Trump Posted Classified Satellite Imagery On Twitter As President (npr.org) 342
According to documents recently declassified by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), former President Donald Trump posted a classified satellite image of a failed rocket launch in Iran on Twitter in 2019. NPR reports: Now, three years after Trump's tweet, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) has formally declassified the original image. The declassification, which came as the result of a Freedom of Information Act request by NPR, followed a grueling Pentagon-wide review to determine whether the briefing slide it came from could be shared with the public. Many details on the original image remain redacted -- a clear sign that Trump was sharing some of the U.S. government's most prized intelligence on social media, says Steven Aftergood, specialist in secrecy and classification at the Federation of American Scientists. "He was getting literally a bird's eye view of some of the most sensitive US intelligence on Iran," he says. "And the first thing he seemed to want to do was to blurt it out over Twitter." "[A]erospace experts determined the photo was taken by a classified spacecraft called USA 224, believed to be a multibillion-dollar KH-11 reconnaissance aircraft," adds Gizmodo. "The spacecraft is similar to the Hubble Telescope, but instead of getting a closer look at the stars, it views the Earth's surface."
I am pretty sure president can declassify things (Score:3, Insightful)
Not a Trump groupie, just saying this might be too sensational.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not? What executive authority exists over the President that can tell him "no"?
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Informative)
The law that outlines the process for declassification which he ignored.
Re: (Score:2)
The president is not the ultimate boss. The people are. Just like the CEO of a company is not the ultimate boss, but is instead beholden to the board or the owners. Nixon and Trump both seem to misunderstand this, and Trump especially seems to have never gotten around to reading his "Introduction to Being President" pamphlet that was left on his desk the first day.
A commander-in-chief is only commander of a military, and only in certain matters. A commander-in-chief is not the boss of the civilians (des
Re: (Score:2)
See my comments above about classified materials. You simply don't understand how the law and process work.
As an aside which January 6ers said they were following orders? From who? To do what? Got a URL?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.foxnews.com/us/jan... [foxnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the military is subject to its own law, the UCMJ. The President is NOT like a CEO. Yes he isn't above the people but he IS above the ENTIRE executive branch... the fact some of them are civilians means there he can't simply bypass the legal system in how he handles them but he absolutely can dictate their work efforts and work product and anything else within the executive branch. This is for a very simple and good reason... the president is the ONLY person in the executive branch who answers to Th
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to go down the path of totalitarianism, sure. But in any sane country you have checks and balances in place so the leader cannot act on any whim. Giving someone absolute power and make them stand over the law is a bad recipe for dictatorship.
The leaders of a country should IMHO be representing and serving their constituents, not having the constituents being the leaders serfs. But perhaps we view leadership very, very, very differently. And from observing Trump, it is clear what he thinks of lea
Re: (Score:2)
We have checks and balances. The authorities our President has, including the authority to declassify information, ARE checks and balances against the other co-equal branches of Congress.
The President isn't above the law but he is above the portion of the law that he is above, his subordinate agencies... hell even an unelected federal prosecutor hired because they didn't rate a high paying gig is above the level of law people keep trying to suggest the President isn't above. That is why there is a way to ho
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and no, the only thing obligating him to do is the need to re-elected.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? The US prez is above the law?
So it's true, the US don't elect a president but rather an ersatz-king?
Re: (Score:2)
The process is for other people. The president can declassify anything.
A president can request something be declassified. That doesn't mean it will happen. Simply saying something doesn't make it so, nor just thinking about it.
This article [nytimes.com] lays out the process by which a document may be declassified, and this link [archives.gov] is the executive order which spells what may and may not be declassified. You'll note that nowhere does it say a president can simply say something is declassified, not even if they think about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Through proper procedures defined in that process "for other people". The president is NOT except from process.
We can see the evolution of Trumpism here.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
True. However you need to understand how classified materials work.
Yes there is law and process but each layer and classification has a person or set people designated to decide the classification of any material from essentially nothing to super duper kwowzo no one even knows this level exists. Each set of people has higher level bosses who can over ride lower tiers.
At the very top? The President. Buck stops there. No higher authority. End of story.
You think this is the first time a President has su
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, president have declassified before. But posting on twitter is not declassifying; having them shipped to Mar-a-lago is not declassifying. Declassifying doesn't magically happen because the president shared the documents. The president has to at least communicate that the documents are declassified to someone; that is not the same as asking permission, but secretly declassifying in one's mind is rather silly and so far the legal opinion from judges, Republican and Democrat is that you can't do this. You also can't retroactively declassify - Trump cannot in 2022 claim that he declassified back in 2020 and have anyone reasonable believe this, he'd need actual evidence for this to hold up in court.
If this photo had been mailed off to a newspaper to be published on the front page, any reasonable editor would have seen the classification markings and returned it immediately like a hot potato (and then report what happened to the public of course). Just because it was put on twitter where a computer accepts it doesn't change the situation. Twice at least Trump displayed photos that clearly had classified markings on them; was there an immense hurry to share these pictures so that there was no time to follow normal executive orders?
Clearly Trump was lying in this instance, and he posted those pictures without declassifying them first, because that is Trump's character. He's impulsive and ego driven. If it really was that easy, Obama should have just declared that he had already declassified all of hillary's emails.
Re: (Score:2)
If this photo had been mailed off to a newspaper to be published on the front page, any reasonable editor would have seen the classification markings and returned it immediately like a hot potato (and then report what happened to the public of course).
If classified documents from the Pentagon had been mailed off to the Washington Post by Daniel Ellsberg, the editor would happily publish them on the front page.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Probably, but depending on circumstances and lawyers, whoever sends them to him and he himself may be subject to criminal charges.
Just because you can do something, or because you do something, doesn't mean you're allowed to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what Trump would say anyway. Reality is far different. Any editor who doesn't understand that jail time awaits for doing that is incompetent.
Traditionally, editors use discretion for far less significant matters than that, you just don't realize it in the era of Fox News.
Re: (Score:3)
the act itself indicates the President intended to declassify the material which makes it declassified.
This assumes several things:
1) the President knew what the classification level was;
2) the President was fully informed/briefed about all of the possible national security implications of declassifying the image (e.g., publishing the image might reveal information about the capabilities of our spy satellite);
3) the President made an informed decision that the image should be declassified anyway.
These assumptions might be reasonable, if the President in question was an intelligent, detail-oriented policy won
Re: (Score:3)
Reality is far different. Any editor who doesn't understand that jail time awaits for doing that is incompetent.
You really need to go look up the Pentagon Papers and get at least an overview of the ensuing lawsuits, because you are ignorant. Cure your ignorance [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
That's what Trump would say anyway. Reality is far different. Any editor who doesn't understand that jail time awaits for doing that is incompetent.
That's not true in the United States. Unlike the UK, we don't have a "Secrets law".
There could possibly (but unlikely) be some trouble about how the material is obtained, but the actual publication is not illegal (unless you have security clearance, wherein you legally agreed to not disclose secrets).
Re: (Score:3)
OK, this thread is just fascinating. Your post is moderated +5 Insightful, the original is moderated Troll.
While your post is well written and well thought out, I'm sorry, it's simply, objectively, wrong. And it's not some Trump defense to say it's wrong, the NPR article, that is *linked in the summary* says directly it is wrong.
"The president has ultimate authority over what material is classified, and Aftergood says that he was probably within his legal rights to publicize the image."
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:4, Insightful)
If the President intends to declassify material then it is declassified. There was another case where Trump indicated he was going to declassify material on twitter which came before the supreme, ultimately they determined that the tweet was not itself an intention to declassify the material...
You just contradicted yourself there.
This suggests that to me, on some level you know what you're saying is nonsense.
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Informative)
His intent is NOT all that is required, and theft of documents is NOT evidence of intent to declassify. Not that theft is the question in this particular case, having nothing to do with some of Trump's other egregious violations of law.
Trump's actions in these unrelated cases are evidence only of his uncontrollable impulses to exploit everything he can for personal gain. Making up hindsight justifications for them is just evidence of the team you are on.
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Informative)
They were his documents
That is completely false. The documents belong to The People. They absolutely do not belong to the president. He is in a position to control their disposition, and he may declassify them, but he never did that. He posted them before making any classification, which we know because he not only did not follow the accepted procedure (executive order) but he also did not follow any other procedure.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That is the point. I've shown he has the power to declassify given by the highest authority in the land and judged by the supreme court. Authority which does not involve any procedure or process beyond his whim. The onus is on you to support your claim that such a thing would be required... support that preempts the Constitution and Supreme Court.
Re: (Score:3)
Everything you think comes from the constitution in this regard actually is indirectly derived from the power to create executive orders, which is in the constitution [wikipedia.org]. The currently relevant EO is 13526 [archives.gov], Classified National Security Information, issued by Obama. There is also this directive from 2010 [fas.org] which defines 32 CFR Parts 2001 and 2003. In section 2001.25, the requirement for declassification markings is defined. Nothing in this law exempts the president or his office from being required to follow this
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:4, Insightful)
At the very top? The President. Buck stops there. No higher authority. End of story.
Actually, that's not correct.
The President is not the absolute top authority. The very reason is exactly what TFS is talking about.
Re: I am pretty sure president can declassify thin (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for illustrating my point.
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Informative)
As far as I can find in sect 3.1 of executive order 13526, the only people / functions that are allowed to declassify information are (in order)
-The person that originally classified the data, if he's still in function and he still has the original authority to classify said information.
-The successor of said person and he has to have the original authority to classify the information as well.
-The supervisor of said person, or its successor and he also has to have the original authority to classify the information.
-The director of National Intelligence, with respect to the Intelligence community, after consulting the head of the department the classified information came from.
The president is not mentioned in this list. He is the top person that delegates (including to himself, I assume) the original right to classify information (and designate others to pass on those rights) but he is not mentioned as a person that can declassify all classified information...
Re: (Score:2)
Someone needs to build a browser plugin that replaces "black" for "white", "democrat" for "republican", and "biden" for "trump" (and vice versa).
If the story reads differently for you depending on if the filter is activated, you've got a perception problem. If the story reads the same, you're likely looking at it fairly.
It's not that people "don't get it", it's that they get it according to their priors.
Re: (Score:2)
For the record this has been decided by the courts before. Congress can't bind future congresses, the same with President's and as recently demonstrated supreme courts, this is also true of the People themselves who thereby despite the supremacy clause could replace or revise the Constitution itself if someone managed to rally enough of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Congress can't bind future congresses
They can bind anyone they want, but only by passing a constitutional amendment, and then it can only be undone by passing another one.
this is also true of the People themselves who thereby despite the supremacy clause could replace or revise the Constitution itself if someone managed to rally enough of them
We call that a "coup"
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:4, Insightful)
While it is true that the President can order that (almost) anything be declassified - the DoE can overrule POTUS regarding nuclear secrets - the declassification process most assuredly does not consist of POTUS just saying so
Re: (Score:2)
At the very top? The President. Buck stops there. No higher authority. End of story.
Nope, sorry. You're wrong. A president might be at the top of the food chain, but they cannot unilaterally declassify something. They can say it should be declassified, at which point there is a whole series of convoluted steps which must be followed to do so. A large part of that process involves determining how much of a document to declassify and within that document what can be revealed.
A president cannot say, "Declassif
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Insightful)
"However you need to understand how classified materials work."
So do you.
"At the very top? The President. Buck stops there. No higher authority. End of story."
Everyone knows that. The question is what the process is for the president. There is one, and it exists for a reason.
"You think this is the first time a President has summarily unclassified highly secret satellite info? "
You think that adding "summarily" means something here? Presidents declassify things, sure. Do they do it over twitter to show off?
"It is certainly better than the P having to ask permission from some faceless peon. That's ridiculous."
And it's also a Trumpian false choice. Presidents don't ask permission, much less from "peon"s of which there are not any making such decisions, and they still need to follow a procedure so that the status of declassified documents is known to everyone.
Also, while the President has the authority to declassify documents, it is not absolute. He cannot do it in order to break laws. The President must comply with law, he is not authorized to use his powers to subvert the law. Comfortable with that? Finally, his declassification in this case may have been within his authority ignoring the blatant violation of reason and process, it may also be impeachable.
Re: (Score:3)
The president is not above the law. The president is not a monarch,
The monarch is not above the law, not since 1215.
When the US was founded, the president was modelled on the king, with true power remaining in the Rule of Law. And congress passed the laws.
Since then, the power of the US president has only increased, to the point where recent presidents have been able to rule by fiat ("executive order"), without the support of congress. Meanwhile the power of the king has slowly diminished.
While the UK has become more democratic, the US seems to be e
Re: (Score:2)
This is a false narrative, the highest law is not from congress who is but one of three co-equal branches of government. The authority of the President is equal to that of congress and that of courts. This was always the case. All authority in the UK derives from the crown, in the US it derives from the People who empowered the Constitution and the authority of the three branches is Constitutional.
The President isn't a dictator because power is separated between the three branches, he is the absolute dictat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably. Just as probably he didn't listen.
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:4, Insightful)
No but he IS at the top of one of the three co-equal branches of government which means he absolutely is above the any lesser legal authority within that branch and above the authority of the other branches within his slice of the separation of powers.
The President doesn't answer to the executive branch or the military, they answer to him. His constitutional role as dictator of the military, commander and chief, is the source of not only his but all classification/declassification authority.
Re: (Score:3)
Untrue. He remains bound by the Constitution and other restrictions. The joint Chiefs actually have an obligation to ignore an illegal order given by the President.
We even have a process to strip a President of his office and bring him to trial if he violates the law.
Re: (Score:2)
"He remains bound by the Constitution and other restrictions."
He remains bound by the Constitution. Technically he remains bound by the supreme court decisions but technically those aren't additional restrictions but interpretations of the restrictions within the Constitution. This doesn't make anything I said untrue.
As I said, "he IS at the top of one of the three co-equal branches of government which means he absolutely is above the any lesser legal authority within that branch and above the authority of
Re: (Score:2)
Small correction to myself. The constitution doesn't specify restrictions on government but rather enumerates the powers government has. What seem like restrictions are clarifications or exemptions from those grants of authority.
Re: (Score:2)
His constitutional role as dictator of the military
No, absolutely not. Commander-in-Chief does not translate to "dictator" in a republic, let alone an actual democracy.
Re: (Score:2)
The military is not a republic, nor a democracy. In the military we defended democracy, we didn't practice it.
The military is under the control of civilians in congress, as only they can make war. This is a fundamental aspect of a democracy. What you did in the military is wholly irrelevant to this fact.
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as I know there's procedures that must be followed, even by the president according to: https://crsreports.congress.go... [congress.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
That's the process for Congress declassifying its own documents. Has absolutely nothing to do with the executive branch.
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Informative)
Those are the two known procedures for declassification by the president. And those existed before the Biden administration, see Public Interest Declassification Act of 2000, as amended: https://www.archives.gov/files... [archives.gov] and Declassification Reviews of Certain Documents Concerning the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 https://www.federalregister.go... [federalregister.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
I'd mod you up, but it looks like you're getting that anyway, so:
I'll just point out that in neither of the sections you quoted does it specify how the president must perform those declassifications. Both sections agree that the president has the authority to declassify stuff, while the second merely gives an example of how it has been done recently. One could (and I'm sure someone orange already has) argue that tweeting the picture is just another example of how it has been done recently. I'll just add tha
Re: (Score:2)
A post on twitter might work as an Executive Order in the future either, if twitter can make sure that the other guidelines are faithfully followed with involvement of more government agencies like the Federal Register, or if there are new exceptions for how things can be handled more informally.
Or maybe there could be entirely different ways to declassify documents that's neither "Public Interest Declassification Board" or "Executive Order" in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Reader further
Those are the two known procedures for declassification by the president. And those existed before the Biden administration, see Public Interest Declassification Act of 2000, as amended: https://www.archives.gov/files... [archives.gov] and Declassification Reviews of Certain Documents Concerning the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 https://www.federalregister.go... [federalregister.gov]
So Trump just thinking "I declassify this" as he posts it on Twitter is not enough? ... Figured as much.
Re: I am pretty sure president can declassify thin (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The headline for that paragraph is "Executive Order". And right in the next sentence it also says "Executive Order". That's the procedure.
Is there an executive order that NPR is not mentioning?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The Executive Orders that are talked about there are about a very specific procedures that's subject to other rules.
Re: (Score:2)
You should change your handle to FakeNickname.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop your trolling. Just because you say something doesn't mean it is true. Words have meanings and when it comes to these matters it is not the colloquial meaning that you try to pass off as the correct interpretation that is correct. It is the formal meaning, written down in the laws and regulations.
Thanks to fazig and the others that point out the correct interpretation of these words.
Re: (Score:2)
An unlimited amount of "authority" could exist that tells him that, and we wouldn't know. A President could change that authority, but not merely ignore it.
Re: (Score:2)
The president absolutely can do that. All classification of federal government information rests in the power of the executive branch. The president can declassify anything, at any time, for any reason, without any discussion with anyone.
The only remedies are impeachment and the ballot box.
Re: (Score:2)
The president can declassify anything, at any time, for any reason, without any discussion with anyone.
Just posting something doesn't declassify it. Traditionally, presidents have declassified documents by executive order.
Re: (Score:2)
There are procedures that are supposed to be followed (ha ha)... but the sitting president can choose to declassify almost anything he wants (excepting some nuclear secrets).
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/new... [nbcnewyork.com]
Re: I am pretty sure president can declassify thin (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much, yup.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, he probably can... sort of... but only as long as he did it *WHILE* he was president. You're right that he can't technically declassify things merely by posting them on Twitter, but merely posting them on twitter does show clear and obvious intent to declassify, and the process of actual declassification can commence as soon as the appropriate people are made aware of it. The declassification process happens at the discretion of the president, but this process, very importantly, happens WHILE
Re: (Score:2)
The President actually can declassify things by posting them on twitter. In fact, there was another case, also Trump, where he'd indicated he would declassify materials and the crux of the case before the supreme court ultimately came down to whether or not he INTENDED to declassify materials.
The authority to classify and declassify materials, and who might see them if they remain classified, all originates with the President. Other procedures and agencies handling of classified materials stems from the Pre
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:5, Insightful)
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Just because a president *can* do something doesn't make it a sane or good or reasonable thing to do, especially when it's done purely at randomly, without any procedures being followed and without any due consideration for what harm releasing the information could do. The president can order assassinations but it would be a big fucking deal if he pulled out a glock and started taking out tourists in the oval office. Or, at least it should be ... but if it were Trump somehow people would be climbing over themselves to excuse his behavior. If anyone really thinks it's acceptable and above criticism for any US president to randomly give away national secrets just so he can brag on Twitter then they've lost their mind.
Re: (Score:2)
There are 2 distinct and separate issues.
1) was it legal? Absolutely. No doubt.
2) was it a good idea? Maybe. Maybe not. It certainly wouldn't be the first time a president has shown an enemy we can see what they're up to.
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. a president can, if done properly. It can't be done by thinking about it, and it can't be done just by verbally declaring it. Now a sitting president most likely cannot be prosecuted for revealing classified info, but they might be impeached for it. An ex-president positively absolutely cannot declassify stuff, especially not retroactively. Even presidents must follow the law.
(Nevertheless, Trump is in trouble merely for the non-classified docs he refused to turn over and at least his lawyers are in
Re: (Score:2)
It has been done by several presidents just be doing it. This was not the first by a long way.
Impeached? Lol no one is getting kicked out of office for making an executive decision to show an enemy state and the world we know what they're up to. It's a threat. It has been very successfully used in the past.
Back here on earth, Trump is out of office. This was years ago. Nothing is going to come from this. It's pure click bait and to rile up the TDS crowd. Let it go. There are more important things g
Re:I am pretty sure president can declassify thing (Score:4, Insightful)
The point isn't that he arbitrarily declassified something without properly going through the declassification process. The point rather is that he disclosed to our dear Iranian, Russian, Chinese, and NORK friends just how good are our sky cameras. This alleged man should never be allowed near top secret, secret, or even confidential information again. Taking the classified stuff to his homes and then treating it like McDonald's wrappers shows this.
Re: (Score:3)
The president has to go through a procedure for that. Unless and until he does, posting classified material publicly is a crime. Yes, Trump is too dumb to see that, but if that defense would work, the prisons would be pretty empty.
It's not a national secret... (Score:2, Funny)
If the President leaks it.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. It might be stupid of him to do something like that, but otherwise it doesn't make any sense for information classified by a branch of the Executive to be beyond the reach of the head Executive.
The takeaway here is that Trump is clueless and sloppy.
Re: (Score:3)
He was already impeached twice. Maybe if he gets re-elected they can try a third time?
Also, treason? Over that? Not even close.
None of the redactions were in Trump's tweet (Score:3)
Many details on the original image remain redacted -- a clear sign that Trump was sharing some of the U.S. government's most prized intelligence on social media.
None the things that were redacted from the declassified release were included in Trump's tweet. In fact, just the opposite conclusion can be derived in that everything that was tweeted is now considered no longer worthy of continued classification.
I got an idea (Score:3, Funny)
Let's keep Trump stories off from Slashdot. We're not really adding to the discussion about anything and I'm pretty sure we can all agree that he's a divisive personality.
Nothing really is being gained at this point other than beating dead horses.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Any chance to add the cryptobull stories?
But then again... what else is left?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ad hits to keep the /. servers going one more day.
Although with so few people whole thing is probably running on 2 small aws instances and is just taken from the editor's coffee budget.
The office of POTUS (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue that I think the US is having most trouble with is that it has relied far too heavily on a belief that the president will be a decent, hard working and honest person.
Throughout presidencies we know that many presidents have been caught being less than honest but I do not think any have been so self-serving as the 45th president.
There is such scrutiny of civil servants, background checks, character references and indeed vetting and mechanisms and watchdogs in place to make sure that serious infrigements are reprimanded.
For me, all his various falsehoods, infrigements, unethical behaviour and outright lies shouldn't have been allowed to happen at all because if he was applying for any civil servant position other than president he wouldn't have made the cut through an impartial process.
If you consider the president is the employee of the people consider this; Trump went golfing something between 150 and 280 times during his tenure. IMO he would have been fired...and if you think about it, he was fired when he lost to Joe Biden.
Full disclosure I voted for neither.
The office of preseding needs someone who is willing to dedicate that portion of their lives to better the lives of the American people in all the various forms such an agenda must take. Presently the safeguards to keep that office in check have been shown to be dangerously loose when in the hands of a self-interested president.
Re: (Score:2)
For me, all his various falsehoods, infrigements, unethical behaviour and outright lies shouldn't have been allowed to happen at all because if he was applying for any civil servant position other than president he wouldn't have made the cut through an impartial process.
Uh, clearly Senators don't go through such a process either. Otherwise people who have no fucking clue about anything like MTG or bobo wouldn't be allowed.
Re: The office of POTUS (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:3)
Voters. The republican voters passed over about 3 competent conservative candidates and picked an utterly unqualified guy. The problem lies with the people
Voters were deliberately dumbed down by Republican leadership, do not let them off the hook for their deliberate actions to make voters make bad decisions. HTH HAND [bestcolleges.com]
Re: (Score:3)
We have checks and balances, what he did was illegal, but here's the problem. Nobody wants to move fast and break one thing in particular, their own immunity from prosecution. If they hold presidents accountable for things, like actually hold them accountable to the law, then the chances that one of their presidents or they themselves will fall victim to the same standard. Yes, the law. Remember, American presidents are largely war criminals [cgtn.com]. So the checks and balances don't function because everybody invol
not an aircraft (Score:2)
Emulating his hero (Score:2)
Sheesh (Score:3)
JFK (Score:3)
JFK "posted" classified pictures of Russian missiles in Cuba.
Time for us all to hate Trump and love DeSantis (Score:4, Interesting)
It'll be interesting to see if his fans (many of which are on this forum) tell the establishment to go **** themselves like they did with Jeb! or if they dutifully get in line like they're supposed to. Trump won't have that big media push like he did last time, the media at large is going to be attacking him, especially Fox News.
This also means he'll get increasingly desperate. It'll be tough for the media to ignore him since he'll say increasingly incendiary (and stochastic) things. As soon as one of them give him coverage they'll get mad ratings and the other's won't be able to resist.
Meanwhile DeSantis is just as opposed to democracy as Trump, and is almost certainly going to do his own January 6th if he wins, but unlike Trump he's smart enough to get the military behind him first.
I personally want both men to lose, because both of them are a threat to democracy and literal fascists (a word who's meaning has been diluted to an insult unfortunately). But right now I'm routing for Trump because he can win a primary but not a General. DeSantis can win both, and if he's ever in the Whitehouse he won't ever leave.
What Did It Hurt? What Was So Classified? (Score:3)
It's been out for years and nothing of value was harmed. People found out the resolution of satellite imagery maybe? People already knew. And still the paranoid world of spooks only release a redacted version of a photo that has been in the public domain for quite some time. That is proof that many of the things they hold tight to don't need to be. And that is a real world problem because it takes resources, MONEY, to keep so many things locked up. The world of spooks need to be told to get a fucking grip and only worry about real issues, not unimportant edge cases. And for the record, Trump is an idiot and shouldn't be let near a hot stove, never mind the oval office. But it is obvious by now that he didn't release anything of great value.
Re:Classified? (Score:5, Insightful)
I like how suddenly Trump people are huge fans of the Clintons now that he is accused of the same sort of malfeasance for which they were once so rightly castigated. Have you ever considered the possibility, remote though it may be, that all of them were behaving in unacceptable ways? Hillary Clinton concealed public records on a private email server, and there is very little reasonable argument that this was for any other purpose than maintaining control over what became part of the public record. Their collective activity in managing the Clinton Foundation was, at best, an extremely bad idea as it created the impression that access to the Secretary of State could be purchased - even if one is to believe that there was no relationship between these two things. It is, in fact, entirely possible for these things to be major violations of the public trust, disqualifying both of them from future office in at least a moral sense, and Donald Trump's far, far worse behavior to be treated the same way. It's not one or the other.
Incidentally, no, Clinton's tapes, the 'documents' stored in a sock drawer, were not "classified" in any way - they were recordings of interviews with a reporter intended for purposes of making a memoir. They were made while he was president, and the issue was whether they were private or public - a distinction which is allowed by the PRA. So no, it is most assuredly not "worse". I don't know how much of an argument there really is that classified documents, prepared by intelligence services, pertaining to the nuclear capabilities of foreign nations, were somehow intended for Donald Trump's private use.
If you have some example of anything remotely like this done by the others you list, "Clinton, Obama, Bush W, Bush HW, Carter", by all means, share it. Thus far, all we have seen are accounts of the National Archives, which you may recognize as the agency specifically designated by law to receive presidential records, collecting those records for the purpose of establishing presidential libraries. Those who desperately want Trump to be something other than the greatest threat to US security in recent memory have certainly done their best to conflate the NA with the presidents whose records they collect, but one has nothing to do with the other. It turns out that when you elect a man who doesn't believe laws apply to him, then don't apply the law to him, he will not obey the law. It's not really a surprising result.
Re: (Score:2)
Cuban missile crisis. Kennedy showed Soviets we could see what they were up to.
Same situation but up to date with modern social media conducting international diplomacy by tweet! Very hip.
Seriously, whole thing is a joke. Anon's posting that the P needs permission from his own staff to do anything are fucking nuts.
Well, except Joe. He says in public he'll "get in trouble" if he doesn't do what they say but that's a whole other story.
Re:Classified? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, presidents after Nixon have NOT taken official documents with them. They all go to National Archives, BY LAW. After that happens some documents are given back to be put into presidential libraries. This is for unclassified documents, so there certainly is no exception for classified ones. The government documents do not belong to the person, they belong to the office, they cannot be taken as mere souvenirs of their time in office, which is apparently what Trump was doing. This is the law and no president is above the law. The president is not a monarch!
Stop with the bullshit slashdot poster, you're better than this.
Re: (Score:2)
Is that the right-wing version of "islamophobia"? As in, whenever the sancrosanct group or person does something wrong, you must not criticize it lest you get some label?
Put it on the pile back there with the others, I'll ignore later?
Re: (Score:3)
Kiddie-fucking is now a leftist thing?
Those priests don't really come across as liberals, though, you sure about that?