of the things that you said. now they indicted him before the 2024 presidential race. on july 21st, a recording of a conversation that he had said, quote, as president, i could have declassified it. talking about a document he was holding. now i can t. that means it wasn t declassified. but i want to move on to what s in this indictment. i m sure you ve seen the photos. saying he could is not the same as saying he didn t. there are classified documents in the bathroom. in the ballroom stage, and classified information that he we re talking about information that the united states shares with its allies, critical information strewn on the floor. does that look secure to you? again, dana, the standard is the standard. the president of the united states can classify and he can control access to national security information however he wants. that s the standard. that s the constitution. that s what the court said in
that was not justified and was taking steps to prevent that from happening with other members of the national security team. that s the background, the context. talk to me about the significance of this that you see, regarding the investigation, as you have been reporting it. yeah. i think that s exactly right. what paul said is important. the issue is trump s claim that he can declassify anything. the reporting isn t just that he acknowledges he has a classified document, but he says, i would love to get it out there but i can t because it s classified. that would indicate he knows it wasn t declassified. he has not created a different situation where the document could be released. it s important to remember that there s no evidence whatsoever by the way that he did declassify anything. there s no order that anybody has found, no memo, nobody who has come forward with a specific testimony saying, yes,
least the doj says at this point it s looking under here, espionage act, obstruction, but also the willful retention of national defense information. we were talking about this last hour and it was ellie honing s view that those documents would not need to be classified for them to qualify under that particular statute. willful retention of national defense information, which is under the espionage act. do you agree with that? i do. it s a separate statute with separate requirements than the statutes that prohibit retention of classified materials without proper clearance. you know, you have to look at these things, i think, as a floor not a ceiling when prosecutors are charging and also when you re listing statutes for something like this, a search warrant, you want to pick the section that fits your facts but is the least hard to prove. so that s what they ve done here. it s harder to prove that he took classified information because then you obviously have to prove that it was cla
sensory tools, it would find it pretty easily and quickly and tell a human helper on land that, hey, there s something over here that you should check out. how long have militaries been training dolphins? why don t we hear much about them? the u.s. started it first in the late 50s into the 60s. that program wasn t declassified until the 90s. i think the militaries are pretty sense itive about it. it has the ethical considerations of keeping the animal in an aquarium or in an amusement park. it s also the jobs that they do are relatively basic. i think there s this film in the 70s where a dolphin tried to assassinate the president and that s not really what they are used for. they are used for much more