ChiGoose Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 Just now, SoCal Deek said: There have been countless interpretations by very informed people expressing their opinions on national television specifically relevant to the President's authority, etc here. The reason you cannot understand is because you are a partisan hack. (With all due respect.) LOL! Gotcha. Not cooperating is secretly actually cooperating because somebody on the TV said so. Very convincing! I guess Biden is just a big dope for turning documents over. He should have just kept them and said he was cooperating anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 15 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: LOL! Gotcha. Not cooperating is secretly actually cooperating because somebody on the TV said so. Very convincing! I guess Biden is just a big dope for turning documents over. He should have just kept them and said he was cooperating anyway. He's kept them for years already, sheesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 6 minutes ago, wnyguy said: He's kept them for years already, sheesh. The special counsel will have to determine if he knew they were there during that time. I doubt the Vice President packs up everything himself. So if some staffer put them there and he didn’t know, then he’s not going to be charged with anything. If it turns out that he did know and didn’t do anything about it for years, then he could be in trouble. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 25 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: LOL! Gotcha. Not cooperating is secretly actually cooperating because somebody on the TV said so. Very convincing! I guess Biden is just a big dope for turning documents over. He should have just kept them and said he was cooperating anyway. Nice try. You know the debate is far more complicated than that but you’re willing to accept that if someone from the steno pool wants a piece of paper back….she should get it. You don’t appear to be the least bit curious what these documents might show or why the former President’s lawyers may want him to retain them. Interesting, but all too expected. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Buffalo Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 1 hour ago, ChiGoose said: Cooperating with investigators is how you avoid charges when you are found to have things you shouldn’t So cooperating is not about actual crimes but making idiots in the public believe you are the good guy? To a prosecutor cooperating should only affect a sentence after gaining a conviction not influence whether to press charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Nice try. You know the debate is far more complicated than that but you’re willing to accept that if someone from the steno pool wants a piece of paper back….she should get it. You don’t appear to be the least bit curious what these documents might show or why the former President’s lawyers may want him to retain them. Interesting, but all too expected. It’s really not complicated at all. Neither Biden nor Trump had any right to those documents. What legal repercussions they might face depend on their cooperation with the investigations. From all accounts, Biden had been cooperating while Trump has not. The contents of the documents have no bearing on whether or not they could keep them. They couldn’t. I don’t know why Trump kept them. Speculation runs rampant from “because he liked having them” to selling the info to the Saudis. If I had to guess, I’d pick the former as much more likely than the latter. 3 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said: So cooperating is not about actual crimes but making idiots in the public believe you are the good guy? To a prosecutor cooperating should only affect a sentence after gaining a conviction not influence whether to press charges. In the very narrow situation of spillage, the main thing the government wants is to secure the documents and assess potential damage. So if the spillage was unintentional and those responsible cooperate, they likely won’t be prosecuted. Prosecuting in those instances would likely backfire because securing a conviction would be unlikely and it would incentivize people to conceal future spillages to avoid prosecution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted January 16, 2023 Author Share Posted January 16, 2023 14 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Prosecuting in those instances would likely backfire because securing a conviction would be unlikely and it would incentivize people to conceal future spillages to avoid prosecution. For sure. The Feds almost never get a conviction. Data published by the Pew Research Center in 2019 highlighted how federal prosecutors have a 99.6% conviction rate. To put those numbers in perspective, U.S. Attorneys filed 79,704 cases in 2018. Of those, only 320 resulted in acquittals. https://www.doarlaw.com/blog/2021/04/what-you-should-know-about-the-federal-governments-conviction-rate/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 21 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: The special counsel will have to determine if he knew they were there during that time. I doubt the Vice President packs up everything himself. So if some staffer put them there and he didn’t know, then he’s not going to be charged with anything. If it turns out that he did know and didn’t do anything about it for years, then he could be in trouble. A couple thoughts occur to me here. Who’s responsible for oversight and ensuring laws are not violated? Is erroneous delegation an excuse to skirting laws dealing with confidential/top secret information? It seems unlikely that team Biden would not know the law on this matter, assuming a staffer is responsible for the illegal activity, I wonder if they would face legal jeopardy? Biden was pretty clear on whom he thought was responsible for files at Trump’s place. It’s weird that suddenly he feels differently when he’s in the mix. It’s going to be a tall task to work backwards through 7 or 8 years of Biden’s life to get to the bottom of all this. Prayers up to him and the “staffers” who hid the files on him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 24 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said: So cooperating is not about actual crimes but making idiots in the public believe you are the good guy? To a prosecutor cooperating should only affect a sentence after gaining a conviction not influence whether to press charges. Hilarious! So in your mind if the President has documents showing how the Deep State was plotting an internal coup against the people (for instance), you’re more desperate that he return them to the secrecy of the archives than wait to collect and expose additional information. Now remember I’m not saying that’s what the documents show but I am FAR MORE interested in what these documents do actually show (for both Biden and Trump) than you even remotely are. Very interesting! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 7 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: For sure. The Feds almost never get a conviction. Data published by the Pew Research Center in 2019 highlighted how federal prosecutors have a 99.6% conviction rate. To put those numbers in perspective, U.S. Attorneys filed 79,704 cases in 2018. Of those, only 320 resulted in acquittals. https://www.doarlaw.com/blog/2021/04/what-you-should-know-about-the-federal-governments-conviction-rate/ When did I say the Feds never get a conviction? The Feds are generally conservative and only bring cases when they feel confident of a conviction. I simply said that in the specific instance of negligent spillage in which the responsible party is cooperating, a conviction would be tough. If there are a ton of cases that say otherwise, I’d be open to taking back my statement but most of the cases I’ve seen include some sort of intentionality and/or lack of cooperation. 6 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: A couple thoughts occur to me here. Who’s responsible for oversight and ensuring laws are not violated? Is erroneous delegation an excuse to skirting laws dealing with confidential/top secret information? It seems unlikely that team Biden would not know the law on this matter, assuming a staffer is responsible for the illegal activity, I wonder if they would face legal jeopardy? Biden was pretty clear on whom he thought was responsible for files at Trump’s place. It’s weird that suddenly he feels differently when he’s in the mix. It’s going to be a tall task to work backwards through 7 or 8 years of Biden’s life to get to the bottom of all this. Prayers up to him and the “staffers” who hid the files on him. I believe it would be who should have known. If you have professional staffers that routinely deal with classified docs and they didn’t follow the rules, then they could be in trouble. If it was some guy from a moving company who didn’t realize what he had, it’s unlikely they would be in much trouble. If Biden himself knew, then he’ll be in trouble, too. This is what we have a special counsel for, to figure out who knew what and when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted January 16, 2023 Author Share Posted January 16, 2023 2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: If there are a ton of cases that say otherwise, I’d be open to taking back my statement but most of the cases I’ve seen include some sort of intentionality and/or lack of cooperation. How many have you seen? It seems like you are claiming to be familiar with quite a few cases of unintentional spillage and follow on cooperation followed by Uncle Sam shrugging his shoulders and saying ok. Do you mind sharing a few samples from the “most cases you’ve seen”? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Buffalo Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 1 hour ago, ChiGoose said: It’s really not complicated at all. Neither Biden nor Trump had any right to those documents. What legal repercussions they might face depend on their cooperation with the investigations. From all accounts, Biden had been cooperating while Trump has not. The contents of the documents have no bearing on whether or not they could keep them. They couldn’t. I don’t know why Trump kept them. Speculation runs rampant from “because he liked having them” to selling the info to the Saudis. If I had to guess, I’d pick the former as much more likely than the latter. In the very narrow situation of spillage, the main thing the government wants is to secure the documents and assess potential damage. So if the spillage was unintentional and those responsible cooperate, they likely won’t be prosecuted. Prosecuting in those instances would likely backfire because securing a conviction would be unlikely and it would incentivize people to conceal future spillages to avoid prosecution. Dude your love of Biden and hatred of Trump is weird to watch at times, the way you twist yourself. No law should come down to intent since we can't prove intent in 90% of cases and it is absurd to think DC is capable of doing anything outside the realm of politics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 So the buck doesn't stop with Joke, it stops with his staffers? Staffers who don't have clearance to view the some of the documents taken in the first place? Is that the defense that's being used? And this is the "adult in the room" we were promised? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 (edited) Keeps getting better… crackhead Hunter was renting the house where the docs were found for $50 grand per month??? 😂 good thing he had that big board job to pay the rent. https://dailycaller.com/2023/01/16/joe-hunter-biden-delaware-residence-classified-documents/ Edited January 17, 2023 by Over 29 years of fanhood 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 2 hours ago, JDHillFan said: How many have you seen? It seems like you are claiming to be familiar with quite a few cases of unintentional spillage and follow on cooperation followed by Uncle Sam shrugging his shoulders and saying ok. Do you mind sharing a few samples from the “most cases you’ve seen”? The issue is intent. If it is truly accidental, it's unlikely to be prosecuted. One way of avoiding the intent issue is that if you discover the documents, you immediately contact the authorities and hand them over. Here are some cases where people didn't do that: United States v. Gonzalez, 16 M.J. 428 (1983) Defendant inadvertently took two classified documents when visiting a friend in Alaska. He discovered them when he arrived, put them in a desk drawer to retrieve them later but forgot. The documents were later discovered by someone else who turned them over to the government. United States v. Kendra Kingsbury FBI agent took classified documents and stored them in her home, knowing this violated the law United States v. Ahmedelhadi Yassin Serageldin Contractor took documents home, altered the classification markings and lied when confronted about it United States v. Harold T. Martin III Contractor took classified documents knowing that he was not allowed to do so In the first one, the guy is probably not indicted if he drops everything and returns the documents immediately when he discovers the problem. He doesn't, and then suffers the consequences. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Buffalo Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 28 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: The issue is intent. If it is truly accidental, it's unlikely to be prosecuted. One way of avoiding the intent issue is that if you discover the documents, you immediately contact the authorities and hand them over. Here are some cases where people didn't do that: United States v. Gonzalez, 16 M.J. 428 (1983) Defendant inadvertently took two classified documents when visiting a friend in Alaska. He discovered them when he arrived, put them in a desk drawer to retrieve them later but forgot. The documents were later discovered by someone else who turned them over to the government. United States v. Kendra Kingsbury FBI agent took classified documents and stored them in her home, knowing this violated the law United States v. Ahmedelhadi Yassin Serageldin Contractor took documents home, altered the classification markings and lied when confronted about it United States v. Harold T. Martin III Contractor took classified documents knowing that he was not allowed to do so In the first one, the guy is probably not indicted if he drops everything and returns the documents immediately when he discovers the problem. He doesn't, and then suffers the consequences. This is actually useful and interesting, thank you. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 44 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said: This is actually useful and interesting, thank you. No problem. From what I can tell, you can avoid charges if the spillage was accidental and you return everything and cooperate immediately when it’s discovered. If it’s intentional, you may be facing prosecution. If it was originally accidental but you don’t immediately turn everything over and cooperate, they are going to take that as intent (as in the Gonzalez case) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 OOPS: WaPo Columnist Says the Quiet Part Out Loud About Biden’s Classified Doc Scandal. “ Joe Biden’s classified document scandal continues to rage, with legions of liberal pundits, legal scholars, and congressional Democrats making the most predictable and irrelevant excuses for why an aging, dementia-ridden old man can keep state secrets unsecured in his garage. Biden got busted for having classified materials at multiple locations, including his residence in Wilmington, Delaware. Liberal America just got slapped in the face; the moral grandstanding that was pervasive and incessant after the FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago last summer is now looking increasingly ridiculous. . . . The Left has no defense, so they’re going with their go-to line: it’s okay when we do it because we’re Democrats. That’s what Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart said on PBS Newshour, saying the Trump and Biden classified documents scandals are different because—in his eyes—they just are. Well, that settles it.” https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2023/01/16/wapo-columnist-says-the-quiet-part-out-loud-about-bidens-classified-doc-scandal-n2618352 https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/clay-waters/2023/01/16/capehart-classified-docs-comparing-trump-and-biden-apples-and 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 8 minutes ago, B-Man said: OOPS: WaPo Columnist Says the Quiet Part Out Loud About Biden’s Classified Doc Scandal. “ Joe Biden’s classified document scandal continues to rage, with legions of liberal pundits, legal scholars, and congressional Democrats making the most predictable and irrelevant excuses for why an aging, dementia-ridden old man can keep state secrets unsecured in his garage. Biden got busted for having classified materials at multiple locations, including his residence in Wilmington, Delaware. Liberal America just got slapped in the face; the moral grandstanding that was pervasive and incessant after the FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago last summer is now looking increasingly ridiculous. . . . The Left has no defense, so they’re going with their go-to line: it’s okay when we do it because we’re Democrats. That’s what Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart said on PBS Newshour, saying the Trump and Biden classified documents scandals are different because—in his eyes—they just are. Well, that settles it.” https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2023/01/16/wapo-columnist-says-the-quiet-part-out-loud-about-bidens-classified-doc-scandal-n2618352 https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/clay-waters/2023/01/16/capehart-classified-docs-comparing-trump-and-biden-apples-and They are different because of intent. Prosecutors can show intent in the Trump case, but it’s not clear yet that they can with Biden. That is obviously subject to change as the investigation continues but from what we know at this stage, that is the difference. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts