The Washington Post is reporting in a, so far, exclusive story that at least one nuclear document was among the documents seized at Mar-a-Lago on August 8.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/09/06/trump-nuclear-documents/
"Material on foreign nation’s nuclear capabilities seized at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago."
"A document describing a foreign government’s military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities, was found by FBI agents who searched former president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and private club last month, according to people familiar with the matter, underscoring concerns among U.S. intelligence officials about classified material stashed in the Florida property. ..."
.
It has not yet been confirmed nor denied by DoJ, but WaPo is reporting the above. They did not report in which tranche of docs it was found: basement storage room, Trump's "45 Office", Melania's lingerie drawer, the glove box on Trump's golf cart, or some other top secret storage place (inside Trump's golf club bag?).  
.
If the above is true, and REGARDLESS of how it got to M-a-L, do you think that someone should be sent to jail for the crime?  I don't care if it was low level lackey who was helping to pack up the Oval Office in Jan 2021 or a close Trump assistant specifically told to pack it in a box for M-a-L, or one of the moving men from the truck who grabbed it by mistake and shoved it in one of the boxes for shipment to FL ... even if was FPOTUS himself. And if no one will step up to take the blame for packing / shipping / storing, what about whoever withheld it from NARA or told NARA and the DoJ that there were no more confidential docs at M-a-L?
.
That's my polling Q for today: Without naming names, does someone need to go to jail for the crime of sending / storing / withholding / obstructing recovery of a top secret nuclear document at M-a-L?  
.
If the WaPo info is true, I say, "Yes."
.
.
.
.
.
(I know that Trump supporters will divert with "Not proven!" and "Criminal leaky leakers should go to jail!" and "Trump declassified it!" and "If a Dem did it, Yes; if a Rep did it, No." and so on. But my "Yes or No" Q: is "If the WaPo info is true, should someone go to jail?" Y or N?)  
.
EDIT: typos

-- Modified on 9/6/2022 10:23:26 PM

In one sentence you say “without naming names”…”at M-a-L”  then in another sentence you say “I know Trump supporters will…”  

What a nonsensical word salad post from someone we will not be following. And to answer the OP question a resounding YES.

Democrats: “oh please oh please let us find something on Trump so we can disqualify him from running in 2024 because we know he’d beat any Democrat we could put up against him. Please oh please! We’re getting desperate!”

After all, trump is the one being actively investigated by not one, not two, but three grand juries and one congressional committee. Tick tock.

The FBI has found a stolen, top secret document related to nuclear secrets in an unsecure location.  
Should the FBI investigate the matter? Y/N?
Should the party or parties responsible for taking and/or hiding the document and/or lying to the FBI about the document be prosecuted? Y/N
SHOULD SOMEONE GO TO JAIL FOR VIOLATING THE ESPIONAGE ACT, as it relates to nuclear secrets?

Because, while people do have some doubts about Biden, a majority knows Trump would be an incredible danger if let anywhere near the Oval again. Also, most folks simply don't want all the tension and drama he brings with him.

And Hillary’s already said she’s not going to run ever again. So who else do the Democrats have?

After all, you're also the guy who keeps repeating the lie that "BLM burned down half of America" among other totally wrong ideas.
Plus, Joe's on a winning streak.

I’m saying “No” until we get an acknowledgment from the DOJ that this document was actually at MAL, and then they have to figure out how it got there, who accessed it, and then press charges.

…from pissing himself whenever he tries to say hello. At this rate he’ll be confined to a wheelchair by Christmas and he’ll only be capable of moaning by spring. And that’s with him spending 80% of his time on vacation.

He's been playing hide and seek with the DOJ for months.And you are kidding with the "acknowledgment from the DOJ that this document was actually at MAL", seriously where do you think FBI got or found those doc? Or are you of the belief that the FBI planted them at MAL?
Anyways, trump had been jerking around the DOJ since the first haul of 15 boxes in January, and then going into June and finally ending in the August haul. And I bet there's still more shit he's hiding.
Remember his lawyers signed the notice in Jan that all was gone, no ore to see here...

…once say that Trump talking to his lawyers was obstruction of justice? I mean when you guys weren’t openly fantasizing about shooting him.

Key point in Imp’s original post:

yesterday that showed and described the chaos when Trump was moving out of the WH.  Many boxes were packed by staffers and it's doubtful that anyone took the time to read or catalogue the docs before putting them in boxes.  Trump thought he was still going to win the election up until a week before Biden was sworn in, so the departure was hasty and probably did not include any vetting of docs at all.  Everything from the oval office was just put into boxes and removed.  Some had already been returned to the National Archive.   Likewise, no one has alleged that Trump has reviewed any of the documents in any of the boxes since he left the WH.  It's a hard fact that ANY information contained in the documents is now outdated by at least 19 months, maybe more.  

It is also clear you have no clue about intelligence and what could be in still-classified documents. Just as Trump's declassification "process" is a joke that has been laughed at by Barr and others.

Your obsession with finding excuses to exonerate trump is pathological.  He stole government documents, carelessly stored them, refused to return any for a year,  concealed and illegally retained others,  returned some, but not all, additional documents upon subpoena. It took a court issued warrant and search of his resodence to obtain all the documents still in his possession at that location. Many documents were clearly marked Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret so whoever packed them could see those designations as could trump. Some of these secret files were found in trump's desk next to his passports so don't tell me he didn't know he had them. How many documents are still unaccounted for? Where are the documents in the empty envelopes? How many secret documents have already be seen by others? Your attempts to create imaginary scenarios that minimize the potential serious damage to our country's security is equally pathetic.

your argument that I have no clue what "could be" in those documents when neither do you?  I gave two examples of "could be's" that were on point, which is the fact that ALL of those documents were classified as to what the national security issues were 19 months ago, not what they are today.  The classification may be moot on most of them. You claim that they are "still-classified," and that Trump did NOT declassify them.  What, pray tell, is your source for THAT tidbit of information.  Maybe I missed you being appointed the special master or the judge in the case.  According to the Presidential Records Act, Trump can declassify them any time and in any manner he wants, and he can have possession of them whether they are still classified or not.  This is a nothing-burger, as will soon be shown as it plays out in the courts. That's why they are leaking info that "others" may be responsible.  They are trying to save face and hope they can convict at least one person who might have mishandled a classified document by spilling coffee on it.  Lol

False Equivalency Alert!!! I never Pretended I had a clue what "could be" intros documents. That was YOU. And your "could bes" were the sheerest of speculation. And the you ignored lots of obvious things. Like your Afghan example. Yes, we're gone (thanks to Trump!) but we certainly left behind intelligence assets. If so, Trump (in YOUR example) could easily of compromised them.
Regarding de-classification, Trump claims he did but NO ONE who worked for him ever saw him do it, or heard of it. And you DON'T declassify a document just by waving your Presidential hand over it. There's a complex process of approval and there's ZERO evidence it was ever used. You are totally WRONG t say Trump can "declassify them any time and in any manner he wants." And if proper procedure wasn't used, those document are STILL classified.
Stop making shit up.

Analysts are of the opinion that this is NOT a gov leak but has all the hallmarks of a leak from a witness. The implication is that it is probably the witness who reported the existence of the nuke doc being held at M-a-L to the FBI in the first place.

what this super-secret "complex process for approval" consists of, but you Lefties, including the fake news media keep saying there is one.  Read the Presidential Records Act, then edit your post.  

Maybe Fox News didn't mention it, but every other news source had interviews with former intel officers and Cabinet level gov officials who explained their own training: the value of the intel in the documents goes far beyond any specific tidbit of timely info. Rather, seemingly "useless" info itself could reveal the identity of a human source (spy) or technology (electronic tap) and so on.  
.
If the intel is, "Boss got bad case of diarrhea from dinner on Tuesday." and only two very close associates of the Boss even knew that, well, their ID is now blown, even if they have moved on to some other high level position. If the intel is, "From his own computer, Boss sent electronic authorization to transfer $17.5 M  to Orangeman's bank account,"  it gives away that there is a sophisticated tap on a key computer or network.

Here's a link for Mr. Can't Do Links.
It's awfully long so he probably won't read it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/20/us/politics/trump-fbi-search.html
"The Final Days of the Trump White House: Chaos and Scattered Papers."
.
"... Upstairs in the White House ***residence,*** there were, however, a few signs that Mr. Trump had finally realized his time was up. Papers he had accumulated in his last several months in office had been dropped into boxes, roughly two dozen of them, and not sent to the National Archives. Aides had even retrieved letters from Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader, and given them to Mr. Trump in the final weeks, according to notes described to The New York Times. ...]
.
***** [Trump and staff were told by WH Counsel that the papers had to go to NARA.] *****
.
"Although the White House Counsel’s Office had told Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s last chief of staff, that the roughly two dozen boxes worth of material ****in the residence**** needed to be turned over to the archives, at least some of those boxes, including those with the Kim letters and some documents marked highly classified, were shipped to Florida. There they were stored at various points over the past 19 months in different locations inside Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s members-only club, home and office, according to several people briefed on the events. ..."
.
***** [Trump and Meadows KNEW that there was a PROCESS by which to declassify documents that did not involve ESP or Magic Verbal Incantations.] *****
.
"... In Mr. Trump’s last weeks in office, Mr. Meadows, with the president’s blessing, prodded federal law enforcement agencies to declassify a binder of Crossfire Hurricane materials that included unreleased information about the F.B.I.’s investigative steps and text messages between two former top F.B.I. officials, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who had sharply criticized Mr. Trump in their private communications during the 2016 election. The F.B.I. worried that releasing more information could compromise the bureau, according to people familiar with the debate. Mr. Meadows dismissed those arguments, saying that **Mr. Trump himself wanted the information declassified** [so why didn't Trump just wave his magic wand and do so?] and disseminated, they said. ..."
.
"Just three days before Mr. Trump’s last day in office, the White House and the F.B.I. ****settled on a set of redactions,**** and Mr. Trump declassified the rest of the binder. Mr. Meadows intended to give the binder to at least one conservative journalist, according to multiple people familiar with his plan. But he reversed course after Justice Department officials pointed out that disseminating the messages between Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page could run afoul of privacy law, opening officials up to suits. ..."
.
How does ANYONE with the most minimal training to work in the WH ignore "Secret", "Top Secret", "SCI", "Return to Military Aide ..." stamped in bright colors on folders and files??? If those aides testify under oath that, "Trump told me to go to the Oval Office and bring him the Kim letters" and "Trump told me to leave the Secret folders in the boxes." will THAT satisfy you? ... ... Of course not.

I just replied, above, to CDL's "There are photos on the internet . . . ." post that Trump and Meadows KNEW that there was PROCESS for declassification. I am repeating part of it here, for emphasis:
---------------------------

has unilateral authority under Section 1.3(1) to classify documents superior to that of any other person or agency, he also has the unilateral authority to declassify documents.  You can't have one without the other.  The President, as head of the executive branch, is the final arbiter of classification or declassification.  

I disagree with your reading of 1.3(1) which says,  
"Sec. 1.3.  Classification Authority.  (a)  The authority to ***classify information originally*** may be exercised only by:
(1)  the President and the Vice President;
(2) ... [a listing of others with classification authority] ..."  
It does NOT grant DECLASSIFICATION authority in section 1.3(1)!! Neither does it say that POTUS is the "final arbiter" of classification. Read on ... there are other authorities and panels that make such FINAL decisions.
.
All of "PART 3 -- DECLASSIFICATION AND DOWNGRADING" is about DEclassification.  
.
"Sec. 3.1.  Authority for Declassification. ...  
(b)  Information shall be declassified or downgraded by: ...
(4)  officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official of the originating agency. ...
...
Sec. 3.4.  Systematic Declassification Review.  (a)  Each agency that has originated classified information under this order or its predecessors shall establish and conduct a program for systematic declassification review ..."
.
I'll see your 1.3(1) and I'll raise you 1.3(d):
"(d) All original classification authorities [which includes Pres and Vice-Pres] must receive **training in ***proper*** classification** (including the avoidance of over-classification) **and declassification** [classification and DEclassification are two separate processes] as provided in this order and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year.  ***Such training must include instruction on the **proper safeguarding of classified information** and on the sanctions in section 5.5 of this order that may be brought against an individual who fails to classify information properly or protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.*** ..."  
.
Trump has taken legal actions to prevent the disclosure of his high school and college transcripts, his SAT scores, etc.. Do you think Trump actually "passed" the training course on classification and declassification? Let's see his test results! From his first days in office, his behavior is that of someone who got an F in that training course ... if he attended to it at all.  
.
.
"Sec. 1.6.  Identification and Markings.  (a)  At the time of original classification, the following shall be indicated in a manner that is immediately apparent:  
(1)  one of the three classification levels defined in section 1.2 of this order;
...
(4)  ***declassification instructions, which shall indicate one of the following:***
(A)  the date or event for declassification, as prescribed in section 1.5(a)
[and other criteria] ..."
.
Do you think that Trump properly marked the ALLEGEDLY declassified documents?  If so, then I have a condo to sell you on the 72nd floor of Trump Tower. (Doesn't "72nd floor" sound a lot better than 52nd floor?)
.
Every legal and intel expert (including Barr) interviewed in video or print has mocked the notion that a POTUS can declassify any document, never mind BOXES of documents, with a simple declaration that, "I hereby declare you DEclassified!"

He relies on PPP cash.
He needs to, as his selective reading of gov't. rules is totally deficient.

before the Supremes, they will find that none of this following minutia limits the ability of the President to classify or declassify at will.  He is the HEAD of the executive branch.  You are arguing that a CEO of a big company is bound by the rules set up for all subordinate employees.  He's the CEO, he does what he wants because he is where the buck stops. Socialists want to always interpret language to mean that everyone is equal.  In an organization, they are not.  There are privileges and responsibilities that are endemic to EACH level of management.  People at the top are seldom subject to the same rules as the people at the bottom.  Most people in business know this.  The executive branch of the government is structured similarly when it comes to a cohesive management system.  Aren't you sorry now that you wasted your time repeating the language that is in the written guidelines for subordinates of the President?

The US Gov is NOT "Trump Org," a privately held company owned ~100% by Trump, where Trump is Pres and CEO, and where Trump can do whatever the hell he wants until the law catches up to him ... such as when Trump Org goes on trial in October for tax fraud, his Trump Org CFO already having plead guilty to tax fraud.
.
In a PUBLICLY held company -- such as "a government of the people, by the people, for the people" -- the Pres or CEO is answerable to the Board of Directors -- or the Constitution and laws the United States -- and cannot do whatever the fuck he wants. Not even if he CLAIMS he can:  
.
http://theweek.com/speedreads/854487/trump-have-article-2-where-have-right-whatever-want-president
"Trump: 'I have an Article 2 where I have the right to do whatever I want as president'."
[embedded video]
"... During a speech at Turning Point USA's Teen Action Summit, Trump played his usual hits. But while railing against the Democrats for their "witch hunt" into 2016 Russian election interference and alleged obstruction of justice, Trump mentioned that he has "an Article II," which would allow him to do whatever he pleases."
.
"TRUMP: "Then I have an Article 2, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president." (Article 2 does not in fact empower the president to do whatever they want.)"
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl_gO3uOds8
"All the times Trump said the constitution let's him do whatever he wants."

Here's an extensive analysis.

a Law Review is, don't you?  It's a forum for Law Students to postulate hypothetical arguments on any subject.  Did you also see the comments of the instructor interlineated throughout the term paper?   These are often opinions and/or corrections.  He makes the argument that an elected executive has a council (in this case, his cabinet and advisors) to help him administrate the government, which is separate from the legislative and judicial branches, but nevertheless, the council is advisory only and cannot overrule the chief executive.  You have failed to address any specific points I made, so I assume you have surrendered.  At least explain why the chief executive of the nation is any different than the chief executive of a major corporation when it comes to wielding power and authority.  Or, . . . . you can dodge or deflect if you don't have an answer.  Lol

"You DO understand" the difference between a privately held company (e.g., Trump Org), a publicly held company (e.g., Fox News, Nasdaq FOXA), and a Constitutional Republic (e.g., The United States of America), don't you? I raised the point, above, but you ignored it and chose to defend the position that "the chief executive of the nation is [not] any different than the chief executive of a major corporation when it comes to wielding power and authority." First of all, "the chief executive of a major corporation" is answerable to the Board of Directors and can be removed by that Board. The Board of Directors is "elected" by SHAREHOLDERS and they are legally required to put shareholders' interests ahead of their own. The board plays a supervisory role, overseeing corporate activities and assessing performance, including those of the CEO. So much for your claim that a CEO has some sort of Ultimate Authority.
.
Article II also requires that the President must take this oath of office: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." (which is written IN Article II).  
.
Trump is CEO of his private company Trump Org and can do whatever TRUMP wants until City, State, and Federal laws catch up to him. Trump Org has been charged with tax fraud going back at least 15 years. NYS might be able to dissolve the corporation (Trump Org) for operating "in a persistently fraudulent or illegal manner" as allowed under NYS law. (Trump Foundation, his fake charity, found guilty of fraud, was dissolved under the same law.)  
.
Publicly traded companies have removed CEOs. When CEO Roger Ailes was fired from FOX, was Fox privately held by Murdoch or had it already gone public?  Whatever, there are other cases, e.g., the Papa John's CEO who was fired.
.
The President of the US is NOT above the law, even if he claims to be and acts that way.

more boards than you have, let me augment your researched argument with an inconvenient fact.  The Board of Directors  can remove a CEO of he takes the company in a direction that the Board deems not in the interests of shareholders, but they cannot usurp or micromanage the CEO's decisions in how he runs the country.  

CEO: "I think I'll declassify our intellectual property that we haven't patented yet. It will make me look like a smart guy for hiring such smart subordinates. Trade secrets? Not once I blab about them to the competition (for some payola, of course). ... The Board might object? Fuck them!!  I'm the CEO and I have absolute authority to declassify whatever I want!"
.
CEO: "I'm tired of manufacturing jet engines. The future is in buggy whips. I'm ordering conversion of the production line from jet engines to buggy whips! ... The Board thinks that they set company policy? Fuck them!! I'm the CEO and I have absolute authority over what the company is going to do!"  
.
CEO: "I was going to enter into a business arrangement with Donald Trump but I read that he doesn't pay his vendors, he lies to his partners, cheats his investors, and he is going to get convicted of tax fraud and have his company shut down. So I decided against the deal. That makes me a GENIUS and that's why I'm CEO!"