This flows better, funnier, if you substitute 'Ora
Post# of 126911
(Total Views: 140)
Posted On: 09/22/2022 11:18:05 AM
Re: Goodspeed65 #92881
This flows better, funnier, if you substitute 'Orange Jesus' or 'Treasonous Piece of Shit' for 'Plaintiff'. 2 of the 3 judge panel are Trump appointees.
Panel in effect says 'C'mon Aileen, WTF?!
11th Circuit on "Why does Trump need classified documents?"
Lol....
For our part, we cannot discern why Plaintiff would have an
individual interest in or need for any of the one-hundred docu-
ments with classification markings. Classified documents are
marked to show they are classified, for instance, with their classifi-
cation level. ...
They are “owned by, produced by
or for, or . . . under the control of the United States Government.”
And they include information the “unauthorized disclo-
sure [of which] could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable
or describable damage to the national security.”
For this reason, a person may have access to classified information only if,
among other requirements, he “has a need-to-know the information.”
Id. § 4.1(a)(3). This requirement pertains equally to former Presidents,
unless the current administration, in its discretion,
chooses to waive that requirement.
Plaintiff has not even attempted to show that he has a need
to know the information contained in the classified documents.
Nor has he established that the current administration has waived
that requirement for these documents. And even if he had, that, in
and of itself, would not explain why Plaintiff has an individual in-
terest in the classified documents.
Plaintiff suggests that he may have declassified these docu-
ments when he was President. But the record contains no evidence
that any of these records were declassified. And before the special
master, Plaintiff resisted providing any evidence that he had declas-
sified any of these documents.See Doc. No. 97 at 2–3., Sept. 19,2022, letter from
James M. Trusty,et al., to Special Master Raymond J. Dearie, at 2–3.
In any event, at least for these purposes,
the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying
an official document would not change its content or render it per-
sonal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or
all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal
interest in them.
Panel in effect says 'C'mon Aileen, WTF?!
11th Circuit on "Why does Trump need classified documents?"
Lol....
For our part, we cannot discern why Plaintiff would have an
individual interest in or need for any of the one-hundred docu-
ments with classification markings. Classified documents are
marked to show they are classified, for instance, with their classifi-
cation level. ...
They are “owned by, produced by
or for, or . . . under the control of the United States Government.”
And they include information the “unauthorized disclo-
sure [of which] could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable
or describable damage to the national security.”
For this reason, a person may have access to classified information only if,
among other requirements, he “has a need-to-know the information.”
Id. § 4.1(a)(3). This requirement pertains equally to former Presidents,
unless the current administration, in its discretion,
chooses to waive that requirement.
Plaintiff has not even attempted to show that he has a need
to know the information contained in the classified documents.
Nor has he established that the current administration has waived
that requirement for these documents. And even if he had, that, in
and of itself, would not explain why Plaintiff has an individual in-
terest in the classified documents.
Plaintiff suggests that he may have declassified these docu-
ments when he was President. But the record contains no evidence
that any of these records were declassified. And before the special
master, Plaintiff resisted providing any evidence that he had declas-
sified any of these documents.See Doc. No. 97 at 2–3., Sept. 19,2022, letter from
James M. Trusty,et al., to Special Master Raymond J. Dearie, at 2–3.
In any event, at least for these purposes,
the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying
an official document would not change its content or render it per-
sonal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or
all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal
interest in them.
(0)
(0)