Jim Jordan's latest defense of Trump's document stash shredded by Watergate prosecutor

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) claims that a Supreme Court decision from over 30 years ago grants former President Donald Trump a blank check to do whatever he wants with classified information, eliminating any basis for a criminal indictment against him under the Espionage Act.

But not so fast, said CNN anchor Jake Tapper and former Watergate prosecutor Nick Akerman on Monday — that's not actually what the case says.

"The standard is clear," said Jordan in a clip played by CNN. "The standard is Navy v. Egan, 1988 case, unanimous decision from the court that Justice Blackman wrote the opinion. It said the president's ability to classify and control access to national security information flows from the Constitution. He decides. He alone decides. He said he declassified this material. He can put it wherever he wants. He can handle it however he wants. That's the law."

"Now, it is true that oft-cited 1988 Supreme Court case says it's the sitting president's authority to, quote, 'classify and control access to information bearing national security,'" said Tapper. "But there are a few issues with what the chairman there is saying. First of all, Navy v. Egan isn't really a case about a president's authority to declassified documents. That sentence is merely background in a case about a Navy contractor who lost his job because his security clearance had been revoked. That narrow case is what the court decided on unanimously. And perhaps more importantly, Chairman Jordan conveniently glossed over the damning evidence that suggests that Mr. Trump knew he could but did not declassify these documents while he was president. There's no evidence that we've seen at all that he declassified any of these documents while he was president."

Akerman, invited onto the segment, agreed with this assessment.

"[Navy v. Egan] has absolutely nothing to do with Trump's situation," said Akerman. "All it stands for is this poor guy, Egan, who had a criminal record and a drinking problem was denied a security clearance to work on the Triton submarine program. It has nothing to do with what Trump did. In fact, what it does say, it warns about giving untrustworthy people access to classified information, which applies in spades to Donald Trump. If you look at what he did with this material after he was president, that he held onto it when he had no right to do it, that he basically put it in his bathroom and in his living quarters, and essentially lied and orchestrated a lie to keep the government from getting this stuff back. This case has absolutely nothing to do with any of these issues. In fact, it wasn't even unanimous. I think there were four dissents in the case. It has to do with whether or not this poor guy who couldn't get a clearance could appeal it."

Watch the segment below or at this link.

Jake Tapper and Nick Akerman debunk Jim Jordan's defense of Trumpwww.youtube.com