Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
But as stated, the documents weren't used in his "book deal", making such an allegation tricky to prove in court, which is what Hur ultimately concludedThat was a really terrible weasel.
The fact is that Biden stole documents he had no authority to have. He stole them for the purpose of padding his book deal.
Biden's stolen documents used in his book is irrelevant. Biden admitted to illegally possessing the documents.But as stated, the documents weren't used in his "book deal", making such an allegation tricky to prove in court, which is what Hur ultimately concluded
You decide to omit exculpatory evidence is terribly dishonest.
www.washingtontimes.com
Low IQ hyper-partisans simply cannot imagine a world where everybody else isn't just like them.Never voted for the dude, so GFY.
Yes.
Even worse than that. Biden had no right whereas Trump was a President. Trump also has the PRA on his side as well as the Clinton sock drawer tapes case, which the DOJ forcefully argued in favor of Clinton, and the DC Circuit concurred in that argument.
If you want to make a motive for him to keep the documents for the book, the fact that he didn't use them in the book makes that case far more difficult to prove to a jury.Biden's stolen documents used in his book is irrelevant. Biden admitted to illegally possessing the documents.
Biden likely took classified notebooks for $8 million book deal, special counsel claims
President Biden’s $8 million book deal was a likely motive behind his decision to take notebooks containing classified information when he left the White House in 2017, special counsel Robert K. Hur said.
Mr. Hur, testifying Tuesday before the House Judiciary Committee about his investigation into Mr. Biden’s possession of classified documents, described audio recordings from 2017 in which Mr. Biden admitted having classified material.(bolded text added by me.)
The former vice president read some of the material to his ghostwriter, who was helping him author his second memoir and did not have a security clearance, Mr. Hur said.
Nt at all. The fact that he stole the documents for personal gain would be an easy case to make in front of a jury.If you want to make a motive for him to keep the documents for the book, the fact that he didn't use them in the book makes that case far more difficult to prove to a jury.
Convincing a jury that they’re for personal gain is a harder argument to make to make when he didn’t attempt to gain from them.Nt at all. The fact that he stole the documents for personal gain would be an easy case to make in front of a jury.
We both know the corrupt DOJ will not bring charges.
No. Trump lied to the DoJ about having the documents, then about returning all of the documents. That's bad intent.
Trump obstructed justice. Biden cooperated fully.
Convincing a jury that they’re for personal gain is a harder argument to make to make when he didn’t attempt to gain from them.
As I stated earlier, the DoJ has previously allowed Reagan to keep notebooks which were classified, so it would have been a double standard to prosecute Biden for this.Biden clearly had the documents because he intended to use them for personal gain.
It's in the Hur report.
Mr. Hur testified for more than four hours, affirming the conclusion of his February report that Mr. Biden “had strong motivations to ignore proper procedures for safeguarding his classified notebooks” because he sought to secure a book deal, signed with Macmillan publishers, that would ultimately pay him $8 million.
As you chose to sidestep earlier, this has nothing to do with Reagan. Biden stole classified documents and used those in furtherance of his book deal.As I stated earlier, the DoJ has previously allowed Reagan to keep notebooks which were classified, so it would have been a double standard to prosecute Biden for this.
It’s in the Hur report.
The "documents" used for the book deal where his personal notes which the DoJ allows former executives to have.As you chose to sidestep earlier, this has nothing to do with Reagan. Biden stole classified documents and used those in furtherance of his book deal.
It's in the Hur report.
False. Biden used classified documents for personal gain in furtherance of a book deal.The "documents" used for the book deal where his personal notes which the DoJ allows former executives to have.
So even though a motive exists to retain those notes, Hur decided this wasn't prosecutable for other reasons.
I'm not arguing against this point.False. Biden used classified documents for personal gain in furtherance of a book deal.
Mr. Hur testified for more than four hours, affirming the conclusion of his February report that Mr. Biden “had strong motivations to ignore proper procedures for safeguarding his classified notebooks” because he sought to secure a book deal, signed with Macmillan publishers, that would ultimately pay him
I understood you believe Biden should be given a free pass for his illegal acts.I'm not arguing against this point.
I'm saying there are other reasons that prosecuting Biden for possession of these notebooks is not a good idea. This is a point that you seem unable to acknowledge.
DoJ gave Reagan a free pass for having notebooks with classified information. Should we have prosecuted him?I understood you believe Biden should be given a free pass for his illegal acts.
Why should I acknowledge a corrupt, career crook like Biden should not be prosecuted?
Trump Hit With Harsh Truth After Harsh Truth From Former Voters In Scathing Ads
In the new Republican Voters Against Trump campaign, one- and two-time Donald Trump voters reveal why they're not going there again.www.huffpost.com
As I stated earlier, the DoJ has previously allowed Reagan to keep notebooks which were classified, so it would have been a double standard to prosecute Biden for this.
It’s in the Hur report.
The "documents" used for the book deal where his personal notes which the DoJ allows former executives to have.
So even though a motive exists to retain those notes, Hur decided this wasn't prosecutable for other reasons.
