Read on Twitter
Judge Amy Jackson ruled that “control over presidential records rests SQUARELY in the hands of a FORMER PRESIDENT.”
“A former president CAN KEEP WHATEVER presidential records he wants and the government has NO AUTHORITY to seize them. Period.”
- Judge Amy Berman Jackson
1/7
“A former president CAN KEEP WHATEVER presidential records he wants and the government has NO AUTHORITY to seize them. Period.”
- Judge Amy Berman Jackson
1/7
Judge Jackson adopted the very argument made in court by the Justice Department: “National Archives DOES NOT have the authority to designate materials as presidential records. It LACKS ANY RIGHT, DUTY, or MEANS to SEIZE control of them:” That: —
2/7
2/7
(Seizing the records) is an ‘extraordinary request’ that is “UNFOUNDED, contrary to the Presidential Records Act’s express terms, and contrary to the traditional principles of administrative law.”
Finally, Judge Jackson’s opinion reinforces the CONSTRAINTS on the —
3/7
Finally, Judge Jackson’s opinion reinforces the CONSTRAINTS on the —
3/7
National Archives and the Justice Department. Their ability to retrieve documents is LIMITED TO a civil action, NOT CRIMINAL seizure.
That was the Department of Justice’s legal opinion for over a decade.
It was a conclusion shared by both the National Archives and a U.S —
4/7
That was the Department of Justice’s legal opinion for over a decade.
It was a conclusion shared by both the National Archives and a U.S —
4/7
District Court in Washington D.C. On that basis, ex-president @BillClinton was allowed to maintain custody of -
whatever he wanted, including allegedly CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS and AUDIO TAPES that he stored IN HIS HOME.
If Trump declassified the documents in question as —
5/7
whatever he wanted, including allegedly CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS and AUDIO TAPES that he stored IN HIS HOME.
If Trump declassified the documents in question as —
5/7
he claims, then this ENTIRE controversy is about custody of presidential papers under the meaning of the Presidential Records Act.
As the Clinton case underscores, these kinds of disputes belong in CIVIL COURT. But Garland and the FBI took a different course. Why? The —
6/7
As the Clinton case underscores, these kinds of disputes belong in CIVIL COURT. But Garland and the FBI took a different course. Why? The —
6/7
answer should be obvious to any reasonable observer. #WitchHunt
President Trump deserves the SAME EQUAL PROTECTIONS under the same laws as Clinton, Bush and Obama PERIOD
7/7
thegreggjarrett.com/the-brief-it-w…
President Trump deserves the SAME EQUAL PROTECTIONS under the same laws as Clinton, Bush and Obama PERIOD
7/7
thegreggjarrett.com/the-brief-it-w…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
