Those that get their news from memes are lambasting former President Donald Trump for stealing classified documents and sharing nuclear secrets with Saudi Arabia. At least that's the most common accusation making its rounds on social media. Of course, conservatives and some liberals that still believe in the rule of law, like Alan Dershowitz, believe the FBI raid was not justified legally. And there are some facts that appear to have been ignored by the FBI and the judge who issued the warrant.

I have read multiple reports, mostly from members of the White House staff and transition team, where they claimed there was a standing order declassifying all documents that were to be moved from the White House to other locations. This process was put in place early in the President's term. it is something other presidents have done as well.

We have also heard that the president and his lawyers were cooperating with the FBI and National Archives as to what documents should be returned. There were some discussions about making copies and who should have the original documents. But it's clear that it wasn't about the documents, it was more about accusing Donald Trump of being a criminal and traitor.

There of course is more that's making its way around the media and social pages, but there is one significant legal case that is not being discussed, probably deliberately because on its face it would seem to justify anything President Trump did with the documents; and it involved Bill Clinton.

In March 2012,  Judicial Watch went to court in an effort to obtain some audiotapes Bill Clinton had removed from the White House and put in a sock drawer at one of his mansions. Judicial Watch sought to have those tapes returned to the National Archives and Records Administration so the American people could listen to them. What Judicial Watch thought was on those tapes is only relevant in that they could have contained classified information that was being discussed in conversations. The tapes had also been used by an author to write a book about the Clinton presidency, which is where JW got the idea that classified information may have been discussed.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson rejected the suit in March 2012 based upon her reading of the Presidential Records Act. Her opinion reads in part, "Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President's term and in his sole discretion. "Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records."

This seems to set precedence legally that Donald Trump's claim that the records were both personal and declassified must be honored by the FBI and other government agencies, unless they have definitive proof that the opposite is true. Of course, the law doesn't matter to the FBI, at least when it comes to someone threatening their authority.

But judge Berman Jackson's opinion in the Bill Clinton case has even more bearing on Trump's situation. The judge opined that, "Because the audiotapes are not physically in the government's possession, defendant submits that it would be required to seize them directly from President Clinton in order to assume custody and control over them. Defendant considers this to be an 'extraordinary request' that is 'unfounded, contrary to the PRA's express terms, and contrary to traditional principles of administrative law.' The Court agrees."

Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch, is correct when he points out that the fact scenario presented to the judge by the government's lawyers in the Bill Clinton case is almost identical to that of Donald Trump. Alan Dershowitz, who has said he would never vote for Donald Trump, agrees. Were we a nation that honors the rule of law, the FBI would never have been granted a search warrant without having to overturn the Clinton decision.

But we have not been a nation governed by people who believe in the rule of law for quite some time. It is why our founding fathers wanted to limit the power and authority of the federal government but since that has not been taught in our government school systems for quite some time, most Americans don't understand what the rule of law is and why it's important. Without changing the way our children are taught and what they are taught, the task of taking back our country is almost impossible. But if we exercise our voice at the ballot box in November, electing candidates who do believe in the rule of law, we will have a chance.