Biden, A Good American President, Pilfers Classified Docs

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

9 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

For probably the millionth time:

 

The difference between the two is that Trump obstructed law enforcement. And you can easily prove intent with Trump.

 

So no. Given the current facts, I would expect an indictment for Trump but not for Biden. 

Literally the entirety of Part 2 of the Mueller report AND the obstruction of the documents investigation are examples of Trump obstructing an investigation and refusing to cooperate with authorities. 

The ultimate resolution of Mueller was no obstruction, and an AG stating emphatically that what happened in this absurd spectacle based on lies and innuendo  was that what happened to Trump should never, ever happen to a president again.  
 

 

[JDHillFan]

5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Has everyone forgotten the existence of boxes? Like, do you think he had a document marked classified sitting on the passenger seat of his vette? Or does he have X-ray vision and can automatically detect that there’s a classified document in any room?

 

If it comes out during the investigation that he knew about the documents, then that changes things. But you’re just speculating based on what you want to be true. 

THEY WERE IN BOXES!! Further illustrating your ignorance about classified info security. Carry on. 🤦 

[Tommy Callahan]

6 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Has everyone forgotten the existence of boxes? Like, do you think he had a document marked classified sitting on the passenger seat of his vette? Or does he have X-ray vision and can automatically detect that there’s a classified document in any room?

 

If it comes out during the investigation that he knew about the documents, then that changes things. But you’re just speculating based on what you want to be true. 

Hunter vacuumed the carpet and smoked parm Cheese in an effort to get a buzz.

 

could he have gotten his hands on them?  

 

and countless other questions.

 

 

8 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Has everyone forgotten the existence of boxes? Like, do you think he had a document marked classified sitting on the passenger seat of his vette? Or does he have X-ray vision and can automatically detect that there’s a classified document in any room?

 

If it comes out during the investigation that he knew about the documents, then that changes things. But you’re just speculating based on what you want to be true. 

With every comment you prove you have no experience with anything classified. 

 

YES. with classified documents the possession, storage and disposal process is very well documented.

 

from the sounds of it they were in boxes just sitting with other garage stuff.

 

 

 

 

[JDHillFan]

3 hours ago, redtail hawk said:

not chaste but decent.  he f'd up here and it will appropriately cost him.  trump's indecent and leading others into indecency.  he f's up all the time, often purposefully and it only occasionally costs him.  I get it.  life's not fair.  but I don't cheer for cheaters.

A decent man that refuses to acknowledge the existence of his young granddaughter. Interesting. 

[ChiGoose]

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

The ultimate resolution of Mueller was no obstruction, and an AG stating emphatically that what happened in this absurd spectacle based on lies and innuendo  was that what happened to Trump should never, ever happen to a president again.  
 

 

This is absolutely false. Mueller specifically stated that Trump met the elements of obstruction multiple times but couldn’t be charged because he was president. He also stated that the proper remedy was impeachment. 
 

Try reading the actual report instead of a summary that was so misleading that Mueller complained to Barr about it. 

 

3 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

THEY WERE IN BOXES!! Further illustrating your ignorance about classified info security. Carry on. 🤦 

It’s bad that he had them! I’m just pointing out that one doesn’t automatically know everything that is on a room when they walk into it. I have boxes in my garage, I’m not 100% of everything that’s in them. 

 

3 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Hunter vacuumed the carpet and smoked parm Cheese in an effort to get a buzz.

 

could he have gotten his hands on them?  

 

and countless other questions.

 

 

Questions that will be answered by the special counsel investigation.  

[Doc]

15 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Has everyone forgotten the existence of boxes? Like, do you think he had a document marked classified sitting on the passenger seat of his vette? Or does he have X-ray vision and can automatically detect that there’s a classified document in any room?

 

If it comes out during the investigation that he knew about the documents, then that changes things. But you’re just speculating based on what you want to be true. 

 

Oh, the excuse is "they were in boxes."  

 

[Tommy Callahan]

Just now, ChiGoose said:

It’s bad that he had them! I’m just pointing out that one doesn’t automatically know everything that is on a room when they walk into it. I have boxes in my garage, I’m not 100% of everything that’s in them. 

 

you do when its classified and your job in ended. 

 

Destruction of classified documents is part of the entire classification process.

 

 

[JDHillFan]

22 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

It’s bad that he had them! I’m just pointing out that one doesn’t automatically know everything that is on a room when they walk into it. I have boxes in my garage, I’m not 100% of everything that’s in them. 

For someone that tries to show him/herself as a superior thinker you really sh*t the bed with the “what about boxes” argument. No worries. It happens to all of us. 

Edited January 16, 2023 by JDHillFan
Bed - not bad. Inexcusable.

[Orlando Tim]

30 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

For probably the millionth time:

 

The difference between the two is that Trump obstructed law enforcement. And you can easily prove intent with Trump.

 

So no. Given the current facts, I would expect an indictment for Trump but not for Biden. 

Literally the entirety of Part 2 of the Mueller report AND the obstruction of the documents investigation are examples of Trump obstructing an investigation and refusing to cooperate with authorities. 

So no crime actually committed by Trump, as I said cooperating with prosecutors is only a sign of innocence to someone who has already made a decision about guilt. 

[Orlando Tim]

5 hours ago, Orlando Tim said:

Cooperating with law enforcement is not a sign of innocence except to those who already have made their determination of guilt. Trump has always cooperated except when the media said he did not. 

@redtail hawk you actually believe that "cooperating with authorities" is a sign of innocence? 

[sherpa]

10 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

It’s bad that he had them! I’m just pointing out that one doesn’t automatically know everything that is on a room when they walk into it. I have boxes in my garage, I’m not 100% of everything that’s in them. 

 

 

You are digging deeper.

You don't simply throw classified material in a box, and pack it like any moving item.

Further, you are required that anyone who has access to it has appropriate security clearances, and depending on level, a need to know.

This is gross negligence.

 

It is this attitude that permeates the gov including Congress and their staffs, and it's exactly why we get less cooperation from the Brits and more specifically the Israelis in security and intel matters.

 

There is a view that the US doesn't treat this stuff with anywhere near the level of importance that other countries do, and our porous history is embarrassing, and ultimately expensive if not dangerous.  

[SoCal Deek]

I marvel at the rabbit hole the media has taken you all down here. Biden is 'guilty' as all heck of possessing those documents...and everyone knows it. What isn't being discussed is what were the actual contents of the documents! Come on people! There aren't that many of them. Can we not have a select few classification cleared individuals (a couple of Senators from both political parties) take a serious look at the documents, in a conference room....together? Is that really too much to ask? If the documents are about security at the annual Easter Egg hunt then honestly, who cares? But, if the documents all point to Hunter, the Ukrainian or Chinese money scandals, then we have an entirely different story.

[ChiGoose]

17 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

So no crime actually committed by Trump, as I said cooperating with prosecutors is only a sign of innocence to someone who has already made a decision about guilt. 

Cooperating with investigators is how you avoid charges when you are found to have things you shouldn’t 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

23 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

This is absolutely false. Mueller specifically stated that Trump met the elements of obstruction multiple times but couldn’t be charged because he was president. He also stated that the proper remedy was impeachment. 
 

Try reading the actual report instead of a summary that was so misleading that Mueller complained to Barr about it. 
 

Don’t be so presumptuous, and as you so frequently suggest, follow the facts. 
 

The conclusions rendered by AG Barr are quite clear and quite compelling.  Those comments came after an objective and unbiased review of everything Russia related.   
 

Mueller’s concern and complaint(s) are of no value to me, he had so much time and effort invested in the hunt for Reds in the WH it was probably inevitable he would lose focus and objectivity.   At least half the nation was absolutely convinced of DJTs Russian citizenship, and the pressure to find something, anything to justify time and expense must have been extraordinary.  

I think it’s time for you to remove the partisan blinders and recognize the damage that the Dems did to our system with that ginned up scandal.   

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

18 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Cooperating with investigators is how you avoid charges when you are found to have things you shouldn’t 

Cooperating with investigators often incriminates yourself and provides evidence for said charges.

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

Once again, this entire topic cracks me up! If the Una-Bomber was found to have an expired library book entitled "How to Build a Bomb", many of you would be more interested in the $3.00 fine for the late fees, than the actual contents of the book. We're in a really sad place.

[ChiGoose]

35 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Cooperating with investigators often incriminates yourself and provides evidence for said charges.

 

 

Doing so without a lawyer, for sure. 
 

But if you are found to have classified documents you shouldn’t have and you wish to avoid charges, you hire a lawyer and you cooperate. 

[SoCal Deek]

4 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Doing so without a lawyer, for sure. 
 

But if you are found to have classified documents you shouldn’t have and you wish to avoid charges, you hire a lawyer and you cooperate. 

Did Trump have lawyers? Yes....check

Were Trump's lawyers cooperating? Yes....check

 

Next topic

[ChiGoose]

12 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Did Trump have lawyers? Yes....check

Were Trump's lawyers cooperating? Yes....check

 

Next topic

How is refusing to comply and then lying cooperating?

 

Like honestly, a lot of people here seem to think not doing what you’re supposed to do and then lying to law enforcement is the same as cooperating and I cannot understand how people reach that conclusion. 

[SoCal Deek]

6 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

How is refusing to comply and then lying cooperating?

 

Like honestly, a lot of people here seem to think not doing what you’re supposed to do and then lying to law enforcement is the same as cooperating and I cannot understand how people reach that conclusion. 

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.) 

[ChiGoose]

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. 

[wnyguy]

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.

[ChiGoose]

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. 

[SoCal Deek]

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. 

[Orlando Tim]

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.

[ChiGoose]

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. 

[B-Man]

 

[JDHillFan]

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/

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

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. 
 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

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! 

[ChiGoose]

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. 

[JDHillFan]

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”?

[Orlando Tim]

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. 

[Doc]

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?

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

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

[ChiGoose]

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.

[Orlando Tim]

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.

[ChiGoose]

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)

[B-Man]

 

 

 

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

[ChiGoose]

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.