I don't think being able to sell secrets on eBay is a bad thing. The point of secret classification isn't to restrict trusted people - but to restrict *unathorized* access. And highest person in chain of command naturally has full authority to do as he sees the situation fit
What I don't understand how it's allowed is that money earned from such ebay sell would go to private pocket instead of the government
I feel like that latter point isn't accentuated enough
This sounds like POTUS is the new Roman Emperor of our times and he / she can sell the republic or interests of its subjects to anyone as he wishes, keeping all the benefits generated for his personal fortune and distributing all the mis-fortune / longer term effects to the wider population base...
Guess what there is a name for this game, "Privatize the profits and socialize the losses".
Just because POTUS writes down classified information in his personal notes/papers does not mean the information is no longer classified. Yes, POTUS has the power to de-classify, but there's a way of doing that so everyone is aware that certain information is now public. Doing it on a whim as a CYA because someone wants to make their illegal decision legal only after it becoming publicly known it occurred is not the way of properly de-classifying something.
It looks like this stems from the Mar-a-lago raid in 2022. Did we ever find out what the president was actually squirreling away there that he wants to sell on eBay? I remember the leak at the time was that it was nuclear secrets, but I haven't really seen an update on it.
The results of that investigation were squashed by Judge Eileen Canon in Florida claiming the special prosecutor was not legal. Jack Smith has bent over backwards to not release information based on the court's decision to bar its release.
However, Trump's case against the BBC has become an interesting one. The judge overseeing this case recently stated that the BBC can call Jack as a witness potentially allowing an end run around Judge Canon's release of Jack's report.
to be honest, I wasn't even thinking in those terms. I didn't s/squash/quash/ in my head and use the wrong term. I literally was thinking the judge stomped all over the case. Is quash really the correct term here as you're implying?
We all know who Trump is. This behavior, from Trump, should shock no one by now. I'm equally upset with all those who enable him. Midterms are here, time to do the one thing we are still allowed to. Be certain, Trump will cry foul on the elections unless they go his way.
It's less about who is doing it rather than that a US president is doing it at all. Obviously, once you find the right person, things can change quickly. Finding the right person when the other two branches of government are controlled by the same party, you can speed run the end of democracy. This is the part that's really shameful to me more so than just a single megalomaniac POTUS. The fact Congress has just capitulated its duties while overtly corrupt members of SCOTUS flaunt jurisprudence is something I thought we'd never have to see.
Grump will cry foul on anything, because that's what he does. Normally this would be confined to yelling at nursing home staff for the food being too cold and having the wrong color skin. But unfortunately, there are way too many gullible fools in this country.
"Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview, at least presumptive immunity for official acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibility, and no immunity for unofficial acts".
Now, if there was any kind of consistency, there would be a ruling that the president's "personal" White House papers aren't above the law, but I expect another piece of legal Calvinball to happen again.
Ridiculous as it may be, I'm not sure the argument is incorrect under the law. The president is the ultimate classification authority. The only reason he was prosecuted for mishandling classified documents previously is because that was after he left office.
The American system of executive power needs a major rethink. For decades, Congress has given up more and more power to the executive under the assumption that the president will be a careful steward of those powers. This was a dumb decision at the time and it's made quite obvious now that an absolute cretin holds the office.
Unfortunately, I don't imagine we'll get that rethink. Instead, we'll just try to fix it by giving somebody else too much power and hoping they use it better.
The question is not around classification but of ownership and especially of the ownership of the documents after the president leaves office. The argument is that the documents generated during the presidency are the personal property of the president.
Congress created the laws which allow classification & declassification. The president is the authority over what gets classified, but should still be required to follow the procedures for doing so.
For selling his own personal documents? That's crazy talk.
Edit: This is obviously a politically charged topic, so I should be more clear. If we accept the (absurd) premise that a president can sell national secrets on eBay because they're his own personal property, I'd be mildly surprised if a court found that he had to give the proceeds to the state.
What I don't understand how it's allowed is that money earned from such ebay sell would go to private pocket instead of the government
I feel like that latter point isn't accentuated enough
However, Trump's case against the BBC has become an interesting one. The judge overseeing this case recently stated that the BBC can call Jack as a witness potentially allowing an end run around Judge Canon's release of Jack's report.
But we need to do some serious rethink and work on curbing the power of the POTUS.
"Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview, at least presumptive immunity for official acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibility, and no immunity for unofficial acts".
Now, if there was any kind of consistency, there would be a ruling that the president's "personal" White House papers aren't above the law, but I expect another piece of legal Calvinball to happen again.
The American system of executive power needs a major rethink. For decades, Congress has given up more and more power to the executive under the assumption that the president will be a careful steward of those powers. This was a dumb decision at the time and it's made quite obvious now that an absolute cretin holds the office.
Unfortunately, I don't imagine we'll get that rethink. Instead, we'll just try to fix it by giving somebody else too much power and hoping they use it better.
Edit: This is obviously a politically charged topic, so I should be more clear. If we accept the (absurd) premise that a president can sell national secrets on eBay because they're his own personal property, I'd be mildly surprised if a court found that he had to give the proceeds to the state.
Only in America.