Trump - 4 more years of this at least...

[husaberg]

There's a coupla things about Biden and Pence having classified docs at home. Cabinet members have a huge amount of reading to do so it seems they routinely take paperwork home that would get almost anybody else fired or imprisoned.

The second thing is that when they finally leave office, they don't get down on their hands and knees and pack the boxes personally. Staff do that for them.

Neither instance comes close to Trump removing a truck load of documents to which he was not entitled and he knew it.

Then there was Reality Winner. She was an intelligence analyst who released one document confirming Russian interference in the 2016 election. She was locked up while the case was investigated and then sentenced to five years.

Unlike our resident whataboutism trump expert "apologists" who claims to know more than anyone else in their specialist fields yet clearly has no grounding for their dunning krugerism.
Back years ago there were calls to send Hilary to jail yet i bet none of the trumpers are suggested to do the same with trump now will they, for they will just be using their modified form of whataboutism saying she was investigated but not charged so trump cant be charged or found guilty ......

here is real opinion from someone actually qualified to make comments. who weighed up the differences. Who is a proper expert.

Oona A. Hathaway is a professor of law and political science at Yale University and former special counsel to the general counsel at the U.S. Department of Defense.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/11/o...onage-act.html
https://law.yale.edu/oona-hathaway
The key difference between the legal situations of Mr. Biden and Mr. Pence and that of Mr. Trump is not politics. Rather, the difference lies in what they did once they discovered the classified materials: Mr. Biden and Mr. Pence immediately notified the federal government, turned over the documents, and fully consented to thorough F.B.I. searches of their personal offices and residences. They did not willfully retain documents that they knew they had no legal right to keep, and they certainly did not undertake elaborate schemes to mislead their own lawyers or the government in order to conceal and hold the documents. The special counsel working on Mr. Biden’s case has not yet announced whether he will pursue charges, but the Justice Department has closed the case against Mr. Pence, announcing just days before the Trump indictment was filed that no criminal charges will be sought.

What about Hillary Clinton? Mrs. Clinton was the subject of chants at Trump rallies during the 2016 presidential campaign after it came to light that she had sent and received classified information on a private email server while serving as secretary of state. Unlike Mr. Trump, Mrs. Clinton had the right to see the documents in question; she was in office at the time and was cleared to see the most sensitive classified materials. The concern instead was that she had made classified information vulnerable by sharing it over an unclassified server and then deleted thousands of emails in what some saw as an attempted cover-up.

An F.B.I. investigation found that out of 30,000 emails sent to the State Department, 110 emails in 52 email chains contained classified information. Eight of the chains contained information at the top secret level. But only “a very small number” of the emails contained classification markings that would have signaled the presence of classified information. Announcing that no charges would be brought, James Comey, the F.B.I. director at the time, stated that Mrs. Clinton and her colleagues were “extremely careless” in handling classified information but that the F.B.I. had not found clear evidence that she “intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information.” Not only is Mr. Trump on tape discussing a classified document he knew he had no legal right to possess, but he also repeatedly attempted to play a shell game with classified documents to keep them out of the government’s hands.

Unless Mr. Trump pleads guilty (which seems very unlikely), it will be up to a jury to determine his guilt. But the picture that emerges from the indictment is of a man who never really took seriously the responsibility he had as president to preserve and defend the national security of the United States. When he was president, it was reported that he rarely read his daily brief, yet the indictment reveals that once out of office, he hoarded some of our country’s most important national secrets, trotting them out on occasion as if they were party tricks.

Those who are describing this indictment as Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida did, as “the weaponization of federal law enforcement,” misunderstand the situation that Jack Smith, the special counsel who was appointed to investigate the case, faced. Those who say Mr. Trump should have been allowed to get away with putting U.S. national security at risk have claimed that he is not receiving equal treatment under the law. But that is, in fact, what Mr. Trump is getting.


“The DeSantis administration will bring accountability to the DOJ, excise political bias and end weaponization once and for all,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis tweeted about two hours after the news. | Charlie Neibergall/AP Photo

By SALLY GOLDENBERG and GARY FINEOUT

06/08/2023 11:02 PM EDT

He’s only been a presidential candidate for two weeks, but Ron DeSantis is already finding himself defending his chief rival.

Several hours after news broke that former President Donald Trump was indicted over his handling of classified documents, DeSantis lambasted the Department of Justice.

“The weaponization of federal law enforcement represents a mortal threat to a free society. We have for years witnessed an uneven application of the law depending upon political affiliation. Why so zealous in pursuing Trump yet so passive about Hillary or Hunter?” DeSantis tweeted about two hours after the news. “The DeSantis administration will bring accountability to the DOJ, excise political bias and end weaponization once and for all.”

#note Rep and GOP candidate rep Gov. Ron DeSantis never offered any legal reasons for his opinion or any insight only a statement inferring bias.

[TheDemonLord]

Unlike our resident whataboutism trump expert "apologists" who claims to know more than anyone else in their specialist fields yet clearly has no grounding for their dunning krugerism.
Back years ago there were calls to send Hilary to jail yet i bet none of the trumpers are suggested to do the same with trump now will they, for they will just be using their modified form of whataboutism saying she was investigated but not charged so trump cant be charged or found guilty ......

here is real opinion from someone actually qualified to make comments. who weighed up the differences. Who is a proper expert.

It's funny how your definition of a Proper Expert is one who agrees with your view.

As for Dunning Krugerism - You remember that time when I did, in fact, know more about Covid Death reporting than the NZ Government?

See the problem with appealing to experts is that experts aren't inherently correct. That's why it's a fallacy. Let's take your quote from Oona A. Hathaway for a moment:

Those who are describing this indictment as Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida did, as “the weaponization of federal law enforcement,” misunderstand the situation that Jack Smith, the special counsel who was appointed to investigate the case, faced.

The problem is that Ron Desantis is a former JAG - or Judge Advocate General. He is - by your own standards - someone who is qualified to make comments. He is, as you put it, ' a proper expert' and he view it as Weaponization of Law enforcement. Your expert never addresses why someone who is also trained in the legal profession would hold a different view - they simply dismiss it.

If you want me to put any stock in your expert, then I think it's a reasonable expectation that they go into detail as to why he (and many others) are wrong. The problem is that the why they present in the body of their argument is contradictory.

People keep bringing up Hillary because despite the attempts to downplay the amount of material - let's address this quote:

that she had made classified information vulnerable by sharing it over an unclassified server

An unclassified server that was a willful act. Which means this line:

but that the F.B.I. had not found clear evidence that she “intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information.”

Doesn't wash.

See, if you build a server that you aren't meant to, then configure that server for email that you shouldn't use, then use that email platform to handle information that it shouldn't - that's a lot of conscious effort. It's not a case of 'Oops I accidentally forwarded it to my home email' - there's a whole lot of intent there that your expert (and the FBI) is handwaiving away.

The justification for why it's different is flimsier than a bit of tissue paper soaked in water.

The democrats and the FBI have set their precedent - you can do multiple willful acts and it still doesn't reach the threshold for prosecution....

Unless you are a Trump.

Now - if Hillary was in prison for what she did, you could make a pretty compelling argument that Trump demonstrated intent and should be locked up. Problem is, that didn't happen and the other facts around this case aren't as clear-cut. For example, we have the memo from the president the day before he left office saying he was taking the boxes home and declassifying them as was his right as president at the time.

You then have that the FBI asked him to put a lock on the area, which he complied with, and to await further instruction.

[onearmedbandit]

Whataboutism seems to be a popular choice of argument for people from both sides of the debate lol

[TheDemonLord]

Whataboutism seems to be a popular choice of argument for people from both sides of the debate lol

I prefer the term 'Precedent' - and I feel it's more than justified in this instance.

[husaberg]

Trumps former laywer
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...sexual-assault

In the suit it contends he tried to sell pardons with Trump and him splitting the proceeds....
what's damming is the FBI already have all his computers so if there is anything on there its going to come out..

Whataboutism seems to be a popular choice of argument for people from both sides of the debate lol

whataboutit?

[sugilite:Me]

Let Bill Barr bring some of us here back to reality.



I repeat, trump is well fucked

[husaberg]

Let Bill Barr bring some of us here back to reality.



I repeat, trump is well fucked

Bill Barr

In May 2019, three months into his tenure as attorney general, the Associated Press characterized Barr as a champion and advocate for Trump.Barr had enthusiastically supported Trump's political agenda, misrepresented aspects of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report, repeated Trump's assertion that those investigating Trump had engaged in spying, defied congressional subpoenas, and refused to give Congress an unredacted version of the Mueller report.
During his first tenure as AG, media characterized Barr as "a staunch conservative who rarely hesitates to put his hardline views into action

Trump supporters When the dude that was always in trumps and other repudicklickins corner says what he just did in the video, your dude you have well f'éd up.
Plus to say it on Fox news.....

"If even half of [the indictment] is true then he's toast. It's a very detailed indictment, and it's very, very damning," Barr said.
"This idea of presenting Trump as a victim here--the victim of a witch hunt--is ridiculous

But all we will hear will be but but hunter Biden, but hilary but joe biden but but but butt hurt....

[pete376403]

In the course of working for an organisation, it is quite common to handle information that is confidential to that organisation, however once you no longer work there, it is a given that any material or information belonging to that employer remains behind. In what way does this not apply to trump? Hes an ex president, nothing to do with running the country any more, no reason to hold this information. Unlike Biden, who is the current Pres, and whose job allows, indeed, relies on the handling of the information.

TDL - if you leave your current employer - how much of their confidential documentation do you expect to keep stored in your garage?

[husaberg]

In the course of working for an organisation, it is quite common to handle information that is confidential to that organisation, however once you no longer work there, it is a given that any material or information belonging to that employer remains behind. In what way does this not apply to trump? Hes an ex president, nothing to do with running the country any more, no reason to hold this information. Unlike Biden, who is the current Pres, and whose job allows, indeed, relies on the handling of the information.

TDL - if you leave your current employer - how much of their confidential documentation do you expect to keep stored in your garage?

hey look in the picture, do you see what I see?
not sure if its a set up but...

oh look it widely reported as being a legit pic.


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2355704.html

[Pursang]

Tim Palatore, the former attorney for Donald Trump claimed on CNN (or MSNBC?) that Trump didn't have the original docs...just Copies!!!!

'Cos that, somehow, makes it all better. Actually, copying classified documents is specifically prohibited and a whole other (really serious) crime in the espionage related rules.

Strangely, he has now clammed up and neither he, or the remaining/new lawyers are actively pursuing this line of "defense".

[husaberg]

Tim Palatore, the former attorney for Donald Trump claimed on CNN (or MSNBC?) that Trump didn't have the original docs...just Copies!!!!

'Cos that, somehow, makes it all better. Actually, copying classified documents is specifically prohibited and a whole other (really serious) crime in the espionage related rules.

Strangely, he has now clammed up and neither he, or the remaining/new lawyers are actively pursuing this line of "defense".

I have seen stuff written that some of them appear to be copies as the colour doesn't go to the edge i have no idea what a top secret doc look like. but i see a photocopier right next to his doc storage..... some say modern copiera have some sort storage facility so its possible to see what's been copied, But again no idea if this is true.

[pete376403]

I have seen stuff written that some of them appear to be copies as the colour doesn't go to the edge i have no idea what a top secret doc look like. but i see a photocopier right next to his doc storage..... some say modern copier have some sort storage facility so its possible to see whats been copied But again no idea if this is true.

Most office copiers can have hard drive storage and network connectivity, thats been the norm for the last 10 years or more.

[TheDemonLord]

In the course of working for an organisation, it is quite common to handle information that is confidential to that organisation, however once you no longer work there, it is a given that any material or information belonging to that employer remains behind. In what way does this not apply to trump? Hes an ex president, nothing to do with running the country any more, no reason to hold this information. Unlike Biden, who is the current Pres, and whose job allows, indeed, relies on the handling of the information.

TDL - if you leave your current employer - how much of their confidential documentation do you expect to keep stored in your garage?

The accusations against Biden were from the period of time after he was VP and before he was President.

So, by your own logic, it should apply to him - yes? If you believe Trump should be in prison, then by the same logic, Biden should be too? And Hillary for that matter. And therein lies the first problem - if you are only going after Trump - are you fairly enforcing the law? Or are you using it to target your political opponents?

But let's address the actual question - firstly - let's re-frame it so it's a more accurate scenario:

If you are the CEO of the Company - how much documentation do you expect to keep stored in your garage? Well, the answer there is a little more interesting. It's not uncommon for CEOs to keep mementos and other items that are tangentially related to their time running the company. Some of it may even be proprietary information.

The issue here is that before leaving office, Trump signed a memo saying I'm taking boxes of personal items to my home - as he still had the power to do so. It seems that there were some documents that shouldn't have been there. Fair enough - mistakes happen - the FBI knew where they were, told him to up his security - which he complied with - and that creates an awfully tricky situation for the issue of Intent. See, taking a box of documents that someone else had accidentally filed classified information in seems a lot lower on the intent scale, then... Oh... I dunno... building your own private email server to bypass governmental IT security policy.

And as James Comey told us at length - that doesn't reach the level of threshold for prosecution.

Which makes this case look increasingly like a Witchhunt.

[TheDemonLord]

hey look in the picture, do you see what I see?
not sure if its a set up but...

Looks like just about every office I've ever worked in where the Photocopier was in the same back-office location as the document storage.

Next, you'll be posting a picture of Trump's Kitchen with a Microwave near the Oven and use that as proof of something else...

[pritch]

Most office copiers can have hard drive storage and network connectivity, thats been the norm for the last 10 years or more.

Yeah. That was a thing years before I retired, and I've been retired just short of ten years.