Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"A cover sheet saying Confidential or Top Secret does not make the document classified at this date"

Actually, it does. As has been discussed in this thread ad nauseum: declassification is a process, where declassified docs are marked as such and dated, so you know that something was declassified and when. Trump can order anything he wants to be declassified, but that order starts a process, it doesn't instantly make it so.

What I've never seen any satisfactory explanation for is: why did he even have these documents? He keeps saying he would have given them back if asked (seriously undermining his "I declassified it" excuse), but they did ask and he didn't give them back, so the obvious question is why did he do that?

At some point you need to step back and recognize that these excuses are competing with each other, they can't all be true. Usually that is a strong indicator that someone is lying, poorly, and I honestly don't understand how y'all don't get that yet (or maybe you do, but loyalty to the Big Man requires you to pretend that you don't).

---

Assuming the reporting is accurate, how is this significantly different from the when the HRC's lawyers use of Bleachbit to wipe clean her server?

I don't like the idea of Trump mishandling classified docs, but a standard seems to have been set.

Also these TOP SECRET documents are too risky to have in the hands of a former president, in locked rooms, in locked cabinets under massive security, secret service detail, and 24/7 surveillance... so we plaster them on the internet?

---

Yes it has. The standard is: "if you are for good reason suspected of mishandling classified information, you should not be president." Lets keep applying that standard.

---

My beef with Trump is he makes stupid hiring decisions and doesn't have the balls to go scorched earth. He should have declassified all of this stuff years ago. I'm pretty certain he has damning evidence against the crossfire hurricane plot.

If Trump gets jail time for this, the political fallout might break this country. Especially when democrats and the FBI get a pass. When Joe's involvement with Hunter get's suppressed to help Joe in an election, there's no consequences. When Hillary get's to destroy subpoenaed data. there's no consequences. When Eric Swallwell screws a Chinese spy, there's no consequences.

Are you sure you want to put democrats up against Desantis?

---

I am not arguing Trump should go to jail. I am arguing that he should not be president. Which is the consequence Hillary suffered.

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Who is JD Sharp? There are several found on Google

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"A cover sheet saying Confidential or Top Secret does not make the document classified at this date"

Actually, it does. As has been discussed in this thread ad nauseum: declassification is a process, where declassified docs are marked as such and dated, so you know that something was declassified and when. Trump can order anything he wants to be declassified, but that order starts a process, it doesn't instantly make it so.

What I've never seen any satisfactory explanation for is: why did he even have these documents? He keeps saying he would have given them back if asked (seriously undermining his "I declassified it" excuse), but they did ask and he didn't give them back, so the obvious question is why did he do that?

At some point you need to step back and recognize that these excuses are competing with each other, they can't all be true. Usually that is a strong indicator that someone is lying, poorly, and I honestly don't understand how y'all don't get that yet (or maybe you do, but loyalty to the Big Man requires you to pretend that you don't).

---

Assuming the reporting is accurate, how is this significantly different from the when the HRC's lawyers use of Bleachbit to wipe clean her server?

I don't like the idea of Trump mishandling classified docs, but a standard seems to have been set.

Also these TOP SECRET documents are too risky to have in the hands of a former president, in locked rooms, in locked cabinets under massive security, secret service detail, and 24/7 surveillance... so we plaster them on the internet?

---

Yes it has. The standard is: "if you are for good reason suspected of mishandling classified information, you should not be president." Lets keep applying that standard.

---

My beef with Trump is he makes stupid hiring decisions and doesn't have the balls to go scorched earth. He should have declassified all of this stuff years ago. I'm pretty certain he has damning evidence against the crossfire hurricane plot.

If Trump gets jail time for this, the political fallout might break this country. Especially when democrats and the FBI get a pass. When Joe's involvement with Hunter get's suppressed to help Joe in an election, there's no consequences. When Hillary get's to destroy subpoenaed data. there's no consequences. When Eric Swallwell screws a Chinese spy, there's no consequences.

Are you sure you want to put democrats up against Desantis?

---

I am not arguing Trump should go to jail. I am arguing that he should not be president. Which is the consequence Hillary suffered.

---

There is a small difference. She actually had more votes in the popular vote, it was razor thin in the states that made the difference. She wasn't "disqualified" to run for office. It was more her unlikability that cost her the election, not the bleach bit incident.

If Trump is disqualified it is no great loss, but it's not the same as with Clinton. She wasn't disqualified, she simply lost.

---

Booray said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"A cover sheet saying Confidential or Top Secret does not make the document classified at this date"

Actually, it does. As has been discussed in this thread ad nauseum: declassification is a process, where declassified docs are marked as such and dated, so you know that something was declassified and when. Trump can order anything he wants to be declassified, but that order starts a process, it doesn't instantly make it so.

What I've never seen any satisfactory explanation for is: why did he even have these documents? He keeps saying he would have given them back if asked (seriously undermining his "I declassified it" excuse), but they did ask and he didn't give them back, so the obvious question is why did he do that?

At some point you need to step back and recognize that these excuses are competing with each other, they can't all be true. Usually that is a strong indicator that someone is lying, poorly, and I honestly don't understand how y'all don't get that yet (or maybe you do, but loyalty to the Big Man requires you to pretend that you don't).

---

Assuming the reporting is accurate, how is this significantly different from the when the HRC's lawyers use of Bleachbit to wipe clean her server?

I don't like the idea of Trump mishandling classified docs, but a standard seems to have been set.

Also these TOP SECRET documents are too risky to have in the hands of a former president, in locked rooms, in locked cabinets under massive security, secret service detail, and 24/7 surveillance... so we plaster them on the internet?

---

Yes it has. The standard is: "if you are for good reason suspected of mishandling classified information, you should not be president." Lets keep applying that standard.

---

My beef with Trump is he makes stupid hiring decisions and doesn't have the balls to go scorched earth. He should have declassified all of this stuff years ago. I'm pretty certain he has damning evidence against the crossfire hurricane plot.

If Trump gets jail time for this, the political fallout might break this country. Especially when democrats and the FBI get a pass. When Joe's involvement with Hunter get's suppressed to help Joe in an election, there's no consequences. When Hillary get's to destroy subpoenaed data. there's no consequences. When Eric Swallwell screws a Chinese spy, there's no consequences.

Are you sure you want to put democrats up against Desantis?

---

I am not arguing Trump should go to jail. I am arguing that he should not be president. Which is the consequence Hillary suffered.

---

Not the same thing. You're arguing for disqualification. HRC wasn't disqualified.

---

You just cannot admit what a screw up this guy is, I will phrase it this way for you and see if you agree:

Donald Trump's careless handling of sensitive information demonstrates that just like Hillary Clinton, he puts his personal interests above those of the country. No one should vote for either of them if they ever run for elected office again based on their demonstrated disregard for the nation's best interests.

---

Those are two different thing.

1 - If he is found guilty by due process, I will be the first to say he should not be allowed to run,
2 - What we have now is not a guilty verdict, we have a narrative. In the US, people are innocent until proven guilty (even *******s).

---

Sure, except I was responding to Doc who said there would be riots in the streets if Trump was prosecuted.

I am fine with either. Try him and give him a day in Court to explain his numbnuts theories.

Or don't try him, say we got the docs back and nobody votes for him or Clinton ever again.

---

Booray said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"A cover sheet saying Confidential or Top Secret does not make the document classified at this date"

Actually, it does. As has been discussed in this thread ad nauseum: declassification is a process, where declassified docs are marked as such and dated, so you know that something was declassified and when. Trump can order anything he wants to be declassified, but that order starts a process, it doesn't instantly make it so.

What I've never seen any satisfactory explanation for is: why did he even have these documents? He keeps saying he would have given them back if asked (seriously undermining his "I declassified it" excuse), but they did ask and he didn't give them back, so the obvious question is why did he do that?

At some point you need to step back and recognize that these excuses are competing with each other, they can't all be true. Usually that is a strong indicator that someone is lying, poorly, and I honestly don't understand how y'all don't get that yet (or maybe you do, but loyalty to the Big Man requires you to pretend that you don't).

---

Assuming the reporting is accurate, how is this significantly different from the when the HRC's lawyers use of Bleachbit to wipe clean her server?

I don't like the idea of Trump mishandling classified docs, but a standard seems to have been set.

Also these TOP SECRET documents are too risky to have in the hands of a former president, in locked rooms, in locked cabinets under massive security, secret service detail, and 24/7 surveillance... so we plaster them on the internet?

---

Yes it has. The standard is: "if you are for good reason suspected of mishandling classified information, you should not be president." Lets keep applying that standard.

---

My beef with Trump is he makes stupid hiring decisions and doesn't have the balls to go scorched earth. He should have declassified all of this stuff years ago. I'm pretty certain he has damning evidence against the crossfire hurricane plot.

If Trump gets jail time for this, the political fallout might break this country. Especially when democrats and the FBI get a pass. When Joe's involvement with Hunter get's suppressed to help Joe in an election, there's no consequences. When Hillary get's to destroy subpoenaed data. there's no consequences. When Eric Swallwell screws a Chinese spy, there's no consequences.

Are you sure you want to put democrats up against Desantis?

---

I am not arguing Trump should go to jail. I am arguing that he should not be president. Which is the consequence Hillary suffered.

---

There is a small difference. She actually had more votes in the popular vote, it was razor thin in the states that made the difference. She wasn't "disqualified" to run for office. It was more her unlikability that cost her the election, not the bleach bit incident.

If Trump is disqualified it is no great loss, but it's not the same as with Clinton. She wasn't disqualified, she simply lost.

---

If Comey doesn't reopen the email subject as an October surprise, she almost certainly wins. That is what I am referring to.

I am saying that all those GOPer who said HRC was unfit based on the email controversy have to say the same thing about Trump now.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"A cover sheet saying Confidential or Top Secret does not make the document classified at this date"

Actually, it does. As has been discussed in this thread ad nauseum: declassification is a process, where declassified docs are marked as such and dated, so you know that something was declassified and when. Trump can order anything he wants to be declassified, but that order starts a process, it doesn't instantly make it so.

What I've never seen any satisfactory explanation for is: why did he even have these documents? He keeps saying he would have given them back if asked (seriously undermining his "I declassified it" excuse), but they did ask and he didn't give them back, so the obvious question is why did he do that?

At some point you need to step back and recognize that these excuses are competing with each other, they can't all be true. Usually that is a strong indicator that someone is lying, poorly, and I honestly don't understand how y'all don't get that yet (or maybe you do, but loyalty to the Big Man requires you to pretend that you don't).

---

Assuming the reporting is accurate, how is this significantly different from the when the HRC's lawyers use of Bleachbit to wipe clean her server?

I don't like the idea of Trump mishandling classified docs, but a standard seems to have been set.

Also these TOP SECRET documents are too risky to have in the hands of a former president, in locked rooms, in locked cabinets under massive security, secret service detail, and 24/7 surveillance... so we plaster them on the internet?

---

Yes it has. The standard is: "if you are for good reason suspected of mishandling classified information, you should not be president." Lets keep applying that standard.

---

My beef with Trump is he makes stupid hiring decisions and doesn't have the balls to go scorched earth. He should have declassified all of this stuff years ago. I'm pretty certain he has damning evidence against the crossfire hurricane plot.

If Trump gets jail time for this, the political fallout might break this country. Especially when democrats and the FBI get a pass. When Joe's involvement with Hunter get's suppressed to help Joe in an election, there's no consequences. When Hillary get's to destroy subpoenaed data. there's no consequences. When Eric Swallwell screws a Chinese spy, there's no consequences.

Are you sure you want to put democrats up against Desantis?

---

I am not arguing Trump should go to jail. I am arguing that he should not be president. Which is the consequence Hillary suffered.

---

Not the same thing. You're arguing for disqualification. HRC wasn't disqualified.

---

You just cannot admit what a screw up this guy is, I will phrase it this way for you and see if you agree:

Donald Trump's careless handling of sensitive information demonstrates that just like Hillary Clinton, he puts his personal interests above those of the country. No one should vote for either of them if they ever run for elected office again based on their demonstrated disregard for the nation's best interests.

---

Those are two different thing.

1 - If he is found guilty by due process, I will be the first to say he should not be allowed to run,
2 - What we have now is not a guilty verdict, we have a narrative. In the US, people are innocent until proven guilty (even *******s).

---

Sure, except I was responding to Doc who said there would be riots in the streets if Trump was prosecuted.

I am fine with either. Try him and give him a day in Court to explain his numbnuts theories.

Or don't try him, say we got the docs back and nobody votes for him or Clinton ever again.

---

I didn't say there would be riots in the street. I'm telling you people will lose complete faith in the system. It could kickstart a secession movement that has serious support by millions, not just radicals.

---

Booray said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Who is JD Sharp? There are several found on Google

---

His twitter bio says he he is a sports bettor in Vegas. Seems stable.

---

fubar said:

---

I don't really give a **** if some neanderthals "lose faith" in anything.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

An article on the well documented issues with Mar-a-Lago. It was already known as a "security nightmare" in the early months of Trump's presidency:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-mar-lago-security-risk-espionage-235950

---

So in 5.5 years, they didn't figure out how to protect ans secure the home of the President? I guess in your mind, the President shouldn't be able to go to his home after he is done because the Secret Service can't figure out how to secure it? Have you ever heard of any other leader, US or Foreign, that could not go home because their security team was put out???

Please rethink about what you are saying. I like you Sam and I enjoy our back and forth, but when it comes to Trump you throw out some stuff that is mind boggling.

---

No, I can't think of any other example because no other president took highly sensitive material home when he left office (at least not under the current rules).

---

Every president has taken home files. Many they arguably should not have. Like everything around Trump, I will not defend his taking of document inappropriately, if he did, or the allegedly sloppy way they were maintained.

What I am concerned about, which is a much greater threat to democracy and our mutual governance is the Democrats continual misuse of power and disregard for protocol to maintain power. That is much more concerning than a National archivist having his TDS panties in a wad over not getting his documents when he wants them.

As noted, the Obama-Biden White House (they're more or less the same) has a track record of weaponizing the federal government against political opponents, and that is far more dangerous than some overdue library books. In order to have faith in government, all people need to trust the institutions. The FBI and DOJ have eroded that trust through its obvious double standards.
- The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop, knew it was legitimate, and yet still told Facebook and other social media organizations that it likely was "Russian disinformation"
- The FBI (and CIA) was colluded with a Russian operative to foist the Russian Hoax on not only Trump's presidency but also the American people
- The FBI has been targeting American citizens at best needlessly and at worse intentionally entrapping them

Being used as a political tool by one political party is dangerous and undermines trust in the federal government. It obviously a political stunt because of the silly, juvenile leaks to the left-wing noise machine that it so vociferously parrots: TRUMP HAD NUCLEAR CODES! HE SOLD THEM TO THE CHINESE! I do not recall a case where we have seen a similar level of leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine as we did with Trump whether the Russian Hoax of the Overdue Library Books hoax.

The Trump answer is very simple. One of these things are true:
- The documents Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were a threat to national security - in which case the raid should have been conducted in February 2020
- The document Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were technically wrongly taken but not a threat to national security - in which case he should have been shown the same courtesy given to other presidents

The litmus test as always with double standard Democrats is would you support raiding Clinton, Obama, or Biden's homes to get overdue library books? Of course the left-wing noise machine would be screaming about "threats to democracy," "UltraMAGA," and "fascism."

The FBI did not raid Obama's home to get the myriad documents he refused to return nor Clinton's home to get his tapes. And there were no leaks about how Obama was selling nuclear codes to the Russians, the Iranians, or the Chinese.

---

Being wrongly accused by the FBI doesn't give you life-long immunity. That's true of any person. It's especially true when you're the person who fired the FBI director and hand-picked his successor.

The claim that Obama refused to return myriad documents is false. It was known to be false when Sen. Cruz tweeted it. NARA released a statement a few days later in case there was any doubt. NARA didn't consider the Clinton tapes to be presidential records and didn't ask for the FBI to get involved. Clinton wasn't even a party to the case.

The "raid in February or not at all" dilemma is also false. You ignore the possibility that the DOJ did exactly what you say you want them to do: secure national secrets while respecting due process and using particular caution in politically charged cases. I posted a quote on another thread asking what choice they had under the known circumstances. It didn't get many replies, so I'll re-post it here:

Quote:

---

For those of us who remain skeptical about whether the drastic measure of a search warrant was really necessary (especially given the FBI and DOJ's evident lack of urgency in the months after Trump's surrender of the 15 boxes in January 2022), these revelations require grappling with a hard question: Given that the former president was not responsibly securing the government's most closely held intelligence, that he was trying to prevent the FBI from examining what he'd returned, that his lawyers were either misinformed about or lying about the classified information still retained at Mar-a-Lago, and that even the issuance of a grand-jury subpoena (with potential criminal penalties for noncompliance) had not succeeded in getting Trump to hand over the remaining classified information, what option short of a search warrant would have sufficed?

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/111639

---

---

You offer a red herring. It does not provide lifelong immunity but it demonstrates to corrupt, political nature of the FBI that has a track record in participating in political stunts for a particular candidate. So it lacks credibility. This is clear by the silly leaks. If the FBI were serious we would not have it leaking to the left-wing noise machine about nuclear codes, etc. The fact it is leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine shows it's not acting like a law enforcement agency but a political arm of the Democrat party.

Obama fought to retain thousands of documents. It's not really a question. Again, you just admit this is little more than returning overdue library books to the National Archives. Yes it should be done. Is this a matter of national security, hardly.

You're just incorrect. If the president has documents unsecured that are a genuine risk to national security then it should not take 18 months to resolve. Otherwise, the administration is just flippant. There is a reason it was delayed until just before the mid-term elections.

This is playing out just like the Russian Hoax and every coordinated disinformation attack against Trump: lots of leaks and disinformation parroted by the left-wing noise machine that results in no substance.

---

Multiple confusions and misrepresentations here.

First, the major source of what's been going on has been Trump, not the media. In fact, we would know nothing about the raid had Trump not started whining about it.

Second, Obama quickly turned over all docs requested. This isn't in the neighborhood of a valid comparison.

Third, the reason why it took so long to get the docs was because Trump was resisting, obstructing, and otherwise dragging it out. If he had followed Obama's example, this would have been cleared up immediately.

Trump is in genuine trouble, and the more info he demands be made public, the more guilty he looks.

---

Democrats are in bigger trouble without Trump.

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. (HINT: this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms.

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

ScruffyD said:

---

Secession? That talk always makes me laugh when you see states like Mississippi begging the federal government for help because they cannot provide WATER to residents.

When Texas was within minutes of losing its electric grid for months, pretty sure Abbott would have been begging for help too.

You see when you secede, you are on your own like a dumbass hillbilly.

---

C. Jordan said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

Secession? That talk always makes me laugh when you see states like Mississippi begging the federal government for help because they cannot provide WATER to residents.

When Texas was within minutes of losing its electric grid for months, pretty sure Abbott would have been begging for help too.

You see when you secede, you are on your own like a dumbass hillbilly.

---

Secession is such a dumb discussion.

Red states get more government aid than they contribute.

Also, there are strong pockets of blue in lots of red states.

So it would be like Amarillo and Odessa seceding from Dallas, Ft. Worth, Houston, and San Antonio.

I don't see that working out well.

---

Wangchung said:

---

fubar said:

---

I don't really give a **** if some neanderthals "lose faith" in anything.

---

My exact feelings when listening to leftists cry about Roe being overturned causing them to lose faith in the Supreme Court.

---

C. Jordan said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. (HINT: this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms.

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Multiple problems here.

First, Trump must formally declare he's declassifying the docs. He didn't.

Second, it doesn't matter because the law he's being investigated under is about government property and the security of its documents.

These weren't Trump's documents. They belonged to the U.S. government. So it doesn't matter if he declassified them.

The questions are:

Did Trump hang on to documents that belonged to the U.S. government? (He did).

Did Trump secure documents that were vital to U.S. security interests? (He didn't)

Did Trump turn over documents he was legally obligated to turn over by subpoena? (He didn't)

It might help the discussion to pay attention to the law.

---

C. Jordan said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. (HINT: this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms.

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Multiple problems here.

First, Trump must formally declare he's declassifying the docs. He didn't.

Second, it doesn't matter because the law he's being investigated under is about government property and the security of its documents.

These weren't Trump's documents. They belonged to the U.S. government. So it doesn't matter if he declassified them.

The questions are:

Did Trump hang on to documents that belonged to the U.S. government? (He did).

Did Trump secure documents that were vital to U.S. security interests? (He didn't)

Did Trump turn over documents he was legally obligated to turn over by subpoena? (He didn't)

It might help the discussion to pay attention to the law.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

An article on the well documented issues with Mar-a-Lago. It was already known as a "security nightmare" in the early months of Trump's presidency:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-mar-lago-security-risk-espionage-235950

---

So in 5.5 years, they didn't figure out how to protect ans secure the home of the President? I guess in your mind, the President shouldn't be able to go to his home after he is done because the Secret Service can't figure out how to secure it? Have you ever heard of any other leader, US or Foreign, that could not go home because their security team was put out???

Please rethink about what you are saying. I like you Sam and I enjoy our back and forth, but when it comes to Trump you throw out some stuff that is mind boggling.

---

No, I can't think of any other example because no other president took highly sensitive material home when he left office (at least not under the current rules).

---

Every president has taken home files. Many they arguably should not have. Like everything around Trump, I will not defend his taking of document inappropriately, if he did, or the allegedly sloppy way they were maintained.

What I am concerned about, which is a much greater threat to democracy and our mutual governance is the Democrats continual misuse of power and disregard for protocol to maintain power. That is much more concerning than a National archivist having his TDS panties in a wad over not getting his documents when he wants them.

As noted, the Obama-Biden White House (they're more or less the same) has a track record of weaponizing the federal government against political opponents, and that is far more dangerous than some overdue library books. In order to have faith in government, all people need to trust the institutions. The FBI and DOJ have eroded that trust through its obvious double standards.
- The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop, knew it was legitimate, and yet still told Facebook and other social media organizations that it likely was "Russian disinformation"
- The FBI (and CIA) was colluded with a Russian operative to foist the Russian Hoax on not only Trump's presidency but also the American people
- The FBI has been targeting American citizens at best needlessly and at worse intentionally entrapping them

Being used as a political tool by one political party is dangerous and undermines trust in the federal government. It obviously a political stunt because of the silly, juvenile leaks to the left-wing noise machine that it so vociferously parrots: TRUMP HAD NUCLEAR CODES! HE SOLD THEM TO THE CHINESE! I do not recall a case where we have seen a similar level of leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine as we did with Trump whether the Russian Hoax of the Overdue Library Books hoax.

The Trump answer is very simple. One of these things are true:
- The documents Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were a threat to national security - in which case the raid should have been conducted in February 2020
- The document Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were technically wrongly taken but not a threat to national security - in which case he should have been shown the same courtesy given to other presidents

The litmus test as always with double standard Democrats is would you support raiding Clinton, Obama, or Biden's homes to get overdue library books? Of course the left-wing noise machine would be screaming about "threats to democracy," "UltraMAGA," and "fascism."

The FBI did not raid Obama's home to get the myriad documents he refused to return nor Clinton's home to get his tapes. And there were no leaks about how Obama was selling nuclear codes to the Russians, the Iranians, or the Chinese.

---

Being wrongly accused by the FBI doesn't give you life-long immunity. That's true of any person. It's especially true when you're the person who fired the FBI director and hand-picked his successor.

The claim that Obama refused to return myriad documents is false. It was known to be false when Sen. Cruz tweeted it. NARA released a statement a few days later in case there was any doubt. NARA didn't consider the Clinton tapes to be presidential records and didn't ask for the FBI to get involved. Clinton wasn't even a party to the case.

The "raid in February or not at all" dilemma is also false. You ignore the possibility that the DOJ did exactly what you say you want them to do: secure national secrets while respecting due process and using particular caution in politically charged cases. I posted a quote on another thread asking what choice they had under the known circumstances. It didn't get many replies, so I'll re-post it here:

Quote:

---

For those of us who remain skeptical about whether the drastic measure of a search warrant was really necessary (especially given the FBI and DOJ's evident lack of urgency in the months after Trump's surrender of the 15 boxes in January 2022), these revelations require grappling with a hard question: Given that the former president was not responsibly securing the government's most closely held intelligence, that he was trying to prevent the FBI from examining what he'd returned, that his lawyers were either misinformed about or lying about the classified information still retained at Mar-a-Lago, and that even the issuance of a grand-jury subpoena (with potential criminal penalties for noncompliance) had not succeeded in getting Trump to hand over the remaining classified information, what option short of a search warrant would have sufficed?

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/111639

---

---

You offer a red herring. It does not provide lifelong immunity but it demonstrates to corrupt, political nature of the FBI that has a track record in participating in political stunts for a particular candidate. So it lacks credibility. This is clear by the silly leaks. If the FBI were serious we would not have it leaking to the left-wing noise machine about nuclear codes, etc. The fact it is leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine shows it's not acting like a law enforcement agency but a political arm of the Democrat party.

Obama fought to retain thousands of documents. It's not really a question. Again, you just admit this is little more than returning overdue library books to the National Archives. Yes it should be done. Is this a matter of national security, hardly.

You're just incorrect. If the president has documents unsecured that are a genuine risk to national security then it should not take 18 months to resolve. Otherwise, the administration is just flippant. There is a reason it was delayed until just before the mid-term elections.

This is playing out just like the Russian Hoax and every coordinated disinformation attack against Trump: lots of leaks and disinformation parroted by the left-wing noise machine that results in no substance.

---

Multiple confusions and misrepresentations here.

First, the major source of what's been going on has been Trump, not the media. In fact, we would know nothing about the raid had Trump not started whining about it.

Second, Obama quickly turned over all docs requested. This isn't in the neighborhood of a valid comparison.

Third, the reason why it took so long to get the docs was because Trump was resisting, obstructing, and otherwise dragging it out. If he had followed Obama's example, this would have been cleared up immediately.

Trump is in genuine trouble, and the more info he demands be made public, the more guilty he looks.

---

Democrats are in bigger trouble without Trump.

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

An article on the well documented issues with Mar-a-Lago. It was already known as a "security nightmare" in the early months of Trump's presidency:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-mar-lago-security-risk-espionage-235950

---

So in 5.5 years, they didn't figure out how to protect ans secure the home of the President? I guess in your mind, the President shouldn't be able to go to his home after he is done because the Secret Service can't figure out how to secure it? Have you ever heard of any other leader, US or Foreign, that could not go home because their security team was put out???

Please rethink about what you are saying. I like you Sam and I enjoy our back and forth, but when it comes to Trump you throw out some stuff that is mind boggling.

---

No, I can't think of any other example because no other president took highly sensitive material home when he left office (at least not under the current rules).

---

Every president has taken home files. Many they arguably should not have. Like everything around Trump, I will not defend his taking of document inappropriately, if he did, or the allegedly sloppy way they were maintained.

What I am concerned about, which is a much greater threat to democracy and our mutual governance is the Democrats continual misuse of power and disregard for protocol to maintain power. That is much more concerning than a National archivist having his TDS panties in a wad over not getting his documents when he wants them.

As noted, the Obama-Biden White House (they're more or less the same) has a track record of weaponizing the federal government against political opponents, and that is far more dangerous than some overdue library books. In order to have faith in government, all people need to trust the institutions. The FBI and DOJ have eroded that trust through its obvious double standards.
- The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop, knew it was legitimate, and yet still told Facebook and other social media organizations that it likely was "Russian disinformation"
- The FBI (and CIA) was colluded with a Russian operative to foist the Russian Hoax on not only Trump's presidency but also the American people
- The FBI has been targeting American citizens at best needlessly and at worse intentionally entrapping them

Being used as a political tool by one political party is dangerous and undermines trust in the federal government. It obviously a political stunt because of the silly, juvenile leaks to the left-wing noise machine that it so vociferously parrots: TRUMP HAD NUCLEAR CODES! HE SOLD THEM TO THE CHINESE! I do not recall a case where we have seen a similar level of leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine as we did with Trump whether the Russian Hoax of the Overdue Library Books hoax.

The Trump answer is very simple. One of these things are true:
- The documents Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were a threat to national security - in which case the raid should have been conducted in February 2020
- The document Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were technically wrongly taken but not a threat to national security - in which case he should have been shown the same courtesy given to other presidents

The litmus test as always with double standard Democrats is would you support raiding Clinton, Obama, or Biden's homes to get overdue library books? Of course the left-wing noise machine would be screaming about "threats to democracy," "UltraMAGA," and "fascism."

The FBI did not raid Obama's home to get the myriad documents he refused to return nor Clinton's home to get his tapes. And there were no leaks about how Obama was selling nuclear codes to the Russians, the Iranians, or the Chinese.

---

Being wrongly accused by the FBI doesn't give you life-long immunity. That's true of any person. It's especially true when you're the person who fired the FBI director and hand-picked his successor.

The claim that Obama refused to return myriad documents is false. It was known to be false when Sen. Cruz tweeted it. NARA released a statement a few days later in case there was any doubt. NARA didn't consider the Clinton tapes to be presidential records and didn't ask for the FBI to get involved. Clinton wasn't even a party to the case.

The "raid in February or not at all" dilemma is also false. You ignore the possibility that the DOJ did exactly what you say you want them to do: secure national secrets while respecting due process and using particular caution in politically charged cases. I posted a quote on another thread asking what choice they had under the known circumstances. It didn't get many replies, so I'll re-post it here:

Quote:

---

For those of us who remain skeptical about whether the drastic measure of a search warrant was really necessary (especially given the FBI and DOJ's evident lack of urgency in the months after Trump's surrender of the 15 boxes in January 2022), these revelations require grappling with a hard question: Given that the former president was not responsibly securing the government's most closely held intelligence, that he was trying to prevent the FBI from examining what he'd returned, that his lawyers were either misinformed about or lying about the classified information still retained at Mar-a-Lago, and that even the issuance of a grand-jury subpoena (with potential criminal penalties for noncompliance) had not succeeded in getting Trump to hand over the remaining classified information, what option short of a search warrant would have sufficed?

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/111639

---

---

You offer a red herring. It does not provide lifelong immunity but it demonstrates to corrupt, political nature of the FBI that has a track record in participating in political stunts for a particular candidate. So it lacks credibility. This is clear by the silly leaks. If the FBI were serious we would not have it leaking to the left-wing noise machine about nuclear codes, etc. The fact it is leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine shows it's not acting like a law enforcement agency but a political arm of the Democrat party.

Obama fought to retain thousands of documents. It's not really a question. Again, you just admit this is little more than returning overdue library books to the National Archives. Yes it should be done. Is this a matter of national security, hardly.

You're just incorrect. If the president has documents unsecured that are a genuine risk to national security then it should not take 18 months to resolve. Otherwise, the administration is just flippant. There is a reason it was delayed until just before the mid-term elections.

This is playing out just like the Russian Hoax and every coordinated disinformation attack against Trump: lots of leaks and disinformation parroted by the left-wing noise machine that results in no substance.

---

Multiple confusions and misrepresentations here.

First, the major source of what's been going on has been Trump, not the media. In fact, we would know nothing about the raid had Trump not started whining about it.

Second, Obama quickly turned over all docs requested. This isn't in the neighborhood of a valid comparison.

Third, the reason why it took so long to get the docs was because Trump was resisting, obstructing, and otherwise dragging it out. If he had followed Obama's example, this would have been cleared up immediately.

Trump is in genuine trouble, and the more info he demands be made public, the more guilty he looks.

---

Democrats are in bigger trouble without Trump.

---

Of course.

Trump is the Dem's ultimate lighting rod.

As long as the focus is on 'master spy' Trump..........Biden can continue to hide from his administration's dismal performance .

Dems are ruthless but not stupid. They realize people are experiencing run away inflation every single day . And these continual spending bills are only going to make matters worse. So they want to make every single election about Donald Trump.

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

An article on the well documented issues with Mar-a-Lago. It was already known as a "security nightmare" in the early months of Trump's presidency:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-mar-lago-security-risk-espionage-235950

---

So in 5.5 years, they didn't figure out how to protect ans secure the home of the President? I guess in your mind, the President shouldn't be able to go to his home after he is done because the Secret Service can't figure out how to secure it? Have you ever heard of any other leader, US or Foreign, that could not go home because their security team was put out???

Please rethink about what you are saying. I like you Sam and I enjoy our back and forth, but when it comes to Trump you throw out some stuff that is mind boggling.

---

No, I can't think of any other example because no other president took highly sensitive material home when he left office (at least not under the current rules).

---

Every president has taken home files. Many they arguably should not have. Like everything around Trump, I will not defend his taking of document inappropriately, if he did, or the allegedly sloppy way they were maintained.

What I am concerned about, which is a much greater threat to democracy and our mutual governance is the Democrats continual misuse of power and disregard for protocol to maintain power. That is much more concerning than a National archivist having his TDS panties in a wad over not getting his documents when he wants them.

As noted, the Obama-Biden White House (they're more or less the same) has a track record of weaponizing the federal government against political opponents, and that is far more dangerous than some overdue library books. In order to have faith in government, all people need to trust the institutions. The FBI and DOJ have eroded that trust through its obvious double standards.
- The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop, knew it was legitimate, and yet still told Facebook and other social media organizations that it likely was "Russian disinformation"
- The FBI (and CIA) was colluded with a Russian operative to foist the Russian Hoax on not only Trump's presidency but also the American people
- The FBI has been targeting American citizens at best needlessly and at worse intentionally entrapping them

Being used as a political tool by one political party is dangerous and undermines trust in the federal government. It obviously a political stunt because of the silly, juvenile leaks to the left-wing noise machine that it so vociferously parrots: TRUMP HAD NUCLEAR CODES! HE SOLD THEM TO THE CHINESE! I do not recall a case where we have seen a similar level of leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine as we did with Trump whether the Russian Hoax of the Overdue Library Books hoax.

The Trump answer is very simple. One of these things are true:
- The documents Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were a threat to national security - in which case the raid should have been conducted in February 2020
- The document Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were technically wrongly taken but not a threat to national security - in which case he should have been shown the same courtesy given to other presidents

The litmus test as always with double standard Democrats is would you support raiding Clinton, Obama, or Biden's homes to get overdue library books? Of course the left-wing noise machine would be screaming about "threats to democracy," "UltraMAGA," and "fascism."

The FBI did not raid Obama's home to get the myriad documents he refused to return nor Clinton's home to get his tapes. And there were no leaks about how Obama was selling nuclear codes to the Russians, the Iranians, or the Chinese.

---

Being wrongly accused by the FBI doesn't give you life-long immunity. That's true of any person. It's especially true when you're the person who fired the FBI director and hand-picked his successor.

The claim that Obama refused to return myriad documents is false. It was known to be false when Sen. Cruz tweeted it. NARA released a statement a few days later in case there was any doubt. NARA didn't consider the Clinton tapes to be presidential records and didn't ask for the FBI to get involved. Clinton wasn't even a party to the case.

The "raid in February or not at all" dilemma is also false. You ignore the possibility that the DOJ did exactly what you say you want them to do: secure national secrets while respecting due process and using particular caution in politically charged cases. I posted a quote on another thread asking what choice they had under the known circumstances. It didn't get many replies, so I'll re-post it here:

Quote:

---

For those of us who remain skeptical about whether the drastic measure of a search warrant was really necessary (especially given the FBI and DOJ's evident lack of urgency in the months after Trump's surrender of the 15 boxes in January 2022), these revelations require grappling with a hard question: Given that the former president was not responsibly securing the government's most closely held intelligence, that he was trying to prevent the FBI from examining what he'd returned, that his lawyers were either misinformed about or lying about the classified information still retained at Mar-a-Lago, and that even the issuance of a grand-jury subpoena (with potential criminal penalties for noncompliance) had not succeeded in getting Trump to hand over the remaining classified information, what option short of a search warrant would have sufficed?

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/111639

---

---

You offer a red herring. It does not provide lifelong immunity but it demonstrates to corrupt, political nature of the FBI that has a track record in participating in political stunts for a particular candidate. So it lacks credibility. This is clear by the silly leaks. If the FBI were serious we would not have it leaking to the left-wing noise machine about nuclear codes, etc. The fact it is leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine shows it's not acting like a law enforcement agency but a political arm of the Democrat party.

Obama fought to retain thousands of documents. It's not really a question. Again, you just admit this is little more than returning overdue library books to the National Archives. Yes it should be done. Is this a matter of national security, hardly.

You're just incorrect. If the president has documents unsecured that are a genuine risk to national security then it should not take 18 months to resolve. Otherwise, the administration is just flippant. There is a reason it was delayed until just before the mid-term elections.

This is playing out just like the Russian Hoax and every coordinated disinformation attack against Trump: lots of leaks and disinformation parroted by the left-wing noise machine that results in no substance.

---

Multiple confusions and misrepresentations here.

First, the major source of what's been going on has been Trump, not the media. In fact, we would know nothing about the raid had Trump not started whining about it.

Second, Obama quickly turned over all docs requested. This isn't in the neighborhood of a valid comparison.

Third, the reason why it took so long to get the docs was because Trump was resisting, obstructing, and otherwise dragging it out. If he had followed Obama's example, this would have been cleared up immediately.

Trump is in genuine trouble, and the more info he demands be made public, the more guilty he looks.

---

Democrats are in bigger trouble without Trump.

---

Dems are ruthless but not stupid. They realize people are experiencing run away inflation every single day . And these continual spending bills are only going to make matters worse. So they want to make every election about Donald Trump.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

fubar said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

An article on the well documented issues with Mar-a-Lago. It was already known as a "security nightmare" in the early months of Trump's presidency:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-mar-lago-security-risk-espionage-235950

---

So in 5.5 years, they didn't figure out how to protect ans secure the home of the President? I guess in your mind, the President shouldn't be able to go to his home after he is done because the Secret Service can't figure out how to secure it? Have you ever heard of any other leader, US or Foreign, that could not go home because their security team was put out???

Please rethink about what you are saying. I like you Sam and I enjoy our back and forth, but when it comes to Trump you throw out some stuff that is mind boggling.

---

No, I can't think of any other example because no other president took highly sensitive material home when he left office (at least not under the current rules).

---

Every president has taken home files. Many they arguably should not have. Like everything around Trump, I will not defend his taking of document inappropriately, if he did, or the allegedly sloppy way they were maintained.

What I am concerned about, which is a much greater threat to democracy and our mutual governance is the Democrats continual misuse of power and disregard for protocol to maintain power. That is much more concerning than a National archivist having his TDS panties in a wad over not getting his documents when he wants them.

As noted, the Obama-Biden White House (they're more or less the same) has a track record of weaponizing the federal government against political opponents, and that is far more dangerous than some overdue library books. In order to have faith in government, all people need to trust the institutions. The FBI and DOJ have eroded that trust through its obvious double standards.
- The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop, knew it was legitimate, and yet still told Facebook and other social media organizations that it likely was "Russian disinformation"
- The FBI (and CIA) was colluded with a Russian operative to foist the Russian Hoax on not only Trump's presidency but also the American people
- The FBI has been targeting American citizens at best needlessly and at worse intentionally entrapping them

Being used as a political tool by one political party is dangerous and undermines trust in the federal government. It obviously a political stunt because of the silly, juvenile leaks to the left-wing noise machine that it so vociferously parrots: TRUMP HAD NUCLEAR CODES! HE SOLD THEM TO THE CHINESE! I do not recall a case where we have seen a similar level of leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine as we did with Trump whether the Russian Hoax of the Overdue Library Books hoax.

The Trump answer is very simple. One of these things are true:
- The documents Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were a threat to national security - in which case the raid should have been conducted in February 2020
- The document Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were technically wrongly taken but not a threat to national security - in which case he should have been shown the same courtesy given to other presidents

The litmus test as always with double standard Democrats is would you support raiding Clinton, Obama, or Biden's homes to get overdue library books? Of course the left-wing noise machine would be screaming about "threats to democracy," "UltraMAGA," and "fascism."

The FBI did not raid Obama's home to get the myriad documents he refused to return nor Clinton's home to get his tapes. And there were no leaks about how Obama was selling nuclear codes to the Russians, the Iranians, or the Chinese.

---

Being wrongly accused by the FBI doesn't give you life-long immunity. That's true of any person. It's especially true when you're the person who fired the FBI director and hand-picked his successor.

The claim that Obama refused to return myriad documents is false. It was known to be false when Sen. Cruz tweeted it. NARA released a statement a few days later in case there was any doubt. NARA didn't consider the Clinton tapes to be presidential records and didn't ask for the FBI to get involved. Clinton wasn't even a party to the case.

The "raid in February or not at all" dilemma is also false. You ignore the possibility that the DOJ did exactly what you say you want them to do: secure national secrets while respecting due process and using particular caution in politically charged cases. I posted a quote on another thread asking what choice they had under the known circumstances. It didn't get many replies, so I'll re-post it here:

Quote:

---

For those of us who remain skeptical about whether the drastic measure of a search warrant was really necessary (especially given the FBI and DOJ's evident lack of urgency in the months after Trump's surrender of the 15 boxes in January 2022), these revelations require grappling with a hard question: Given that the former president was not responsibly securing the government's most closely held intelligence, that he was trying to prevent the FBI from examining what he'd returned, that his lawyers were either misinformed about or lying about the classified information still retained at Mar-a-Lago, and that even the issuance of a grand-jury subpoena (with potential criminal penalties for noncompliance) had not succeeded in getting Trump to hand over the remaining classified information, what option short of a search warrant would have sufficed?

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/111639

---

---

You offer a red herring. It does not provide lifelong immunity but it demonstrates to corrupt, political nature of the FBI that has a track record in participating in political stunts for a particular candidate. So it lacks credibility. This is clear by the silly leaks. If the FBI were serious we would not have it leaking to the left-wing noise machine about nuclear codes, etc. The fact it is leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine shows it's not acting like a law enforcement agency but a political arm of the Democrat party.

Obama fought to retain thousands of documents. It's not really a question. Again, you just admit this is little more than returning overdue library books to the National Archives. Yes it should be done. Is this a matter of national security, hardly.

You're just incorrect. If the president has documents unsecured that are a genuine risk to national security then it should not take 18 months to resolve. Otherwise, the administration is just flippant. There is a reason it was delayed until just before the mid-term elections.

This is playing out just like the Russian Hoax and every coordinated disinformation attack against Trump: lots of leaks and disinformation parroted by the left-wing noise machine that results in no substance.

---

Multiple confusions and misrepresentations here.

First, the major source of what's been going on has been Trump, not the media. In fact, we would know nothing about the raid had Trump not started whining about it.

Second, Obama quickly turned over all docs requested. This isn't in the neighborhood of a valid comparison.

Third, the reason why it took so long to get the docs was because Trump was resisting, obstructing, and otherwise dragging it out. If he had followed Obama's example, this would have been cleared up immediately.

Trump is in genuine trouble, and the more info he demands be made public, the more guilty he looks.

---

Democrats are in bigger trouble without Trump.

---

Dems are ruthless but not stupid. They realize people are experiencing run away inflation every single day . And these continual spending bills are only going to make matters worse. So they want to make every election about Donald Trump.

---

Well here at least is one thing the dems and Trump agree on: Every election is about him.

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Doc, is this the internet gambler? Does he have any other credentials?

---

Canada2017 said:

---

fubar said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

An article on the well documented issues with Mar-a-Lago. It was already known as a "security nightmare" in the early months of Trump's presidency:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-mar-lago-security-risk-espionage-235950

---

So in 5.5 years, they didn't figure out how to protect ans secure the home of the President? I guess in your mind, the President shouldn't be able to go to his home after he is done because the Secret Service can't figure out how to secure it? Have you ever heard of any other leader, US or Foreign, that could not go home because their security team was put out???

Please rethink about what you are saying. I like you Sam and I enjoy our back and forth, but when it comes to Trump you throw out some stuff that is mind boggling.

---

No, I can't think of any other example because no other president took highly sensitive material home when he left office (at least not under the current rules).

---

Every president has taken home files. Many they arguably should not have. Like everything around Trump, I will not defend his taking of document inappropriately, if he did, or the allegedly sloppy way they were maintained.

What I am concerned about, which is a much greater threat to democracy and our mutual governance is the Democrats continual misuse of power and disregard for protocol to maintain power. That is much more concerning than a National archivist having his TDS panties in a wad over not getting his documents when he wants them.

As noted, the Obama-Biden White House (they're more or less the same) has a track record of weaponizing the federal government against political opponents, and that is far more dangerous than some overdue library books. In order to have faith in government, all people need to trust the institutions. The FBI and DOJ have eroded that trust through its obvious double standards.
- The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop, knew it was legitimate, and yet still told Facebook and other social media organizations that it likely was "Russian disinformation"
- The FBI (and CIA) was colluded with a Russian operative to foist the Russian Hoax on not only Trump's presidency but also the American people
- The FBI has been targeting American citizens at best needlessly and at worse intentionally entrapping them

Being used as a political tool by one political party is dangerous and undermines trust in the federal government. It obviously a political stunt because of the silly, juvenile leaks to the left-wing noise machine that it so vociferously parrots: TRUMP HAD NUCLEAR CODES! HE SOLD THEM TO THE CHINESE! I do not recall a case where we have seen a similar level of leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine as we did with Trump whether the Russian Hoax of the Overdue Library Books hoax.

The Trump answer is very simple. One of these things are true:
- The documents Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were a threat to national security - in which case the raid should have been conducted in February 2020
- The document Trump allegedly illegally took to his home were technically wrongly taken but not a threat to national security - in which case he should have been shown the same courtesy given to other presidents

The litmus test as always with double standard Democrats is would you support raiding Clinton, Obama, or Biden's homes to get overdue library books? Of course the left-wing noise machine would be screaming about "threats to democracy," "UltraMAGA," and "fascism."

The FBI did not raid Obama's home to get the myriad documents he refused to return nor Clinton's home to get his tapes. And there were no leaks about how Obama was selling nuclear codes to the Russians, the Iranians, or the Chinese.

---

Being wrongly accused by the FBI doesn't give you life-long immunity. That's true of any person. It's especially true when you're the person who fired the FBI director and hand-picked his successor.

The claim that Obama refused to return myriad documents is false. It was known to be false when Sen. Cruz tweeted it. NARA released a statement a few days later in case there was any doubt. NARA didn't consider the Clinton tapes to be presidential records and didn't ask for the FBI to get involved. Clinton wasn't even a party to the case.

The "raid in February or not at all" dilemma is also false. You ignore the possibility that the DOJ did exactly what you say you want them to do: secure national secrets while respecting due process and using particular caution in politically charged cases. I posted a quote on another thread asking what choice they had under the known circumstances. It didn't get many replies, so I'll re-post it here:

Quote:

---

For those of us who remain skeptical about whether the drastic measure of a search warrant was really necessary (especially given the FBI and DOJ's evident lack of urgency in the months after Trump's surrender of the 15 boxes in January 2022), these revelations require grappling with a hard question: Given that the former president was not responsibly securing the government's most closely held intelligence, that he was trying to prevent the FBI from examining what he'd returned, that his lawyers were either misinformed about or lying about the classified information still retained at Mar-a-Lago, and that even the issuance of a grand-jury subpoena (with potential criminal penalties for noncompliance) had not succeeded in getting Trump to hand over the remaining classified information, what option short of a search warrant would have sufficed?

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/111639

---

---

You offer a red herring. It does not provide lifelong immunity but it demonstrates to corrupt, political nature of the FBI that has a track record in participating in political stunts for a particular candidate. So it lacks credibility. This is clear by the silly leaks. If the FBI were serious we would not have it leaking to the left-wing noise machine about nuclear codes, etc. The fact it is leaking disinformation to the left-wing noise machine shows it's not acting like a law enforcement agency but a political arm of the Democrat party.

Obama fought to retain thousands of documents. It's not really a question. Again, you just admit this is little more than returning overdue library books to the National Archives. Yes it should be done. Is this a matter of national security, hardly.

You're just incorrect. If the president has documents unsecured that are a genuine risk to national security then it should not take 18 months to resolve. Otherwise, the administration is just flippant. There is a reason it was delayed until just before the mid-term elections.

This is playing out just like the Russian Hoax and every coordinated disinformation attack against Trump: lots of leaks and disinformation parroted by the left-wing noise machine that results in no substance.

---

Multiple confusions and misrepresentations here.

First, the major source of what's been going on has been Trump, not the media. In fact, we would know nothing about the raid had Trump not started whining about it.

Second, Obama quickly turned over all docs requested. This isn't in the neighborhood of a valid comparison.

Third, the reason why it took so long to get the docs was because Trump was resisting, obstructing, and otherwise dragging it out. If he had followed Obama's example, this would have been cleared up immediately.

Trump is in genuine trouble, and the more info he demands be made public, the more guilty he looks.

---

Democrats are in bigger trouble without Trump.

---

Dems are ruthless but not stupid. They realize people are experiencing run away inflation every single day . And these continual spending bills are only going to make matters worse. So they want to make every election about Donald Trump.

---

Well here at least is one thing the dems and Trump agree on: Every election is about him.

---

Strongly doubt Dems prefer to face DeSantis as the Republican nominee debating Biden's record throughout the campaign trail .

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Doc, is this the internet gambler? Does he have any other credentials?

---

As the lawyer who filed all of Carter Page’s FISA abuse litigations, I can tell you this analysis is 100% correct. It’s great to see everyone waking up to the depths of government corruption in our nation. It runs wider and deeper than you can possibly imagine. https://t.co/EfrfL0ZM6F

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) August 31, 2022

Doc Holliday said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Doc, is this the internet gambler? Does he have any other credentials?

---

How about Carter Page's Lawyer's take on it?

As the lawyer who filed all of Carter Page’s FISA abuse litigations, I can tell you this analysis is 100% correct. It’s great to see everyone waking up to the depths of government corruption in our nation. It runs wider and deeper than you can possibly imagine. https://t.co/EfrfL0ZM6F

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) August 31, 2022

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Doc, is this the internet gambler? Does he have any other credentials?

---

How about Carter Page's Lawyer's take on it?

As the lawyer who filed all of Carter Page’s FISA abuse litigations, I can tell you this analysis is 100% correct. It’s great to see everyone waking up to the depths of government corruption in our nation. It runs wider and deeper than you can possibly imagine. https://t.co/EfrfL0ZM6F

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) August 31, 2022

---

No. Was this lawyer representing anyone implicated in the storage of documents in MAL?
Why not Amarillo Slim?

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Doc, is this the internet gambler? Does he have any other credentials?

---

How about Carter Page's Lawyer's take on it?

As the lawyer who filed all of Carter Page’s FISA abuse litigations, I can tell you this analysis is 100% correct. It’s great to see everyone waking up to the depths of government corruption in our nation. It runs wider and deeper than you can possibly imagine. https://t.co/EfrfL0ZM6F

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) August 31, 2022

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Doc, is this the internet gambler? Does he have any other credentials?

---

How about Carter Page's Lawyer's take on it?

As the lawyer who filed all of Carter Page’s FISA abuse litigations, I can tell you this analysis is 100% correct. It’s great to see everyone waking up to the depths of government corruption in our nation. It runs wider and deeper than you can possibly imagine. https://t.co/EfrfL0ZM6F

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) August 31, 2022

---

No. Was this lawyer representing anyone implicated in the storage of documents in MAL?
Why not Amarillo Slim?

---

goal posts! They are a moving!

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

What actually happened:

The Biden regime not only knew about the Raid on Mar-A-Lago, they created the path that allowed it to happen 🔽 pic.twitter.com/V7LNGOH206

— JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) August 30, 2022

---

Doc, is this the internet gambler? Does he have any other credentials?

---

How about Carter Page's Lawyer's take on it?

As the lawyer who filed all of Carter Page’s FISA abuse litigations, I can tell you this analysis is 100% correct. It’s great to see everyone waking up to the depths of government corruption in our nation. It runs wider and deeper than you can possibly imagine. https://t.co/EfrfL0ZM6F

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) August 31, 2022

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. (HINT: this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms.

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents.

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. (A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. MAL is also a personal residence and office. USSS was/is deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. Access does not happen without their approval. That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc….exceedingly well defended. Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc….

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad.

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things.

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Ok. Elaborate.

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

whiterock said:

---

https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/29/one-giant-problem-with-the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid/

Link states status quo on the question of Presidential classification authority, giving an example I have cited here previously:

"...But in 2017, there were still a few adults at the Washington Post who felt the need to educate the public. Another headline read, "No, Trump did not break the law in talking classified details with the Russians," adding, "The president is essentially the ultimate arbiter of what is classified and what is not. While the heads of particular agencies also have original classification authoritythe power to deem material classified or not classifiedtheir authority is limited to their departments and bound by their departments' particular rules."

"When it comes to classification issues and those kinds of things, he's not above the law," defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., told the Post. "He basically is the law."

In other words, Trump did not break the law by revealing classified information to the Russians because the president is the ultimate authority over what is classified. He can reveal or share anything with anyone regardless of its security classification. He doesn't need to follow any procedures or make the decision in writing. If the person with whom he shares the information is not "cleared" to access that classified information, then the classification is automatically modified to permit such access. All that's needed is something that clearly demonstrates the president's intent to share or otherwise dispose of the classified information. Thus, the moment the president told the Russians about the terrorist plot, those Russians were legally allowed to possess the information...."

...and then goes on to make the appropriate connection:

"....When those trucks arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was still president. The decision to repose classified documents in Mar-a-Lago was a presidential decision. Joe Biden might not have agreed with Trump's decision keep these records after leaving office. But this situation is no different than Trump's decision to share intelligence with the Russians. He made an executive decision to repose classified documents in his personal residence...."

Garland chose to make a political issue out of this by not waiting until after the mid-terms. After the mid-terms are done, he might chose to de-escalate by announcing he will not seek indictment. That would be a step toward addressing growing public concern over politicization in the DOJ/FBI. Or he could proceed with indictment and set of a titanic constitutional crisis which would require SCOTUS to end. That is a high risk gamble, as it might or might not be settled by election day 2022. (HINT: this SCOTUS is not likely to allow a former POTUS to be prosecuted over something that has traditionally been an implicit power of the office.) So escalation to push this issue into the 2024 elections risks a humiliating defeat in an election year.

For those reasons, in normal politics, Garland could be expected to withdraw after the mid-terms.

But we are not in "normal politics."
We are in "regime politics."
Democrats genuinely appear to believe their own propaganda, that they are defending the realm from fascism.
Prepare for a bumpy ride.

---

Correct. The president is the ultimate arbiter of what is classified or not. That's why it has been obvious from day one it was a political stunt to get overdue library books to the National Archives, which is unprecedented in another act of authoritarian destruction of polity and protocol. Every president keeps records - let's name the last one to get raided by the FBI to return them.

---

The same Government, inventoried, packed the boxes and paid to have them shipped to the location that the FBI had to raid to protect National Security.

---

...at a location guarded by the United States Secret Service

---

Stop deluding these poor people. You know good and well the Secret Service isn't there to monitor what Trump does with his documents.

---

Neither are the Marine Security Guards (MSGs) at our Embassies abroad there to monitor what US diplomats do with their documents.

Both are, however, deployed to protect US Govt personnel and facilities, to specifically include preventing access by unauthorized individuals to facilities, thereby sharply limiting unauthorized access to classified materials at those facilities. Each has specific responsibility to defend the living as well as work spaces of POTUS or equivalent. (A US Ambassador is the PERSONAL representative to POTUS and the senior USG official in country, save for a designated theater commander of the US Military.)

So, actually, the only upgrade to the USSS for the purposes of protecting classified material from unauthorized use would be an armed US military detachment.

(Sorry, but you kinda walked into the proverbial tree limb on that one)

---

There's nothing to be sorry about except for that word salad you just spilled. None of it changes a thing, and you know it. Mar-a-Lago is a hotel, not a government facility. The Secret Service are there to keep out weapons and wiretaps. They have no real idea who's coming or going, let alone who's "authorized."

---

Wrong. MAL is also a personal residence and office. USSS was/is deployed there to protect the President of the United States, his person, his residence, and his office. Access does not happen without their approval. That is/was true at the Bush Ranch, at the Bush home in Dallas, at the Obama home, etc….exceedingly well defended. Access is logged in/out, cameras, armed patrols, etc….

Documents at the residence of a former POTUS are better defended than at any Embassy abroad.

You do not know what you are talking about and are saying demonstrably silly things.

---

You do know what you're talking about (presumably) and are saying demonstrably silly things...which is worse.

---

Odd hill to choose to die on. Your position is you believe Trump wouldn't have a serious security team regardless of USSS presence and it is based on nothing but your imagination. It's insane to assume a very wealthy man with so many violent leftists calling for his demise every day wouldn't bother to hire security, and that is your premise here. You day drinking? This isn't like you.

---

Wangchung said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Deliberate defiance of a subpoena is strong evidence of intent. DoJ filings are practically spelling out for you in detail that they have evidence the documents were willfully withheld, and even moved around to avoid detection when the FBI sent agents out there to collect the first time.

Hillary turned over what she had, and what she didn't have was recovered through other means. That's the difference here, she didn't lie in sworn declarations or ignore subpoenaes like Trump did, and she didn't move stuff around so investigators wouldn't find it.

---

Hillary turned over what she had? Are you seriously trying to claim that 33,000 subpoenaed emails were not destroyed? That her phones were never destroyed with hammers? That she didn't bleachbit wipe her servers that were in question?!? Good god.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"A cover sheet saying Confidential or Top Secret does not make the document classified at this date"

Actually, it does. As has been discussed in this thread ad nauseum: declassification is a process, where declassified docs are marked as such and dated, so you know that something was declassified and when. Trump can order anything he wants to be declassified, but that order starts a process, it doesn't instantly make it so.

What I've never seen any satisfactory explanation for is: why did he even have these documents? He keeps saying he would have given them back if asked (seriously undermining his "I declassified it" excuse), but they did ask and he didn't give them back, so the obvious question is why did he do that?

At some point you need to step back and recognize that these excuses are competing with each other, they can't all be true. Usually that is a strong indicator that someone is lying, poorly, and I honestly don't understand how y'all don't get that yet (or maybe you do, but loyalty to the Big Man requires you to pretend that you don't).

---

Assuming the reporting is accurate, how is this significantly different from the when the HRC's lawyers use of Bleachbit to wipe clean her server?

I don't like the idea of Trump mishandling classified docs, but a standard seems to have been set.

Also these TOP SECRET documents are too risky to have in the hands of a former president, in locked rooms, in locked cabinets under massive security, secret service detail, and 24/7 surveillance... so we plaster them on the internet?

---

Yes it has. The standard is: "if you are for good reason suspected of mishandling classified information, you should not be president." Lets keep applying that standard.

---

Are you sure you want to put democrats up against Desantis?

---