[Action80]

The Espionage Act does not and cannot apply in this particular case, given the documents listed in the indictment come nowhere near meeting this language:

"(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it..."

Bolded the bit which might help you. Dude, just read the Indictment.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000188-a12f-db74-ab98-b3ff4de50000

Dude, I quoted the law on which the indictment is based. The POTUS (while in office and post term) is entitled to both RECEIVE and RETAIN these documents.

Jesus, you are getting smashed here.

"The classified documents TRUMP stored in his boxes included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack, and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack

"As he departed the White House, TRUMP caused scores of boxes, many of which contained classified documents, to be transported to the Mar-a-Lago Club...Trump was not authorized to possess or retain those classified documents

TRUMP showed and described a "plan of attack" that TRUMP said was prepared for him by the Department of Defense and a senior military official. TRUMP told the individuals that the plan was "highly confidential" and "secret". TRUMP also said "as president I could have declassified it," and, "Now I can't, you know, but this is still a secret".

TRUMP showed a representative of his political action committee who did not possess a security clearance as classified map related to a military operation and told the representative that he should not be showing it to the representative and that the representative should not get too close

So, you know. Bad.

So, you know, the indictment is bullshit...

The language you quote is just a bunch of fluff, as there is no actual evidence he showed anything to anyone...

[AATW]

Dude, I quoted the law on which the indictment is based.

You did. And I bolded the relevant part here. Trump was authorised to see these documents at the time he was shown them. He was not entitled to retain them, he allegedly showed them to others and actively resisted and obstructed efforts to get the documents back.

there is no actual evidence he showed anything to anyone...

It actually doesn't matter if he did. I mean, it's worse if he did, but just to retain them and refuse to give them back when asked is already illegal.
The evidence that he did though is that there are witnesses which claim that - claims are evidence, right Tom?
And one of the incidents where he did so was allegedly recorded. So...

[markjo]

Dude, I quoted the law on which the indictment is based. The POTUS (while in office and post term) is entitled to both RECEIVE and RETAIN these documents.

In office, yes.  Post term, no.  You may also want to brush up on the Presidential Records Act.

§2202. Ownership of Presidential records

The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
---
(g)(1) Upon the conclusion of a President's term of office, or if a President serves consecutive terms upon the conclusion of the last term, the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President.

[Lord Dave]

Guys, both tom and Action are just trolls.  They're gonna stand there and proclaim the same point over and over again regardless of how much evidence we present.  It literally does not matter.
God himself could bitchslap both of them with the legal knowledge to know they're wrong and they will still log in here and loudly proclaim that we are wrong.

[Roundy]

Guys, both tom and Action are just trolls.  They're gonna stand there and proclaim the same point over and over again regardless of how much evidence we present.  It literally does not matter.
God himself could bitchslap both of them with the legal knowledge to know they're wrong and they will still log in here and loudly proclaim that we are wrong.

Careful using the "t" word about Tom, Dave!!

[markjo]

Guys, both tom and Action are just trolls.  They're gonna stand there and proclaim the same point over and over again regardless of how much evidence we present.  It literally does not matter.

True enough, but sometimes it isn't that bad of an idea to go up against a well known contrarian just to try to improve one's own game.

[Action80]

It is a bad idea when you guys have no clue about what you are writing. All of you are patently wrong.

[Lord Dave]

Guys, both tom and Action are just trolls.  They're gonna stand there and proclaim the same point over and over again regardless of how much evidence we present.  It literally does not matter.
God himself could bitchslap both of them with the legal knowledge to know they're wrong and they will still log in here and loudly proclaim that we are wrong.

Careful using the "t" word about Tom, Dave!!

You're right.

Allow me to reprase:
A person who is intentionally arguing from a static position regardless of evidence or argument provided for the purpose if generting heated debate and frustration.

[Action80]

Guys, both tom and Action are just trolls.  They're gonna stand there and proclaim the same point over and over again regardless of how much evidence we present.  It literally does not matter.
God himself could bitchslap both of them with the legal knowledge to know they're wrong and they will still log in here and loudly proclaim that we are wrong.

Careful using the "t" word about Tom, Dave!!

You're right.

Allow me to reprase:
A person who is intentionally arguing from a static position regardless of evidence or argument provided for the purpose if generting heated debate and frustration.

Intentionally arguing from a static and true position is always good practice. It leads to thoughtful, coherent writing, unlike this ^mess above...

[Lord Dave]

Guys, both tom and Action are just trolls.  They're gonna stand there and proclaim the same point over and over again regardless of how much evidence we present.  It literally does not matter.
God himself could bitchslap both of them with the legal knowledge to know they're wrong and they will still log in here and loudly proclaim that we are wrong.

Careful using the "t" word about Tom, Dave!!

You're right.

Allow me to reprase:
A person who is intentionally arguing from a static position regardless of evidence or argument provided for the purpose if generting heated debate and frustration.

Intentionally arguing from a static and true position is always good practice. It leads to thoughtful, coherent writing, unlike this ^mess above...

I never said you or tom argue from a true position.

[Action80]

Guys, both tom and Action are just trolls.  They're gonna stand there and proclaim the same point over and over again regardless of how much evidence we present.  It literally does not matter.
God himself could bitchslap both of them with the legal knowledge to know they're wrong and they will still log in here and loudly proclaim that we are wrong.

Careful using the "t" word about Tom, Dave!!

You're right.

Allow me to reprase:
A person who is intentionally arguing from a static position regardless of evidence or argument provided for the purpose if generting heated debate and frustration.

Intentionally arguing from a static and true position is always good practice. It leads to thoughtful, coherent writing, unlike this ^mess above...

I never said you or tom argue from a true position.

Given your unfamiliarity with the entire concept, not surprising in the least.

[markjo]

Intentionally arguing from a static and true position is always good practice.

I think that it would be an even better practice to argue from a position that is consistent with the facts.  The fact that the Presidential Records Act requires an outgoing president to turn over all presidential and government documents to the National Archives does not support your argument or position.  Even while in office, Trump did not seem to care about the legal requirements of preserving presidential records.

Trump has been cavalier about the law requiring records be preserved. He has a habit of ripping up documents before tossing them out, forcing White House staffers to spend hours taping them back together.

"They told him to stop doing it. He didn't want to stop," said Solomon Lartey, a former White House records analyst who spent hours taping documents back together well into 2018.

The president also confiscated an interpreter's notes after Trump had a chat with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. Trump scolded his White House counsel for taking notes at a meeting. Top executive branch officials had to be reminded more than once not to conduct official business on private email or encrypted text messaging systems and to preserve it if they did.

[Tom Bishop]

A president can rip up documents if he wants to. It's an expression of his displeasure over whatever he is ripping up and a form of presidental communication. If he rips up a proposal from a senator asking for xyz, it's important since this is a communication of his expression. The whitehouse saved Trump's ripped up documents, as they have admitted. They have also saved his circling of pictures, crossing out of paragraphs, and so on. All of this is presidental communication, some of which may become a part of a presidential library and museum.

If your concern is that there is only one copy of a document in existence when a printer prints out a copy of a document, you don't have to worry about that, since that is false.

[Roundy]

The whitehouse saved Trump's ripped up documents, as they have admitted. They have also saved his circling of pictures, crossing out of paragraphs, and so on. All of this is presidental communication, some of which may become a part of a presidential library and museum.

Did they save the fake hurricane Sharpie picture?

[markjo]

If your concern is that there is only one copy of a document in existence when a printer prints out a copy of a document, you don't have to worry about that, since that is false.

Actually, a printer prints out as many copies of a document as directed, and the default is usually one.

But no, that isn't my concern.  My concern is that some people don't seem to understand the importance of keeping sensitive documents (especially ones that have supposedly been declassified but not redacted) properly secured.

[Lord Dave]

The whitehouse saved Trump's ripped up documents, as they have admitted. They have also saved his circling of pictures, crossing out of paragraphs, and so on. All of this is presidental communication, some of which may become a part of a presidential library and museum.

Did they save the fake hurricane Sharpie picture?

They had to.
I, for one, look forward to it in the Museum of Terrible Presidents.

[Tom Bishop]

If your concern is that there is only one copy of a document in existence when a printer prints out a copy of a document, you don't have to worry about that, since that is false.

Actually, a printer prints out as many copies of a document as directed, and the default is usually one.

But no, that isn't my concern.  My concern is that some people don't seem to understand the importance of keeping sensitive documents (especially ones that have supposedly been declassified but not redacted) properly secured.

Your concern seems to place you in the position of decider for how the documents should be handled. The President is the ultimate arbitrator, and is basically the god of classification and declassification and document secrecy. If President Trump thought that the Whitehouse documents should have been stored at Mar-a-Lago at the end of his presidency, then that is therefore the appropriate place for them.

People were not taking nuclear weapons schematics to the Whitehouse. The President decided that the sensitive documentation and high level communication was appropriate to be at Mar-a-Lago, a building surrounded by secret service and hardened with security measures, which even contained a SCIF during Trump's presidency, classed for classified information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_compartmented_information_facility

"When Donald Trump became president in 2017, a SCIF was set up at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, which he referred to as his Winter White House. Trump (at the head of the table with various cabinet members, advisers, and staffers) is seen here monitoring the Syrian cruise missile attack from the Mar-a-Lago SCIF."



There is Trump at Mar-a-Lago in the middle of a military operation, in the Mar-a-Lago SCIF. The page describes some of the regulations a SCIF must adhere to for classified information.

If you thought Mar-a-Lago was just a resort, you were mistaken.

[markjo]

Your concern seems to place you in the position of decider for how the documents should be handled. The President is the ultimate arbitrator, and is basically the god of classification and declassification and document secrecy. If President Trump thought that the Whitehouse documents should have been stored at Mar-a-Lago, then that is therefore the appropriate place for them.

President Trump may have had those nigh godlike declassification powers, but former president Trump does not.  According to the Presidential Records Act, former president Trump was required to turn over all presidential and other government owned documents.  He did not, despite repeated requests.  He lied about not having classified documents.  It's no one's fault but his own that he was indicted.  That is unless you don't think that former presidents should be held accountable for their actions,

People were not taking nuclear weapons schematics to the Whitehouse.

How do you know what documents were or were not taken to the White House?

The President decided that the documentation and high level communication was appropriate to be at Mar-a-Lago, a building surrounded by secret service and hardened with security measures, which even contained a SCIF during Trump's presidency, classed for classified information.

Then why were the boxes of documents stored in unsecured locations like a ballroom and a bathroom instead of the highly secured SCIF?  Or are you under the impression that the SCIF designation refers to the entire resort instead of just one specially prepared room?

[Tom Bishop]

It is unclear whether there were any classified documents in those boxes that were seen in a bathroom, or how secure that bathroom was.

The Secret Security has hardened portions of Mara-a-Lago for sensitive information. See this 2019 document  from the GAO regarding security at Mar-a-Lago: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-246



Secret Security have been at Mar-a-Lago and in Trump's immediate vicinity since Jan 20, 2021.

Why do you think that they suddenly stopped caring about the security of classified or potentially classified information?

[markjo]

Tom, how Trump handled sensitive documents while president is irrelevant.  How he handled sensitive documents that he no longer has a right to possess since leaving office is the issue.