Rep. Gaetz to File Ethics Charges Against Pelosi: ‘She Destroyed Official Records’

[Grumpy]

View attachment 145120

*Note to self: do NOT piss Gemma Rae off. Not unless you LIKE being on the receiving end of that.

You'll be fine, just don't say her name 3 times fast.

 

[awpitt]

Actually the problem is with you and that you consistently conflate things. The Congressional Record (that you linked to earlier) is the record of the events that night and a "transcript" of the delivered remarks as well as all other proceedings that night. It was not the signed "official" document itself. The signed document is what McCarthy is seeking to preserve in addition to the transcript of the event.

As has already been mentioned, the official copy of the speech was sent to the National Archives from the Office of the President. That's the copy that's maintained as the official govt copy.

 

[Ken King]

As has already been mentioned, the official copy of the speech was sent to the National Archives from the Office of the President. That's the copy that's maintained as the official govt copy.

That is the "record" required under the Presidential Documents program. As also has been mentioned is that the copies given to the VP and Speaker are official copies too. Your continued denial that those additional copies are not official documents is unfounded.

 

[Hijinx]

Isn't an official copy of a document that has the presidents personal signature on it an official document.

Does the law say you can tear up copies of official documents OFICIALLY PRESENTED to you?

 

[GWguy]

Isn't an official copy of a document that has the presidents personal signature on it an official document.

Does the law say you can tear up copies of official documents OFICIALLY PRESENTED to you?

Seems lots of official documents have been put thru shredders without many arrests.

 

[Clem72]

It is not.


It is required to be given to the Congress, which Trump did. That's why it is in the Congressional Record and the official document submitted to the National Archives.

You are incorrect, as any number of people on this board who have had to take years of annual Federal Records Keeping training can attest.

Not only does this constitute a federal record, but more specifically it is a "Presidential Record"

(2) The term "Presidential records" means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President. Such term--

(A) includes any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the President or members of the President’s staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President; but

(B) does not include any documentary materials that are (i) official records of an agency (as defined in section 552(e) of title 5, United States Code; (ii) personal records; (iii) stocks of publications and stationery; or (iv) extra copies of documents produced only for convenience of reference, when such copies are clearly so identified.

And before you try to claim this specific document falls under (2)(B)(iv) - This document isn't "only" for convenience of reference, as it is signed and required as part of "official or ceremonial duties of the President". The other copies distributed to congress may well be exempted.

I know you don't actually care enough to educate yourself, but it's easy enough to google the Federal Records Act and the regulations empowered by that act.

 

[awpitt]

..................

Our Verify researchers spoke with two legal experts, who explain Pelosi didn’t violate the U.S. Code.

Victoria Nourse with Georgetown Law explains the state of the union isn’t quote “filed or deposited” officially with the Speaker or Vice President Pence, they just get a copy.

It’s the President’s copy that’s the official Presidential Record that goes to the National Archive, and Pelosi ripped her own copy not his.

"The SOTU is a Presidential Record which must go to the National Archives under the Presidential Records Act," Nourse said. "She did not mutilate the record that is filed with the Archive. If the statute were not read this way, then any copy of the SOTU held by anyone could never be destroyed."

National Archives confirmed they will receive the President’s copy for preservation as a permanent record, and provided the following statement:

"The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) preserves and provides access to the permanent records of Federal Agencies and the President in accordance with laws and regulations that govern the disposition of those records. Although NARA also holds the historical records of the House and Senate, those records remain the legal property of the respective Chambers. The rules governing those records are not determined by federal laws or overseen by NARA, but rather by each Chamber's agreed-upon rules. While NARA does not have information about the record status of Speaker Pelosi’s copy of the speech, NARA will receive the President’s version for preservation as a permanent record in accordance with the Presidential Records Act.”

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/...peech/65-4cafa72a-a5e2-4629-881f-e7d5a5754a42

Trump says it's 'illegal' for Pelosi to tear up his State of the Union address. Experts say that's not true

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ar-up-speech-but-experts-disagree/4691243002/

Trump said Pelosi "broke the law" by ripping her copy of his speech.

That’s not how the law in question works. The copy Pelosi tore was not the official document that would be shipped to the National Archives for preservation.

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...-trump-says-nancy-pelosis-speech-tear-was-il/