Source?There were no classified documents at all in Clinton's case. That keeps having to be debunked.
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.
Source?There were no classified documents at all in Clinton's case. That keeps having to be debunked.
Did you read what I responded to?What does that mean?
Source?
I got lost on what or who Quid Pro is.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.
Quid Pro Joe, Tater Head, The Sniffer. Any of these ring a bell?I got lost on what or who Quid Pro is.
Does it refer to Clinton?
Do you have evidence that President Biden, as Vice President, did something illegal or criminal?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 ?
Who is going to consider it to be illegal?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?
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?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?
Yes, I do understand that perfectly.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?
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.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?
Intent has everything to do with this. On both cases.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.
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.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.
There is a thread to discuss all of this.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.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"?
I have yet to see a substantive online defense of Tater and the documents that does not involve "But TRUMP!".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?
Why?I have yet to see a substantive online defense of Tater and the documents that does not involve "But TRUMP!".
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!.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?
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.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!.