Post #2795753

2023-06-16 09:42 UTC

@jschuh@infosec.exchange you’re mostly correct, but it’s important to remember that EOs and regulations are not laws, and do not apply to elected officials such as the President or Congress (VP is a strange case as the positions has changed over the decades). I’m confused why NARA isn’t taking the rest of the records too…virtually everything a President does in office is NARA property.

Replies (1)

@jschuh@infosec.exchange 2023-06-16 12:23

@uptill3@hacked.af I'm not sure why you have that impression, but none of that is correct. EOs are often a critical step in executing laws, and at present neither the relevant EOs nor the underlying statute make exceptions for elected officials. The DoJ does have a policy against charging a sitting president for anything, and it would be very difficult to prove an Espionage Act case against a former president for any actions they took while in office. That's why they're charging Trump only for what he did after leaving office. But there's no law, and nothing in the constitution that forbids it. The courts have also found certain applications of the Espionage Act to be unconstitutional. So, perhaps you were thinking of Gravel v. United States (1972), which held that the "Speech or Debate" clause indemnifies members of both houses for statements made from the floor, while in session. But that's actually a very narrow exception, and in any other context the liability for them is the same as anyone else. As for why NARA likely hasn't retrieved all the documents yet, it's because they still don't know exactly what Trump has and where. If they knew that, I'm sure they would have already raided every location and grabbed everything. But since Trump is a former president they're being extremely cautious and giving him an unprecedented level of deference. Were it anyone else he'd already be incarcerated, and likely giving up the remaining documents in hopes of some additional leniency on his sentence.

Open ##2795754