User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
MS, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:07:21 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Honest discussion? Is that like posting an inflammatory thread title but then admitting you don’t actually understand what you are listening to and hoping for somebody else to explain it? Because I’ve been asking since page 2 for somebody to post a single citation from the unredacted documents this thread is about showing how the “WH created the Mar A Lago crime”. And nobody has been able to do it. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Logcutter: The ignore function would work better if people would quit quoting the idiots who are not here to actually engage in honest discussion Honest discussion? Is that like posting an inflammatory thread title but then admitting you don’t actually understand what you are listening to and hoping for somebody else to explain it? Because I’ve been asking since page 2 for somebody to post a single citation from the unredacted documents this thread is about showing how the “WH created the Mar A Lago crime”. And nobody has been able to do it. Maybe you should try inpeaching the president before charging him with "crimes" that only a president could commit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:18:31 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: nope. You invented that out of thin air. Did he sign an NDA? No he did not. Guess why not… Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:22:12 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panzersergeant: Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. Getting schooled? Is your contention that former presidents maintain the same access to classified information they had while holding office? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:26:25 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Morlawn66: Trump has the goods on the guilty parties , the infamous Binder on Crossfire Hurricane . That fact is ignored by select posters . Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Morlawn66: Originally Posted By Smokey0844: Stop trying to be cute. Let’s go with Crossfire Hurricane for $500 Trump has the goods on the guilty parties , the infamous Binder on Crossfire Hurricane . That fact is ignored by select posters . You know he actually formally declassified that while he was still in office, right? Pretty sure there's nobody questioning the legitimacy of that executive order. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:27:34 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: nope. You invented that out of thin air. Did he sign an NDA? No he did not. Guess why not… Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who “granted “ the President his Q clearance? Hint: not DoE The clearance comes with the office. And you lose it when you leave office. Did he sign an NDA? No he did not. Guess why not…  Are we really going to do this again? |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:30:53 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Getting schooled? Is your contention that former presidents maintain the same access to classified information they had while holding office? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By panzersergeant: Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. Getting schooled? Is your contention that former presidents maintain the same access to classified information they had while holding office? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:31:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: CMiller]
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prezboi44: In normal circumstances, the president retains access for life because they can be called upon by current administrations to give the history of individual subjects, discussions with foreign leaders, clear up confusion, lines of thinking at the point of events, etc. That's been national security policy forever. But only the president. Not their family or anyone else AFAIK. They may undergo background checks, but it has no bearing on their access to classified materials. They aren't going to go around asking how many tons of force do I need to push a graphite rod into a radioactive core, but if it's needed to make a determination on a certain question, I don't think the national security apparatus wants to run around asking "what's the classification of this piece of information in this context and can we tell the president?" as a nuclear power plant is melting down in timbuktu. You understand the thinking behind this, right? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prezboi44: Originally Posted By Low_Country: I don’t think you are wrong, though I’ve never had a Q clearance, so I don’t know if there is anything especially unique. I read the document as confirming that Presidents have the clearance while in office, and they cease to keep it when they leave office. The document was offered as a rebuttal to the claim that he still had the clearance, years after he left office. In normal circumstances, the president retains access for life because they can be called upon by current administrations to give the history of individual subjects, discussions with foreign leaders, clear up confusion, lines of thinking at the point of events, etc. That's been national security policy forever. But only the president. Not their family or anyone else AFAIK. They may undergo background checks, but it has no bearing on their access to classified materials. They aren't going to go around asking how many tons of force do I need to push a graphite rod into a radioactive core, but if it's needed to make a determination on a certain question, I don't think the national security apparatus wants to run around asking "what's the classification of this piece of information in this context and can we tell the president?" as a nuclear power plant is melting down in timbuktu. You understand the thinking behind this, right? What's your evidence that your claims are correct? I'm pretty sure you're framing the question wrong, former presidents do not retain any kind of formal security clearance after they leave office. They never had a formal security clearance to retain. The only thing that may happen is that the current president has the ability to authorize them being shown specific classified information for whatever purpose he chooses. That just comes from his authority to do anything he wants with classified information. It has nothing to do with the fact that a person was a former president. @Prezboi44 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:32:07 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ThornBooger: Why are you ignoring cincinatus? (That's rhetorical, everyone knows why) Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ThornBooger: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By panzersergeant: Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. Getting schooled? Is your contention that former presidents maintain the same access to classified information they had while holding office? Maybe you missed it, but we already did about 20 pages on this question with him in another thread. I don't think there's any point in doing another 20 pages with him again, as he obviously has not budged one inch from his position. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:35:38 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Are we really going to do this again? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who "granted " the President his Q clearance? Hint: not DoE The clearance comes with the office. And you lose it when you leave office. Did he sign an NDA? No he did not. Guess why not Are we really going to do this again? JFC Patriot Act vs. TDS. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:40:52 PM EDT
[#10]
Jesus, it must be miserable letting one slightly orange man make you so obnoxious. I would say argumentative, but Lord knows there is no debate or anything because you are the smartest of all Arfcommers and everyone else is just ignorant heathens that are beneath your superior intellect
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:42:54 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ThornBooger: Why are you ignoring cincinatus? (That's rhetorical, everyone knows why) We had a two week long thread on this exact topic not long ago. Cincinnatus is a smart guy. But in this case I think he is wrong. Former presidents traditionally have been granted access to classified information generated during their presidency, after a request to the current executive branch. Thats generally it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:43:06 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BlueCoyote: Jesus, it must be miserable letting one slightly orange man make you so obnoxious. I would say argumentative, but Lord knows there is no debate or anything because you are the smartest of all Arfcommers and everyone else is just ignorant heathens that are beneath your superior intellect 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:43:07 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Hardly. As a legal professional, what would your interpretation of “by the conditions of the original grant” be? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By mcculver5: "Wishcasting" Hardly. As a legal professional, what would your interpretation of “by the conditions of the original grant” be? Me? No clue. Same as most people on this web zone. Same as you I suspect. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:45:10 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Getting schooled? Is your contention that former presidents maintain the same access to classified information they had while holding office? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By panzersergeant: Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. Getting schooled? Is your contention that former presidents maintain the same access to classified information they had while holding office? Access is irrelevant. The information is classified, not the paper. He has classified information in his head. Did some higher authority require him to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement when he left office? If so, who? If not, why not. |
|
|
|
CT, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:46:31 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panzersergeant: Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. He was never a Never Trumper he just doesn't like Trump and really isn't happy he has to vote for him again but he's an adult and understands the consequences of another 4 years of Biden . Grown up stuff 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:47:05 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Yes, presidents have access to everything while in office, purely due to the office they hold. Former presidents maintain access to classified information solely at the pleasure of the current president. This has traditionally been granted as a courtesy, but it doesn’t have to be. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Prezboi44: No, it doesn't. That's just the point. You think you have a document in writing from a bureaucracy that did not exist when the Constitution was created. The president is Commander in Chief and by virtue of the office, they have access. Article. II. Section. 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows ------------- Then we have Article. II. Section. 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. Yes, presidents have access to everything while in office, purely due to the office they hold. Former presidents maintain access to classified information solely at the pleasure of the current president. This has traditionally been granted as a courtesy, but it doesn’t have to be. I suppose we'll just have to throw out all traditions and shoot presidents in the head, or hold them in an iron mask at papillon as soon as the leave the successor's nomination. Otherwise, it seems like a whole lot of traditional stuff and things have been thrown out to get the orange man. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:47:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Cincinnatus]
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panzersergeant: Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panzersergeant: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: nope. You invented that out of thin air. Did he sign an NDA? No he did not. Guess why not… Ha ha, that's what makes this thread so entertaining... the most famous nevertrumper of arfcom getting schooled by a fellow NT that is known for his superior intellect. NT? I have voted for Trump twice. Not good enough? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:47:55 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Are we really going to do this again? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who “granted “ the President his Q clearance? Hint: not DoE The clearance comes with the office. And you lose it when you leave office. Did he sign an NDA? No he did not. Guess why not… Are we really going to do this again? Do what? Highlight your bottomless ignorance. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:51:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Cincinnatus]
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: We had a two week long thread on this exact topic not long ago. Cincinnatus is a smart guy. But in this case I think he is wrong. Former presidents traditionally have been granted access to classified information generated during their presidency, after a request to the current executive branch. Thats generally it. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By ThornBooger: Why are you ignoring cincinatus? (That's rhetorical, everyone knows why) We had a two week long thread on this exact topic not long ago. Cincinnatus is a smart guy. But in this case I think he is wrong. Former presidents traditionally have been granted access to classified information generated during their presidency, after a request to the current executive branch. Thats generally it. Access has nothing to do with it. Biden hasn’t invited Trump to the White House for any parties, either. It’s the same thing. But Trump has knowledge of SAPs, covert action, weapons design info, and stuff about the Martians, and he has never and will never be required to sign an NDA. You can’t grasp why. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:53:46 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ranging-by-zipcode: He was never a Never Trumper he just doesn't like Trump and really isn't happy he has to vote for him again but he's an adult and understands the consequences of another 4 years of Biden . Grown up stuff Opinions vary but I've seen him shit on Trump enough in this forum to believe otherwise. But his rep for thoughtful and intelligent insight on most subjects he posts about is well known, much like Sylvan. He is one of the very few NTs I have respect for and will stop to read whatever he posts. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:54:59 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Access is irrelevant. The information is classified, not the paper. He has classified information in his head. Did some higher authority require him to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement when he left office? If so, who? If not, why not. The contention was that Trump maintained a Q level clearance after leaving office, despite the DOE affirming presidents lose that access the day they leave office. Who is right? |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:56:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: nu3gawhat]
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: The contention was that Trump maintained a Q level clearance after leaving office, despite the DOE affirming presidents lose that access the day they leave office. Who is right? Well, everyone involved with this adminstration or on the left is a liar so..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:58:18 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: NT? I have voted for Trump twice. Not good enough? Low_Country voted for him twice too. And his infamous position as head NT is pretty much cast in stone.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:58:46 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panzersergeant: Low_Country voted for him twice too. And his infamous position as head NT is pretty much cast in stone. Doubt |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 9:59:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Cincinnatus]
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: The contention was that Trump maintained a Q level clearance after leaving office, despite the DOE affirming presidents lose that access the day they leave office. Who is right? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Access is irrelevant. The information is classified, not the paper. He has classified information in his head. Did some higher authority require him to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement when he left office? If so, who? If not, why not. The contention was that Trump maintained a Q level clearance after leaving office, despite the DOE affirming presidents lose that access the day they leave office. Who is right? The subordinates within the Executive Branch do not dictate to the President anything regarding powers that are uniquely granted to the President by the Constitution. Again, did some higher authority require him to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement when he left office? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:04:04 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: The subordinates within the Executive Branch do not dictate to the President anything regarding powers that are uniquely granted to the President by the Constitution. Again, did some higher authority require him to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement when he left office? That’s a dodge. We aren’t talking about the president. We are talking about a former president. Do former presidents maintain Q level access based off an office they formerly held? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:04:15 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Access has nothing to do with it. Biden hasn’t invited Trump to the White House for any parties, either. It’s the same thing. But Trump has knowledge of SAPs, covert action, weapons design info, and stuff about the Martians, and he has never and will never be required to sign an NDA. You can’t grasp why. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By ThornBooger: Why are you ignoring cincinatus? (That's rhetorical, everyone knows why) We had a two week long thread on this exact topic not long ago. Cincinnatus is a smart guy. But in this case I think he is wrong. Former presidents traditionally have been granted access to classified information generated during their presidency, after a request to the current executive branch. Thats generally it. Access has nothing to do with it. Biden hasn’t invited Trump to the White House for any parties, either. It’s the same thing. But Trump has knowledge of SAPs, covert action, weapons design info, and stuff about the Martians, and he has never and will never be required to sign an NDA. You can’t grasp why. Why am I suddenly hearing talk about an NDA for the first time from multiple people? Did some MAGA talking point go out recently about it? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:10:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Cincinnatus]
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Why am I suddenly hearing talk about an NDA for the first time from multiple people? Did some MAGA talking point go out recently about it? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By ThornBooger: Why are you ignoring cincinatus? (That's rhetorical, everyone knows why) We had a two week long thread on this exact topic not long ago. Cincinnatus is a smart guy. But in this case I think he is wrong. Former presidents traditionally have been granted access to classified information generated during their presidency, after a request to the current executive branch. Thats generally it. Access has nothing to do with it. Biden hasn’t invited Trump to the White House for any parties, either. It’s the same thing. But Trump has knowledge of SAPs, covert action, weapons design info, and stuff about the Martians, and he has never and will never be required to sign an NDA. You can’t grasp why. Why am I suddenly hearing talk about an NDA for the first time from multiple people? Did some MAGA talking point go out recently about it? Don’t project. All of your words come from Google rather than first hand experience or knowledge. Some of us are familiar with how these things work. Others, such as yourself, are driven by emotions and democrat talking points. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:17:15 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Don’t project. All of your words come from Google rather than first hand experience or knowledge. Some of us are familiar with how these things work. Others, such as yourself, are driven by emotions and democrat talking points. At least you didn’t call him a propagandist. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:19:04 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Why am I suddenly hearing talk about an NDA for the first time from multiple people? Did some MAGA talking point go out recently about it? Just blather... and btw word is trump's legal team acknowledges their immunity argument has little chance of success, but claim victory is the resulting procedural delay in the prosecution of the criminal case. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:20:19 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AdLucem: Just blather... and btw word is trump's legal team acknowledges their immunity argument has little chance of success, but claim victory is the resulting procedural delay in the prosecution of the criminal case. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AdLucem: Originally Posted By CMiller: Why am I suddenly hearing talk about an NDA for the first time from multiple people? Did some MAGA talking point go out recently about it? Just blather... and btw word is trump's legal team acknowledges their immunity argument has little chance of success, but claim victory is the resulting procedural delay in the prosecution of the criminal case. “Word is,” huh? lol. Sure. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:22:28 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: “Word is,” huh? lol. Sure. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By AdLucem: Originally Posted By CMiller: Why am I suddenly hearing talk about an NDA for the first time from multiple people? Did some MAGA talking point go out recently about it? Just blather... and btw word is trump's legal team acknowledges their immunity argument has little chance of success, but claim victory is the resulting procedural delay in the prosecution of the criminal case. “Word is,” huh? lol. Sure. There was a Rolling Stone article dude... a Rolling Stone article. |
|
|
|
CT, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:26:27 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mcculver5: There was a Rolling Stone article dude... a Rolling Stone article.
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:28:14 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: That’s a dodge. We aren’t talking about the president. We are talking about a former president. Do former presidents maintain Q level access based off an office they formerly held? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: The subordinates within the Executive Branch do not dictate to the President anything regarding powers that are uniquely granted to the President by the Constitution. Again, did some higher authority require him to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement when he left office? That’s a dodge. We aren’t talking about the president. We are talking about a former president. Do former presidents maintain Q level access based off an office they formerly held? I think they retain access to those files that they have been read into and have a legitimate need to access, think litigation or inquiries. Now future information may not be shared if it's outside the scope of certain briefings, think we was in bum fuck Egypt and at war when the president changed lanes. Now 5 years later he's not getting current situation reports from the top. But if there is a hearing and he needs to brush up on his notes, the option exists. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:28:21 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mcculver5: There was a Rolling Stone article dude... a Rolling Stone article. 
|
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:30:39 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By st0newall: this would be WONDERFUL! if he was unable to run, we'd get someone who would wipe the floor with bidet. trump is the ONLY candidate that the mummy could defeat. trumps gonna be on the ticket and get slaughtered. Lol. U should post less and lurk more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:32:18 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bgrhammer: I think they retain access to those files that they have been read into and have a legitimate need to access, think litigation or inquiries. Now future information may not be shared if it's outside the scope of certain briefings, think we was in bum fuck Egypt and at war when the president changed lanes. Now 5 years later he's not getting current situation reports from the top. But if there is a hearing and he needs to brush up on his notes, the option exists. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bgrhammer: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: The subordinates within the Executive Branch do not dictate to the President anything regarding powers that are uniquely granted to the President by the Constitution. Again, did some higher authority require him to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement when he left office? That’s a dodge. We aren’t talking about the president. We are talking about a former president. Do former presidents maintain Q level access based off an office they formerly held? I think they retain access to those files that they have been read into and have a legitimate need to access, think litigation or inquiries. Now future information may not be shared if it's outside the scope of certain briefings, think we was in bum fuck Egypt and at war when the president changed lanes. Now 5 years later he's not getting current situation reports from the top. But if there is a hearing and he needs to brush up on his notes, the option exists. “Read in” by whom? Themselves? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:33:13 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ranging-by-zipcode:  no..no..no I have a reputable GD source, a youtube basement dweller posted this. There are many of self-professed legal pundits here who believe the SCOTUS will overturn the decision... I think not, but I was admittedly surprised they bothered to hear it... time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 10:45:32 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AdLucem: no..no..no I have a reputable GD source, a youtube basement dweller posted this. There are many of self-professed legal pundits here who believe the SCOTUS will overturn the decision... I think not, but I was admittedly surprised they bothered to hear it... time will tell. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AdLucem: Originally Posted By ranging-by-zipcode: no..no..no I have a reputable GD source, a youtube basement dweller posted this. There are many of self-professed legal pundits here who believe the SCOTUS will overturn the decision... I think not, but I was admittedly surprised they bothered to hear it... time will tell. Says the dude with his quals in his bio. I did see that headline attributed to a Rolling Stone article in my news feed this morning. But I could be wrong, maybe you have a source inside the Trump team. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:07:51 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mcculver5: Says the dude with his quals in his bio. I did see that headline attributed to a Rolling Stone article in my news feed this morning. But I could be wrong, maybe you have a source inside the Trump team. I have had "quals in my bio" for decades.... started with "le thug or something like that. I evolved, bio evolved. Just read the article btw. it seems like a pretty tame and unprovocative short piece to me... does it say anything you believe untrue? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-celebrating-supreme-court-immunity-heist-1235009838/ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:15:46 PM EDT
[#41]
I will be the neutral guy as I would like to know a few things
So how long can a former President retain former classified or classified documents after they leave office? Does a former President sign a NDA? Can a former President declassify documents after leaving office? My guess is no |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:15:49 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AdLucem: I have had "quals in my bio" for decades.... started with "le thug or something like that. I evolved, bio evolved. Just read the article btw. it seems like a pretty tame and unprovocative short piece to me... does it say anything you believe untrue? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-celebrating-supreme-court-immunity-heist-1235009838/ Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AdLucem: Originally Posted By mcculver5: Says the dude with his quals in his bio. I did see that headline attributed to a Rolling Stone article in my news feed this morning. But I could be wrong, maybe you have a source inside the Trump team. I have had "quals in my bio" for decades.... started with "le thug or something like that. I evolved, bio evolved. Just read the article btw. it seems like a pretty tame and unprovocative short piece to me... does it say anything you believe untrue? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-celebrating-supreme-court-immunity-heist-1235009838/ Don't plan on reading it thanks. But here's some real talk. In almost every case, delay favors the defense. So, who cares I guess? Any dumbass can pass the bar, I'm living proof of that. But to pretend the Rolling Stone is offering some deep insight onto the Trump team is silly. Delay favoring the defense is a standard observation. Journalism!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:23:38 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AdLucem: Just read the article btw. it seems like a pretty tame and unprovocative short piece to me... does it say anything you believe untrue? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-celebrating-supreme-court-immunity-heist-1235009838/ Rollingstone, citing an anonymous source? …and you “believe” it to be true. There’s that confirmation bias again!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:27:24 PM EDT
[#44]
Threaaaad Sliiiiding
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:29:38 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FreefallRet: I will be the neutral guy as I would like to know a few things So how long can a former President retain former classified or classified documents after they leave office? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FreefallRet: I will be the neutral guy as I would like to know a few things So how long can a former President retain former classified or classified documents after they leave office? Does a former President sign a NDA? Can a former President declassify documents after leaving office? My guess is no No need, in this case. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:29:59 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mcculver5: Don't plan on reading it thanks. But here's some real talk. In almost every case, delay favors the defense. So, who cares I guess? Any dumbass can pass the bar, I'm living proof of that. But to pretend the Rolling Stone is offering some deep insight onto the Trump team is silly. Delay favoring the defense is a standard observation. Journalism!!!!! I try and read everything... I hardly suggested this was some deep insight and, as you say, merely commenting on the fact that the defense team was considering the delay a victory was a pretty standard observation. question: Do you believe the scotus will hold that the precedent that the chief executive enjoys absolute civil immunity for all official acts committed within the “outer perimeter” of his office, extends to criminal acts? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:34:04 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Go back and read the charges from the indictment and then tell us how your analogy is relevant. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Originally Posted By ceetee: Originally Posted By Low_Country: So I just finished skimming all 315 pages, and didn’t find a single thing even remotely related to the thread title about the WH manufacturing anything. Perhaps you can point me to some of the specific pages? I did find the DOE memo you might have been referencing. Care to read aloud the first paragraph for the class? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/430926/IMG_0985-3197004.png Imagine some douchebag at the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending your driver's license... retroactively to 2021. And then the cops show up at your door with 1095 citations for driving on a suspended license... Go back and read the charges from the indictment and then tell us how your analogy is relevant. You're the smart guy. You read it, and then cite me page, chapter, and verse. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:36:52 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: Originally Posted By Enigma102083: Originally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: Originally Posted By CMiller: Lol we already what round and round on this for 20 pages in another thread, I'm not going to bother getting back into it. I'll just say that a federal appeals panel already rejected the concept and didn't even consider it worthy of discussion. But for what it's worth I'm not aware of any claim that he ever even made a verbal order regarding this question. He's never even claimed himself that it happened, much less found anybody willing to testify to it. All of this is a provable lie in the unredacted indictment that has been released with the last twenty-four hours. Then provide a quote, lots of people claiming the unredacted documents prove all sorts of things but not one single excerpt or quote is posted anywhere by anyone making these claims  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHfFIAhL42025:23 -27:35 Dude.....that guy is literally making massive assumptions out of whole cloth, every reference he's reading is clarified in other parts of the document. He's just conveniently leaving it out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:44:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AdLucem]
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: There’s that confirmation bias again! Ahhh... one of your cherished platitudes, "confirmation bias." I am gratified to see that I had no need to be worried about your fully recovering from the sport injury you mentioned last week. It appears it has had no effect on your posting. To good health and productive gardening. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 11:49:14 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Who “granted “ the President his Q clearance? Hint: not DoE Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Prezboi44: I find this document strange. Presidents don't hold clearances by virtue of their election to office. As elected officials, how would you have an unelected bureaucrat deciding access over the top elected official, least of all the CICAF. Many in the WH hold an SSB with a Yankee White clearance. NSC also. Where am I going wrong? I get you probably don't want a president to have the NOC list, but with the PDB, an "Agency" is going to withhold information of national security based on a clearance, because that's the exact situation they could be put in. https://news.clearancejobs.com/2016/07/25/kind-security-clearance-president-get/ I don’t think you are wrong, though I’ve never had a Q clearance, so I don’t know if there is anything especially unique. I read the document as confirming that Presidents have the clearance while in office, and they cease to keep it when they leave office. The document was offered as a rebuttal to the claim that he still had the clearance, years after he left office. Who “granted “ the President his Q clearance? Hint: not DoE DoE is the only classification authority established by legislation and this the president does not supercede it, that's why the DoE issues a Q clearance, that's why DoE has to grant one to the president. It's the ONE access program the president isn't the originating classifying authority. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
