Olivia Troye found classified documents in ladies room

[hadit]

There were no classified documents at all in Clinton's case. That keeps having to be debunked.

Source?

 

[hadit]

What does that mean?

Did you read what I responded to?

"If that's true (and it's a BIG if) the fact of having them after he left the WH is ILLEGAL"

If it's illegal for TRUMP! to have documents, it's illegal for Quid Pro to have them as well.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Source?

SEP 6, 2022

Nearly every day, fresh revelations emerge concerning the national security material purloined from the White House by former President Donald Trump, and the negligent treatment of that classified information by him and his aides. So far, we have seen no adequate public reckoning of why he took those papers, what he meant to do with them, how some went missing or even exactly how many documents he brought to his Florida estate.


Yet amid growing evidence of the former president’s reckless and potentially criminal misconduct, he and his defenders keep pointing to “her emails.” They insist that because the Justice Department declined prosecution of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after a long and thorough probe of how she handled allegedly classified information, there should be no investigation, let alone indictment, of Trump.

But while we don’t yet know the extent or nature of Trump’s abuse of classified documents, we can determine how many were found by investigators, after exhaustive searches, among Clinton’s thousands of State Department emails.

The accurate answer is zero — although few if any news outlets have informed the public of that startling fact. And it is a fact that the Trump administration itself confirmed three years ago.

In recent news stories that reference her emails, former FBI Director James Comey is sometimes quoted saying that of the 33,000 Clinton emails examined by bureau investigators, three had classification markings. That’s less than one-hundredth of 1 percent, and not worth comparing to Trump’s malfeasance anyway, but it’s still an exaggeration, apparently meant to bolster Comey’s absurd claim that other Clinton emails were “classified” although not marked as such.


Those three State Department documents were “call sheets,” innocuous memos reminding Clinton to make scheduled phone calls. During her FBI interview, investigators showed her one of those memos, reminding her to place a condolence call to the president of Malawi. Not exactly a top-secret matter and, as Comey himself later admitted, any classification marking on that sheet had been wrongly applied.

In short, the three supposedly classified documents attributed to her emails were barely even confidential, let alone secret or subject to the sanctions of the Espionage Act.

How many of her emails were classified? Actually, zero

Nearly every day, fresh revelations emerge concerning the national security material purloined from the White House by former President Donald Trump, and the negligent treatment of that classified information by him and his aides. So far, we have seen no adequate public reckoning of why he took...

www.timesrepublican.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Did you read what I responded to?

"If that's true (and it's a BIG if) the fact of having them after he left the WH is ILLEGAL"

If it's illegal for TRUMP! to have documents, it's illegal for Quid Pro to have them as well.

I got lost on what or who Quid Pro is.
Does it refer to Clinton?

 

[hadit]

I got lost on what or who Quid Pro is.
Does it refer to Clinton?

Quid Pro Joe, Tater Head, The Sniffer. Any of these ring a bell?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Quid Pro Joe, Tater Head, The Sniffer. Any of these ring a bell?

Do you have evidence that President Biden, as Vice President, did something illegal or criminal?

Did he bring those documents to his home? Did he obstruct justice, refuse to return any of the 10 documents found by his attorney's ?

What is the difference between Trump's document's and Biden's ?

 

[hadit]

Do you have evidence that President Biden, as Vice President, did something illegal or criminal?

Did he bring those documents to his home? Did he obstruct justice, refuse to return any of the 10 documents found by his attorney's ?

What is the difference between Trump's document's and Biden's ?

I refer you back to what I quoted:

"If that's true (and it's a BIG if) the fact of having them after he left the WH is ILLEGAL"

Did you not see that?

 

[Sixties Fan]

I refer you back to what I quoted:

"If that's true (and it's a BIG if) the fact of having them after he left the WH is ILLEGAL"

Did you not see that?

Who is going to consider it to be illegal?

Are you not going to allow the DOJ to decide that? Why are you one of many who have decided that something illegal was done?

What if nothing illegal was done? Will you accept that?

 

[hadit]

Who is going to consider it to be illegal?

Are you not going to allow the DOJ to decide that? Why are you one of many who have decided that something illegal was done?

What if nothing illegal was done? Will you accept that?

Another poster made the claim that TRUMP! merely possessing the documents was illegal. I pointed out that, under that standard, Quid Pro also broke the law. Do you understand that?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Another poster made the claim that TRUMP! merely possessing the documents was illegal. I pointed out that, under that standard, Quid Pro also broke the law. Do you understand that?

Yes, I do understand that perfectly.

Trump took documents from the WH to his home. Thousands of them.

Trump returned 15 boxes of them in January of 2021. NO problems.

Trump then decided he would not respond to the requests to return all other documents in his possession after he returned some more in May of 2021.

Trump refused to abide by a subpoena to return all documents, by also having a lawyer write a letter saying that there were no more documents.

Someone at Mar A Lago told the FBI that there were more documents, and after the letter denying it, they had to go and retrieve all they could find.

Later on, more documents were found at a storage unit.


None of those documents were kept safe, out of public walking in and out. Except for the storage unit one, perhaps.


The DIFFERENCE between Trump's and Biden's documents is simple:


Biden's attorneys were clearing his things from the Center and found those documents. They called NARA immediately and NARA went and got them the next day.


After returning 15 boxes to NARA, Trump refuse to return or even acknowledge that he had any more of them.



It is not the HAVING of the documents that got Trump in trouble, it is the REFUSAL to return all the others he had and OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE in the process of returning them to NARA.


Are you able to see the difference between the two?

 

[hadit]

Yes, I do understand that perfectly.

Trump took documents from the WH to his home. Thousands of them.

Trump returned 15 boxes of them in January of 2021. NO problems.

Trump then decided he would not respond to the requests to return all other documents in his possession after he returned some more in May of 2021.

Trump refused to abide by a subpoena to return all documents, by also having a lawyer write a letter saying that there were no more documents.

Someone at Mar A Lago told the FBI that there were more documents, and after the letter denying it, they had to go and retrieve all they could find.

Later on, more documents were found at a storage unit.


None of those documents were kept safe, out of public walking in and out. Except for the storage unit one, perhaps.


The DIFFERENCE between Trump's and Biden's documents is simple:


Biden's attorneys were clearing his things from the Center and found those documents. They called NARA immediately and NARA went and got them the next day.


After returning 15 boxes to NARA, Trump refuse to return or even acknowledge that he had any more of them.



It is not the HAVING of the documents that got Trump in trouble, it is the REFUSAL to return all the others he had and OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE in the process of returning them to NARA.


Are you able to see the difference between the two?

All of that is irrelevant to the discussion I was having with the other poster, who was waxing indignant about TRUMP! having these documents in his possession. I was merely making the point that, if mere possession is illegal, then the current president has also done illegal things. I'm not interested in playing Orange Man Bad because feelz and reasons and stuff.

 

[Sixties Fan]

All of that is irrelevant to the discussion I was having with the other poster, who was waxing indignant about TRUMP! having these documents in his possession. I was merely making the point that, if mere possession is illegal, then the current president has also done illegal things. I'm not interested in playing Orange Man Bad because feelz and reasons and stuff.

Intent has everything to do with this. On both cases.

I will wait for the DOJ investigation of it to conclude.

If Biden was handling those documents after they were left there, there may be a case.

If he did not even know that they were there, after he stopped being Vice President, as it all depends on who left them there and forgot about them.....is there a case?


Please remember, it is all about INTENT that makes one case or the other illegal or even with the need to prosecute.

 

[hadit]

Intent has everything to do with this. On both cases.

I will wait for the DOJ investigation of it to conclude.

If Biden was handling those documents after they were left there, there may be a case.

If he did not even know that they were there, after he stopped being Vice President, as it all depends on who left them there and forgot about them.....is there a case?


Please remember, it is all about INTENT that makes one case or the other illegal or even with the need to prosecute.

That is incorrect. It is illegal to possess classified documents if you do not have the necessary security clearance to do so, and a president or VP loses that clearance when they leave office. Intent is a different issue that can influence whether and to what extent someone is prosecuted or even charged, but the action is illegal in both cases.

If you park in a handicapped parking space and you're not handicapped, you're parked illegally whether you did it to get to a burning building to save children or because you're a jerk.

In this case, Quid Pro has lost a major source of outrage he was planning to use against TRUMP! for possessing classified documents. I know the usual suspects will be dancing around screaming, "But TRUMP!, but TRUMP!", and they already are. Have you noticed that there is no defense of Tater in this case that does not involve, "Well, at least he's not Orange Man because Orange Man Bad"?

 

[Sixties Fan]

That is incorrect. It is illegal to possess classified documents if you do not have the necessary security clearance to do so, and a president or VP loses that clearance when they leave office. Intent is a different issue that can influence whether and to what extent someone is prosecuted or even charged, but the action is illegal in both cases.

If you park in a handicapped parking space and you're not handicapped, you're parked illegally whether you did it to get to a burning building to save children or because you're a jerk.

In this case, Quid Pro has lost a major source of outrage he was planning to use against TRUMP! for possessing classified documents. I know the usual suspects will be dancing around screaming, "But TRUMP!, but TRUMP!", and they already are. Have you noticed that there is no defense of Tater in this case that does not involve, "Well, at least he's not Orange Man because Orange Man Bad"?

There is a thread to discuss all of this.

This thread was about Olivia Troye finding a classified document at a building's bathroom.



See you there:

"It's not theirs, Its mine"

Mueller, She Wrote Oct 12 According to the email, the company was supposed to pick up packed boxes from the federal warehouse the Tuesday before Biden’s inauguration, and then scheduled to pick up boxes at the White House early on Inauguration Day. The contract was cancelled just days ahead of...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

That is incorrect. It is illegal to possess classified documents if you do not have the necessary security clearance to do so, and a president or VP loses that clearance when they leave office. Intent is a different issue that can influence whether and to what extent someone is prosecuted or even charged, but the action is illegal in both cases.

If you park in a handicapped parking space and you're not handicapped, you're parked illegally whether you did it to get to a burning building to save children or because you're a jerk.

In this case, Quid Pro has lost a major source of outrage he was planning to use against TRUMP! for possessing classified documents. I know the usual suspects will be dancing around screaming, "But TRUMP!, but TRUMP!", and they already are. Have you noticed that there is no defense of Tater in this case that does not involve, "Well, at least he's not Orange Man because Orange Man Bad"?

The defense is not based on Trump is bad.

The defense is based on the facts of the matter.

Is Trump actually going to bring as defense Clinton's emails and now Biden's 10 documents?
His lawyers can do so, but to what effect where the law is concerned?

 

[hadit]

The defense is not based on Trump is bad.

The defense is based on the facts of the matter.

Is Trump actually going to bring as defense Clinton's emails and now Biden's 10 documents?
His lawyers can do so, but to what effect where the law is concerned?

I have yet to see a substantive online defense of Tater and the documents that does not involve "But TRUMP!".

 

[Sixties Fan]

I have yet to see a substantive online defense of Tater and the documents that does not involve "But TRUMP!".

Why?
Trump is doing it all the time with Clinton, and he will be doing it with Biden as well.

What makes you think that comparisons are not legitimate, if the Republicans are already throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the documents found at the Center to attempt to delegitimize Biden?

 

[hadit]

Why?
Trump is doing it all the time with Clinton, and he will be doing it with Biden as well.

What makes you think that comparisons are not legitimate, if the Republicans are already throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the documents found at the Center to attempt to delegitimize Biden?

Because if the best defense you can come up with is, "He's not the other guy", you don't have much of a defense. All you're doing is trying to cloud the issue. If you want to talk about TRUMP!, you're free to start your own threads about him. If we want to talk about Quid Pro, we aren't talking about TRUMP!.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Because if the best defense you can come up with is, "He's not the other guy", you don't have much of a defense. All you're doing is trying to cloud the issue. If you want to talk about TRUMP!, you're free to start your own threads about him. If we want to talk about Quid Pro, we aren't talking about TRUMP!.

This thread is not about Trump, it is about finding a classified document in a bathroom, which should not have been there, during Trump's Presidency. I started it.

And I also started the thread about Trump and his documents. You will not go there.

There is nothing to really discuss with a person who insists in dehumanizing a human being by calling them a potato.

You do not wish to understand the difference, that is fine.

This is all in the hands of the DOJ, both cases. I will let the DOJ, and not anyone who thinks they know the laws of the country, decide what is what and who should be prosecuted.

You basically know nothing about the laws, and are here on this thread only to cheerlead Trump.
We can clearly understand it from your posts.


Is there ANYTHING that Trump did since his Presidency that you may have been upset about, in regards to the laws of the country?

Has Trump broken any laws at all before, during or after?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Does this answer the questions for everyone?
From a Law Professor: