I'm a little out of it today, and I have a question about the review of classified documents.

[LuckyCharms]

What is it, exactly, that trump and/or his lawyers need to "review", other than to confirm their classification?

If they are stamped with a classification, then they are classified, period, end of story.

Why do the details of these documents need to be revealed in discovery?

To me, the issue is the classification of the documents, not the content. Is the defense somehow trying to prove that the content of the documents are misclassified?

What am I missing? Or, am I confusing the J6 trial with the documents trial?

Thanks in advance.

[Ms. Toad]

1. If you are talking about the hearing today -

Yes, you are confusing the two trials.

[LuckyCharms]

2. When there is talk about a SCIF being created at Mar-A-Lago...

What is that related to? J6 discovery or documents trial discovery?

Thank you.

[wnylib]

7. SCIF applies only to the MAL docs case.

Restrictions being established today for the J6 case are due to Trump's threats and intimidation of witnesses and potential jurors. When SC Smith turns over info from his investigations to Trump's lawyers to prepare a defense, Smith wants restrictions on Trump's ability to reveal names and testimonies in the investigative materials. The concern is that Trump will use the info to try the case in the media and to threaten witnesses and potential jurors.

See my other post on this farther down in the thread.

[global1]

3. I Do Believe There Is Some Confusion Here RE: Document Classification &.....

the J6 case and the documents case.

Perhaps - on of the talking lawyer heads in the media can clarify this with us.

This confusion is what happens when you have such a notorious criminal - like a Tr**p. So many indictments - we can't keep track anymore.

[erronis]

4. I agree. He had classified documents and refused to return them. Easy-peasy.

I believe you are talking about needing a SCIF for him and his lawyers to confer and review documents.

A SCIF needs to be constantly monitored by trained personnel (not SS agents), otherwise it is not a SCIF.

The other question might be: How can trump actually see classified documents since he no longer has authority? He has no clearance (and couldn't get one.)

[LuckyCharms]

5. Yes, that's probably what is confusing me. Why is a SCIF needed, and

if a SCIF is needed to review classified documents, why do lawyers need to know the content of the documents if they are notated with a classification already?

[wnylib]

9. Today's meeting with Trump lawyers was NOT

about the MAL docs case. It was about the J6 case. No SCIF because J6 does not involve top secret docs.

[wnylib]

6. Your last question is right. You are

mixing up the cases. Today's meeting and decisions about the viewing of documents is for the J6 charges.

Trump's attorneys will get the info that Smith's team has collected so that the Trump attorneys can prepare a defense. The restrictions being discussed today have nothing to do with top secret docs. That is the Florida docs case.

Eventually, though, SC Smith will also have to give the Trump attorneys in the Florida case the info that he has on Trump for that case. Those docs will have to be viewed in a SCIF. The DC records are not too secret, so no SCIF. Today's restrictions in the DC case are solely due to Trump's blabbermouth attempts to intimidate witnesses and potential jurors with the names and testimony that he will receive from Smith.

[LuckyCharms]

8. Thanks, that clears a few things up. However, with regard to the documents case,

I still do not see the need for a detailed review of highly classified documents.

In my mind, a SCIF would not be needed to review the documents (in the Florida documents case), because all of the information contained in those documents should be completely redacted before any defense lawyer review.

It would make no sense to grant defense lawyers a security clearance to review the documents because all that they would need to know is that there is a cover sheet and classification stamps on the documents in question, not the contents of the documents themselves.

A cleared lawyer is not going to be able to dispute whether the information contained in the documents is indeed classified or not. That's not their area of expertise, nor is it their decision.

This is why I cannot understand why they are asking for a SCIF.

[wnylib]

11. They are asking for a SCIF because even redacted docs

can contain some sensitive info that would be harmful if viewed by the wrong people or if allowed to be accessible without the SCIF restrictions.

For example, the docs could contain info that might reveal methods of collecting info. If everything is redacted out, the docs would be blank sheets. Lawyers who see the docs would not know enough about the background to pick up on collection methods or possible agents. But, if SCIF precautions are not taken, then somebody could copy what info is not redacted and give it (or sell it) to knowledgeable persons who could decipher a lot from even a redacted doc.

The docs are so sensitive and secret that SCIF regulations cannot be relaxed or ignored.

[LuckyCharms]

12. My point is that once a document, or even a paragraph contained

within a classified document is classified, the ENTIRE document needs to be redacted. So yes, to be viewed outside of a SCIF by someone without a clearance especially, everything in the document would need to be redacted.

Sometimes, only a paragraph, or even just one word within a "classified document" is actually considered to be classified. That renders the ENTIRE document as classified, with a large stamp at the top and bottom of the page, as well as a glaring cover sheet over the document.

The issue in the Florida trial is the withholding of classified documents, not the content of the classified documents.

To simplify: Is the completely redacted document classified? If yes, did you withhold or disclose them before redaction? Oh, you did? Guilty.

[Tetrachloride]

10. LC's questions are good

What does Trump need to know from the secret documents

what he really wants his revenge

[Wonder Why]

13. In a real case, they would need to know that the government is not pulling

wool over their eyes that these are legitimately classified, not just ordinary documents with a misleading cover page.

But in this case, the only thing Trump's lawyers really need to know is how they can delay the trial by demanding more and more.

[LuckyCharms]

14. Three points:

1) Stamps and markings on a classified document would be difficult for a bad actor to fake. There are certain protocols that are followed when stamping and notating a classified document. Legitimate classification stamps cannot be bought off-the-shelf.

2) There are most likely hidden watermarks or other artifacts contained within a legitimate classified cover sheet.

3) Unless a lawyer who is specifically cleared to review a classified document is a DoD employee or similar, they wouldn't have the slightest idea if the information they are reading is classified or not.

[Wonder Why]

15. That's why I didn't say "fake". But putting a classified cover on a copy of the Constitution

would not make the document classified.

I disagree about being a "DoD employee or similar". First, not every DoD employee would be able to recognize that a document was classified. We made documents classified because the specific numbers in them made it so, not anything else. Very few persons outside or organization would recognize that. Secondly, many documents that are classified are not that hard to recognize as being classified. That's why they are viewed in a secure room. A copy of e.g., an Israeli document for an attack on Iran ought to be clear to anyone intelligent enough but that would not necessarily include Trump or his lawyers. However, they could have an "expert" of their own get permission from the special counsel to be trained as the lawyers are required to be to view the documents. Trump, of course, would need special training as, obviously, he failed that class the last time. on him.