From Ed Whelen on twitter: In today’s WSJ, Judicial Watch’s Michael Bekesha claims that Presidential Records Act gives an outgoing president complete authority to “decide what records to return and what records to keep at the end of his presidency.” Bizarro World account of PRA. Bekesha makes wild wrong turn in his very first sentence. Indictment is *not* predicated in any way on PRA. As Andrew McCarthy explains here classified docs Trump retained were *agency records* outside scope of PRA. Frivolous Trump Argument No. 1: Classified Intelligence Reports Compiled by Government Agencies Are ‘Personal Records’ under the Presidential Records Act | National ReviewAgency intelligence records are not even presidential records under the PRA, much less a president’s personal records. @mentionsPRA’s definition of “presidential records” excludes “agency records” from their scope. That of course doesn’t make them “personal records.” It instead means that PRA doesn’t govern them at all. Insofar as classified materials that Trump retained fall under PRA, they are obviously not “personal records.” Nothing in PRA remotely suggests that former president may take and retain classified materials. PRA sharply limits possessory rights of former presidents. Let’s get into weeds of 2012 district-court ruling in Judicial Watch v. NARA.NARA agreed with former president Clinton that audiotaped interviews were his personal records. JW claimed that admin-law principles required NARA to take control of tapes. District court ruled in JW v. NARA that JW’s admin-law claim “is not redressable.” Ruling concerns limits of *judicial review under PRA*, not limits of current president’s power…