to what Hillary and Obama did in 2016 it pales in comparison.

Interestingly, Nixon was popularly elected AFTER his Watergate involvement came to light. Surprising that he couldn't just pardon himself, I mean, he was the President, right, and Presidents are immune from prosecution of anything they do that is "official duty"?

Nope, wrong again...The Senate holds that power. Ford pardoned him afterwards, but the senate just removed him.

No, she didn't destroy data on her private server, and it wasn't her private server that was hacked.

Her server was hacked...FBI said it was...

She destroyed phones and...

On 3 May 2016, web site the Washington Free Beacon published an article provocatively titled "Clinton Campaign Made Payments to Hard Drive and Document Destruction Company" (and subtitled "Payments could have purchased destruction of 14 hard drives"). The article reported that the Hillary Clinton campaign made payments totaling $187 to a document destruction company (American Document Destruction, Inc.) in February and March of 2016.

The article implied (without directly stating) that the Clinton campaign might have spent the funds on destroying disk drives involved in the controversy surrounding Clinton's use of private, home-based servers and accounts for official business she conducted while serving as U.S. secretary of state:

The Hillary Clinton campaign made multiple payments to a company that specializes in hard drive and document destruction, campaign finance records show.

The payments, which were recorded in February and March of 2016, went to the Nevada-based American Document Destruction, Inc., which claims expertise in destroying hard drives or “anything else that a hard drive can come from.”

“Our hard drive destruction procedures take place either at your site or at our secure facility in Sparks, NV,” the company’s website states. “This decision is yours to decide based on cost and convenience to you. In either situation, the hard drive will be destroyed by a shredding.”

Stop trying to protect her...

In truth, the most highly classified documents in the USA use 'two-person integrity' where there are two people authorized to ensure document security at all times.

Yeah, whatever. I been involved in classified for 40+ years.

Each agency has been authorized to manage classification of its own documents. As Secretary of State, Clinton had sufficient power to create, classify and declassify information (or to prevent declassification) of anything under her purview.

Very limited in they can do that only with documents at their level. The President is above all, doesn't even hold a clearance, can wave a magic wand and say declassified.

Still doesn't account for her having a private server with classified on it.

Democrat officials and pundits are coming out of the most miserable Thanksgiving they've ever had, and finding that President-elect Trump did not rest. He kept assembling his cabinet and team.

As they find out KASH PATEL is going to be Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, they're blowing mental gaskets and resurrecting their now familiar "sky is falling!" fear mongering language. For example:

Kash Patel will trigger a CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS BIGGER THAN WATERGATE!!: www.theatlantic.com...

When analysts who work for "The Atlantic" think-tank are upset, those who made them upset, are doing a good job with executing "Americans First" goals!

🥳👍

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: hangedman13

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: WeMustCare

Didn't he own the Kwik-e-Mart in the Simpsons?

It always comes out, consistently the biggest racists and bigots.

Love this pick!!

The mention of an ethnicity isn't racism. Racism is where such mentions are a put-down implied to all of similar ethnicity. This is why the humour of the Simpsons is comedy and observations of the quirks of the human condition, and is not a target of civil liberties organizations.

When someone implies that an ethnic group of families and individuals trying to escape from poverty and oppression are drug dealing murdering rapist cartel members, that is racism.

NOPE. What you typed was "racially insensitive"! Please keep up with the current trends. Remember Biden got lots of blowback for a very similar comment, something about them at 7 eleven's. Just the fact that was your opening statement spoke volumes.

The far-right which has a very strong historical white-supremacist background, and historically has persued that racism to the extent of murder and attempted genocide, often tries to whitewash itself by implying that any vague mention of ethnicity is racist.

Southern trees bear a strange fruit
Blood on the leaves and blood at the root
Black bodies swinging in the Southern breeze
Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees

Pastoral scene of the gallant south
The bulging eyes and the twisted mouth
Scent of magnolias, sweet and fresh
Then the sudden smell of burning flesh

Here is a fruit for the crows to pluck
For the rain to gather, for the wind to suck
For the sun to rot, for the tree to drop
Here is a strange and bitter crop

wildly off topic, but your revisionist history is sad and weak, like you. Or are republicans and conservatives of today, just the democrats of yesterday? Don't ever change. You provide hours of enjoyment.

Some of those that perpetrated these crimes were probably Democrats. But all of them were right-wing and white supremacist.

Democrats in the US are LEFT WINGERS historically.

History of the Democratic Party (United States)

The US Democratic Party was older than the US Republican Party (which at the time was quite liberal in comparison to Democratic Party conservatism). The liberalness and conservatism of the respective parties has almost completely reversed over the years.

President Harry Truman formulated the Truman Doctrine to stop Soviet expansionism. President Truman was a Democrat. He was anti-Communist and anti Soviet.

Until Roosevelts New Deal Coalition, many, if not most, Democratic Party members were Conservative.

Conservative Democrat

The right-wing press pretend that they are somehow disconnected from right-wing dictatorships like those of Franco, Hitler and Mussolini, but they have direct connections. And they paint their current opposition as Communist and hard-left-wing, but such is not the case now, nor was it historically.

To read the real story, I suggest that you research accounts from outside the right-wing propaganda machine, and look at histories from other countries and written in time frames closer to those events. Then you will see the contradictions in the current US right-wing narratives.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: chr0naut

ordering a break in of the FBI is NOT covered by presidential immunity.

They broke in to the DNC headquarters in the Watergate Hotel.

The President sits as executive of the FBI. If he authorized an impromptu gathering of data from an office of the FBI, then it wouldn't be a break in. He has every right to do that.

As an example, Trump has just replaced the current head of the FBI, Wray, with Patel. He has the power and authority to do so to any branch under his executive office.

I think this is great, maybe the FBI won't be targeting parents who don't want their 1st graders reading porn.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I think this is great, maybe the FBI won't be targeting parents who don't want their 1st graders reading porn.

More importantly, the FBI will once again stop a good number of terror attacks, instead of showing up to ask, "What happened?".

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

Not when it is a secret server, silly rabbit... She broke so many rules on that alone. Kind of like she wanted to do things outside of the government's privity.

The official servers in the SCIF at her home mandatorily had limited connection to publicly connected internet services (you wouldn't allow MySpace, Twitter, Facebook & etc to be accessed inside a SCIF, and would have firewall rules in place to prevent that possibility from even occurring).

The private server was located in the basement of her home just outside of the SCIF and was in full view of the technicians who built and maintained the SCIF. There wasn't much secrecy about it.

She was supposed to use the SCIF only for all official State Department work (which excluded communications to the DNC and to the rest of the Internet), but she used the private server instead (probably because she was too lazy to comply with secure protocols, and it also allowed functionality that the SCIF didn't have.

The confusion that most people seem to have is that all news articles conflate the multiple servers, in multiple locations, as being one and the same thing.

Let me explain:

- The SCIF is electronically secure. There is, by design, almost no way for external people to compromise its security and gain access, physically or electronically. This means you can't do normal e-mail from a SCIF. It's only communications are point to point to other secured and air-gapped (no connection to the wider world) systems. The SCIF even has a faraday cage around it and physical access is limited, so it can retain it's security.

- There was her private Microsoft Exchange 5.0 server. This had all the normal internet connections to allow her to send e-mails secured by TLS 2.0 encryption, DKIM, DMARC, EOP and SPF security to other similarly secured, but probably publicly accessible, e-mail servers.

- Also, there was the server and encryption process for her Blackberry phone's online services (which would never be allowed in a SCIF). These Blackberry services were installed on her home server and on the DNC servers.

- There were several virtualized instances and replicas of the servers installed at the DNC offices. These were the ones that got hacked, and then the .pst files wiped off them afterwards, and then after that, the disk images and backups handed over to the FBI (including the mail store/s with all historical e-mails).

Actually, the fact that Nixon authorized the break-in was the crime. The cover-up only added to that.

Once again you are wrong... He didn't authorize it, didn't even know about it, but he lied to protect the people who did it.

Evidence shows that he probably did:

Who approved the Watergate break-in? Let’s go to the tapes.

He won by a massive 110 electoral votes. He didn't need it and knew he was going to smash the Democrats. The interesting part is when we compare that to what Hillary and Obama did in 2016 it pales in comparison.

Let's see, a Republican whose previous term was under a cloud, but still got elected despite that. Sounds somewhat like history repeating? And the fact that Ford pardoned him, must indicate that Nixon had actually been convicted of a crime.

Nope, wrong again...The Senate holds that power. Ford pardoned him afterwards, but the senate just removed him.

Nixon resigned before the senate removed him.

Her server was hacked...FBI said it was...

The FBI did not say her private server was hacked.

The FBI report expressly said, (page 2, 2nd paragraph) "The FBI's investigation and forensic analysis did not find evidence confirming that Clinton's e-mail accounts or mobile devices were compromised by cyber means".

She destroyed phones and...

Proper Disposal of Electronic Devices - CISA

Stop trying to protect her...

She did the wrong thing, frequently, by using insecure channels for official comms. You appear clearly misinformed about most of the details.

Yeah, whatever. I been involved in classified for 40+ years.

But somehow are clueless about basic cybersecurity?

Very limited in they can do that only with documents at their level. The President is above all, doesn't even hold a clearance, can wave a magic wand and say declassified.

Still doesn't account for her having a private server with classified on it.

The President cannot declassify documents that have been classified in legal statute. To do that, he would have to change the law, which involves Congressional approval.

Usually, it takes an executive order for the President to declassify information. It cannot be done ad-hoc, there is a process. The Federal appeals court in a 2020 Freedom of Information Act case, New York Times v. CIA, underscored that point, finding that: “Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures”

Trump's indictment on the Mar-A-Lago classified documents means that someone in the FBI doubts the legality of Trumps claims.

Presidential Authority & Classification

BEFORE YOU POST.
READ THIS....

Important if Actively Posting

Be the Change you Wish to see... Redux





Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (Redux)

Community Announcement re: Decorum




These rules apply to all threads and if you want to engage in personal attacks there are other sites on the Internet where you can do that. Our goal is for ATS to be above that. For members here to post like mature adults.


To repeat, those who refuse to "get it" WILL face LENGTHY POSTING BANS!!
YOU are responsible for your own posts





And, as always...
Do not reply to this post.

a reply to: WeMustCare

The entire Biden administration was reactive.

Trumps policies are proactive.

a reply to: chr0naut

H.Clinton had more than 100 violations of mis handling classified material connected to her private non-gov computer server systems. Patel might go after it but H.Clinton is said to have made a private sealed plea bargain and the sentences are served. Some emails are still sealed because they involve B.Obama State Department ultra-classified material that was transmitted over unsecured channels. 😁

I'd be happy if Patel just had the FBI arrest criminals, cartels, gangs, reduce crimes instead of picking a target and searching for a crime.

originally posted by: chr0naut

The President cannot declassify documents that have been classified in legal statute. To do that, he would have to change the law, which involves Congressional approval.

Usually, it takes an executive order for the President to declassify information. It cannot be done ad-hoc, there is a process. The Federal appeals court in a 2020 Freedom of Information Act case, New York Times v. CIA, underscored that point, finding that: “Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures”

Trump's indictment on the Mar-A-Lago classified documents means that someone in the FBI doubts the legality of Trumps claims.

He is not a designated official...The President is above it all. In this case let's say the VP, then the VP can declassify documents they classified. In the case of Biden with classifieds in his garage they were not documents he classified, so they sat there how many years...

With Clinton...

Clinton repeatedly claimed that she did not send or receive any information that was marked classified in her personal emails. That’s false. FBI Director James Comey said more than 2,000 emails contained classified information and some of them “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information.”

She lied many times...

Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, has denied mishandling classified information ever since the New York Times on March 2, 2015, disclosed that Clinton “exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state.”

At a March 10 press conference, Clinton addressed her unusual email arrangement. Her office at the time said that on Dec. 5, 2014, it gave the State Department 30,490 printed copies of work-related emails. Clinton said none of them contained classified information.

Clinton, March 10, 2015: I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.

On the same day, her office released a Q&A that said a “separate, closed email system was used by the State Department for the sole purpose of handling classified communications which was designed to prevent such information from being transmitted anywhere other than within that system.”

But about four months later, the inspectors general of the State Department and the Intelligence Community reviewed 40 of Clinton’s emails and found that four did contain classified information, referring the case to the FBI for what they called an investigation into the “potential compromise of classified information.” The inspectors general said the four emails “did not contain classification markings.”

More lies ...lol She sent classified, but removed any markings of classification, that there is another crime...

a reply to: chr0naut

That detailed information about Hillary's server(s) was very enlightening. She was obviously a smart criminal on the "planning" side of her crimes. But we'll see if Hillary Rodham Clinton was as smart in the execution of illegal acts...did she leave evidence that's traceable back to her.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

The entire Biden administration was reactive.

Trumps policies are proactive.

Trump's administration was "reactive" the first time. He had no government experience. On the other hand, there's no excuse for Biden, with 45 years of experience, running his administration as poorly as he did.

a reply to: chr0naut

Exscuse me the DNC headquarters. IT STILL NOT COVERED BY PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY. It was not for national security an dthe DNC is a CIVILIAN organization and can just be ordered by a court to provide information.

Anyway the DEMOCRATS have ALWAYS been KKK members and racist. b but what about welfare and stuff..Yeah the KKK members of the DNC and even the president who made the new deal was anti black. He just decided to break the black family unit eventually and he got his way by using welfare.Now a days you rarely see any happy black families like they used to have.

originally posted by: WeMustCare
Saturday, November 30, 2024

To those of us who have been paying attention to, and understanding the reasons why Donald J. Trump has been treated so horribly by the FBI from 2016 to present, this nomination of Mr. Kash Patel to lead the FBI is (for several reasons), the best possible pick he could make! 🥇

The two men have enjoyed a mutually supportive friendship that's quite special, during and since Donald Trump's first term as U.S. President...

President Trump has officially nominated Kash Patel for the role of FBI Director in his next Administration.

This comes after rumors that deep-state hack Mike Rogers was in consideration for the role were quashed by longtime Trump adviser Dan Scavino.

Rogers, as The Gateway Pundit reported, conceded his highly questionable Senate race in Michigan despite Trump winning, and he was very vocal in trashing President Trump in 2020 for challenging the rigged election. He would be a horrible pick for FBI director, especially concerning election integrity.

Earlier this month, Congressman-elect Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ) predicted that Patel would be selected, telling The Gateway Pundit, “He’ll do amazing at the FBI” and noting that “he’s been very loyal to President Trump since the first Russia Collusion Hoax.”

Trump made the announcement in a Truth Social post, commending Kash Patel’s career of “exposing corruption, defending Justice, and protecting the American People.”

“He played a pivotal role in uncovering the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, standing as an advocate for truth, accountability, and the Constitution,” President Trump continued.

“This FBI will end the growing crime epidemic in America, dismantle the migrant criminal gangs, and stop the evil scourge of human and drug trafficking across the Border.”

Source: www.thegatewaypundit.com...

Current FBI Director Christopher Wray is serving a 10-year term that does not end until June of 2027. (Trump first appointed him as FBI Director in June 2017.) Obviously, he will be fired, if he does not resign soon after January 20, 2025, when Donald Trump is sworn in as U.S. President.

-WeMustCare 🥳

December 3, 2024

It's ironic that President Biden keeps taking actions which benefit incoming President Trump in some way. His pardoning of son Hunter Biden is the latest such action...

You know whose life got a lot easier late last night after news of the Hunter Biden pardon broke?

Trump’s choice to be the next FBI director, Kash Patel.

Senate Democrats are going to argue that the country can’t have partisan politics and personal loyalties and connections to the president mucking around in the justice system.

And Senate Republicans are just going to laugh and laugh...

Extracted from: www.nationalreview.com...

Thanks again Joe!

BTW...It's obvious you're enjoying twisting the knife in the Democrat party's back, after they first stabbed you with it on July 21st. (The coup)

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

The President cannot declassify documents that have been classified in legal statute. To do that, he would have to change the law, which involves Congressional approval.

Usually, it takes an executive order for the President to declassify information. It cannot be done ad-hoc, there is a process. The Federal appeals court in a 2020 Freedom of Information Act case, New York Times v. CIA, underscored that point, finding that: “Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures”

Trump's indictment on the Mar-A-Lago classified documents means that someone in the FBI doubts the legality of Trumps claims.

He is not a designated official...The President is above it all. In this case let's say the VP, then the VP can declassify documents they classified. In the case of Biden with classifieds in his garage they were not documents he classified, so they sat there how many years...

With Clinton...

Clinton repeatedly claimed that she did not send or receive any information that was marked classified in her personal emails. That’s false. FBI Director James Comey said more than 2,000 emails contained classified information and some of them “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information.”

She lied many times...

Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, has denied mishandling classified information ever since the New York Times on March 2, 2015, disclosed that Clinton “exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state.”

At a March 10 press conference, Clinton addressed her unusual email arrangement. Her office at the time said that on Dec. 5, 2014, it gave the State Department 30,490 printed copies of work-related emails. Clinton said none of them contained classified information.

Clinton, March 10, 2015: I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.

On the same day, her office released a Q&A that said a “separate, closed email system was used by the State Department for the sole purpose of handling classified communications which was designed to prevent such information from being transmitted anywhere other than within that system.”

But about four months later, the inspectors general of the State Department and the Intelligence Community reviewed 40 of Clinton’s emails and found that four did contain classified information, referring the case to the FBI for what they called an investigation into the “potential compromise of classified information.” The inspectors general said the four emails “did not contain classification markings.”

More lies ...lol She sent classified, but removed any markings of classification, that there is another crime...

In a country where there is a balance of powers between numerous branches there cannot be an absolute ruler above the law.

So, either you retain the Constitutional configuration, or you discard it and create a government entirely under the control of a a single autocratic dictator.

Trump has destabilized the 3 branch system of checks and balances by negating the powers the other branches of government hold over the Presidency.