Jim Jordan rumbles with Chuck Todd over whether FBI should investigate parents at school board meetings, Chuck says some of them made death threats

[Lesh]

I've seen senators, congressmen, and the FBI saying that classified material can ONLY be read in the SCIF.
Its clearly the case that Biden stole classified documents. Question is, why did he steal them?

They were lying to you.

The only information that must be protected in a SCIF is classified information derived from intelligence sources and methods, said Steven Aftergood, former director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.

So, there is a broad swath of “classified documents” that is not required to be brought to a SCIF in the first place.

 

[kyzr]

They were lying to you.
The only information that must be protected in a SCIF is classified information derived from intelligence sources and methods, said Steven Aftergood, former director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.
So, there is a broad swath of “classified documents” that is not required to be brought to a SCIF in the first place.

Biden stole classified documents. That is a fact.
I believe senators and congressmen before I believe some unknown "scientist". (with no link)

 

[Lesh]

Biden stole classified documents. That is a fact.
I believe senators and congressmen before I believe some unknown "scientist". (with no link)

So you believe asshole partisan jerk offs ...because you want to.

Whatever...they're wrong.

Can classified documents be removed from secure facilities? Sometimes. - Poynter

Appearing on 'Fox News Sunday,' a GOP congressman oversimplifies a claim on classified documents amid the Biden investigation.

www.poynter.org

 

[kyzr]

So you believe asshole partisan jerk offs ...because you want to.
Whatever...they're wrong.

Thanks for the link. That puts a different spin on it.
However, we don't know what kind of classified docs Biden stole.
Even if they don't have to be read in a SCIF, can a pol take classified docs home and keep them in their garage??????
The only "partisan jerk-offs" are people who think Biden didn't steal classified docs.

 

[Lesh]

Thanks for the link. That puts a different spin on it.
However, we don't know what kind of classified docs Biden stole.
Even if they don't have to be read in a SCIF, can a pol take classified docs home and keep them in their garage??????
The only "partisan jerk-offs" are people who think Biden didn't steal classified docs.

Moss said classified documents, no matter their level, “cannot simply be removed and taken outside of any secured space without complying with security protocols.” However, he called Fitzpatrick’s characterization of the process an “oversimplification.”

Dietz said, “Of course, Trump and Biden and every other (president and vice president) have taken sensitive information home. “Therefore, it is not true that sensitive information can never leave a SCIF.”

Deitz said that a president’s or vice president’s home might be considered tantamount to a SCIF.

 

[Marener]

I've seen senators, congressmen, and the FBI saying that classified material can ONLY be read in the SCIF.
Its clearly the case that Biden stole classified documents. Question is, why did he steal them?

President and Vice Presidents are different. They access highly classified material all the time as part of their job.

It’s reasonable that these documents become mixed in with other documents from time to time.

Having the documents is a small scandal. Obstructing the DoJ while they seek their return is a big scandal. How can you not see that?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Even if they don't have to be read in a SCIF, can a pol take classified docs home and keep them in their garage??????

Absolutely not.

They must at least be stored in a storeroom in the basement of a publicly accessible Golf Resort. (Publicly accessible means that there are uncleared hotel guests, uncleared members, uncleared members guests, uncleared resort staff, uncleared FPOTUS family, and uncleared FPOTUS staff on site.)

WW

 

[kyzr]

President and Vice Presidents are different. They access highly classified material all the time as part of their job.
It’s reasonable that these documents become mixed in with other documents from time to time.
Having the documents is a small scandal. Obstructing the DOJ while they seek their return is a big scandal. How can you not see that?

1. The president is different since he can declassify documents. The issue of "over-classification" is a problem that has no simple solution. A VP cannot declassify documents.

2. It is NOT reasonable that classified docs become mixed in with anything. A SCIF is a SCIF. Nothing classified should ever leave the SCIF. Stealing classified docs is obvious. Then again, Sandy Berger stole classified docs and he just lost his security clearance. No jail time.

3. Stealing classified documents is a VERY BIG SCANDAL, especially after the spin Biden put on Trump having them.

4. Obstructing the DOJ has NOT been proven in court, how can you not see that? The DOJ went thru the documents in June. The documents were secure. There was no obstruction, duh.

Litigation by Leak: Government Officials Leak New Details on the Mar-a-Lago Raid While Continuing to Oppose Disclosures in Court

One of the most glaring contradictions in the Mar-a-Lago controversy has been the Justice Department demanding absolute and unwavering secrecy over the FBI raid while officials have been leaking de…

jonathanturley.org

"The level of detail is extraordinary including the very account of past dealings that some of us have argued could be released in the affidavit as well as the contents of the boxes. The leaks describe the June meeting in Mar-a-Lago and reveals that Jay Bratt, the chief of the counterespionage section of the national security division of the Justice Department, met with two of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb. He then went through the boxes himself to identify classified material. (The Trump motion this week also described this meeting with Bratt, which again raises why the same information in the affidavit cannot be disclosed)."

5. The FBI didn't just take the classified documents in the locked storage. They went thru everything, even Melania's undies. They took documents that they had no right to take, including "Attorney-Client" privileged documents.

Federal Judge Indicates Intent to Appoint Special Master to Review Seized Documents in Mar-a-Lago Raid

Since the start of the controversy over the Mar-a-Lago raid, I have called for the release of a redacted affidavit and the appointment of a special master to sort through the seized material, inclu…

jonathanturley.org

Once again, as with the release of the redacted affidavit, Garland could have taken these steps to assure the public that the Department was not acting for political or improper purposes — or using excessive means to achieve those goals. He has refused every opportunity to do so while chastising those who question the integrity of his Department.

So Garland's refusal to release the affidavit proves that the basis for the MAL raid was total BULLSHIT

 

[Marener]

The leaks describe the June meeting in Mar-a-Lago and reveals that Jay Bratt, the chief of the counterespionage section of the national security division of the Justice Department, met with two of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb. He then went through the boxes himself to identify classified material.

This part of the article is either extremely poorly written or intentionally misleading.

It’s unclear if he’s referring to The NY Times article in this sentence, but that’s the leak he refers to originally so I assume it is. He’s provided no other sources. Bad writing to leave such ambitiously. Maybe that’s the point. Moving on.

It’s also unclear who is the “he” is in the sentence that says “he then went through the boxes”. The most logical person to think the “he” is Jay Bratt, since Bratt was the subject of the previous sentence.

But that’s a huge problem for two reasons.

One, The NY Times article doesn’t say Bratt went through the boxes. It says that Corocon went through the boxes. This is what it says: “Mr. Corcoran went through the boxes himself to identify classified material beforehand, according to two people familiar with his efforts”.

Since this article is from August 2022, there was a lot Turley didn’t know that we now know. Bratt was specifically prevented from looking in the boxes by Trump’s lawyers on that meeting. The DoJ said so in their response to Trump’s lawsuit:

DOJ response to Trump special master

August 30, 2022

www.documentcloud.org

This raises a few questions. Is Turley that careless or is he being dishonest? Did Turley actually think the DoJ looked through the boxes and if so where did he get that information? Not from The NY Times, that’s for sure.

Your assertion that the DoJ was allowed to look and take whatever they wanted to is plainly false.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The leaks describe the June meeting in Mar-a-Lago and reveals that Jay Bratt, the chief of the counterespionage section of the national security division of the Justice Department, met with two of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb. He then went through the boxes himself to identify classified material. (The Trump motion this week also described this meeting with Bratt, which again raises why the same information in the affidavit cannot be disclosed)."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_4.pdf

This is false.

Court documents show that during the June meeting when the FPOTUS lawyers turned over the redweld of a couple of dozen documents, the FPOTUS team refused to allow the NARA/FBI representatives the ability to look in any other containers.

WW

 

[kyzr]

This part of the article is either extremely poorly written or intentionally misleading.

It’s unclear if he’s referring to The NY Times article in this sentence, but that’s the leak he refers to originally so I assume it is. He’s provided no other sources. Bad writing to leave such ambitiously. Maybe that’s the point. Moving on.

It’s also unclear who is the “he” is in the sentence that says “he then went through the boxes”. The most logical person to think the “he” is Jay Bratt, since Bratt was the subject of the previous sentence.

But that’s a huge problem for two reasons.

One, The NY Times article doesn’t say Bratt went through the boxes. It says that Corocon went through the boxes. This is what it says: “Mr. Corcoran went through the boxes himself to identify classified material beforehand, according to two people familiar with his efforts”.

Since this article is from August 2022, there was a lot Turley didn’t know that we now know. Bratt was specifically prevented from looking in the boxes by Trump’s lawyers on that meeting. The DOJ said so in their response to Trump’s lawsuit:

This raises a few questions. Is Turley that careless or is he being dishonest? Did Turley actually think the DOJ looked through the boxes and if so where did he get that information? Not from The NY Times, that’s for sure.

Your assertion that the DOJ was allowed to look and take whatever they wanted to is plainly false.

My point EXACTLY! We don't know who is lying. Does the affidavit say Bratt was prevented from looking thru the boxes for classified documents? If so is that a lie? It makes no sense for Trump's lawyers to look thru the boxes of classified docs since they probably don't have security clearances.

Maybe Jim Jordan's committee can sort out who the liars are?

 

[Marener]

My point EXACTLY! We don't know who is lying. Does the affidavit say Bratt was prevented from looking thru the boxes for classified documents? If so is that a lie? It makes no sense for Trump's lawyers to look thru the boxes of classified docs since they probably don't have security clearances.

Maybe Jim Jordan's committee can sort out who the liars are?

Ha! You think Jim Jordan is going to ask Christina Bobb or Evan Corocon to testify and tell us? Hell no. Jordan doesn’t want to hear those answers because they destroy his claim of a double standard. Even if he did call them to testify, they’d almost certainly plead the 5th (if they have a lick of common sense). But we don’t even need that. Why? We have the info we need.

The DoJ says in a court filing (where lying will get you sanctioned) that Trump’s lawyers stopped them from looking for the documents. Trump’s lawyers did not dispute this.

We do know who is lying. Trump is a liar. Turley is a liar. The DoJ never had an opportunity to look through Trump’s papers until they came with a search warrant.

 

[struth]

This part of the article is either extremely poorly written or intentionally misleading.

It’s unclear if he’s referring to The NY Times article in this sentence, but that’s the leak he refers to originally so I assume it is. He’s provided no other sources. Bad writing to leave such ambitiously. Maybe that’s the point. Moving on.

It’s also unclear who is the “he” is in the sentence that says “he then went through the boxes”. The most logical person to think the “he” is Jay Bratt, since Bratt was the subject of the previous sentence.

But that’s a huge problem for two reasons.

One, The NY Times article doesn’t say Bratt went through the boxes. It says that Corocon went through the boxes. This is what it says: “Mr. Corcoran went through the boxes himself to identify classified material beforehand, according to two people familiar with his efforts”.

Since this article is from August 2022, there was a lot Turley didn’t know that we now know. Bratt was specifically prevented from looking in the boxes by Trump’s lawyers on that meeting. The DoJ said so in their response to Trump’s lawsuit:

DOJ response to Trump special master

August 30, 2022

www.documentcloud.org

View attachment 752501

This raises a few questions. Is Turley that careless or is he being dishonest? Did Turley actually think the DoJ looked through the boxes and if so where did he get that information? Not from The NY Times, that’s for sure.

Your assertion that the DoJ was allowed to look and take whatever they wanted to is plainly false.

Smart move by Counsel....nobody would of wanted someone without proper authority getting their hands on classified material before everything could be reviewed.....we have no evidence Xiden took those protocals.

 

[kyzr]

Ha! You think Jim Jordan is going to ask Christina Bobb or Evan Corocon to testify and tell us? Hell no. Jordan wasn’t want to hear those answers because they destroy his claim of a double standard. Even if he did call them to testify, they’d almost certainly plead the 5th (if they have a lick of common sense). But we don’t even need that. Why? We have the info we need.

The DoJ says in a court filing (where lying will get you sanctioned) that Trump’s lawyers stopped them from looking for the documents. Trump’s lawyers did not dispute this.

We do know who is lying. Trump is a liar. Turley is a liar. The DoJ never had an opportunity to look through Trump’s papers until they came with a search warrant.

How can we get past Trump if we don't get to the bottom of MAL and the classified docs?
You call people liars without proof. Either we find out Trump is a victim or a liar.
Voters need to know. I want to see the affidavit and what classified docs we're discussing.
Nuclear secrets or operations crossfire-hurricane & razor and NSA & CIA political activities??
i.e. real secrets or embarrasing deep state secrets?

 

[francoHFW]

The doctor wanted to examine genitals?? LOL!! That's all you got? WTF did Jim have to do with a doctor? Was he the head coach?

View attachment 752054 How about Joe Biden examining Ashley's genitals?

View attachment 752055 To quote Joe: "I was 30, she was 12"

totally discredited garbage propaganda super duper

 

[Marener]

How can we get past Trump if we don't get to the bottom of MAL and the classified docs?
You call people liars without proof. Either we find out Trump is a victim or a liar.
Voters need to know. I want to see the affidavit and what classified docs we're discussing.
Nuclear secrets or operations crossfire-hurricane & razor and NSA & CIA political activities??
i.e. real secrets or embarrasing deep state secrets?

Jim Jordan has no intention of getting to the bottom of anything. He is only intent on pushing a narrative.

The DoJ and special prosecutor are handling it, as they should.

Yes. I call Turley a liar because his claims are not substantiated whatsoever by even his own source. The DoJ in a legal filing refuted it and there’s been no evidence or argument to the contrary by anyone connected to the actual event.

We can’t talk about classified documents because they’re classified. That’s the whole point of making them classified. Even Trump and his little peon Kash Patel won’t talk about them even those two people like to claim they were declassified. It raises serious credibility issues when people say one thing and act totally differently.

 

[struth]

Ha! You think Jim Jordan is going to ask Christina Bobb or Evan Corocon to testify and tell us? Hell no. Jordan wasn’t want to hear those answers because they destroy his claim of a double standard. Even if he did call them to testify, they’d almost certainly plead the 5th (if they have a lick of common sense). But we don’t even need that. Why? We have the info we need.

The DoJ says in a court filing (where lying will get you sanctioned) that Trump’s lawyers stopped them from looking for the documents. Trump’s lawyers did not dispute this.

We do know who is lying. Trump is a liar. Turley is a liar. The DoJ never had an opportunity to look through Trump’s papers until they came with a search warrant.

why would you invite someone's lawyers to come testify? They can't. There is something called attorney-client priv. I mean, I guess your desire highlights the real reason for the raid....to get access to that attorney-client priv documents that Xiden took.

 

[kyzr]

Jim Jordan has no intention of getting to the bottom of anything. He is only intent on pushing a narrative.
The DoJ and special prosecutor are handling it, as they should.
Yes. I call Turley a liar because his claims are not substantiated whatsoever by even his own source. The DoJ in a legal filing refuted it and there’s been no evidence or argument to the contrary by anyone connected to the actual event.
We can’t talk about classified documents because they’re classified. That’s the whole point of making them classified. Even Trump and his little peon Kash Patel won’t talk about them even those two people like to claim they were declassified. It raises serious credibility issues when people say one thing and act totally differently.

1. You have no clue WTF Jim Jordan will or won't investigate
2. True, the special prosecutors have the ball. We all know Biden gets a pass and Trump did something wrong that disqualifies him from running in 2024.
3. Turley has backup for his articles. Calling him a liar is premature.
4. Over-classified and declassified happens all the time. My exact point. I want any deep state activities declassified.
5. Agree that Trump is, as Gen. Kelly describes him, a "very flawed man".

 

[Marener]

1. You have no clue WTF Jim Jordan will or won't investigate
2. True, the special prosecutors have the ball. We all know Biden gets a pass and Trump did something wrong that disqualifies him from running in 2024.
3. Turley has backup for his articles. Calling him a liar is premature.
4. Over classified and declassified happens all the time. My exact point. I want any deep state activities declassified.
5. Agree that Trump is, as Gen. Kelly describes him, a "very flawed man".

I posted an extensive takedown of the Turley article and how it was ambiguous or dishonest (or just mistaken). You clearly got the impression that Turley claimed Jay Bratt from the DoJ was able to look through Trump’s papers. The source Turley refers to is The NY Times and their article says nothing of the sort.

I can call Turley a liar because his article is extremely disingenuous (if not outright lying) and gives readers (such as yourself) a belief that is clearly false. The DoJ was NOT allowed to go through Trump’s papers and the leak to The NY Times did NOT say anything of the sort.

 

[westwall]

You make overt threats of death or bodily harm. You get investigated.
But hey Gym, at least the AG of the State of OH is not moving very fast in seeing that your sorry ass is held accountable for what you let go on at OSU.

Links to overt death threats.