ā€œOf course they did! They may have been the boxes etc. that were openly and plainly brought from the White House, as is my right under the Presidential Records Act,ā€ Trump posted on social media.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12ā€¢8 months ago

    Remind me again how Hilaryā€™s emails were a crime but the literal theft of top secret documents is just an ethical dilemma?

    • roguetrick
      link
      fedilink
      -2ā€¢8 months ago

      I was talking about this guyā€™s actual legal arguments about hypothetical administrative powers of the presidency. I do not give a shit about Hillaryā€™s emails and I did feel that what trump did was illegal.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3ā€¢8 months ago

        You have to, they canā€™t start a criminal investigation if they didnā€™t think it was a crime. Both crimes are just as equally ā€œadministrativeā€.

        Similarly all of our foundational documents are living documents so a penalty just needs to be issued and precedent would be set. No one legitimately expected such a fucking masturbatory love of a document the writers of specifically said to change ā€¦ Often and as the need presents.

        • roguetrick
          link
          fedilink
          -2ā€¢8 months ago

          No, Iā€™m talking about law. Administrative law is set by the administrative branch of the government as delegated by congress. Itā€™s not codified, but is the policy and procedures of those administrative bodies, which has the force of law. Breaching those policies and procedures, which is what Trump did, is in violation of administrative law.

          A legal duty is a more nebulous concept that is generally based on legal precedent. Usually has to do with something related to torts. You canā€™t just take someone to court for an novel legal duty and expect that to magically stick criminally. It needs to be codified by congress or created in administrative law first.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            2ā€¢8 months ago

            If itā€™s a law they have a legal duty, your hedging doesnā€™t particularly make sense.

            legal

            1 of 2

            adjective

            leĀ·ā€‹galĀ Ėˆlē-gəlĀ 

            Synonyms ofĀ legal

            1

            :Ā of or relating to law

            She has manyĀ legalĀ problems.

            2

            a

            :Ā deriving authority from or founded on lawĀ :Ā DE JURE

            aĀ legalĀ government

            b

            :Ā having a formal status derived from law often without a basis in actual factĀ :Ā TITULAR

            a corporation is aĀ legalĀ but not a real person

            c

            :Ā established by law

            especiallyĀ :Ā STATUTORY

            theĀ legalĀ test of mental capacityā€”K. C. Masteller

            3

            :Ā conforming to or permitted by law or established rules

            The referee said it was aĀ legalĀ play.

            Fishing in this lake isĀ legal.

            4

            :Ā recognized or made effective by a court of law as distinguished from a court of equity

            5

            :Ā of, relating to, or having the characteristics of the profession of law or of one of its members

            a bottle ā€¦ that someĀ legalĀ friend had sent himā€”J. G. Cozzens

            6

            :Ā created by the constructions of the law

            AĀ legalĀ fiction is something assumed in law to be a fact regardless of the truth of that assumption.

            legal

            2 of 2

            noun

            :Ā one that conforms to rules or the law

            • roguetrick
              link
              fedilink
              -2ā€¢8 months ago

              Iā€™m not getting into semantics, Iā€™m talking about the original post I replied to, namely

              he has a clear duty to protect their secrecy

              Which is talking about a duty in derived sense, not a codified duty.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                3ā€¢8 months ago

                He does, nothing youā€™ve offered implies or states otherwise.

                No, it has to do with a law or rather a series of them an oath to office and an oath to maintain national secrets.

                • roguetrick
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -2ā€¢8 months ago

                  Thatā€™s the definition of a derived duty, and it isnā€™t what Iā€™d call ā€œlaw.ā€

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    3ā€¢8 months ago

                    18 usc 1924 Is a law that created a duty, a legal duty.

                    (a)

                    Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containingĀ classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

                    You say you donā€™t want to play semantics but thatā€™s your entire argument.

            • roguetrick
              link
              fedilink
              1ā€¢8 months ago

              That Iā€™ll concede. Can you guess what I meant though.

    • originalucifer
      link
      fedilink
      -5ā€¢8 months ago

      you should stop using ā€˜top secretā€™, because its almost irrelevant and bad actors are grabbing onto it like it has substance.

      hes being prosecuted for document mishandling, regardless of ā€˜top secretā€™ status. their secret status is irrelevant (technically, not morally).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2ā€¢8 months ago

        There are lists higher punishments for the level of security. There are a few excuses for this shit that somewhat make some sense, yours just now is not one of them.