本周早些时候，前总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)在被传讯数小时后对支持者发表讲话，概述了潜在的法律论据，为自己的第二项指控进行辩护。
特朗普在迈阿密法庭出庭几小时后，在新泽西州贝德明斯特的高尔夫俱乐部登台，在那里他不服罪37项重罪指控，涉及他对机密文件的不当处理。
“这一天将作为耻辱而被载入史册，”他说。
专家告诉ABC新闻，特朗普卸下了指控，并在此过程中错误地描述了《总统记录法》和《间谍法》的一些方面。
以下是对这位前总统言论的更深入的分析。
他引用了总统记录法案
特朗普说:“根据民事而非刑事的总统记录法案，我完全有权拥有这些文件。”
起诉书中没有提到的1978年的法律规定正好相反，因为它要求总统和副总统在任期结束时将创建的记录移交给国家档案和记录管理局(NARA)。
“相反，前总统绝对没有权利带着任何总统记录去Mar A Lago，”奈良前诉讼主管杰森·r·巴伦(Jason R. Baron)在一封电子邮件中告诉美国广播公司新闻(ABC News)。
巴伦说:“根据《总统记录法》，在拜登总统宣誓就任总统后，美国档案保管员立即承担了特朗普白宫所有官方记录的法律监护权。”“构成官方文件的每一张纸，无论是机密还是非机密，都应该移交给奈良。此外，当奈良的工作人员要求归还被不当拿走的记录时，前总统应该立即将他拥有的所有官方文件交给奈良。”
据检察官称，在他位于佛罗里达州的住所发现的文件中，有一些标有“绝密”字样，还有一些是关于国家的核计划。
“我认为这是一种误导，因为《总统记录法》根本不是有争议的法规，”俄亥俄州立大学法学教授玛格丽特·科沃卡对美国广播公司新闻频道(ABC News)谈到特朗普的言论时说。
“没有理由认为《总统记录法》在某种程度上凌驾于《反间谍法》之上，”Kwoka补充道。“因此，在我看来，这不会为针对起诉书中的指控进行辩护提供非常有力的依据。”
他暗指一名法官在涉及前总统比尔·克林顿的案件中的判决
特朗普说:“艾米·伯曼·杰克逊法官的决定表明，根据《总统记录法》建立的法定计划，将个人资料与总统记录分开的决定是由总统在总统任期内完全酌情做出的。”
特朗普在被起诉后多次提到涉及前总统比尔·克林顿的一个案件。
2010年，保守团体司法观察(Judicial Watch)起诉美国国家档案和记录管理局(National Archives and Records Administration)，称克林顿在任职期间接受历史学家泰勒·布兰奇(Taylor Branch)采访时保留的录音带是“总统记录”，应该向公众开放。
美国地方法院法官艾米·伯曼·杰克逊(Amy Berman Jackson)驳回了此案，特朗普及其盟友在辩护中引用了她的不同观点。
根据巴伦的说法，总统记录法案确实包含个人记录的例外，包括“日记、日志和其他从未在政府事务中使用的个人笔记”
“特朗普总统有权保留这些类型的记录。但是，一些人提出的论点是，他在担任总统期间有某种绝对的权力宣布机密记录或其他关于政府事务的官方记录为他的个人记录，这从表面上看是荒谬的。“这也是违反法律的。杰克逊法官的裁决援引了华盛顿巡回法院此前的先例，支持相反的主张。
杰克逊意见中引用的部分内容是，总统记录法案“没有授予总统权力，在没有任何司法审查可能性的情况下，对他选择指定为总统记录的任何材料行使全面的权力。”
“杰克逊法官继续推测，对于一位总统就他的记录是否属于个人隐私做出明确决定，她会受到多大程度的尊重，但她从未就这个问题做出裁决，”巴伦说。"相反，该案被驳回，理由是原告没有资格强迫档案保管员扣押不属于政府所有的材料。"
这两种情况下的材料也有很大的不同。
“在那种情况下，记录是非常不同的，真的似乎可以说是私人的，”Kwoka说克林顿的事情。“就特朗普总统保留的记录而言，我们与今天讨论的情况相去甚远。”
他声称自己仍在与国家档案和记录管理局(NARA)谈判
特朗普说:“我应该与奈良谈判，这正是我在Mar-a-Lago被突袭前所做的事情。”
特朗普继续提出他和他的团队几个月来一直坚持的观点，声称他被允许在离任后与奈良就哪些文件是私人文件以及哪些文件是总统文件进行谈判。
奈良，在6月9日声明他说，法律要求总统“在离任前”将个人文件和总统文件分开
奈良说:“没有历史、惯例或法律规定让总统在离任时带走官方记录进行整理，如一些报告中所述的两年时间。”
他说他被当成了间谍
《反间谍法》被用来追捕叛徒和间谍。这与前总统合法保留自己的文件没有任何关系，”他说。
特朗普被指控违反《反间谍法》第18条第793(e)款，该条款禁止未经授权保留和披露国防信息，也不要求将信息保密或传播给外国政府。
起诉书也没有指控他传播信息意图伤害美国。
尽管如此，特朗普及其盟友一再声称他被指控为间谍。
“对于被告来说，这并不是一个不寻常的论点，”大卫·亚伦，珀金斯律师事务所的高级律师，司法部国家安全司的前联邦检察官告诉美国广播公司新闻。"《反间谍法》这个名称有点用词不当，因为它包含的远不止间谍活动."
“间谍活动与第18章完全不同。他只是被指控故意保留国防信息，”亚伦说。“他没有被指控向外国政府或其他任何人泄露机密信息，尽管在目前的起诉书中提到他涉嫌向未经授权的人泄露机密信息。”
Trump makes legal claims about classified documents, experts push back: Fact check
Earlier this week, former President Donald Trump, speaking to supporters hours after his arraignment, outlined potential legal arguments as he defends himself against his second indictment.
Trump took the stage at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club just hours after his appearance in a Miami courtroom, where he pleaded not guilty to 37 felony counts in relation to his alleged mishandling of classified documents.
"This day will go down in infamy," he said.
Trump unloaded on the charges and in the process mischaracterized aspects of the Presidential Records Act and the Espionage Act, experts told ABC News.
Here's a more in-depth look at the former president's claims.
He cites the Presidential Records Act
"Under the Presidential Records Act, which is civil not criminal, I had every right to have these documents," Trump said.
The 1978 law, not mentioned in the indictment, states just the opposite, as it requires records created by presidents and vice presidents be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of their administrations.
"On the contrary, the former President had absolutely no right to have taken any presidential records with him to Mar A Lago," Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at NARA, told ABC News in an email.
"Under the Presidential Records Act, the Archivist of the United States assumed legal custody of all Trump White House official records immediately upon President Biden's swearing in as President," Baron said. "Every piece of paper constituting an official document, whether it was classified or unclassified, should have been turned over to NARA. Moreover, when NARA staff asked for the return of the records improperly taken, the former President should have immediately given NARA every official document in his possession."
Among the documents found at his Florida estate, according to prosecutors, were ones marked "top secret" and some about the country's nuclear programs.
"I think it is misleading because the Presidential Records Act just isn't the statute at issue," Margaret Kwoka, a law professor at Ohio State University, told ABC News of Trump's remarks.
"There's no reason to think that the Presidential Records Act somehow overrides the Espionage Act," Kwoka added. "And so this is not, in my view, going to provide a very strong sort of basis for defense against the charges in the indictment."
He alludes to a judge's decision in a case involving former President Bill Clinton
"Judge Amy Berman Jackson's decision states under the statutory scheme established by the Presidential Records Act, the decision to segregate personal materials from presidential records is made by the president during the president's term and in the president's sole discretion," Trump said.
Trump has repeatedly pointed to a case involving former President Bill Clinton in the wake of the indictment.
In 2010, the conservative group Judicial Watch sued the National Archives and Records Administration, arguing audio tapes kept by Clinton for interviews he did with historian Taylor Branch during his years in office -- and which he afterward allegedly kept in a sock drawer -- were "presidential records" and should be made available to the public.
U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson dismissed the case, and Trump and his allies have taken to quoting different parts of her opinion in their defense.
The Presidential Records Act does contain an exception for personal records, according to Baron, including items such as "diaries, journals, and other personal notes that were never used in the transaction of government business."
"President Trump had the right to keep those types of records. But the argument being made by some that he had some kind of absolute authority while president to declare classified records or other official records about government business as his personal records is absurd in its face," he said. "It is also contrary to law. The decision by Judge Jackson cited prior precedent from the D.C. Circuit that stands for the opposite proposition."
That citation included in Jackson's opinion reads, in part, that the Presidential Records Act "does not bestow on the president the power to assert sweeping authority over whatever materials he chooses to designate as presidential records without any possibility of judicial review."
"Judge Jackson went on to speculate about the level of deference to be afforded a president making a categorical decision about whether records of his were personal, but she never ruled on that issue," Baron said. "Instead, the case was dismissed on the grounds that plaintiff had no standing to compel the Archivist to seize materials not in the government’s possession."
There are also significant differences between the materials in question in the two cases.
"In that case, the records were very different and really did seem arguably personal," Kwoka said of the Clinton matter. "We're just sort of nowhere near the situation that we're discussing today with the records that President Trump kept."
He claims he was still negotiating with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
"I was supposed to negotiate with NARA, which is exactly what I was doing until Mar-a-Lago was raided," Trump said.
Trump continued to make an argument he and his team have been for months, asserting he's allowed to negotiate with NARA over which documents are personal and what's presidential after leaving office.
NARA, in a June 9 statement, said the law requires a president to separate personal and presidential documents "before leaving office."
"There is no history, practice, or provision in law for presidents to take official records with them when they leave office to sort through, such as for a two-year period as described in some reports," NARA said.
He says he's being treated like a spy
"The Espionage Act has been used to go after traitors and spies. It has nothing to do with a former president legally keeping his own documents," he said.
Trump has been charged under 18 U.S.C. § 793(e) of the Espionage Act, which prohibits unauthorized retention and disclosure of national defense information, and does not require that information be classified or disseminated to a foreign government.
Neither did the indictment charge him with disseminating information with the intent to harm the U.S.
Still, Trump and his allies have repeatedly claimed he's accused of being a spy.
"This is not an uncommon argument for defendants to make," David Aaron, a senior counsel at Perkins Coie and former federal prosecutor with the Justice Department's national security division, told ABC News. "The title Espionage Act is kind of a misnomer because it includes much more than espionage."
"Espionage is a different section entirely of Title 18. He's charged simply with willfully retaining national defense information," Aaron said. "He's not charged with disclosing classified information to foreign governments or to anyone else, although there are references in the current indictment to his alleged disclosure to unauthorized people.”
