Trump: ‘I’m Allowed to Do Whatever I Want’ With Classified Info

politics @lemmy.world – 483 points – 10 months ago

Trump: 'I'm Allowed to Do Whatever I Want' With Classified Info

DONALD TRUMP SAID he “absolutely” plans to testify in the federal government’s case against him regarding classified documents he removed from the White House. “I’m allowed to do whatever I want … I’m allowed to do everything I did,” the former president told conservative podcast host Hugh Hewitt.

In an interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show” that dropped Wednesday, the host asked Trump, “Did you direct anyone to move the boxes, Mr. President? Did you tell anyone to move the boxes?” referring to the boxes of more than 300 classified documents the federal government seized last year from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

“I don’t talk about anything. You know why? Because I’m allowed to do whatever I want. I come under the Presidential Records Act,” Trump replied, while also taking a quick detour to bash Hewitt. “I’m not telling you. You know, every time I talk to you, ‘Oh, I have a breaking story.’ You don’t have any story. I come under the Presidential Records Act. I’m allowed to do everything I did.”

You are viewing a single comment

View all comments Show the parent comment

That is very much not what diplomatic immunity is.

Diplomatic immunity is a principle of international law by which certain foreign government officials are not subject to the jurisdiction of local courts and other authorities for both their official and, to a large extent, their personal activities.

It's to protect diplomats from specific laws within the nations in which they serve (often religious laws).

You’re trying to tell me that no president ever did a little oopsie until trump? That’s patently ridiculous, they must have immunity or else one of them would have got in some kind of trouble. Did Jackson go to jail for doing trail of tears? No? But Trump takes a couple sheets of paper home to read on the toilet and you want to put him in jail? It’s a clear partisan bias.

No, he didn't try to tell you anything other than the fact that diplomatic immunity has nothing at all to do with the president, you moron. But, yeah, Trump didn't do "oopsies"; he knowingly and intentionally broke the law. Which, incidentally, has nothing to do with what former presidents did or did not do.

If you think other presidents didn’t all break the law I’ve got a bridge to sell you!

If you think that's what I said, I'll sell that bridge to you...

No refunds on the bridge, sorry!

Ok. I will not refund you for the purchase of your own property.

It must be very easy for you to cite examples then, yes?

Trail of Tears was a shitty thing, but it was literally not illegal, and he had the support and direction of Congress. It wasn't like, a pet project. It was a popular policy at the time and not a scandal until later.

These Indian nations, in the view of the settlers and many other white Americans, were standing in the way of progress. Eager for land to raise cotton, the settlers pressured the federal government to acquire Indian territory

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2959.html#:~:text=These%20Indian%20nations%2C%20in%20the,forceful%20proponent%20of%20Indian%20removal.

It literally was illegal, the Supreme Court said so. And Jackson said suck my nuts and did it anyway. And not only did he not get in trouble, they put him on the $20 bill. And now Trump took some papers to the bathroom with him and they want to put him in jail? Typical democrat double standards!

Lol no

Trail of Tears Time Line

The Supreme Court ruled in 1823 that the Native Americans' right of occupancy on lands in the United States was secondary to the right of discovery by the United States.

State of Georgia pushed Indian Removal

Gold was found in Northern Georgia in 1828

On May 28, 1830, the Indian Removal Act was signed into law by President Andrew Jackson

https://www.nps.gov/places/pea-ridge-trail-of-tears.htm#:~:text=Trail%20of%20Tears%20Time%20Line,discovery%20by%20the%20United%20States.&text=Georgia%20in%201828-,On%20May%2028%2C%201830%2C%20the%20Indian%20Removal%20Act%20was%20signed,law%20by%20President%20Andrew%20Jackson.

1832: Marshall infuriated Jackson by insisting that Georgia laws that purported to seize Cherokee lands on which gold had been found violated federal treaties. Jackson is famous for having responded: "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it." Although the comment is probably apocryphal, both Georgia and Jackson simply ignored the decision.

https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/history2.html#:~:text=Jackson%20is%20famous%20for%20having,Jackson%20simply%20ignored%20the%20decision.

Hurrr de durrr durrr you didn’t read far enough into the timeline I guess. You do know that the Supreme Court rules on laws after they are passed and not before, correct?

Actually you didn't read far enough. Here's the actual decision:

In Worcester, the Court ruled that only the United States, and not the individual states, had power to regulate or deal with the Indian nations.

The Court did not ask federal marshals to carry out the decision.[10] Worcester thus imposed no obligations on Jackson; there was nothing for him to enforce,[11][12] although Jackson's political enemies conspired to find evidence, to be used in the forthcoming political election, to claim that he would refuse to enforce the Worcester decision

You’re literally making excuses for crimes against humanity to own Drumpf, maybe take a step back?

I literally did the opposite of that, and called the Trail of Tears bad. My actual words:

Trail of Tears was a shitty thing, but it was literally not illegal

Things can be very, very bad, and not illegal. Chattel slavery was totally legal and not morally defensible

You called it a crime and it is not.

Do you have actual crimes, like Trump is accused of, or are you going to make up more nonsense?

The Trail of Tears was a literally crime against humanity you fucking psychopath

"Crimes against humanity" are a rhetorical device, and most assuredly weren't an actual thing in the 19th century, while chattel slavery existed.

This is why King Leopold wasn't brought up in an international court on crimes against humanity - that didn't exist.

I'm just going to assume you don't know of any actual crimes.

Why are you making excuses for slavers and genociders? Very gross

You're dumb, but even you aren't dumb enough to actually think that's what I'm saying, when my own words state the opposite.

12 more...

I already replied to you with a whole video full of examples, why are you pestering me again? https://youtube.com/watch?v=5BXtgq0Nhsc&si=bAB0syFHw1sN6g6q

Noam Chomsky is not a source lol

Reeks of desperation on your part. Let’s see your better source arguing that no presidents ever did any crimes.

I don't need to prove the negative. Burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

You’re making the extraordinary claim that no presidents have ever done a crime until now, also I’ve provided you a list of many such crimes which you are free (but not able, perhaps?) to research yourself

I didn't make any claim, and I think it's reasonable to assume some Presidents probably committed crimes. There have been a lot of them, during some very corrupt times.

What I did was ask you for examples, and you specified the last 20 years. I'd love to hear those examples.

Obama bombed a Doctors Without Borders hospital

No, Obama authorized military strikes in an active warzone and due to miscommunication - which happens often in war - a hospital was bombed.

Again, not great, and also not a crime. Bad things happen in wars.

Do you have any actual crimes to bring up?

So you support bombing hospitals?

It is illegal to bomb hospitals under international law. Obama did that and it’s pretty much impossible that it was an accident. The internationally recognized and Nobel prize winning Doctors Without Borders organization made it entirely clear what their location was, Obama decided to bomb it and they kept bombing even after being called up and informed that it was in fact a hospital being bombed. Crime against humanity.

It's illegal to intentionally bomb hospitals.

Also citation needed on "Obama decided to bomb it and they kept bombing it"

Because here are the actual facts:

On 25 November 2015, General John F. Campbell, the American commander in Afghanistan, spoke about the results of their internal investigation and described the incident as "the direct result of avoidable human error, compounded by process and equipment failures."[56] Campbell said that the internal investigation had showed that the AC-130 gunship crew misidentified the clinic as a nearby Taliban-controlled government building.[56] The American gunship had identified the building based on a visual description from Afghan troops, and did not consult their no-strike list, which included the coordinates of the hospital as provided by MSF.[56] Campbell said electronic equipment malfunctions on the gunship prevented it from accessing email and images, while a navigation error meant its targeting equipment also misidentified the target buildings.[57] The internal report states the aircraft fired 211 shells at the building in 29 minutes, before American commanders realized the mistake and ordered the attack to stop.

Bad things happen in war. That's why war sucks.

13 more...

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=5BXtgq0Nhsc&

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

13 more...

25 more...