Classified Documents from Biden’s VP days found in office

Bricktop · Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:00 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
He didn't give back all the documents. His people stumbled upon them, stumbled upon some more, stumbled upon more yet again, and then DOJ found even more.
That is not "correcting said mistake" by any stretch. If he really took classified documents seriously, there wouldn't be a two and a half month timelapse. Anyone taking it seriously would have done it in a week max. And if he had "followed the rules", he wouldn't have had them in the first place, right?

As far as not lawyering up, that's just false and bizarre. Any question since this broke has been met with "I refer you to the White House Counsel's Office", and he also has personal lawyers on the job. And "I have no regrets" falls far short of owning up to it.

You are just repeating your same incorrect interpretation over and over again. I posted the article that contained the actual sequence of events, and explained them, which you have ignored in favor of your alternate facts. But you can't expect people to take that seriously. It's not a good faith effort at discussion.

You objected to bringing up Trump, and I obliged. But then you come back with your own theories as to what happened, which are not factually based. And the purpose of those theories, is to paint the Biden saga in as negative a light as possible.

The best defense for those theories, is to point out the contradictions with the only other relevant case, which is Trump. You notably have not arrived at those same theories or conclusions for that case, even though the offenses were considerably worse, and did unquestionably involve intent. Which is evidence of the bias in your position.

I've said from the begining, that the false equivalence would be used here, as we've seen it dozens of times before. Your solution to that is to eliminate the equivalence part, by complaining about Trump being brought up, but continuing with the false part, in terms of misrepresentations of the facts.

So sorry, but you can't have it both ways. SEB146 is right on the money about that. If you don't want to talk about Trump, then fine, drop the theories and the falsehoods, and talk about the facts as posted. How are they incorrect, and what evidence can you provide to support that?

Unless you are willing to do that, you have no right to complain about others pointing out the false equivalence, that is blatantly evident here. There is nothing non-factual in the false equivalence argument, no basis for establishing that it is untrue.

I am not saying there is a false equivalence, and I don't care about Trump's issues. Is that clear enough? That's why it is so irritating to read and get back Trump MAGA Trump MAGA over and over. I am interested in Biden standalone, without the noise. What Trump did or did not do has no impact on what Biden did or didn't do. All the spin doctoring and posting of self-serving interpretations of what Trump did doesn't change that.

Now if you think Biden has totally clean hands, just say so. Tell me what in the quote of mine above is incorrect. He had stuff he shouldn't have had. Two and a half months later they are still finding docs, despite the White House saying MULTIPLE TIMES that the search is over. It's a cluster-f of incompetence, but some people are pathologically incapable of admitting it. All the spin doctoring and posting of self-serving interpretations of what Biden did doesn't change that.

Avatar2go · Mon Jan 23, 2023 9:40 pm

Bricktop wrote:
I am not saying there is a false equivalence, and I don't care about Trump's issues. Is that clear enough? That's why it is so irritating to read and get back Trump MAGA Trump MAGA over and over. I am interested in Biden standalone, without the noise. What Trump did or did not do has no impact on what Biden did or didn't do. All the spin doctoring and posting of self-serving interpretations of what Trump did doesn't change that.

Now if you think Biden has totally clean hands, just say so. Tell me what in the quote of mine above is incorrect. He had stuff he shouldn't have had. Two and a half months later they are still finding docs, despite the White House saying MULTIPLE TIMES that the search is over. It's a cluster-f of incompetence, but some people are pathologically incapable of admitting it. All the spin doctoring and posting of self-serving interpretations of what Biden did doesn't change that.

I can't put it any more simply than this. If you want us to stop citing Trump, then stop saying stuff like this:

"Two and a half months later they are still finding docs, despite the White House saying MULTIPLE TIMES that the search is over. It's a cluster-f of incompetence, but some people are pathologically incapable of admitting it."

This is your opinion and is not substantiated by the facts. You have the article which reports the actual sequence, and the reasoning for it. What you are saying here, is objectively false.

On the other hand, what we have said about Trump is objectively true, as borne out by the courts. Which you know perfectly well, and is the reason you don't want us to discuss it.

You forget that we have seen all these tactics before. And although you will complain if I refer to them as being associated with MAGA, they absolutely are.

If you'd care to refute the article, and the facts it presents, then please do so. If you aren't willing to do that, then please stop complaining about everyone else. Otherwise there is no point in continuing the discussion in bad faith.

No one here has claimed that Biden's hands are clean, or that no fault was involved. On the contrary, we have said repeatedly there is an administrative failure, but most likely not criminal, in the absence of intent.

You are holding this up as either-or, but that's another false equivalence. It's not either Biden is an angel or he's the devil incarnate, and we do not have to choose between your options. Errors were made, but they were comparatively minor. And you already know the comparison of which I speak.

seb146 · Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:30 pm

Bricktop wrote:
But I thought Obama and Biden were closerthanthis, best buds, "Last Guy In The Room" stuff. Even so, I would be surprised if Biden didn't see 99% of the documents Obama saw, same with any VP because they have to be "ready from Day One" don't they? It's pure sophistry to argue that because he was only VP, so he was getting unimportant stuff, therefore it's no big deal.

According to right wing media, they were. Biden knows how to lead and listens to his advisors. Just like he did in the Senate and just like he did when he was vice president. Again, as I have said before, the vice president is given fewer documents than the president but that does not make him or her worth less. Biden, as VP, had documents. We all know that, we all agree with that. Copies were given to Pence as part of the normal transition. And, again, the Archives did not know they were missing until Biden's office returned them. There was not intent on Biden or his office keeping the documents. MAGAs continuing to blow this up is insane. There is no there there.

But, because it is Biden, he is evil incarnate and must have planned this because he is pure evil, according to MAGAs.

Bricktop · Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:40 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
I can't put it any more simply than this. If you want us to stop citing Trump, then stop saying stuff like this:

"Two and a half months later they are still finding docs, despite the White House saying MULTIPLE TIMES that the search is over. It's a cluster-f of incompetence, but some people are pathologically incapable of admitting it."

This is your opinion and is not substantiated by the facts. You have the article which reports the actual sequence, and the reasoning for it. What you are saying here, is objectively false.

Nonsense. It is objectively true. I don’t care how many times you reference the article, the FACT remains that two and a half months later, documents are being found. Can you argue against that? The White House said on January 12 that the search was over as an example. Do you deny that fact? Actually you do, saying they are my opinion.

Then we do get into the realm of opinion why I wonder the reason for stuff still turning up. Can it be attributed to anything other than incompetence? Saying incompetence is far kinder than some interpretations that can be made. If Biden takes this so seriously then he should be incandescent with anger that it wasn’t taken care of in early November. Why wasn’t it? Biden could have said then to get the FBI to do a search, couldn’t he? Now that would have been transparent. But they slow played it thinking they could keep it all quiet (per NY Times).

And the fact that you bring that MAGA garbage out again reveals that when it gets down to it, you really have no real defense. “Errors were made but they were comparably minor”. (emphasis mine). You have to conflate Trump into it to play down the gravity of this. You forget we have seen all these tactics before.

Avatar2go · Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:00 pm

Bricktop wrote:

Then we do get into the realm of opinion why I wonder the reason for stuff still turning up. Can it be attributed to anything other than incompetence? Saying incompetence is far kinder than some interpretations that can be made. If Biden takes this so seriously then he should be incandescent with anger that it wasn’t taken care of in early November. Why wasn’t it? Biden could have said then to get the FBI to do a search, couldn’t he? Now that would have been transparent. But they slow played it thinking they could keep it all quiet (per NY Times).

And the fact that you bring that MAGA garbage out again reveals that when it gets down to it, you really have no real defense. “Errors were made but they were comparably minor”. (emphasis mine). You have to conflate Trump into it to play down the gravity of this. You forget we have seen all these tactics before.

The NYT article clearly explains that the search was expanded multiple times. As well as why that happened, when, and how. For each phase & location, the search was completed, in accordance with White House statements.

You still have not refuted any of the evidence given in the article, or provided any evidence of your own to counter it, except your opinion.

As far as playing down the gravity, I have repeatedly given that assessment based on what we know of the events, the law, and prior enforcement of it, in other similar events.

There are no examples of criminal prosecution that I am aware of, outside of circumstances involving intent. For all others, there have been administrative actions. I'm sure there will be some form of that in this case as well. Again if you can provide examples of where this is incorrect, we're listening.

What I see here is willful ignorance, in not being willing to consider the evidence that does not support your position. I suspect that evidence will continue to emerge with time and the investigation. But there is no point in discussion if you are not open to the facts and evidence.

Bricktop · Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:02 pm

seb146 wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
But I thought Obama and Biden were closerthanthis, best buds, "Last Guy In The Room" stuff. Even so, I would be surprised if Biden didn't see 99% of the documents Obama saw, same with any VP because they have to be "ready from Day One" don't they? It's pure sophistry to argue that because he was only VP, so he was getting unimportant stuff, therefore it's no big deal.

According to right wing media, they were. Biden knows how to lead and listens to his advisors. Just like he did in the Senate and just like he did when he was vice president. Again, as I have said before, the vice president is given fewer documents than the president but that does not make him or her worth less. Biden, as VP, had documents. We all know that, we all agree with that. Copies were given to Pence as part of the normal transition. And, again, the Archives did not know they were missing until Biden's office returned them. There was not intent on Biden or his office keeping the documents. MAGAs continuing to blow this up is insane. There is no there there.

But, because it is Biden, he is evil incarnate and must have planned this because he is pure evil, according to MAGAs.

No my friend, Biden himself was the origin of the Last Guy in the Room line, not "right wing media". His whole spiel was how close he was with Obama. Remember the "Friendship Bracelets" or was that MAGA disinformation too? "Barack and I" was out of his mouth all the time. And your attempt at a subtle rewrite didn't go unnoticed. You said previously that the docs he got were less important.

seb146 wrote:
Any documents a former vice president has are not as sensitive as documents of a former president.

Now you say "the vice president is given fewer documents than the president but that does not make him or her worth less." As I said before, the VP probably gets at least 99% of what the POTUS gets.

Perhaps you should follow your own advice on seeing where the evidence leads before pronouncing "There is no there there." I notice the direct quote of the President. Let's hope you have no regrets at the end of the day.

But remember, don't underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up.

Bricktop · Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:14 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
Bricktop wrote:

Then we do get into the realm of opinion why I wonder the reason for stuff still turning up. Can it be attributed to anything other than incompetence? Saying incompetence is far kinder than some interpretations that can be made. If Biden takes this so seriously then he should be incandescent with anger that it wasn’t taken care of in early November. Why wasn’t it? Biden could have said then to get the FBI to do a search, couldn’t he? Now that would have been transparent. But they slow played it thinking they could keep it all quiet (per NY Times).

And the fact that you bring that MAGA garbage out again reveals that when it gets down to it, you really have no real defense. “Errors were made but they were comparably minor”. (emphasis mine). You have to conflate Trump into it to play down the gravity of this. You forget we have seen all these tactics before.

The NYT article clearly explains that the search was expanded multiple times. As well as why that happened, when, and how. For each phase & location, the search was completed, in accordance with White House statements.

You still have not refuted any of the evidence given in the article, or provided any evidence of your own to counter it, except your opinion.

As far as playing down the gravity, I have repeatedly given that assessment based on what we know of the events, the law, and prior enforcement of it, in other similar events.

There are no examples of criminal prosecution that I am aware of, outside of circumstances involving intent. For all others, there have been administrative actions. I'm sure there will be some form of that in this case as well. Again if you can provide examples of where this is incorrect, we're listening.

What I see here is willful ignorance, in not being willing to consider the evidence that does not support your position. I suspect that evidence will continue to emerge with time and the investigation. But there is no point in discussion if you are not open to the facts and evidence.

Can I assume that this was left out from your reply, that you will stipulate to it?

Bricktop wrote:
Nonsense. It is objectively true. I don’t care how many times you reference the article, the FACT remains that two and a half months later, documents are being found. Can you argue against that? The White House said on January 12 that the search was over as an example. Do you deny that fact? Actually you do, saying they are my opinion.

Now as to the ever-expanding search narrative that you cling to so fervently, yes you can see what happened and why it happened. It was a slow-play. It was a political and PR driven process. That has clearly backfired. It was not transparent, but it could have been. Yes, that is my opinion.

casinterest · Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:23 pm

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/2 ... s-00079072

“We do not have different rules for Democrats or Republicans, different rules for the powerful or the powerless, different rules for the rich and for the poor, we apply the facts, and the law in each case in a neutral, non-partisan manner,” Garland told reporters during a press availability at Justice Department headquarters. “That is what we always do.”

Garland is handling this issue as stipulated.

Aaron747 · Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:31 pm

casinterest wrote:
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/23/garland-biden-trump-classified-document-probes-00079072

“We do not have different rules for Democrats or Republicans, different rules for the powerful or the powerless, different rules for the rich and for the poor, we apply the facts, and the law in each case in a neutral, non-partisan manner,” Garland told reporters during a press availability at Justice Department headquarters. “That is what we always do.”

Garland is handling this issue as stipulated.

He has to say that, of course, but the outcome in court for this kind of case is different depending on power and access to legal shielding.

Avatar2go · Mon Jan 23, 2023 11:57 pm

Aaron747 wrote:

He has to say that, of course, but the outcome in court for this kind of case is different depending on power and access to legal shielding.

The Biden case is very unlikely to see the inside of a courtroom, based on what we know now, due to the lack of any discernable intent.

For those cases that do end up in court, the outcome does depend on the legal firepower that is brought to bear. But that also can backfire, as we see in the sanctions against Trump. You still need to have a factual basis in court.

Bricktop · Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:16 am

casinterest wrote:
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/23/garland-biden-trump-classified-document-probes-00079072

“We do not have different rules for Democrats or Republicans, different rules for the powerful or the powerless, different rules for the rich and for the poor, we apply the facts, and the law in each case in a neutral, non-partisan manner,” Garland told reporters during a press availability at Justice Department headquarters. “That is what we always do.”

Garland is handling this issue as stipulated.

“It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.

Kent350787 · Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:35 am

Bricktop wrote:
casinterest wrote:
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/23/garland-biden-trump-classified-document-probes-00079072

“We do not have different rules for Democrats or Republicans, different rules for the powerful or the powerless, different rules for the rich and for the poor, we apply the facts, and the law in each case in a neutral, non-partisan manner,” Garland told reporters during a press availability at Justice Department headquarters. “That is what we always do.”

Garland is handling this issue as stipulated.

“It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.

Exactly, as noone in this thread is questioning. But, apart from the discovery of documents, almost every element of the Biden case and that of the former guy is different.

Eolesen · Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:21 am

Three weeks ago: "Biden takes classified documents seriously"

This week ago: "Biden takes classified documents. Seriously."

Aside from the part they weren't supposed to have these documents anymore, just about every element of the Biden case and this case are different.

The Archives knew what was missing with Trump. They knew the limits of exposure. They didn't allow his lawyers to be present for the search.

The Archives had no idea Biden had documents that he wasn't supposed to. There's no idea of who might have had access, or what other documents might still be stashed away somewhere. His lawyers did the first two or three searches, and I'd guess they were probably allowed to be present for the FBI search this past week.

If you remove the names Biden and Trump from that argument, it's hard to try and paint what's unfolding right now as somehow being better....

Aaron747 · Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:43 am

Eolesen wrote:
Three weeks ago: "Biden takes classified documents seriously"

This week ago: "Biden takes classified documents. Seriously."

Aside from the part they weren't supposed to have these documents anymore, just about every element of the Biden case and this case are different.

The Archives knew what was missing with Trump. They knew the limits of exposure. They didn't allow his lawyers to be present for the search.

The Archives had no idea Biden had documents that he wasn't supposed to. There's no idea of who might have had access, or what other documents might still be stashed away somewhere. His lawyers did the first two or three searches, and I'd guess they were probably allowed to be present for the FBI search this past week.

If you remove the names Biden and Trump from that argument, it's hard to try and paint what's unfolding right now as somehow being better....

Except for the part where the latter likened the investigators to Gestapo, had a newly-hired attorney with little knowledge of the situation sign off on incomplete inventory, and demanded return of the taken documents...

scbriml · Tue Jan 24, 2023 10:02 am

Eolesen wrote:
Three weeks ago: "Biden takes classified documents seriously"

This week ago: "Biden takes classified documents. Seriously."

Aside from the part they weren't supposed to have these documents anymore, just about every element of the Biden case and this case are different.

The Archives knew what was missing with Trump. They knew the limits of exposure. They didn't allow his lawyers to be present for the search.

The Archives had no idea Biden had documents that he wasn't supposed to. There's no idea of who might have had access, or what other documents might still be stashed away somewhere. His lawyers did the first two or three searches, and I'd guess they were probably allowed to be present for the FBI search this past week.

If you remove the names Biden and Trump from that argument, it's hard to try and paint what's unfolding right now as somehow being better....

You sound like a stuck record.

Has anyone actually claimed Biden's issue is "better" than that of "he who cannot be mentioned"? It's certainly different, but that's a subtlety that's apparently beyond the comprehension of the red hatters.

Avatar2go · Tue Jan 24, 2023 11:53 am

Eolesen wrote:
Three weeks ago: "Biden takes classified documents seriously"

This week ago: "Biden takes classified documents. Seriously."

Aside from the part they weren't supposed to have these documents anymore, just about every element of the Biden case and this case are different.

The Archives knew what was missing with Trump. They knew the limits of exposure. They didn't allow his lawyers to be present for the search.

The Archives had no idea Biden had documents that he wasn't supposed to. There's no idea of who might have had access, or what other documents might still be stashed away somewhere. His lawyers did the first two or three searches, and I'd guess they were probably allowed to be present for the FBI search this past week.

If you remove the names Biden and Trump from that argument, it's hard to try and paint what's unfolding right now as somehow being better....

So just to correct the facts here:

The originals of the Biden documents are in the Archives, because they weren't withheld. Biden had copies of the originals, which would have been known when they were made. Therefore the claim that they were not supposed to be in Biden's possession, is unsubstantiated. What is known, is that their location was improper.

An open question for the investigation will be, what is the procedure for tracking copies? Can they be permanently retained, or were they forgotten? And what is the process for reporting their location and status?

The Archives knew partially what was missing with Trump, because he withheld those originals. But he had copies as well, that were found in the search for the originals. So they did not know the limit of exposure, any more than with Biden.

Trump's lawyers were not allowed to be present because it was an execution of a search warrant, that only became necessary when he didn't cooperate with the Archives, or the DoJ, or the FBI, over the span of 18 months.

Biden's attorneys were present because he had cooperated fully with the Archives, the DoJ, and the FBI, over the span of 2 months.

There is no idea in either case, of who might have had access. In both cases, the sets of records were locked up. There does not appear to be evidence that either was compromised, but that intelligence impact assessment is still being made.

Bricktop · Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:20 pm

scbriml wrote:
Has anyone actually claimed Biden's issue is "better" than that of "he who cannot be mentioned"? It's certainly different, but that's a subtlety that's apparently beyond the comprehension of the red hatters.

It is "He Who Must Not Be Named". I expected better from an Englishman.

Bricktop · Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:12 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
So just to correct the facts here:

The originals of the Biden documents are in the Archives, because they weren't withheld. Biden had copies of the originals, which would have been known when they were made. Therefore the claim that they were not supposed to be in Biden's possession, is unsubstantiated. What is known, is that their location was improper.

I think this is the first time I have heard the claim that Biden was actually entitled to still have (copies of) the documents. He was certainly entitled to see them, but not supposed to keep them. No-one on his team, or his surrogates have raised that, and I would be interested in the rationale for it. It's a major stretch to call that a "fact" IMO. Has there been any confirmation that these were copies and not originals?

Avatar2go wrote:
An open question for the investigation will be, what is the procedure for tracking copies? Can they be permanently retained, or were they forgotten? And what is the process for reporting their location and status?

I am sure these procedures are already well known and well communicated.

Are you suggesting that when these people leave office they can take copies of classified stuff with them? I cannot imagine that is the case. Without getting into other cases, it would mean someone who took classified originals could just take copies and give the originals back to the Archives, and there would be no fuss. Seems implausible.

<I deleted some stuff here because I don't want to get into the futile and meaningless comparison argument.>

Avatar2go wrote:
There is no idea in either case, of who might have had access. In both cases, the sets of records were locked up. There does not appear to be evidence that either was compromised, but that intelligence impact assessment is still being made.

I agree with this, even though calling stuff in a garage "locked up" is a stretch. But beyond that it is troubling to me that if a) we take Biden at his word that he was "surprised" aka didn't know that he had classified documents, b) documents have been found going back over a decade to his Senate days and c) the Archives didn't even know (copies of?) classified documents were out there, nobody knows what they don't know. Will more be found? It's possible. So to say "there's no there there", as Biden himself said and some here have parroted, is pure BS. But let's be kind and call that an opinion and not a fact.

Avatar2go · Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:31 pm

Again with the false equivalence.

Biden was permitted to have copies of official records, to which the Archives did not object. Whether anyone knew they included classified records, is not yet known. But is doubtful.

The question, as I pointed out, is what is the process for monitoring or returning those that are classified? That is for the investigation to resolve.

Trump was not permitted to have the originals of public records, which is what makes his case different. That is equally true for classified and non-classified records. Further Trump did know that he had classified records, as he claimed he had declassified them. As everyone here knows and understands.

But whatever, it's just the same dance, again and again and again. It's not worth the energy or the time. The facts are what they are, they can't be altered. The investigations will establish them for the public, as well as their significance and impact. It doesn't matter what false implications of facts or equivalence are made, or how insistently.

Bricktop · Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:28 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
Again with the false equivalence.

Biden was permitted to have copies of official records, to which the Archives did not object. Whether anyone knew they included classified records, is not yet known. But is doubtful.

The question, as I pointed out, is what is the process for monitoring or returning those that are classified? That is for the investigation to resolve.

Trump was not permitted to have the originals of public records, which is what makes his case different. That is equally true for classified and non-classified records. Further Trump did know that he had classified records, as he claimed he had declassified them. As everyone here knows and understands.

But whatever, it's just the same dance, again and again and again. It's not worth the energy or the time. The facts are what they are, they can't be altered. The investigations will establish them for the public, as well as their significance and impact. It doesn't matter what false implications of facts or equivalence are made, or how insistently.

Don't you think we are beyond the Archives issue, and into a Classified documents issue? The rest of the world does. That's where it gets uncomfortable right, so whip out the tired Trump card. But whatever, it's just the same dance, again and again and again. It's not worth the energy or the time.

The facts are what they are, they can't be altered. He took Classified documents. He should not have. They were not secure. They have been finding new ones for two and a half months. And there are apparently 1,850 boxes of documents from his Senate days at UD. I hope the FBI is securing them. We already know he had Classified files from his Senate days at home. Want to wager there's nothing at UD? I wouldn't take that bet. But he takes Classified documents very seriously.

Avatar2go · Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:40 pm

Believe what you wish, my friend. I'll continue to follow the facts and the evidence, which don't point to anything like what you are implying here.

Most likely an oversight without any demonstrated intent or criminality, which will be resolved administratively. And the documents returned voluntarily without the need for any fuss, search warrant, or lawsuit. Except of course, the fuss being made by Republicans.

When that happens, the implications will no doubt shift, to conspiracy, favoritism, and persecution of Trump by comparison. That's just as certain and easy to predict as the false equivalences were.

Bricktop · Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:12 pm

I too will follow the facts and the evidence, despite the sly dig that I don't.

We will see where it goes. More may come out, but I think everyone will ultimately get off scott free, even HWMNBN. Not that they aren't guilty of something, but because such is life (for them). Both sides should forget the fantasy that the other guy is going to get executed, and their guy is going to skate. It's an embarrassment to the country that this is our leadership class, and this is how they conduct themselves.

Be well.

Bricktop · Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:17 pm

So now Pence is self-reporting. How soon before you see a line of these dopes doing a Reverse-Sandy-Berger and sneaking stuff back in? Pathetic.

casinterest · Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:25 pm

Bricktop wrote:
So now Pence is self-reporting. How soon before you see a line of these dopes doing a Reverse-Sandy-Berger and sneaking stuff back in? Pathetic.

Well I guess we now need to wait for Quail, Dubya, Cheney, Obama, Clinton, and Gore to all self report. Maybe ask Jimmy Carter for good measure.

seb146 · Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:01 pm

Bricktop wrote:
So now Pence is self-reporting. How soon before you see a line of these dopes doing a Reverse-Sandy-Berger and sneaking stuff back in? Pathetic.

And just like that "both sides do it" is not even on the radar. What's wrong with pointing out flaws in the system and fixing them? Where is the MAGA outrage and demands for raids on Pence's properties?

phatfarmlines · Wed Jan 25, 2023 12:21 pm

So I hope after this debacle that the National Archives considers a formal records retention policy like many corporations have. I'm sure the Archives would be interested in reducing paper waste :duck:

.

Even today, companies now have policies that prohibit e-mailing company documents to personal e-mail addresses. This was a common practice 10-20 years ago if someone wanted to do WFH without a company laptop.

Avatar2go · Wed Jan 25, 2023 1:56 pm

phatfarmlines wrote:
So I hope after this debacle that the National Archives considers a formal records retention policy like many corporations have. I'm sure the Archives would be interested in reducing paper waste .

Even today, companies now have policies that prohibit e-mailing company documents to personal e-mail addresses. This was a common practice 10-20 years ago if someone wanted to do WFH without a company laptop.

This has little to do with the Archives, or document retention policies, which are already far more strict for classification.

The Archives follows a paper trail to establish a bibliography of the official records that are produced by government. Then works to ensure it has the original copies of all those records, and keeps them in an organized catalog. That is the role of an archivist.

These instances are cases of failures on the part of the recipients, to return or destroy copies of the classified documents they are provided. As long as they are working with copies, the Archives would not be involved.

The Archives became involved in the Trump case because he had some originals, for which they had the bibliography, but not the documents.

Once any official or classified documents are found, they must be handed over to the Archives and checked against the bibliography. If not located, the bibliography is updated and the documents are added as originals. If they already have the original, then there is no issue from the standpoint of the Archives.

However if the document is classified, that is referred to the DoJ as a potentially criminal matter.

Bricktop · Wed Jan 25, 2023 2:51 pm

seb146 wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
So now Pence is self-reporting. How soon before you see a line of these dopes doing a Reverse-Sandy-Berger and sneaking stuff back in? Pathetic.

And just like that "both sides do it" is not even on the radar. <trolling deleted>

Utterly wrong. Unsurprisingly. Here on Planet Earth, "both sides do it" is front and center, as we get into the "we really need better rules so these poor innocent people don't run afoul on technicalities" phase.

seb146 · Wed Jan 25, 2023 3:16 pm

Bricktop wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
So now Pence is self-reporting. How soon before you see a line of these dopes doing a Reverse-Sandy-Berger and sneaking stuff back in? Pathetic.

And just like that "both sides do it" is not even on the radar. <trolling deleted>

Utterly wrong. Unsurprisingly. Here on Planet Earth, "both sides do it" is front and center, as we get into the "we really need better rules so these poor innocent people don't run afoul on technicalities" phase.

And everyone agrees the laws need to change. Everyone agreed on that when the first documents were found in Biden's university office. No one disputes that. However, the problem lies with the one side demanding raids and investigations and charges against President Biden but staying silent on Pence after the constant drum beat of "both sides do it" to excuse their own party's bad (and sometimes illegal) behavior.

This is an actual "both sides do it" case but there are zero calls for raids, investigations, and charges against Pence the way there were against Biden. Just more MAGA hypocrisy we are not supposed to talk about, I guess....

Aaron747 · Wed Jan 25, 2023 4:25 pm

Eolesen wrote:
The whole notion of making this out to be a criminal offense or even misdemeanor as opposed to a breach of policy is ridiculous unless there was proven intent to use those documents for unauthorized means.

Well....duh. That's what investigations are for...not sure why it requires repetition.

Avatar2go · Wed Jan 25, 2023 5:44 pm

Eolesen wrote:

<cue up howling liberals claiming that Trump had ill intent because Orange Man Bad >

That's not the reason that demonstrates intent. We'll have to let the DoJ grand jury decide that issue.

bennett123 · Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:34 am

We are talking about 'Classified' documents here.

The level of classification is actually more important than the volume. That often seems to get lost in this type of discussion.

Do we know what classification the documents were in these three instances?.

Avatar2go · Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:03 am

bennett123 wrote:
We are talking about 'Classified' documents here.

The level of classification is actually more important than the volume. That often seems to get lost in this type of discussion.

Do we know what classification the documents were in these three instances?.

Clinton had a moderate number of emails that were retroactively classified top secret (after they were discovered), but contained no classification markings. The majority were sent to her by State Department staff, but she did also respond to some of them. Being in email form, they were not originals and did not involve the National Archives. She voluntarily turned over everything she had to the FBI.

Trump had a larger number of top secret original documents, with classification markings, some requiring the highest security clearance to be viewed. He was aware that he had them and defended his right to keep them under executive privilege, as well as his right to declassify them. He resisted turning them over to the National Archives, DoJ, and FBI, and sued to get them back. Eventually the DoJ prevailed in court and now has custody of all the documents.

Biden had a small number of top secret documents, with classification markings. He was not aware he had them and voluntarily turned them over to the National Archives when discovered. Also voluntarily requested a search of his residence by the FBI.

Pence had a small number of documents with classified markings, the level of which is not known. He was not aware he had them and voluntarily turned them over to the National Archives when discovered. The discovery ocurred during a voluntary search of his homes and office by outside counsel.

Avatar2go · Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:28 pm

Here is a good article summarizing the cases.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... documents/

EA CO AS · Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:43 am

bennett123 wrote:
We are talking about 'Classified' documents here.

The level of classification is actually more important than the volume. That often seems to get lost in this type of discussion.

Do we know what classification the documents were in these three instances?.

I’d say the bigger deal is that in the Biden cases, they were separated. As in someone had been looking at them.

seb146 · Fri Jan 27, 2023 3:28 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
bennett123 wrote:
We are talking about 'Classified' documents here.

The level of classification is actually more important than the volume. That often seems to get lost in this type of discussion.

Do we know what classification the documents were in these three instances?.

I’d say the bigger deal is that in the Biden cases, they were separated. As in someone had been looking at them.

Speculation. Have you ever moved and said "The stuff in this box is stuff I use at home but the stuff in that box is stuff I use at the office" and then not look inside the box for like 5 years? Happens a lot more than you think!

bluecrew · Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:13 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
bennett123 wrote:
We are talking about 'Classified' documents here.

The level of classification is actually more important than the volume. That often seems to get lost in this type of discussion.

Do we know what classification the documents were in these three instances?.

I’d say the bigger deal is that in the Biden cases, they were separated. As in someone had been looking at them.

What?

I've been following this and not only have I not seen this reported, I've never even seen it speculated.

That sounds like an OANN conspiracy theory... or straight from the Tucker Cinematic Universe.

Avatar2go · Wed Feb 01, 2023 9:43 pm

The FBI searched Biden's second home and found no classified documents. They did haul off a few boxes of official records for further review.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/01/politics ... index.html

Aaron747 · Thu Feb 02, 2023 12:31 am

Avatar2go wrote:
The FBI searched Biden's second home and found no classified documents. They did haul off a few boxes of official records for further review.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/01/politics ... index.html

Not enough of a pacifier for the rabid crowd.

Bricktop · Fri Feb 03, 2023 12:43 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:
The FBI searched Biden's second home and found no classified documents. They did haul off a few boxes of official records for further review.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/01/politics ... index.html

Not enough of a pacifier for the rabid crowd.

Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating. :sarcastic:

MaverickM11 · Fri Feb 03, 2023 12:48 am

Bricktop wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:
The FBI searched Biden's second home and found no classified documents. They did haul off a few boxes of official records for further review.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/01/politics ... index.html

Not enough of a pacifier for the rabid crowd.

Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating.

Maybe he could eat them or burn them or flush them down the toilet, or lie about the contents and location, or have some bimbo lawyer sign affidavits lying about their contents and location. The possibilities are endless if he were to follow the lawn order party's leader :rotfl:

Bricktop · Fri Feb 03, 2023 12:57 am

MaverickM11 wrote:
Maybe he could eat them or burn them or flush them down the toilet, or lie about the contents and location, or have some bimbo lawyer sign affidavits lying about their contents and location. The possibilities are endless if he were to follow the lawn order party's leader

Nah, he's better than that. He wouldn't be careless and irresponsible. He just innocently left them where Hunter could plagiarize them (that is a strong gene in the Biden DNA) and flog them. But ignore that he shouldn't have had them in the first place, because he's "cooperating".

Avatar2go · Fri Feb 03, 2023 1:04 am

Bricktop wrote:
Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating.

The Rule of Two:

"Always two there are, no more, no less. The false equivalence and the conspiracy theory."

Yoda was a wise individual.

QF7 · Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:14 am

Anybody other than me think this story is dying everywhere except on some chat boards?

Whether he meant to or not, Pence’s disclosure has neutralized the issue.

Everybody has done it. Get over it. Move on.

Yes, for the future, tighten up procedures, maybe require a screening of all documents moving out at end of terms.

But “might have damaged national security” doesn’t equal “did damage national security.”

Avatar2go · Fri Feb 03, 2023 1:11 pm

QF7 wrote:
Anybody other than me think this story is dying everywhere except on some chat boards?

Whether he meant to or not, Pence’s disclosure has neutralized the issue.

Everybody has done it. Get over it. Move on.

Yes, for the future, tighten up procedures, maybe require a screening of all documents moving out at end of terms.

But “might have damaged national security” doesn’t equal “did damage national security.”

I think the Pence and Biden stories have cancelled each other out, as both were VP's, neither had intent, and both cooperated fully.

The Trump story still has legs until the grand jury decides on the obstruction and PRA charges. If they let him off, that will fade away too. If he is indicted, it will be a major story. The DoJ will have to decide before the 2024 campaign gets rolling, as they cannot interfere in an election.

Bricktop · Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:34 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating.

The Rule of Two:

"Always two there are, no more, no less. The false equivalence and the conspiracy theory."

Yoda was a wise individual.

I know you love to cling to your "false equivalence" line like a talisman, but rather than just saying it, enumerate it. False equivalent between what and what? Equivalency implies a comparison between two. Point it out in what I said.

There is no try, only do!

Avatar2go · Fri Feb 03, 2023 6:47 pm

Bricktop wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating.

The Rule of Two:

"Always two there are, no more, no less. The false equivalence and the conspiracy theory."

Yoda was a wise individual.

I know you love to cling to your "false equivalence" line like a talisman, but rather than just saying it, enumerate it. False equivalent between what and what? Equivalency implies a comparison between two. Point it out in what I said.

There is no try, only do!

Obvious it is, Padawan. Evidence there is not, for destruction of documents by the Alliance Leader. Evidence there is, for destruction of documents by the Emperor himself. False is the equivalence that compares these events.

Always two there are, the false equivalence and the conspiracy together. No more, no less. Exist not can they, one without the other.

Bricktop · Fri Feb 03, 2023 8:53 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
Obvious it is, Padawan. Evidence there is not, for destruction of documents by the Alliance Leader. Evidence there is, for destruction of documents by the Emperor himself. False is the equivalence that compares these events.

Always two there are, the false equivalence and the conspiracy together. No more, no less. Exist not can they, one without the other.

Firstly, absolute props to you for the style of your reply. It brought a genuine smile to my face, and credit is well due to you.

The substance side is where it falls down. Quoting oneself always seems off, but

Bricktop wrote:
Point it out in what I said.

in

Bricktop wrote:
Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating.

Notice no mentions here about the Emperor. Nor would I try to raise any, quite the opposite. I have consistently asked that he not be raised as a defense of the Alliance Leader as is so frequently the case amongst the "But MAGA!!!" crowd here. Unfortunately, because of their own massive prejudices they cannot help themselves, and thus see any attack on their boy as a defense of the other guy. That is the stuff of the child's playground. I do not defend the Emperor: He is no friend of mine, and it is irritating and amusing to see how blinkered people are. But let us not lose sight of the fact that the Alliance Leader has feet of clay, merely because the Emperor is a *****. Two there indeed are, and both can be simultaneously true.

Avatar2go · Fri Feb 03, 2023 8:59 pm

Bricktop wrote:

Firstly, absolute props to you for the style of your reply. It brought a genuine smile to my face, and credit is well due to you.

The substance side is where it falls down. Quoting oneself always seems off, but

Bricktop wrote:
Point it out in what I said.

in
Bricktop wrote:
Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating.

Notice no mentions here about the Emperor. Nor would I try to raise any, quite the opposite. I have consistently asked that he not be raised as a defense of the Alliance Leader as is so frequently the case amongst the "But MAGA!!!" crowd here. Unfortunately, because of their own massive prejudices they cannot help themselves, and thus see any attack on their boy as a defense of the other guy. That is the stuff of the child's playground. I do not defend the Emperor: He is no friend of mine, and it is irritating and amusing to see how blinkered people are. But let us not lose sight of the fact that the Alliance Leader has feet of clay, merely because the Emperor is a *****. Two there indeed are, and both can be simultaneously true.

Implied the false equivalence is, as sins of the Emperor known they are. Without which, reason there is not for Allied Leader allegations to fabricate.

Bricktop · Fri Feb 03, 2023 11:01 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
Bricktop wrote:

Firstly, absolute props to you for the style of your reply. It brought a genuine smile to my face, and credit is well due to you.

The substance side is where it falls down. Quoting oneself always seems off, but

Bricktop wrote:
Point it out in what I said.

in
Bricktop wrote:
Biden decided to go to Rehoboth two weekends ago, before the FBI searched. Don't worry about it being a potential crime scene or anything like that. Maybe his team finally got their act together and got the fireplace going and made some 'smores before the FBI's appointment. Go ahead Mr. President. We trust you, because you're co-operating.

Notice no mentions here about the Emperor. Nor would I try to raise any, quite the opposite. I have consistently asked that he not be raised as a defense of the Alliance Leader as is so frequently the case amongst the "But MAGA!!!" crowd here. Unfortunately, because of their own massive prejudices they cannot help themselves, and thus see any attack on their boy as a defense of the other guy. That is the stuff of the child's playground. I do not defend the Emperor: He is no friend of mine, and it is irritating and amusing to see how blinkered people are. But let us not lose sight of the fact that the Alliance Leader has feet of clay, merely because the Emperor is a *****. Two there indeed are, and both can be simultaneously true.

Implied the false equivalence is, as sins of the Emperor known they are. Without which, reason there is not for Allied Leader allegations to fabricate.

My point, you have made.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net