Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

jBeavertonduck wrote:
Once again, I ask: Who has the authority to tell a President of the United States what he can and can not declassify?
How can a bureaucrat tell the President of the United States what documents he can and can not have?
You do realize that the documents in question are also kept in digital form by the government.

Oh this one is easy: Unelected faceless employees in the 'intelligence community' should be in charge of those records, not the President of the United States. Duh, everyone knows that. Who do you think is the power behind classifying documents in the first place? That power clearly originates with a national archives employee, not a President.

jBeavertonduck wrote:

Phalanx wrote:

dd10snoop28 wrote:There may be a pretty good chance this thing doesn't even get to the jury. The defense is going (and I think already has) to be petitioning to dismiss due to multiple instances of prosecutorial misconduct. If even a couple of those allegations are accepted by the court then I don't see this getting to the jury trial. My non expert legal analysis.

Just because the jury was never told about the Presidential Records Act or the clear precedent in the Clinton sock-drawer case, I don't see what the big deal is. Trump clearly refused to surrender records that have never been demanded of any ex-president before, and he should spend the rest of his life in jail for it.

Once again, I ask: Who has the authority to tell a President of the United States what he can and can not declassify?
How can a bureaucrat tell the President of the United States what documents he can and can not have?
You do realize that the documents in question are also kept in digital form by the government.

Reread phalanx's post, but from a satirical perspective.

dd10snoop28 wrote: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/ex-tr ... number-up/

2-minute video between Tim Parlatore and Andrew Weissman. Absolute gold given Weissman's background.

...uh We'd love to keep talking to you, but my producer is frantically giving the 'kill' sign...

Phalanx wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:
Once again, I ask: Who has the authority to tell a President of the United States what he can and can not declassify?
How can a bureaucrat tell the President of the United States what documents he can and can not have?
You do realize that the documents in question are also kept in digital form by the government.

Oh this one is easy: Unelected faceless employees in the 'intelligence community' should be in charge of those records, not the President of the United States. Duh, everyone knows that. Who do you think is the power behind classifying documents in the first place? That power clearly originates with a national archives employee, not a President.

Once again, I have been proven wrong. Personally I sleep better at night knowing that there are unelected government employees with authority to keep our President from running off the rails because "Orange Man Bad"!!.

I think that it's pretty evident, given the stellar job that our Government did preserving our Bill of Rights protections throughout the pandemic, that Big Brother knows best. As per the mountains of evidence we have been given that the Jab was a spectacular success, I'm going to set up a regular appointment with my doctors office. Every three or four weeks I'll be getting another Covid Jab. Don't forget, until we're all vaccinated, none of us are safe, once you get the jab, you won't acquire or transmit the horrible deadly plague with a 99%++ survival rate.

jBeavertonduck wrote:

Phalanx wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:
Once again, I ask: Who has the authority to tell a President of the United States what he can and can not declassify?
How can a bureaucrat tell the President of the United States what documents he can and can not have?
You do realize that the documents in question are also kept in digital form by the government.

Oh this one is easy: Unelected faceless employees in the 'intelligence community' should be in charge of those records, not the President of the United States. Duh, everyone knows that. Who do you think is the power behind classifying documents in the first place? That power clearly originates with a national archives employee, not a President.

Once again, I have been proven wrong. Personally I sleep better at night knowing that there are unelected government employees with authority to keep our President from running off the rails because "Orange Man Bad"!!.

I think that it's pretty evident, given the stellar job that our Government did preserving our Bill of Rights protections throughout the pandemic, that Big Brother knows best. As per the mountains of evidence we have been given that the Jab was a spectacular success, I'm going to set up a regular appointment with my doctors office. Every three or four weeks I'll be getting another Covid Jab. Don't forget, until we're all vaccinated, none of us are safe, once you get the jab, you won't acquire or transmit the horrible deadly plague with a 99%++ survival rate.

*this post has been removed due to violation of our terms and services and our policy on misinformation, which was put into place due to pressures exerted on us by the same federal agencies that you are referring to in your post*

dd10snoop28 wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:

Phalanx wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:
Once again, I ask: Who has the authority to tell a President of the United States what he can and can not declassify?
How can a bureaucrat tell the President of the United States what documents he can and can not have?
You do realize that the documents in question are also kept in digital form by the government.

Oh this one is easy: Unelected faceless employees in the 'intelligence community' should be in charge of those records, not the President of the United States. Duh, everyone knows that. Who do you think is the power behind classifying documents in the first place? That power clearly originates with a national archives employee, not a President.

Once again, I have been proven wrong. Personally I sleep better at night knowing that there are unelected government employees with authority to keep our President from running off the rails because "Orange Man Bad"!!.

I think that it's pretty evident, given the stellar job that our Government did preserving our Bill of Rights protections throughout the pandemic, that Big Brother knows best. As per the mountains of evidence we have been given that the Jab was a spectacular success, I'm going to set up a regular appointment with my doctors office. Every three or four weeks I'll be getting another Covid Jab. Don't forget, until we're all vaccinated, none of us are safe, once you get the jab, you won't acquire or transmit the horrible deadly plague with a 99%++ survival rate.

*this post has been removed due to violation of our terms and services and our policy on misinformation, which was put into place due to pressures exerted on us by the same federal agencies that you are referring to in your post*

Well, damn. That's okay, I know that our Government has nothing but the best interests of taxpaying Americans regardless of party affiliation at heart.

jBeavertonduck wrote:

dd10snoop28 wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:

Phalanx wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:
Once again, I ask: Who has the authority to tell a President of the United States what he can and can not declassify?
How can a bureaucrat tell the President of the United States what documents he can and can not have?
You do realize that the documents in question are also kept in digital form by the government.

Oh this one is easy: Unelected faceless employees in the 'intelligence community' should be in charge of those records, not the President of the United States. Duh, everyone knows that. Who do you think is the power behind classifying documents in the first place? That power clearly originates with a national archives employee, not a President.

Once again, I have been proven wrong. Personally I sleep better at night knowing that there are unelected government employees with authority to keep our President from running off the rails because "Orange Man Bad"!!.

I think that it's pretty evident, given the stellar job that our Government did preserving our Bill of Rights protections throughout the pandemic, that Big Brother knows best. As per the mountains of evidence we have been given that the Jab was a spectacular success, I'm going to set up a regular appointment with my doctors office. Every three or four weeks I'll be getting another Covid Jab. Don't forget, until we're all vaccinated, none of us are safe, once you get the jab, you won't acquire or transmit the horrible deadly plague with a 99%++ survival rate.

*this post has been removed due to violation of our terms and services and our policy on misinformation, which was put into place due to pressures exerted on us by the same federal agencies that you are referring to in your post*

Well, damn. That's okay, I know that our Government has nothing but the best interests of taxpaying Americans regardless of party affiliation at heart.

*Unbanned*

dd10snoop28 wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:

dd10snoop28 wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:

Phalanx wrote:

jBeavertonduck wrote:
Once again, I ask: Who has the authority to tell a President of the United States what he can and can not declassify?
How can a bureaucrat tell the President of the United States what documents he can and can not have?
You do realize that the documents in question are also kept in digital form by the government.

Oh this one is easy: Unelected faceless employees in the 'intelligence community' should be in charge of those records, not the President of the United States. Duh, everyone knows that. Who do you think is the power behind classifying documents in the first place? That power clearly originates with a national archives employee, not a President.

Once again, I have been proven wrong. Personally I sleep better at night knowing that there are unelected government employees with authority to keep our President from running off the rails because "Orange Man Bad"!!.

I think that it's pretty evident, given the stellar job that our Government did preserving our Bill of Rights protections throughout the pandemic, that Big Brother knows best. As per the mountains of evidence we have been given that the Jab was a spectacular success, I'm going to set up a regular appointment with my doctors office. Every three or four weeks I'll be getting another Covid Jab. Don't forget, until we're all vaccinated, none of us are safe, once you get the jab, you won't acquire or transmit the horrible deadly plague with a 99%++ survival rate.

*this post has been removed due to violation of our terms and services and our policy on misinformation, which was put into place due to pressures exerted on us by the same federal agencies that you are referring to in your post*

Well, damn. That's okay, I know that our Government has nothing but the best interests of taxpaying Americans regardless of party affiliation at heart.

*Unbanned*

Whew!!!!

The current president participating in bribery scheme with foreign governments.

The former president acting as a foreign agent for the Russians.

Which one has more evidence to support?

dd10snoop28 wrote:If people really think an orange man wields any power to do any good (or bad) in this country, you are not well informed:
-His own administration willfully withheld and lied about information and sources that would have revealed the dossier as not having any basis in truth.
-His own administration (CISA/FBI) worked directly with large tech companies to censor/shut-down influential accounts that didn't fit narratives in opposition to the president, leading up to the election.

Well, as should be well-known to most, the censorship of tech companies by the federal government continued into the current administration and was amplified to a level probably never seen before.

The expansiveness of censorship and suppression of free speech is detailed in this thread, which is a summary of the injuction issued by a federal judge last week prohibiting the suppression of free speech by the federal gov't:
https://twitter.com/tracybeanz/status/1 ... 9326429188

Here is a link to the 155-page induction instituted by the federal judge (if you have a few minutes, read pages 2-3 where the judge gives a rudimentary historical background of the 1st amendment):
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 93.0_1.pdf

To summarize: countless federal agencies used their positions of power to either pressure and/or directly command tech companies to suppress speech which they found to be unfavorable to the views of the federal government.

NOTE: this is nothing new. The West has moved shockingly fast in the past 3 years to create an infrastructure that restricts speech. The EU just issued a report where they are planning to institute safeguards to prevent "misinformation" in the public sphere. The Western ideal of individualism and freedom is dead.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither"

dd10snoop28 wrote:

He's been impeached twice (for good reason)

Saying things don't make them true. You either have not taken the time to discover the facts or are relying on your information from mainstream media. They impeached the former president over the Ukraine deal for doing what the derelict DOJ/FBI failed to do by ignoring the previous crimes committed by the previous VP, who unlawfully threatened funds from Ukraine to have them shut-down an investigation into a Ukrainian energy firm that was paying the VP's family millions of $. It's the same thing that happened with the Russian collusion hoax. The former Secretary of State initiated the hoax, and instead of investigating the former secretary, the intelligence community willingly - and with intent - investigated the person that the lies were made about (former president).

It's all playing out in front of the public now... 3 years too late.

Not that certain members of the public will continue in lock step, or anything of that nature... (Tongue pressed painfully in cheek!)

Almost football season!

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/s ... ctment.pdf

Fun read.

Basically the indictment lays the framework for charging every single person who challenges the legitimacy of an election. Seems like a good precedent. Too bad we can't go back to all the Dem/Rep politicians and media figureheads that challenged election integrity in 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2016.

At this point it's probably like Cub Scout badges for him.