Classified documents found in Biden’s old office and garage, and other office, and residence

The problem with this logic can be found in posts #468 and #469. The idea that "it's not a huge amount" is wrong-minded since the actual # of classified documents improperly removed by Biden, etal is unknown. As VAg indicates,

"the originals were in the custody of the National Archives none of the documents were "missing". That still doesn't excuse the fact that there were copies of said documents at unauthorized locations including the Penn Biden Center and Biden's home"

So, it is erroneous to claim Biden removed "not a huge amount" as there is no way to tell how many "he" removed .... and how many were removed from the Biden residence by Hunter while he was a resident of the home .... paying rent of $50K per month. ;^)

 

Depending on what the documents were.. and we do not know… who is to say that there are. Or multiple copies of them floating around? Are we to believe there is no copiers in the Biden home?

 

If you only you had to been able to gaze at Hunter’s penis, all truth would be known.

So ridiculous.

 

Your credibility went out the door calling MAL secured.

The documents were in an office next to the pool in a place where it's been documented that Chinese and Russian spies have been wandering around with impunity.

Pro tip: If you hear something from Trump like that MAL is a secured place, discount it as false from the jump.

 

Injecting a little humor into this matter ... this is the best explanation as to why there were no visitor logs at the Bidne homestead where Hunter lived for a year or so.

" (Mark) Tepper then said that he “gets’ why the Biden home wouldn’t have logs.

“So, you know, it makes sense that there’s no visitor logs,” he said. “Hunter used to live there. So it’s very rare that you see visitor logs being kept at a trap house where illicit drugs are being consumed and things like that.”

“So I get it from that perspective,” he said.

He went on to mention that the place where people keep their “beer fridge’ isn’t the most secure way to store documents, and brought up an old episode of Jay Leno’s car show to make a Christmas gift argument."

‘Just Incredible’: Bartiromo Stunned By Guest Saying Biden Home Had No Visitor Logs Because It’s ‘Rare’ to Keep Records at a ‘Trap House’ (msn.com)

 

will it matter if one set of documents are confidential while others are top secret?

 

MAGAts:

It never happened
The law had no right to investigate this
Ok it happened but it's not really bad
Trump is being targeted unfairly
A president or ex-president can do whatever they want

Dems:

The appointment of a special counsel was appropriate since one was appointed for Trump

 

Is there any chance the Dems are setting this up to get rid of Biden for 2024?

 

Never claimed that it was. I was responding a post that described Mar-a-Lago as a secure location. It had security problems even when Trump was president and was unsecured after he left office taking the documents with him. As I previously stated, once Trump left office the role of the Secret Service was protecting him personally not providing security of the premises at Mar-a-Lago and the role of the facility's private security was essentially keeping the uninvited from entering the club not protecting boxes of documents stored there.

 

I believe the legal standard is the following: The Espionage Act is actually a series of statutes under 18 US Code Chapter 37 related to the collection, retention, or dissemination of national defense or classified information.

So I'd say it matters if it's classified and it matters if it's information pertaining to national defense.

That said, I think basically every President does this and the DOJ just has to save face now because of how they've been treating Trump.

 

We've moved from "he's cooperating, this is different," to "let's wait and see the findings of the investigation."

That's progress but not quite on the level of the bloodlust of all of the Trump investigations.

I actually think this mentality is the best one to have, but if you agree with that now, maybe we should be hearing apologies for the "speculate and slander first and learn what really happened later" approach to the Trump investigations.

 

Biden is cooperating, and that is a significant difference when compared to Trump. Doesn't mean there shouldn't also be an investigation. Again, the DOJ generally looks at three things when it comes to potentially charging those who took classified docs to an unsecure area. Intent, was there any damage done to national security, regardless of intent, and cooperation. Just because Biden is cooperating doesn't mean the Special Counsel shouldn't attempt to figure out why Biden had the docs (intent) and whether or not any secrets were leaked (damage).

Same applies to Trump. We don't know his intent or if there was any damage done. Speculation that the Trump docs may have been the cause of an unusual number of foreign US agents dying, but nothing confirmed. We do know that Trump did not cooperate, unless you consider stonewalling for months and lying about returning all the docs when he didn't cooperation.

 

You left out "breaking the law," which is actually the most important factor.

 

in fairness, the conflict with DT was the way he was treating the national archives. if he would ahve turned over all the records when r requested instead of acting like a spoiled child, none of this happens. he is still refusing to produce the people who did the last "search". Meanwhile, JB search guy is open for q & a. Even you have to acknowledge that drastic difference. Either way, if they were top secret documents that could compromise national security or ongoing operations, both should be held accountable.

 

No, it's not. Every time you speed or j-walk, you are breaking the law. But if you happen to be j-walking while a bank robbery is happening a block over, do you think the police will care or stop you? Of course not.

That's not to say taking classified docs outside of areas where they belong is a misdemeanor like j-walking. It's not. It's a very serious offense. But the DOJ has a long history of not charging civilians, or charging them with minor crimes that are often just misdemeanors if there was no intent to use the docs to hurt the country, no actual damage was done, and there is cooperation with the Feds from the start.

Basically, when it comes to civilians and taking classified docs, the DOJ precedent is no harm, no foul. That's for a few reasons. One, the person in question may still need access to classified docs to do his/her job, and if there is a trial, the contents of the docs may have to be revealed to a larger number of people who do not have clearance. So, if/when no harm is done along with full cooperation, the result is almost always a plea to misdemeanor at worst, and often, no charges at all.

 

That’s good to know, all you have to do is try the old Constanza trick.

 

Nice try, but pleading ignorance is not full cooperation. Full cooperation also includes attempting to figure out why the docs were out of place and putting plans in place to prevent it from happening again.

And again, it's not me who is setting the precedence. It's the Department of Justice. Take your beef up with them. Unless you think prosecuting every crime and every case is important, I will defer to their experience and expertise.

 

Yes the DOJ run by Merrick Garland appointed by Joe Biden who probably believes he was robbed of a Supreme Court seat by Donald Trump just happens to be setting this standard that doesn't really apply anywhere else in law enforcement and we're just supposed to assume it's impartial.

Just because a cop won't necessarily stop you if you're speeding doesn't mean they can't do it. It's within their discretion not to, but if they're following around people they don't like while ignoring people they do like, then finding excuse after excuse why not to bring the hammer down when the people they do like do the same thing as the people they don't like, that looks an awful lot like selective prosecution and/or a fishing expedition to me and anyone who wants to be honest about what is happening here.

 

I don't think that is necessary. I think Biden would step aside for the good of the party if needed without them having to sabotage him. He's not Trump.

 

Garland designated a Special Counsel for both Trump and Biden. We don't know the outcome for either case. But if there is a different outcome, assuming no ill intent and no damage done for both cases, the reason won't be the letter in front of the President's name demarking political affiliation. It will because Biden cooperated, and Trump did not.

And you correct, discretion is important. So is precedence, and just because the DOJ can charge, does not mean they will.