Interesting conversation with ChatGPT on Trump's beliefs regarding taking NDI docs

Trump has been exclaming, on TV, that he 'has every right to take national defense information (NDI) documents from their secure locations if he wants to, and he cites that the authority for his belief is the Presidential Records Act. In point of fact, the PRA does not authorize him to do this. Trump's logic is that if he has the right to declassify, at the time he is taking them he is asserting he has declassified them (without any process, but with his 'thoughts') therefore since they are not classified at that juncture, he can take them.

However, this is a huge misundertanding by Trump. A violation of the Espionage Act, which is what his deeds of taking the docs violated, does NOT depend on any classification regime. The law was enacted before there even existed a classification regime and has not been amended to include them. What will contribute to the seriousness of the theft are DNI (Director of National Intelligence) damage assessments of the documents he took, and even if they were declassified, he still can't take them. Classified or not, they are, per the Presidential Records Act, the property of the US Government.

But, but the more important questions are regarding what is the DOJ policy on prosecution? Okay......

I asked ChatGPT the following questions (words in brackets were not presented to nor given by the Chat). :

Patricio: Does the Presidential Records Act authorize the president to declassify documents at will, without a formal process, even by the President 'thinking it'?

ChatGPT: No, the Presidential Records Act (PRA) does not authorize the president to declassify documents at will or by simply thinking it. The PRA is a federal law that governs the management and preservation of presidential records generated during a president's time in office. It establishes that presidential records are the property of the United States government and should be preserved and made available to the public after a certain period.

Declassification of documents, on the other hand, falls under the authority of executive orders and other statutes specifically related to classification and declassification. The president does have the authority to declassify certain documents, but this power is typically exercised through established processes and procedures. The specific procedures for declassifying documents can vary depending on the nature of the information, the agencies involved, and the applicable executive orders or statutes.

It is important to note that even though the president has the authority to declassify documents, this authority is not unlimited. There are still considerations of national security, ongoing investigations, and other factors that may restrict or limit the declassification of certain information.

Patricio: Which law states that it is illegal to remove national defense information documents from their secure locations.?

ChatGPT: The specific law you are referring to is the Espionage Act of 1917, which encompasses various provisions related to the mishandling, removal, or disclosure of national defense information. Under this act, it is illegal to remove national defense documents from their secure locations without authorization.

Patricio: What is the DOJ policy regarding prosecuting those who take them inadvertently but who do return them when the government requests them returned? [This is the case with Biden and Pence]

ChatGPT: Regarding the Department of Justice's (DOJ) policy on prosecuting individuals [Biden and Pence] who inadvertently take national defense information but later return it when requested by the government, it ultimately depends on the specific circumstances and facts of each case. Generally, the DOJ considers factors such as intent, willfulness, and the overall impact of the actions [i.e., the DNI damage assessments] when deciding whether to prosecute. In cases where the individual's actions were unintentional, and they promptly return the documents when requested, the DOJ may exercise discretion and determine that prosecution is not warranted. However, this is a decision made on a case-by-case basis.

Patricio: What is the DOJ Policy regarding prosecuting those who knowingly, wilfully, though with a mistaken understanding of the Presidential Records Act, and use deceptive tactics to avoid returning them when the Government requests them by subpoena? [This is the case with Trump]

ChatGPT: Regarding the DOJ's policy on prosecuting individuals who knowingly and willfully avoid returning national defense documents when requested by subpoena, the DOJ takes a more serious view. If someone knowingly and willfully disregards a subpoena and uses deceptive tactics to avoid returning the documents, they may face criminal charges for obstruction of justice or contempt of court, depending on the specific circumstances. The DOJ generally views such actions as serious offenses, as they undermine the legal process and hinder the government's ability to conduct investigations.

It's important to note that the specific policies and practices of the DOJ can evolve over time, so it's always best to consult the most up-to-date information or consult legal professionals for specific cases or situations.

Now, some of you will attempt to poo poo the Chat because it gets answers wrong. Yes, it does, but only occasionally, and it so states this on the caveat on the home page of Chat so the point is one must fact check all data points. I did, and each answer, in my view, is correct.

In my view, given that there is now a tape of Trump having a NDI document in hand, where he admits he took it, plus his other statements on TV that "per the PRA, he has every right to take them' (which is wrong) we have conclusive evidence he knowingly, willfully, took them. And then we have evidence (testimonies of employees close to the action) of his using deceptive tactics to avoid giving them to the Government after a subpoena was issued, a subpoena of which was issued because he was stonewalling the government on returning them.This reveals 'mens rea'. in my opinion.

In my view, Trump's goose is cooked.

 

This was decided already in 2012 ... so anything they think they have on him is only a political hack job..
the judge ruled Clinton could keep any records he wants... so can Trump... Biden was only a VP
Judge Amy Jackson ruled in 2012 that a president's discretion to declare records "personal" is far-reaching and mostly unchallengeable.
video here
https://justthenews.com/politics-po...-tapes-bill-clintons-sock-drawer-could-impact
https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-co.../JW-v-NARA-Clinton-Tapes-transcript-01834.pdf
https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1560234754292813827

 

Just the News and Judicial Watch are questionable sources.

Polls have no legal bearing on anything.

Cases having to do with PRA are ruled on a case by case basis, and none of the JW v NARA applies to SC's investigation.

However, violation of the Espionage act does not depend on ANY classification scheme, it depends largely on a number of factors inclusive of DNI damage assessments.

That a president might deem something as 'personal' or 'declassified' does not exempt him from an Espionage violation, should other factors including DNI damage assessments warrant it.

 

ChatGPT lies:


Lawyer in Huge Trouble After He Used ChatGPT in Court and It Totally Screwed Up - ChatGPT made up court cases and fabricated quotes in legal filing. Aficionados of Lying Fake news are impressed by such..

Biden Flops:

If I want to read false docs about Trump, I'll download false claims from the FBI.

 

@Patricio Da Silva I know this is somewhat off-topic and I don't want to make a big thing about it but the fundamental misrepresentation of what chatbots like ChatGPT actually are needs stamping out before it gets embedded in the public perception;

You're not having a conversation with it. You're essentially just using an overly complex search engine with a couple of extra steps.

 

Hi, HonestJoe.

The concept of AI can get rather fuzzy about the edges. Patricio Da Silva could perhaps be excused in this instance for using a literary device to enhance the reading experience of his/her post. Meanwhile, consider what differences, if any, there are between this use of ChatGPT [A literary persona engaged in conversation,] and a research librarian asked the same questions. Fuzzy, nu?

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

Let us know when Chat takes the place of the supreme court. At that time we can take it seriously.

 

@Patricio Da Silva


The court decision stands and Trump declassified the documents before he left office…

Keep spinning my liberal friend…. Just the news is a very credible source as Judicial Watch was also in with that…. They do something your fake CNN and WaPo do not….. actually provide documents and actual people involved speaking on camera.

 

I find it interesting that people are already using AI as a source of debate. Ask ChatGPT if it’s scientifically possible for a man to become a woman.

 

That is false. Since AI is not a sentient being, it cannot possess the 'intent to decieve via falsity' required of that allegation.

Does it get facts wrong? Occasionally , and it says so on the caveat section on the home page of the app and thus to do your homework.

Most of the time, it is accurate, and I do fact check all data points.

That's the fault of the person prompting Chat. You have to specify 'do not add fiction to the output". There is an art called 'prompt engineering' and you must learn that particular art, and learn Chat's idiosyncrasies. Moreover ChatGPT-4 is far better than ChatGPT-3, and the next incarnation will be even better. To access Chat-4 you have to subscribe.

ChatGPT, when asked, will tell you it would be foolish to use it for legal advice, to fact check all data points, and one should never use it for real time arguments.

What ChatGPT is very good at, is summarizing texts, and critiquing them for there strengths and weakness, logical fallacies, etc.

"fake news" is a thought terminating cliché, which has no argumentative value.

There is plenty of good evidence against Trump. But he will have his day in court.

"The feds are coming for trump, and he is going to jail" --Ty Cobb, Trump's former lawyer.



\

 

been hearing that for 7 years, doesn't it get old?

 

What a lot of folks do not understand about ChatGPT is that it is idiosyncratic. The caliber of it's output is commensurate with the caliber of the prompt (the word for 'input' on chat).. The more robust the prompt, the more robust the output will be.

Prompt engineering is becoming a new field, because of this. Some are better at it than others. There are many how-to videos on this subject on YouTube.

Bing/Microsoft Edge, now incorporate Chat in it's search engine (if you have a microsoft account), and unlike the app version, which has a database cut off date of 2021, The Chat in Bing can access the internet for up to date information. However, there are some things that the Bing ChatGPT can't do that the app version can (it doesn't evaluate text like the app version does).

 

You never heard it from a Trump lawyer. That's why I quoted it.

 

If and when I use it for legal advice, I'll let you know. But, legal advice, as it states when queried, is not what it is designed to do.

It says right on the home page 'fact check data'.

But Chat is good at is evaluating texts, their strength and weaknesses, logical fallacies, etc., which is not needed for SC stuff, just arguing on the net.

 

I am still not sure that this is a case worth pursuing very far from a prosecutorial view. I see a legal problem for Trump that will require a substantial plea deal at most. His hair will not blend with his clothing .

 

ChatGTP does about as good as any librarian, when evaluating the caliber of one's essay, argument, etc.

And, FYI, I'm a he, the 'o' at the end of the first name should tip you off, if you know spanish/portuguese.

Though, a masculine avatar is no assurance of gender, of course.

 

I was an engineer by profession. Any software had to be checked and rechecked and then no changes could be made without going through a lengthy change process. ChatGTP has not gone through any such process. There is no guarantee of accuracy. As someone suggested, you should use original links so we can check the reliability of your sources.

 

Chat is woke on that one. I disagree with Chat on this issue. All Transfemales are effeminate males, in my view. Gender and Sex are the same thing, in my view.

Question:
Is it scientifically possible for a man to become a woman?

ChatGPT
Yes, it is scientifically possible for a person assigned male at birth to transition and live as a woman.

Ahh, here Chat is splitting hairs. but to 'live as a woman' does not equal 'become a real woman'.

The process of transitioning typically involves a combination of social, medical, and psychological steps to align a person's gender identity with their physical appearance and social role.

Gender identity is a deeply ingrained sense of being male, female, or something else, and it may not necessarily align with the sex assigned at birth. For individuals who experience gender dysphoria, a condition where there is a distressing incongruence between their gender identity and their assigned sex, transitioning can be an important and affirming step towards living in alignment with their identity.

Medical interventions such as hormone replacement therapy (HRT) can be a part of the transition process for individuals seeking to change their physical appearance. Hormone therapy can help develop secondary sexual characteristics, such as breast development, redistribution of body fat, and changes in body hair growth patterns, that are more consistent with their gender identity.

Gender-affirming surgeries, such as genital reconstruction surgery (also known as gender confirmation surgery or sex reassignment surgery), are also available options for those who desire them. These surgeries aim to create physical characteristics that are more congruent with an individual's gender identity.

It is important to note that the process of transitioning is highly individual and can vary in terms of the specific steps taken, timing, and personal choices. The medical and scientific understanding of gender identity has advanced over time, and healthcare professionals work with individuals seeking to transition to provide appropriate care and support based on best practices and evidence-based guidelines.

 

Not surprised that it would be you defending fabricating court cases and quotes in order to falsely support a position.

 

Now, that is a text book example of a strawman argument

Well, I'm not surprised you accuse me of something I clearly did not do.

If you believe otherwise, provide the quote there I defend fabricating court cases and quotes in order to falsely support a position.

I'll be waiting.

 

kriman, it says right on the home page of the app:

ChatGPT may produce inaccurate information about people, places, or facts.

What that means, Kriman, is 'fact check data'.

However, ChatGPT passed the medical exam:

AI doctor will see you now: ChatGPT takes medical exams | Cybernews

So, overall, it's fairly accurate.

 

They have some mighty strong evidence now. But, there's the 1/6 investigation, there's the Fulton County indictment expected in August, and the 34 felony counts in NY.

IF he escapes jail after all that, a lot of liberals are going to be pissed.

 

Its that Fulton County and 1/6 investigations that really interest me. If I were a prosecutor, I would see some real public policy reasons to pursue those cases even without a clear winning hand. Those crimes are well worth discouraging for a very long time and even losing prosecutions have sufficient negative consequences donw the road to press hard. But time is not an ally in any of these cases. Trump is an old ,very wealthy, and connected man who can depend on hung juries and appeals to keep him going. I seriously doubt that this man is going to spend a night in jail, and I don't think its nessisarily going to be a prosecutor's fault when he doesn't. These are complex legal matters that will offer A LOT of avenues for appeal and a lot of opportunities for Monday Morning quarterbacking. No prosecution is perfect, no case is without its screw-ups

 

You are the one who was saying how great it is and pushing it off as gospel.

 

I already provided the link to the info, if you want more, do your own damn work. But, since I'm a great guy, I'll give you a running start.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chatgpt+cited+false+cases+and+made+up+quotes+in+legal+pleading&ia=web