How does this resolve now we know the information was stored in multiple locations at various times?

@MartinRandall Supposedly secure room includes a restroom. Does it resolve YES if he let a visitor use it but did not go into the restroom with them?

Claim that Trump showed classified docs to donors could be what brings him down: former FBI agent - Raw Story - Celebrating 19 Years of Independent Journalism

@BTE what's your plan for resolution in the no-case? Like, nobody's gonna publish articles that say "the surveillance footage does not show trump taking friends/guests into the room". The question mentions "if we find out the alarming information discovered in the video as something other than Trump taking people into the supposedly secure room." but I think it's pretty easy to imagine a world where that also doesn't happen definitively and the video gets quietly brushed aside by both sides (e.g. if there's no illegal content in the video, but the contents of the video are politically damaging to trump, such that neither side has incentive to talk about it)

no news is NO news 😉

seems like there's a decent possibility that it's not directly to do with unauthorized access to that room (e.g. some other alarming thing) or that it is to do with unauthorized access but not trump taking people in himself (e.g. a cleaner going in or something)

@Adam Kash Patel seems to have signaled publicly several weeks before the raid that he and Trump had all of the documents that were seized and were about to leak everything. So maybe some other people had a key...

What is it's alarming for multiple reasons?

@MartinRandall This is just a question of whether or not they have video evidence of Trump taking people into the room with no business being there.

@BTE What if they have toileting business?

Test

https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1559728412863905794