Biden, A Good American President, Pilfers Classified Docs

[JDHillFan]

This is different. Nothing to see here. Move along. 

 

[Wacka]

IMPEACH!!!!!

[BillsFanNC]

 

 

[Doc]

"But that's different."

[ChiGoose]

Just came here expecting to see the usual complete lack of understanding of facts, how things work, and what the law is and I was not disappointed. 
 

Don’t ever change, PPP. 

[Wacka]

Just look in the mirror, Chi.

 

[ChiGoose]

1 minute ago, Wacka said:

Just look in the mirror, Chi.

 

Just read the actual facts instead of jumping to ridiculous conclusions. A feat basically impossible for members of this board. 

[JDHillFan]

3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Just came here expecting to see the usual complete lack of understanding of facts, how things work, and what the law is and I was not disappointed. 
 

Don’t ever change, PPP. 

Maybe you would be kind enough to enlighten us on what the law is regarding the compartmentalization of classified information. If you don’t mind maybe you could include a discussion of Hillary’s handling of such. Based on your snotty post, I’m sure you have plenty of experience on the matter.

 

 

[Big Blitz]

I choose to take Biden’s word for it that there was nothing nefarious here - the same benefit of the doubt we all gave Trump on January 6th that he didn’t start a coup.  
 

No reason to jump to conclusions - just like we don’t when Trump news breaks and do things like accuse him of stealing nuclear secrets.  

[ChiGoose]

Just now, JDHillFan said:

Maybe you would be kind enough to enlighten us on what the law is regarding the compartmentalization of classified information. If you don’t mind maybe you could include a discussion of Hillary’s handling of such. Based on your snotty post, I’m sure you have plenty of experience on the matter.

 

 

Person A:

1. Not a government employee

2. Does not have security clearance

3. Possesses government documents

4. Discovers said documents and notifies authorities 

5. Returns documents immediately

 

Person B:

1. Not a government employee

2. Does not have security clearance 

3. Possesses government documents

4. Is told to return documents but refuses

5. Returns some documents

6. Lies and says all documents were returned when they weren’t 

7. Continues to refuse to cooperate

Person C :

1. Government employee 

2. Has security clearance

3. Possesses government documents they are entitled to

4. Improperly stores documents

5. Turns over storage device when asked and ceases improper storage

 

I don’t think there’s a case out there that matches Person A in which there as an indictment, not to mention a conviction. Generally, if you discover documents you’re not supposed to have and immediately turn them over, they don’t charge you with anything because they want to encourage people in those situations to cooperate. 
 

Person B gets indicted. There are cases where the defendant even had the proper security clearance but was still indicted due to their behavior and lack of cooperation once the documents were discovered. 
 

Person C is an edge case. You could probably put together a prima facie case but you’re almost assuredly going to lose at trial so it’s really not worth the effort. Negligent possession is almost never prosecuted. 

Possessing documents you’re not supposed to is bad, especially if they are classified. But people aren’t generally prosecuted unless they either  took the documents knowing they weren’t supposed to have them or refuse to cooperate with authorities in returning the documents. 

 

Hope that helps!

[JDHillFan]

3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Possessing documents you’re not supposed to is bad, especially if they are classified.

Thanks for this bit of brilliance. Who would have thought?

 

Masterclass in vaguery. 🤦‍♂️ 

[ChiGoose]

Just now, JDHillFan said:

Thanks for this bit of brilliance. Who would have thought?

 

Masterclass in vaguery. 🤦‍♂️ 

I literally laid out the fact patterns to answer your question. If you just want to ignore it because it’s inconvenient to you, I guess that’s just on you. 

[Roundybout]

Quote

"After the discovery, Biden’s lawyers immediately contacted the National Archives and Records Administration, which started looking into the matter, the source said. Biden’s team cooperated with NARA, which later came to view the situation as a mistake due to lack of safeguards for documents, the source said."

 

Yawn. 

[BillStime]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

"But that's different."

 

On 8/13/2022 at 10:25 PM, Doc said:

Good luck proving intent.

 

On 8/24/2022 at 7:23 PM, Doc said:

Prove he did something with the alleged classified information or prove intent.  The standard has been set.

 

On 11/17/2022 at 6:10 PM, Doc said:

If the reason to indict him is just that and there's no intent, much less use of the material for personal gain, it's a pretty lame charge. 

 

On 8/13/2022 at 9:51 AM, Doc said:

Proving intent is similarly where it will fail against Trump.  Assuming it even gets that far.

 

On 8/22/2022 at 10:03 PM, Doc said:

You can say what you want until the cows come home.  Just like with Hilly, you'll have to prove he did something nefarious with them or at least prove intent.  Good luck with that.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

23 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Just read the actual facts instead of jumping to ridiculous conclusions. A feat basically impossible for members of this board. 

I read the facts.  Turns out when Biden left office, he took classified documents when he left.  He then co-mingled those documents with personal documents, and for reasons as yet unknown, failed to return them as was his responsibility.  
 

Several years then passed, the documents in his possession and accessible by an as-yet-undetermined number of people.  Those documents may have been shared with foreign nationals in some quid pro quo, or may have been his ‘get out of jail free’ card in the event the H Biden scandal became an issue.  It’s possible of course he was just forgetful and careless, something of a resume booster for dem presidential candidates.  
 

We know that the documents were discovered, as if by magic really, by his attorneys, whom one would assume do not have proper credentials to view said documents,  combing through personal paperwork with 5 years of dust on them, just two days before a pivotal midterm election with much riding on the line for Team Biden.  

It doesn’t seem all that complicated to me, Chi.  Since we now know he played fast and loose with national security, and this story is 15 years in the making, at a minimum a serious inquiry into his record keeping processes (online and paper) since his time in office should take place.   What other documents does he have in his possession, and at what location(s)?   I think you have to review email, hard drives, investigate acquaintances etc.   

 

You certainly cannot rule out incompetence, but malfeasance must also be considered.  I would hope the gloves come off on this one. 
 

What an I missing here, Chi? 

 

[ChiGoose]

5 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I read the facts.  Turns out when Biden left office, he took classified documents when he left.  He then co-mingled those documents with personal documents, and for reasons as yet unknown, failed to return them as was his responsibility.  
 

Several years then passed, the documents in his possession and accessible by an as-yet-undetermined number of people.  Those documents may have been shared with foreign nationals in some quid pro quo, or may have been his ‘get out of jail free’ card in the event the H Biden scandal became an issue.  It’s possible of course he was just forgetful and careless, something of a resume booster for dem presidential candidates.  
 

We know that the documents were discovered, as if by magic really, by his attorneys, whom one would assume do not have proper credentials to view said documents,  combing through personal paperwork with 5 years of dust on them, just two days before a pivotal midterm election with much riding on the line for Team Biden.  

It doesn’t seem all that complicated to me, Chi.  Since we now know he played fast and loose with national security, and this story is 15 years in the making, at a minimum a serious inquiry into his record keeping processes (online and paper) since his time in office should take place.   What other documents does he have in his possession, and at what location(s)?   I think you have to review email, hard drives, investigate acquaintances etc.   

 

You certainly cannot rule out incompetence, but malfeasance must also be considered.  I would hope the gloves come off on this one. 
 

What an I missing here, Chi? 

 

Intent. You’re missing intent.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

Just now, ChiGoose said:

Intent. You’re missing intent.

No, I think I addressed that.  It’s possible he was completely clueless on the proper disposition of classified documents, that his attorneys never looked into it, and as a private citizen may be his truth was he could keep whatever he wanted.  
 

Unfortunately, there’s a whole lot of ground to cover between 2016 and 2023.  It certainly makes sense to know who had access to these documents, from the guy slugging boxes down the hall to admin assistants to maintenance staff to landlords and beyond.  
 

I’m not suggesting Biden was trafficking in these secret classified documents, but if he’s being candid and truthful about his actions, as they say,there’s nothing to worry about.   I’m also not suggesting he wasn’t trafficking in this intel, we simply don’t know. 
 

I also think it’s possible and quite likely that presidents and VPs keep classified documents on a fairly regular basis, and it became an issue for Trump because he was Trump.  

[BillStime]

If he’s guilty - charge him - who the fk cares?

 

No one is above the law….

 

But like @Doc told us - you gotta prove intent.

[ChiGoose]

15 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Same thing Trump defenders said

 

hilarious. 
 

Except it would be exceedingly easy to prove intent with Trump since he refused to return the documents when told to and then lied about returning them all when he actually didn’t. A jury would have no problem inferring intent there. 

 

12 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

No, I think I addressed that.  It’s possible he was completely clueless on the proper disposition of classified documents, that his attorneys never looked into it, and as a private citizen may be his truth was he could keep whatever he wanted.  
 

Unfortunately, there’s a whole lot of ground to cover between 2016 and 2023.  It certainly makes sense to know who had access to these documents, from the guy slugging boxes down the hall to admin assistants to maintenance staff to landlords and beyond.  
 

I’m not suggesting Biden was trafficking in these secret classified documents, but if he’s being candid and truthful about his actions, as they say,there’s nothing to worry about.   I’m also not suggesting he wasn’t trafficking in this intel, we simply don’t know. 
 

I also think it’s possible and quite likely that presidents and VPs keep classified documents on a fairly regular basis, and it became an issue for Trump because he was Trump.  

The documents were in storage and only discovered because the office was being closed so everything needed to be removed. 
 

I sincerely doubt that presidents and VPs routinely intentionally keep documents they’re not supposed to have. There’s little reason for it since they can access their docs through NARA. It seems more likely that the controls around these types of documents need fixing. 
 

It’s a problem for Trump because he refused to return them. If he had turned them all over when NARA told him to, he’d have no problem with the law. Even if the tinfoil hat conspiracies about the deep state BS were true and he got charged anyway, he’d skate easily at trial (if it even went that far). 
 

As always, Trump’s problem is Trump himself. 

Edited January 10, 2023 by ChiGoose

[BillsFanNC]

1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:

Just came here expecting to see the usual complete lack of understanding of facts, how things work, and what the law is and I was not disappointed. 
 

Don’t ever change, PPP. 

 

Hey chigoose comes to hand wave his way around how this is different.

 

Shocking!

 

Never change chigoose you crazy former republican you 

 

Edited January 10, 2023 by BillsFanNC

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

22 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

The documents were in storage and only discovered because the office was being closed so everything needed to be removed. 
 

I sincerely doubt that presidents and VPs routinely intentionally keep documents they’re not supposed to have. There’s little reason for it since they can access their docs through NARA. It seems more likely that the controls around these types of documents need fixing. 
 

It’s a problem for Trump because he refused to return them. If he had turned them all over when NARA told him to, he’d have no problem with the law. Even if the tinfoil hat conspiracies about the deep state BS were true and he got charged anyway, he’d skate easily at trial (if it even went that far). 
 

As always, Trump’s problem is Trump himself. 

It’s impossible to derive what happened from a 3 or 4 page news article, but your steadfast belief in your side of the aisle is impressive.  
 

If what you say is true, then a deep dive into it will simply prove it out. Personally, I cannot square extremely reckless behavior with “nothing to see here.”   It’s an awful lot like the release of social security data on political opponents by the 1/6 committee.   

[Big Blitz]

This is the beginning of the Ds escape plan from Brandon.  

[ChiGoose]

10 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

It’s impossible to derive what happened from a 3 or 4 page news article, but your steadfast belief in your side of the aisle is impressive.  
 

If what you say is true, then a deep dive into it will simply prove it out. Personally, I cannot square extremely reckless behavior with “nothing to see here.”   It’s an awful lot like the release of social security data on political opponents by the 1/6 committee.   

I just follow the facts. If Biden did what Trump did, then he should be indicted when he leaves office. But there’s no evidence he did. 

[BillStime]

I can’t believe Biden didn’t sell them to the Saudis for $2 BILLION 

 

 

[Big Blitz]

2 minutes ago, BillStime said:

I can’t believe Biden didn’t sell them to the Saudis for $2 BILLION 

 

 

 

But Trump But Trump But Trump.  
 

Moron.  
 

As if he hasn’t received any scrutiny for anything.  
 

 

How much you pay for eggs today?  

[BillStime]

29 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

But Trump But Trump But Trump.  
 

Moron.  
 

As if he hasn’t received any scrutiny for anything.  
 

 

How much you pay for eggs today?  

Have you thoughts about buying some female chickens?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

45 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

I just follow the facts. If Biden did what Trump did, then he should be indicted when he leaves office. But there’s no evidence he did. 

We don’t know that facts.  We don’t know who had access, who might have reviewed the files, who Biden might have shared the contents with, what safeguards were in place, the security clearances of those with access, whether or not they might have been compromised, and what the portrait of the multi-year journey might look like when painted.   
 

In fact, it’s pure foolishness to speculate that the relative security of Biden’s situation somehow was greater than the Trump scenario.   There was apparently no oversight whatsoever for almost 7 years. 
 

It will be interesting to see where this goes but the potential for whitewashing this debacle and burying the story is quite high.  
 

 

[ChiGoose]

20 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

We don’t know that facts.  We don’t know who had access, who might have reviewed the files, who Biden might have shared the contents with, what safeguards were in place, the security clearances of those with access, whether or not they might have been compromised, and what the portrait of the multi-year journey might look like when painted.   
 

In fact, it’s pure foolishness to speculate that the relative security of Biden’s situation somehow was greater than the Trump scenario.   There was apparently no oversight whatsoever for almost 7 years. 
 

It will be interesting to see where this goes but the potential for whitewashing this debacle and burying the story is quite high.  
 

 

The facts as we have them point to this not being intentional. It’s also being investigated by law enforcement so if the facts change, it might change the most likely story.

 

If it is discovered that Biden knew he had documents illegally and did not immediately turn them over, then he should be indicted when he leaves office. But that is not the most likely scenario given what we know at this point. 
 

Honestly, at this point, I don’t think the facts will end up mattering at all. MAGA is just going to believe whatever feels good because their feelings don’t care about the facts. 

[ExiledInIllinois]

6 hours ago, JDHillFan said:

This is different. Nothing to see here. Move along. 

 

It is. Because his own lawyers turned them over. 😆 

[ChiGoose]

22 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

It is. Because his own lawyers turned them over. 😆 

Cooperating with authorities 

Not cooperating with authorities

 

Trumpers: these are the same thing 

[Warcodered]

21 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Cooperating with authorities 

Not cooperating with authorities

 

Trumpers: these are the same thing 

We wouldn't even know if they hadn't said anything.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

8 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

The facts as we have them point to this not being intentional. It’s also being investigated by law enforcement so if the facts change, it might change the most likely story.

 

If it is discovered that Biden knew he had documents illegally and did not immediately turn them over, then he should be indicted when he leaves office. But that is not the most likely scenario given what we know at this point. 
 

Honestly, at this point, I don’t think the facts will end up mattering at all. MAGA is just going to believe whatever feels good because their feelings don’t care about the facts. 

The facts always matter one way or the other, but we have no idea what they are at this point.  
 

There’s the legal implications of Biden’s actions.  What we have right now is a self-serving version of the story, which rightly should be viewed with cynicism until actual facts are established through an independent investigation.  Sadly, we’re unlikely to get that in today’s world.  Perhaps sadder still, people arguing about the need for the Trump raid and subsequent handling by DOJ are applauding Biden for turning over documents 6 years after he took them. 
 

There are the political implications.  Biden was quite clear in his feelings about Trump’s reckless behavior and the threat to national security it posed.  This, of course, after an armed raid and the apparent seizure of documents purported to be outside the scope of the raid.  Now, we find out that at a minimum,  Biden himself engaged in irresponsible and dangerous behavior exposing national secrets.  
 

There are the potential family implications to be considered.  Biden has made no secret of his love and unquestioned loyalty to his son, and as yet questions about Hunter’s influence peddling remain unanswered.  At the same time, the guy was dealing with a crack and hooker problem, and one must wonder whether he had any access to these documents or Joe Biden might have been squeezed to protect him. 
 

Finally, there’s the issue of public trust in our institutions problem.  In the past few years, you’ve had Hillary Clinton playing fast and loose with top secret information and Obama, Comey et al calling her extremely reckless.  You’ve got Trump removing confidential information and a swat style raid to recover, and Biden speaking of his major concerns about the national security risk that posed.  Now, we find Biden has a trove of documents lifted from his time in the White House, accessible by God-knows-how-many-people, reported upon “immediately!” 6 or 7 years after they went missing. 
 

We agree a full accounting of this matter is necessary.  The question is will we get one? 

6 hours ago, Warcodered said:

We wouldn't even know if they hadn't said anything.

Which they didn’t, from at least 2015-late 2022.  

[Tiberius]

[BillsFanNC]

Imagine still believing, in 2023, that reporting a story that will reflect negatively on a democrat president will provide anything remotely close to the facts.

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

29 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

Imagine still believing, in 2023, that reporting a story that will reflect negatively on a democrat president will provide anything remotely close to the facts.

 

 

 

 

 

[Westside]

13 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Intent. You’re missing intent.

Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law. 

10 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

The facts as we have them point to this not being intentional. It’s also being investigated by law enforcement so if the facts change, it might change the most likely story.

 

If it is discovered that Biden knew he had documents illegally and did not immediately turn them over, then he should be indicted when he leaves office. But that is not the most likely scenario given what we know at this point. 
 

Honestly, at this point, I don’t think the facts will end up mattering at all. MAGA is just going to believe whatever feels good because their feelings don’t care about the facts. 

Lol, says the master of feelz!!!

You do love to project don’t you?

[Doc]

14 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Just came here expecting to see the usual complete lack of understanding of facts, how things work, and what the law is and I was not disappointed. 
 

Don’t ever change, PPP. 

 

Sure that's why you came here.

 

13 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Intent. You’re missing intent.

 

Yup.  So just like with Hilly's situation, this goes "bye bye" for both.  Satisfied or was only Trump's bad? (let me guess... )

[wnyguy]

11 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

But Trump But Trump But Trump.  
 

Moron.  
 

As if he hasn’t received any scrutiny for anything.  
 

 

How much you pay for eggs today?  

Best just to shun Billsy, he's a freakin' moron.

[BillsFanNC]

 

[Doc]

Raid his homes!