Comments by "" (@JohnDoe-ew3xt) on "‘The truth is coming out’ about the Bidens, DOJ, FBI: Republican lawmaker" video.

  1. 3
  2. 2
  3. 1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6.  @jamescrosby3193  what felony??? what crime??? this is covered by the presidential records act! precedence has already been set by the clinton sock drawer case!!! Jackson, who was nominated to the bench by former President Barack Obama. According to the decision, the plaintiffs asked the court “to declare audiotapes created by former President William Jefferson Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during the Clinton administration to be ‘Presidential records’ under the Presidential Records Act (‘PRA’) and to order defendant ‘to assume custody and control’ of them and deposit them in the Clinton Presidential Library.” Berman Jackson ruled: The Court will grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) because plaintiff’s claim is not redressable. NARA does not have the authority to designate materials as ‘Presidential records,’ NARA does not have the tapes in question, and NARA lacks any right, duty, or means to seize control of them. In other words, there has been no showing that a remedy would be available to redress plaintiff’s alleged injury even if the Court agreed with plaintiff’s characterization of the materials. Since plaintiff is completely unable to identify anything the Court could order the agency to do that the agency has any power, much less, a mandatory duty, to do, the case must be dismissed. According to Berman Jackson’s ruling, “even if the Court were inclined to agree with plaintiff’s reassessment of President Clinton’s decision, it would not alter the conclusion that the injury cannot be redressed: the PRA does not confer any mandatory or even discretionary authority on the Archivist to classify records. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the President.” Berman Jackson wrote, “Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal record.”
    1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1