Below is my column in Fox.com on the discovery of highly classified documents in a closet in the private office used by President Joe Biden before 2020. There is still much that we do not know about the documents, though many in the media have already dismissed the matter as no way comparable to the controversy at Mar-a-Lago. Legally, the underlying potential offense of unlawfully possessing classified material is the same, though there are obvious differences in the two cases. Yet, what has been lost may be as serious as any crime for Democrats: clarity. Indeed, the potential crime itself was quickly dismissed by press and pundits who previously insisted that the mere possession of such documents endangered national security and warranted prosecution.
Here is the column:
In the movie classic “Three Days of the Condor,” John Houseman played a weathered spymaster who spoke of the good old days after the Great War “before we knew enough to number them.” When a subordinate asked if he missed “that kind of action,” Houseman responds dryly, “Nope. I miss that kind of clarity.”
The Democrats may soon have the same lament. We have too many scandals to number, but what they will miss most after the discovery of highly classified documents in the president’s former private office is the clarity. With the discovery, Democrats have lost the clarity and separation with Trump. There are clear differences in the two scandals, but those differences could be lost in the echo of Biden’s own words on the mishandling of classified material.
Last year, President Biden was asked by CBS’ Scott Pelley on “60 Minutes,” “When you saw the photograph of the top secret documents laid out on the floor at Mar-a-Lago, what did you think to yourself looking at that image?”
Biden seem to struggle to find words to express his revulsion: “How that could possibly happen, how one anyone could be that irresponsible. And I thought what data was in there that may compromise sources and methods.”
Washington is in full spin control with pundits who previously said that even a misdemeanor conviction of Trump should bar him from ever running again for federal office.
Again, there are distinctions, but we still do not know the full facts, including whether additional classified material has been previously returned or whether additional material may be located in other offices. Nevertheless, there is no allegation of false statements or obstruction.
What is most striking is how this could have easily been far, far worse if the Bidens had gotten their way on the alternative office that was discussed following their departure from government. Rather than the Penn Center, their effective landlord would have been Chinese associates with close ties to Beijing.
For those of us who have followed the Biden influence peddling scandal, one of the benefits that Joe Biden was supposed to receive from Chinese associates was an office that he would use regularly.
In 2017, Hunter Biden asked that keys be made for his new “office mates,” listing his father, Joe Biden, Jill Biden and his uncle, Jim Biden. He said that they planned to share the space with Gongwen Dong, whom he described as an “emissary” for Chairman Ye Jianming — the chairman of CEFC Chinese Energy Co. Hunter Biden also asked for set of keys of Gongwen Dong. The manager was even asked to change the names on the front door to include Joe and Jill Biden.
The arrangement appears to have fallen to the wayside with other aspects of the Chinese deals. Instead, the Bidens found another source at the University of Pennsylvania to cover their office needs.
What is not known is whether some of this classified material was relevant to Biden’s book and his lectures on diplomacy, raising the possibility that he worked with the documents on computers or discussed them with third parties. In the meantime, they apparently sat in a closet, easy pickings for any intelligence service.
While the media continues to dismiss the influence peddling investigation as, in the words this weekend of NBC’s Chuck Todd, a “personal” attack, it is far more serious as a form of corruption due to an array of dangers from such access. The millions given to Hunter Biden came from a variety of foreign sources, including some coming from figures tied to foreign intelligence. This money not only gained influence but access to the Bidens.
Hunter himself stated that foreign intelligence used hotel rooms to steal his files. A videotape purportedly shows Biden claiming that one of his laptops was stolen by Russians for blackmail purposes.
Putting aside the lack of media interest in Biden’s claim, there is no information on any investigation by the FBI that blackmail material may have been acquired on the Bidens.
The danger of influence peddling is that it is not only the preferred avenue for corruption in Washington, but it often allows dangerous levels of access to targeted leaders.
Even if the public dodged this danger on the Chinese-funded office, it was not due to any lack of effort by the Bidens. The question now is how the public can feel confident that the FBI will show the same vigor in investigating the Bidens as it did Trump.
Attorney General Merrick Garland knows that many citizens no longer trust the government and his current position will only deepen those misgivings. There is growing unease over the litany of controversies over political bias at the FBI, including calls for a new “Church Committee” to look into reforms.
At the same time, Garland has maintained an incomprehensible position in refusing to appoint a special counsel to investigate the Biden influence peddling controversy and other issues. He has done so despite clear evidence that the President had lied in denying any knowledge of his son’s foreign dealings and repeated references to the President getting a possible cut or benefits (including the Chinese-funded office) from the deals.
Garland’s position now borders on the comical. He announced that he was compelled to appoint a special counsel on the Mar-a-Lago and other possible offenses by Trump after he officially became a candidate for the 2024 presidential election. At the time, some of us noted that Biden is actually the president but Garland was steadfastly refusing to make such an appointment.
Now Biden stands accused of the same underlying offense as Mar-a-Lago. While there have not been false statement or obstruction claims raised, it is unclear what allegations will emerge. More importantly, the offense of unlawfully removing and storing classified information is the same. Yet, Garland again refused to appoint a special counsel and will keep the matter within the DOJ rank-and-file.
Biden can count on every possible consideration and accommodation from the media. The public is used to that. However, Garland will undermine both investigations by continuing to block the appointment of a special counsel into Biden and his family.
The Biden discovery will complicate the narrative for many in Washington, particularly those who previously took the position that knowing possession alone justifies a criminal charge. When added to the Hillary Clinton destruction of tens of thousands of emails and use of unsecure private servers, Garland may be creating the greatest credibility crisis for the Justice Department in decades. It is due his framing of these investigations.
It is all part of the incredible shrinking Merrick Garland. At a time that leadership is demand, Garland is again evading his most difficult obligation to show total independence from his president in seeking both the full facts and full accountability in a scandal. Otherwise, he will fuel the mistrust over the treatment of the two scandals and many more, beyond the president, and future generations will likely ask “how anyone could be that irresponsible.”
“ Now Biden stands accused of the same underlying offense as Mar-a-Lago. While there have not been false statement or obstruction claims raised, it is unclear what allegations will emerge.”
That’s hilarious. Biden is being accused only because Trump and his supporters want it to be the same as what happened in Mar-a-Lago. It obviously wasn’t. Turley is one of many already making allegations by insinuating stories about Hunter Biden asking for keys to an office and influence peddling schemes giving his gullible readers and MAGA nutties plenty to theorize with pure speculation, speculation that Turley is conveniently providing.
Seriously, the pent up need to “get back at Biden” for any ‘crimes’ is disturbing and hilarious at the same time. The ignorance is thru the roof on this one including Turley’s. He’s feeding the rage full throttle there’s no doubt about that.
The beauty of this event is that it highlights people’s true character and those that penalize one and absolve another for the same crime deserve to be ostracized at best. In a perfect world, they would be removed from society permanently.
The beauty of this is that it exposes the inability of many to really think. This is not about ‘clarity’ it’s about a need to be petty and vindictive while avoiding the simple facts that make these two cases completely different. Trump WANTS to make this as comparable to his own disaster so he can avoid the fact in his case he DID commit a crime when he deliberately withheld property that did NOT belong to him and lied about it.
Biden’s lawyers upon finding the documents immediately called authorities and handed over the documents within 24 hrs. Trump fought and hid hundreds of classified documents including the most sensitive for nearly two years. How is that ‘comparable’?
You’re one of those that should be euthanized. Enough said!
Biden had those classified documents (and perhaps others) for over 5 years.
Nobody knew they were missing. Even NARA was unaware. It’s not even clear if it was Biden who took the documents to that office.
Trump on the other hand knew he had those documents and explicit told others to take them to his home. They were not his to take. Making them stolen documents. That’s a crime.
SV – you keep saying that when Trump transferred classified documents to MAL, while was still President, he “stole” them. Please stop saying that. It is not true. Questions can be raised about Trump’s later co-operation with NARA in releasing requested documents
(“Presidential records” not “classified records”), but there was no crime in merely possesssing them while he was President or thereafter.
Classified documents are all numbered and tracked.
You must sign to recieve them.
TS/SCI documents are rigorously tracked.
Though obviously someone F’d up.
“Nobody knew they were missing.”
Why not – they are tracked. numbered and signed for.
“Even NARA was unaware.”
Why ?
“It’s not even clear if it was Biden who took the documents to that office.”
I doubt he did. It is still a crime. And it is highly unlikely that Biden was not responsible for the documents,
regardless of who moved them.
“Trump on the other hand knew he had those documents and explicit told others to take them to his home.”
Lousy argument – if True, the documents are declassified. PERIOD.
“They were not his to take.”
Hw was president, They were his to do as he pleased with.
“Making them stolen documents. That’s a crime.”
Not unless he took them or directed others to do so AFTER he left office.
I would note that in FACT we do not know how the documents got to MAL.
Nor do we know how they got to Biden Center.
What we do know is that they can get to MAL any number of Legal ways.
There is no legal way for a classified document to get to Biden Center.
And you don’t consider all the persecution that Trump went through during his term in office as “petty and vindictive”? There might be a lot of smoke and little fire surrounding the Biden family but it seems to be well known in political circles that the family is corrupt. I know several engineers that are or were experts in natural gas supply and delivery. None were ever offered a position on a utility board in Ukraine. And all of Schiff’s caterwauling about Russian collusion with Trump.. A nothing burger! Yet the likes of you will be trying to protect President Biden, no matter how much mud sticks on the guy. Sad indeed.
Correction: replace “should be” with “will be” euthanized as we approach the day of reckoning.
Let’s take a look at the chain of custody. Joe Biden left office as VP in January of 2017. The Biden Penn Center did not open until February of 2018. Where did these classified documents reside prior to the opening of that facility? Who may have had access to them?
No doubt the DOJ is looking into the chain of custody in both cases.
The chain of custody in Biden’s case is scary. Did Biden provide secret information to the Chinese that funded the think tank and helped increase Biden’s bank account? Does ATS care?
Catherine Cassidy: You raise two very good points of which I was unaware. Thank you.
Biden was NOT a former President.
Presidential Records Act:
(3)the Presidential records of a former President shall be available to such former President or the former President’s designated representative.
She did. Catherine, you go, girl!
Ok everyone, yes even you Turley, Obviously right leaning media jumped on this as fast a lightning without scrutinizing the facts. Even Turley is already jumping to conclusions and making wild assumptions, even as he constantly points out that they don’t know everything, BUT it’s not stopping him or anyone else from goin straight to the theories and assumptions. The facts first.
No, these are not “highly classified” documents. The media even MSM has a very poor understanding about the difference in classification. There’s classified, tops secret, and top secret/ SCI. The last being the most serious and critical level of classification. What was found in the offices at the think tank are NOT considered “highly classified”, Turley is only referring to them as “highly classified” because it makes it more serous than it is and that is a deliberate mischaracterization given the fact that he admits right away he doesn’t know what the documents entail. This is pure red meat for his gullible readers and clearly they are already making all kinds of wild assumptions based on Turley’s own deliberate assumptions and implied theories as ‘very possible’ fact.
Turley falsely insinuates that this is a potential crime. Nope. There are very stark differences between what Trump did. It’s literally apples to oranges. The only reason why so many on the right are wildly to conclusions and assumptions is to make it seem like Biden is just as guilty as Trump. Again, nope.
NARA spent nearly a year and a half trying to get documents that did NOT belong to Trump. He continually refused to hand over property that did not belong to him. He lied about not having classified material in his possession after attesting all documents were turned in AFTER being subpoenaed by NARA. Trump had TS/SCI classified documents illegally in his possession. It was serious enough that the DOJ had to execute a search warrant of his property and finding over 100 classified documents in unsecured or poorly secured and monitored locations.
The case with the Biden documents, the lawyers who found the documents in a LOCKED closed IMMEDIATELY called the proper authorities and HANDED OVER the documents to NARA. That action alone makes any notion of a crime null and void. Because they did not, like Trump, attempt to hide or cover up or claim they were Biden’s personal records. They did what they were SUPPOSED TO DO.
Should there be an investigation? Absolutely and it’s guaranteed it will be a short one due to the fact that the documents were tuned over IMMEDIATELY. Keep in mind that NARA wasn’t looking for these documents and they were found by chance. Obviously that is pure fodder for conspiracy theorists to go nuts with the assumptions and allegations as Turley is doing on his column.
Turley keeps saying he doesn’t know all the facts even the media.
AG Garland appointed a Trump appointed AG to investigate and it wont be much to investigate since the whole thing was handled as it was supposed to be.
Two of the documents are reported to have been top secret sci.
Actually, the CNN report says that “some” of the documents were top secret sci, so probably more than two.
Daniel, just learned that a few minutes ago. It hasn’t been confirmed yet, but if that’s true they were there for a specific reason I assume. It still doesn’t detract from the fact that the lawyers did the right thing right away. They weren’t trying to hide it like Trump did.
“It still doesn’t detract from the fact that the lawyers did the right thing right away. They weren’t trying to hide it like Trump did.”
Hundreds of senseless posts containing error and contradiction. Trump’s lawyers hid nothing more than Biden’s lawyers. Get your facts straight.
How does the fact that Trump allegedly hid documents when he was protected by the Presidential Records Act compare to Biden divulging that he possessed and had hidden classified documents when he had no authority and no protecting statute???
You said it, Bill, Biden didn’t have the authority Trump had.
Bill, how specifically did the PRA permit Trump to possess Presidential records that could cause harm to the national defence in violation of the Espionage Act? As I read it, the PRA says that the Archive is to take legal ownership and possession of Presidential records as soon as the President leaves office.
What specific reason are you assuming could justify their being there?
There is no “did the right thing”
A crime had already been committed. These documents were not found in Biden’s home – where they MIGHT arguably be allowed.
They were found at a private Foreign policy think tank partly funded by the Chinese.
Though they are weaker than those of Trump as VP’s have no declassification authority, no property interest in WH papers, and no unlimited power to claim WH documents as personal.
Ex-VP’s do retain all access security clearances for life subject only to constraint by the current sitting president.
And Ex-VP’s can arguably possess classified documents – But NOT outside the government office in their home.
These lawyers had no choice. There is ZERO doubt the espionage act was violated here.
Trump’s lawyers were dealing with radically different conditions.
It remains to this date unknown whether the documents at MAL were actually classified.
Government and classified documents can end up at an ex-presidents (or VP’s) government offices in their home without any law being violated. They can not end up at a private think tank without a violation of the law.
Obama’s EO arguably allows ex-presidents and vice presidents the ability to posses classified documents in their government offices in their homes.
Both NARA and the FBI had been given full access to MAL to search for and take whatever they wanted previously.
It was and remains reasonable for Trump and Trump lawyers to beleive that whatever remained was legitimate.
John, I’ve yet seen anyone dispute the fact you consistently bring up: Presidents do not lose their all-access privilege and/or clearance to view classified documents after they leave office and that possession of classified material afterwards is not, de facto, a crime. Not once has anyone been able to show a statute, policy, or other documentation where former Presidents can not, and must not, have access to the documents created or classified during his term. Have you noticed Trump’s detractors never even try to claim the Obama, Clinton, or either Bush (or their VPs) lost their highest-level security clearances when they left office? Only Trump, but not Pence, supposedly did – but they can’t prove it, they can only want it to be true because of their hatred for the man himself. Nor can they explain why, after years of multiple investigations, multiple raids and other inquiries into Trump’s personal and business life, why no criminal charges have ever been filed against him, but not ever against other former presidents for also keeping their ‘government’ documents, nor why the public is NOT entitled transparency into any of those investigations. Continue as you do, keep challenging them to demonstrate why Trump is wrong for doing the exact same things every other President and former President have been able and continue to do.
One of he big deals regarding Clinton was that all the processes that I described in the prior post – and more applied to her.
Her efilitration of classified information to her email server could not have been accidental or inadvertant.
She or staff had to either remove documents from a SCIF without signing for them – which is not supposed to be possible.
Copy them, print them, photograph them, transfer them to a USB stick, memorize them, or write them down – all of which is illegal and supposed to be impossible.
One of the big deals of both the Manning and the Snowden cases is that they were able to transfer classified information to USB sticks from Classified systems – which is supposed to be impossible. Computers on the classified network are ait gapped fromt he internet and do not have CD’s USB or any other means of attaching removable media.
I do nto recall how Snowden managed, but part of what the US is going after assange is that he told Manning where to find information on how to boot Linux and using linux access protected files on a windows system. According to DOJ this makes Assange an accessory – despite the fact that the information Asange provided was links to videos on Youtube.
Regardless, my point is that for almost all of government it is very hard to just walk out of the office with classified information.
You can not do so accidentally and therefore it is pretty much always a crime to posess clasified information in your home.
Not because possession is illegal – if you have the appropriate clearance it is not.
But because removing the information from government custody is almost always illegal.
The Biden and Trump classified documents issues are uniquely different from any other classified incidents.
That is because both the president and the Vice president routinely have classified material in their homes.
No one else in government ever does legitimately. EVER.
In the case of the president that is the White House.
In the case of the vice president that is the Naval Observatory.
I beleive most of the non-public portions of the whitehouse are a SCIF, as well as most of the Naval Observatory.
But in addition Presidents and Vice presidents travel, and they have homes outside the WH and NO.
Classified information follows them all over the places, and at every residence of the president or vice president there is ALWAYS an official government office – that continues to exist when they are no longer president, and a SCIF.
In fact when Presidents Travel they have portable SCIF’s as well as a whole army of people responsible for securing the classifed information that travels with them.
The lawyers did “the right thing right away”
But someone did the WRONG thing for 6 years.
We have no idea who had accessed these documents over the past 6 years.
There is no government office involved here.
There is no deliberate or accidental move at the time of Transistion.
These documents got to Biden Center illegally – there is no legal way for them to have done so.
We do not know where they were between 2017 and 2018.
But it is likely they were at Biden’s DE home
THAT MIGHT have been legal or atleast innocent.
But they neither legally nor innocently got to the Biden Center.
Jeez. Are you a Biden Troll?
The Presidential records is civil, not criminal law. Both laws are gentleman’s agreement between the Executive Branch, and the Congressional Branch. Congress has no power to make these demands. The President has final, non reviewable power as to what is, and is not a Presidential Record. Everything at MAL are personal not Presidential documents.
The President has final and non reviewable power to declassify. All the documents are declassified.
Biden does not have Presidential powers. Biden has viollated laws concerning handling of Classified information.
Literally apples to oranges? Did Biden have the apples or the oranges? If so, what kind?
Just maybe he was using the documents to further his family business in Ukraine. How will we ever know why they were there without an investigation.
Shouldn’t the attorneys for former CIA officer John Kiriakou, Reality Winner, Thomas Drake, Manning, Snowden and many other “subordinates” that were loyal to their Oath of Office (not to violate rights and not to commit war crimes)- some who served prison time and were tortured in prison for upholding that oath – shouldn’t those attorneys file a 14th Amendment lawsuits (equal treatment under the law).
These more law abiding and more loyal subordinates should be made whole financially and an given an individualized official apology from Merrick Garland and President Biden. Biden should pardon all of them.
Since “elites” can do anything with no accountability, how can we penalize those more law abiding but of lesser rank? The U.S. Constitution does not allow it.
Most of the people you named leaked classified material to others, which is not alleged here. All charges against Drake were dropped except exceeding authorized use of a computer.
Biden leaked classified documents to the UofP Bidn center – that is a private foreign policy think tank, funded in part by the chinese, that employed Biden for $1M a year.
“that employed Biden for $1M a year.”
I missed the adequate proof for the dollar amount. Do you have a link. I know this but don’t have a link that satisfies the certainty I desire.
I beleive it was in the original CBS story.
Elsewhere I tripped over a story that claims that:
The initial deal was that the Chinese group that the Biden’s were part of was going to rent this office space directly for the Biden’s.
But that deal “fell through” and that what ultimately occured was the Chinese donated 55M to UofP. UofP then rented the Biden Center space and paid Biden $1M/yr.
It is also alleged that he used this office to write a book about his time as VP.
All of this was reported either by CBS or MSNBC. Obviously it is now being echoed by other sites like JTN or GP.
The unconfirmed back story is that the china deal did not actually “fall through” it was just changed to launder the money through UofP.
Because Joe Biden getting money from UofP is arguably legitimate.
Joe Biden getting money from a Hunter concocted partnership with the Chinese smells like 3 day old fish.
I suspect this was all entirely legal. It STILL smells of 3 day old fish.
I Doubt that Biden intentionally made top secret documents accessible to the chinese.
I have no doubt that if possible they went through his closet thoroughly.
There is going to be a big chinese problem for Biden in this because even though the money was laundered through UofP
and even though it is not likely that it will be possible to prove, it is virtually certain that the chinese copied every single document in Biden’s closet. They knew where his office was. And they knew he had a closet full of foreign policy related material in it.
Whatever security this fascility had – it was not sufficient to keep China from getting to those documents relatively easily.
That is presuming they did not have the keys and drop in as they pleased.
Thank you. That is the $1 million I heard about. Money is fungible and that is why our politicians should learn about arm’s length transactions and morality. That is how I was brought up, so I never thought of taking money that was tainted, and if such money was left untouched, it went to charity.
“I Doubt that Biden intentionally made top secret documents accessible to the chinese”
The document might not have been made accessible but some of the information may have. In their transactions they ended up involved with an American company having military secrets come under control of the Chinese.
Historically we gave secrets to the Russians while at war, and then during the cold war, so none of this is surprising. Many of our major companies such as IBM, Ford and Chevrolet dealt with Hitler. Even Hitler’s racist policies utilized American eugenics. It is said that a group of Nazi’s came to America to determine what would constitute of Jew. They recognized the southern Democrat affinity to racism mostly eradicated today throughout the nation. One drop of blood was considered too harsh by the Nazis.
We are a great and tolerant nation led by thieves.
Many of the problems are ones of Judgement.
Though there is little of the Trump Family making deals with the Chinese.
Even if there were – these would be clear business deals with armies of lawyers, contracts, …
One of the problems with Deals that are essentially about “access” – rather than about Hotels or condos’ or casino’s,
Is that the person paying for access – gets access.
Obviously it was wiser for Biden to recived a $1M salary from UofP to have an office in a DC building rented by UofP, even if the money was being laundered by UofP for the Chinese.
But the whole thing still ties to the chinese, and the chinese did not get a hotel or casino from the deal – so what DID they get ?
Maybe all they wanted was to help elect Biden rather than Trump – that would still be election interferance, and Biden would at the very least be an unwitting but Willing participant.
Anytime you are selling “access” – what the public will see will look like “Money for nothing” and that means they will wonder what the money really was for.
When Russian Oligarchs buy Condo’s in FL from Trump – they got a Condo, we all know that.
I am not concerned about “secrets” in terms of technology or military hardware. Reagan went out of his way to make SURE the russians knew all about Stealth. Stealth was then and is now defeatable – At great expense. And that was the big deal and the reasons that Reagan WANTED Russia to know.
Regardless, successful technology theft requires having the people, and infrastructure to have developed that technology yourself – otherwise it is useless. Russia never – through to today developed a successful Semiconductor capacity. The Russians have brilliant people – Stealth actually came from Them. Their Military equipment designers are among the best in the world. Their fighters – ignoring electronic technology are as good or better than ours. The AK-47 is as good a weapon as the M-16 and better suited to harsh environments.
And yet they never succeeded in making the equivalent of an 8080 CPU.
The Chinese are more Electronically Technically adept, But they are still behind, they can manufacture CPU’s but they can not design them.
Students in US universities graduate able to design CPU’s.
Regardless, my point is that stealing technology only buys you about 6months and only if you already have all the skills necescary to have developed it yourself. If you do not – Stealing tech gets you nowhere.
“Reagan went out of his way to make SURE the russians knew all about Stealth.”
—
Providing Stealth technology is not the same as permitting it to be stolen since that information lets the enemy know they are dealing with a strong adversary who has the technology they do not have and will not have for a long time. Strength deters aggression.
How did Reagan win the Cold War without firing a shot? Russia lacked the economy to keep up, so he bankrupted them.
That is a problem with your flawed argument, “my point is that stealing technology only buys you about 6months.” It saves tremendous resources for other development and production by the adversary. Your pandering creates more threats than before by multiplying their resources and adding to their GDP.
Lenin said, “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them” and we did. Where did Russia get its technology so fast during and after WW2? People seem not to care about the Americans who sent that technology to the Russians. Instead, they blame those who tried to stop such dangerous transfers. Some of those transfers might have been necessary during WW2, but afterward, it was suicide.
We discussed this when discussing Joe McCarthy, who was CORRECT. He might not have been nice, but he was not the only one to say the same things. We have made heroes out of those that sold America out, and villains of those that tried to protect it.
McCarthy was not responsible for the Hollywood Ten because that happened in the House, not in the Senate, where McCarthy was a Senator. That demonstrates the altering of history. One must ask themselves, who did that and why? I want to leave that up to you, but remember, the same things happen today.
We are hoodwinked by the left and losing our nation in the process.
The difference between classified information being stolen and the president just making it public is SOLELY that the President of the United States ALONE has the power to unilaterally declassify information without review.
Reagan had excellent reasons for making stealth public.
But it does not matter whether his reasons are good or poor – he was president it was his choice.
If we do not like the reasons for his acts – we vote him out.
All the above applies to Trump.
Trump as president could declassify information for personal gain and the only risk would be impeachment.
.”The difference between classified information being stolen and the president just making it public is SOLELY that the President of the United States ALONE has the power to unilaterally declassify information without review.”
That is not a response to anything I was discussing. We elect a President to protect us. Not everything needs to remain secret. However, compromising our ability to defend ourselves is not an intelligent thing to do.
Absolutely – but contra the 11th Cir. The President is unique.
Presidents MUST have the power to unilaterally declassify anything.
The consequences of behaving badly with classified information for Presidents should be political not criminal.
That should be True of Trump, and of Biden. and Obama, and Bush.
Biden is overall in more hot water than Trump – specifically because he was behind the efforts to frame up Trump over Classified documents.
AND Because he is strongly tied to weaponizing the federal government for political purposes.
AND because his mishandling of classified documents was as Vice President – which though still unique compared tot he rest of government is NOT nearly the same as that of president.
“Absolutely – but contra the 11th Cir. The President is unique.
Presidents MUST have the power to unilaterally declassify anything.
The consequences of behaving badly with classified information for Presidents should be political not criminal.”
John, did I say anything different?
Did I accidentally reply to you ?
“Did I accidentally reply to you ?”
John, only you would know.
If you build a better mouse trap – everyone else in the mousetrap industry will either copy your idea, or use your idea to improve upon.
With the exception of a few areas like Drugs, patents are a speed bump, because once you know the idea you can work arround the patent.
This is true of 2 competing US companies.
It is true of competing companies accross the world.
You say stealing techgnology saves R&D – that is absolutely true.
But the knowledge of others that a problem has been solved or a product has been developed.
Saves massive R&D.
If I am an Artillery Mfg, and you are a competitor, and I find out – which is unavoidable that you have increased range 50% – without any explanation of how. I will be able to match your solution in 6months – given the will to do so and a staff with the skill and knowledge to do so.
The most important thing that save me massive effort is Knowing the problem can be solved.
Conversely if I do not have a staff with the skill and knowledge you can provide me with every single detail of the design and I will not be able to replicate it.
“without any explanation of how. I will be able to match your solution in 6months – given the will to do so and a staff with the skill and knowledge to do so.”
Skill is limited. If one has the answers, that skill can be used elsewhere moving the project along quicker. Without the answers, the skill is divided.
With the knowledge that a solution exists – people with sufficient skill will replicate or even improve on it in 6 months.
With the knowledge of the exact solution – people without the skill above will not even replicate it.
IBM did a study back in the 80’s and found that its efforts to patent technology had only defensive value – i.e. they protected IBM from patent suits by others.
That IBM and everyone else would see technology advance faster and profit more without patents.
John, the theft is very deleterious. The theft permits ones enemies to take those saved resources and use them on something else. It causes our resources to be thinned trying to stay ahead.
You keep saying MAL is a gated community, why? In Florida that would mean it is something like a PUD (planned unit development). It is not. Where am I mistaken?
https://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/mar-a-lago-360a-panorama-view/view/google/
The homes to the north are separate entities. Only one residence (club) exists at MAL. It is a very big piece of land for coastal Florida, but not the biggest.
“The theft permits ones enemies to take those saved resources and use them on something else.”
A tiny bit at most.
“It causes our resources to be thinned trying to stay ahead.”
Nope.
“The theft permits ones enemies to take those saved resources and use them on something else.”
A tiny bit at most.
“It causes our resources to be thinned trying to stay ahead.”
Nope.
—–
Think as you please. To be a bit simplistic if each entity has 100 units where 50 are spent on Technology and 50 on production we can create our own simulation. You can adjust the numbers any which way you want, but the conclusion will remain the same.
China has 100 units it steals 50 from America. It uses 50 to produce the weapon and has 50 units left to r esearch new weapons. It now has 150 total value
America has 100 units. It spends 50 on research and 50 on production. 100 total value.
The above is messy but makes the point. I don’t have time to create an appropriate simulation.
We have a real world simulation – China and Russia.
China spends about 1/3 what the US does on military. There are a FEW areas they MAY have developed good technology – but they did not steal it from the US. What they have “Stolen” they actually Bought from Russia. And even that demonstrates my point.
China Still can not make a decent Jet engine. Their Russian copy fighters are capable – With Russian made jets engines.
But with Chinese “copies” they are grossly underpowered.
The Russian Technology failure of the Ukraine was is a massive single to the Chinese. While China has more hardware than Russia – a substantial portion of it is inferior russian copies. I do not want to piss on China too much – because they are tediously slowly developing their own internal knowlesge and skills and they are SLOWLY getting better. It is highly likely that the Chinese would prove a more formidable opponent to the US in the Air than Russia – even though Russia has in theory better equipment – there is no air war in Ukraine – why ?
Because Russian equipment is poorly maintained and russian pilots abysmally trained and Russian military doctrine hopelessly outdated.
They have a small amount of excellent technology – atleast as far as the aeronautic design. They are way behind in electronics.
China has inferior equipment to russia, but it is better maintained and the Chinese pilots are better trained.
The state of technology today is that YOU can littlerly simulate any conflict you want, or you can go to youtube and find people with far more skill in that who have done so for you. And probably far better than the US military.
The huge question in any Conflict with China in the future is how well do Chinese equipment – particularly aircraft actually live up to their specs.
If they do – it will be a bloody mess. US Casualties will be high, But China will not be able to invade Tiawan or anywhere else they want to, and if the US is willing to suffer losses that we have not seen since Vietnam. China will be contained, and her economy will collapse within weeks.
The likelyhood of Chinese equipment performing to spec is very low. Again look at Russia in Ukraine.
The US is very concerned about China’s long range hypersonic antiship missles. They developed that technology themselves.
If it meets specs it is very dangerous and will make it very hard for US carriers to operate within 300M of the Coast.
But we have multiple layers of defense against them, The odds of success for a single missle are near zero. But the Chinese have hundreds.
And we do not know what Biden as an example would do if the Chinese sunk a US Carrier.
We have the capacity to completely confine China to her coasts, Frankly within 90 days we will likely control the airspace atleast 90M into the Chinese mainland. And that is where the vast majority of Chinese live and where all their economy is.
We even have the ability to invade China and capture Beijing but at a cost far higher than the american people are likely to tolerate.
Today the largest US problem in dealing with China is logistical – not technological. Every US warship is fully capable of defending itself against whatever the Chinese throw at it – until it runs out of ammunition. And we will run out before the Chinese, and before we can get resupplied.
That is why the current development of energy weapons is so incredibly important. All new us warships have TWO Nuclear reactors.
The 2nd is entirely for future energy weapons. That is near limitless ammunition as the technology matures.
“We have a real world simulation – China and Russia. ”
John, that is wrong, and the rest, not entirely accurate, doesn’t prove your case. Most of your reply is non-responsive to what I said.
“All new us warships have TWO Nuclear reactors.”
I think all aircraft carriers have 4 nuclear reactors.
“John, that is wrong, and the rest, not entirely accurate, doesn’t prove your case.”
non sequitur.
If you claim something is wrong – make an argument.
If you claim something is not entirely accurate – make an argument.
Jefferson on intellectual property
He who lights his candle at mine receives light without darkening me.
“non sequitur. ”
Isn’t that the essence of my reply to you? (“John, that is wrong, and the rest, not entirely accurate, doesn’t prove your case.”)
John, you weren’t replying to what I said, so there is no need to get into such a broad discussion. If you wish to discuss China and Russia with a relationship to wars or our military strength, I will oblige, but not to so many things that diverge.
I don’t think you understand the Chinese 100-year marathon that started in 1949.
The Chinese create military weapons based on our weaknesses. Their strategy is very different from what most think.
The Ukraine war also proves you wrong.
The early part of the Ukraine war went far better for Ukraine than expected – primarily because of Ukrainian technology.
Ukraine developed on their own a command and control system very similar to that of NATO – but using COTS – Commerical off the shelf technology.
This is a huge deal. The importance of this was that Ukraine could identify a target, direct resources against that target and kill that target in minutes – generally 20-30. For Russia it was taking hours to do the same thing. The faster you can run through the identify, target, kill process the more mobile the target you can kill and the more mobile you can keep your own forces so they can not be killed.
We all watched as Javelins killed Russian tanks. But the big deal was getting the Javelins to where they could kill those tanks.
Ultimately Starlink became part of this – but not at the start, but incorporating starlink proved trivial for Ukraine – because of the way they designed there command and control communications system.
Today a significant part of that has been quietly replaced by the US. Semi secret in this war is that US forces using military satelites are now finding russian targets, identifying them, setting priorities and communicating kill orders to the Ukrainians. All in about 3minutes.
The Ukrainians role is primarily in pulling the lanyard on the artilery.
This is actually a huge deal. No one by the US is anywhere close to this capability. Russia has satelites, but they are inferior and regardless, nearly every aspect of their command and control is probably inferior to what the US had in veitnam in practice.
No one else has this.
What Ukraine has made clear – and is likely the future of US conflict globally. Is that we can provide weapons to anyone and they can take on incredibly formidable enemies and win. Without risking a single US soldier.
AND we can turn it all off whenever we want. The Himars, and M150’s and … that we are providing Ukraine are degraded about 80% without US command and control for targeting.
No one has this. The closest country is Russia – and you see how poorly they are doing. China has a small investment in trying to take out the US global surveilance system, But SpaceX has proven that we can replace it faster than anyone can kill it.
“The Ukraine war also proves you wrong.”
How?
I am talking about production and costs, not the ability of two armies to fight one another, where the variables are different than those under discussion.
“Semi secret in this war is that US forces using military satelites are now finding russian targets,”
What you are writing is off-topic, but I want to tell you of an advance China seems to be making They may be creating a satellite that can grab other satellites taking them out of service. It sounds like James Bond, Dr. No, but likely true.
I am aware of chinese anti-satelite developments.
SpaceX can launch faster than China can take out.
The biggest US problem in a conflict with China is supply chain length.
As in every other war we have ever been in the US can out produce any enemy.
We have minor hiccups today – because the most concerning modern wars are likely to be short – Ukraine is proving an exception.
A short war requires winning with material on hand, and it requires getting that material to the Front rapidly.
Every single simulation I have seen of a US/China conflict has the US winning – as long as it can continue to supply forces along China’s coast, and losing if it can not.
One simulation of an accidental conflict with th Ronald Reagan in the South China sea, had the Reagan taking out pretty much everything in the south china sea in a matter of hours before running out of supplies and the entire Reagan battle group being sunk – but US casualities were minimal UNTIL we ran out of supplies.
China’s big advantage is that it can move weapons and material accross china faster than the US can move it accross the pacific.
It is unlikely that the entire Chinese navy on its own can last a single day against a single US Carrier Battle Group.
But a US carrier Battle Group can not survive long within range of China’s land based forces.
This is why Trump successfully unifying China’s neighbors is incredibly important.
It is easier to put out of action for 24hrs a japanese or tiawanese airfield than a US carrier battle group.
But A sunken carrier is out of the fight. It is possible to repair an airfield quickly.
If China is able to take out ALL Tiawanese and Japanese fields in range of its target AND all US CBG’s
AND maintain Air Superiority so that fields are damaged faster than the can be repaired – then China wins.
Otherwise they get slaughters as they try to cross the straights of tiawan.
Most current simulations I have seen result in China falling short of establishing air-superiority, and that means they lose.
Though I am very disturbed by many simulations. The F-22 is an absolutely unequaled aircraft. It can engage 7:1 against most anything else in existance, take all of them out, and come out unscathed. It is 5 times as stealthy as the F-35 and manueverable beyond beleif.
It is near impossible to hit with anything as it can out manueveur any rocket.
The F-35 is pretty much crap comparatively. F-22s are more expensive. But you just do not need near as many.
This BTW is in conflicts where Russian and Chinese craft actually perform up to published specs. Which no one expects they will.
John, China’s plan is not to engage in a war where its enemy is strong. They will bide their time by first destroying the nation from the inside. They will not show their cards upfront. Read their ancient stories and you will see how they look at war.
The supply chain is a problem, but in a war between two nations, both nations have that problem. The offensive country, away from its shores, will need a longer supply chain. Make no mistake, China desires to dominate the world.
China’s best military oportunity was now.
I addressed that.
They have the greatest disparity in power they are likely to have – once energy weapons become available US Carrier Battle groups are effectively invincible.
They have the weakest possible president.
It is not getting better than this.
That said I do not think it will be now. Xi is in trouble. Even if he survives, he is going to have to put more effort into internal that external politics for a long time to come.
Further I do not beleive that China can continue to grow significantly without greater political freedom.
The Pre-XI China was not a threat to the US or really anyone, despite its rapid growth and strenght.
A post -Xi China that is moving towards western levels of political freedom is no threat either.
I beleive the moment of greatest military danger from China has likely passed.
That said the immeidate economic future of China appears dark and very strange things can happen when totalitarian regimes face large internal economic problems.
Unlike others, I cannot predict the future, so I don’t know if now is the ” greatest disparity in power,” but I have been worried about war because our President is weak.
” Xi is in trouble”
It may look that way, but China plays the “weak appearance” card, so one can never be sure. I believe China has serious problems, but what country today doesn’t?
“Further I do not beleive that China can continue to grow significantly without greater political freedom.”
I challenge such a notion. Political freedom can enhance growth, but the lack of it doesn’t prevent growth.
“I beleive the moment of greatest military danger from China has likely passed.”
I believe you to be wrong. I think it was and likely still is China’s goal to become the world’s hegemon by 2049.
When millions are protesting in the streets – China is weak.
Another observation form Bari Weis’s free speech roundtable is that protests are a sign of strength in robust democracies.
They rarely threaten government. And stable democracies know how to deal with and survive protests.
Protests in totalitarian regimes are almost always their death knell.
They do not know how to deal with them. They usually make things worse.
And people do not protest totalitarian regimes lightly.
I do not know if Xi and the CCP will survive. I do not know the depth of current problems.
But it is probably outside of Xi’s ability to attack Taiwan right now – because he needs the military to control internal problems.
“When millions are protesting in the streets – China is weak.”
Are you saying we have no protests in America? Britain? France? All over the world?
“Protests in totalitarian regimes are almost always their death knell.”
That is too much of a generalization.
“I do not know if Xi and the CCP will survive.”
I do not know if America will survive with its freedoms intact.
“But it is probably outside of Xi’s ability to attack Taiwan right now – because he needs the military to control internal problems.”
That is nothing new, but enough reason to hold off on such an attack. Many reasons prevent attacking, but preparation in advance should not rely on such weak predictions.
I will say there was more reason for concern earlier in the Biden administration.
No, I explicitly said protests in totalitarian regimes are radically different.
“Protests in totalitarian regimes are almost always their death knell.”
I don’t know if that is true for protests can occur for a long time and then suddenly the government falls. Protests in our nation lead to a change in government as well, but the change happens slightly differently.
However, our government like others is slowly changing, and moving toward less individualism. I am not sure of your point.
It does appear that you miss my point.
I did not say all protest leads to government collapse.
Protest is important in governements that are not totalitarian. But it is not typically a threat to government.
One of the reasons that J6 was different is that it was a pushback against totalitarianism in this country and therefore much more dangerous.
“It does appear that you miss my point.”
But, in your reply, you didn’t clarify your point.
What was your point?
“That is nothing new”
But it is new. There has been very little civil unrest inside of China under Xi until Covid.
Hong Kong is radically different. Hong Kong is an affluent semi-democracy trying to be forcibly incorporated into a totalitariean regime.
Protests over Covid, Protests calling for Xi to step down, protests for freedom. protests over the financial crisis in China are all highly unusual – not since Tianament Sq.
This is unusual and it means China’s military is inward rather than outward facing.
I am not looking to minimize the Threat Xi specifically and an authoritarian China raise.
But that requires several things:
That the Xi Authoritarian regime continue. Xi is unlike any Chinese Ruler since Mao.
That Chinese economic growth continues.
That Xi’s efforts to make the chinese people more nationalist succeeds.
These are all unlikely.
I expect greater global conflict – and soon.
We have way too many global economic problems and basket case governments.
That is a recipe for violence.
But for nukes Russia is no longer a global power.
They are diminishing as a regional power.
The real problem we face with Russia is the coming failed nuclear state.
Separately I would bet that we are going to have some messy shift in China to a democracy in the next decade or less.
I am very worried about that – because the foundations for democracy in China do not exist.
The chinese want more freedom, but they have no idea what that means.
Regardless, chinese internal problems means little chinese external problems.
But we have Lots of countries across the world facing severe problems.
Turkey, Pakistan, Argentina, Venezuela, Probably most of the mideast, and lots of south america.
There are going to be revolutions.
We have different problems in Japan and Iran, and pretty much the whole EU.
I think we are moving back toward the US and the global Hegemon – but in a more unstable configuration.
There is no one to challenge us. But we are not able to provide global peace and stability.
Take note, Hong Kong is in Chinese hands before the due date. That is now history without us hearing much of anything.
“Protests over Covid, Protests calling for Xi to step down,
I can see many problems Xi faces, but if he disappears voluntarily or involuntarily, we will see a replacement from the CCP, not the people. I anticipate the basic Chinese philosophy heading toward hegemony will not change. Read the ancient stories Xi and other Chinese leaders read.
The west F’d up with Hong Kong.
The US, Canada, Australia, NZ, … all should have accepted a HK passport and allowed anyone from HK that wanted to immigrate.
That would have put a Check on the CCP they would have had to be careful or risk enormous flight.
One needs to remember that HK is one of the wealthiest places in the world. With a standard of living higher than the US.
China can not afford significant flight from HK.
You and I have talked of Technology – HK is not very large, it is only about 10M people, but those in HK are closer in education and abilities to the US. These are the people who can make things happen actually advance technology.
I have recomended Julian Simon’s “The Ultimate Resource II” frequently. It is available for free online.
One of Simon’s observations is that while the number of brains is proportionate to the rate of advance of a country, that the effect of brain power is different in a developed society than an undeveloped one. That more brains results in a faster rate of advance in undeveloped countries.
But there is very little if any leapfrogging. So as an example China’s brain power is targeted more at fundimentals – how to feed 1.6B people,
how to develop infrastructure etc. A more developed country is looking at how to harness nuclear fusion. The differences is not so much a function of the individuals and how smart they are but the world in which they live and grow up, and what it needs.
You see the same in the history of the west – We have invented created, developed what we needed at the moment, and what we were capable of at the moment. The US successfully stole the industrial revolution for the British in the late 18th century – because we were ready and because we actually had more freedom than the Brits.
China can not steel what it is not ready for.
Conversely the limits with respect to the people of HK are more because there are only 10M of them. They are ahead of the US in some areas.
They would likely be ahead of the US in all areas if there were 300M of them.
According to one of the best China experts 3+milliion HKs have a strong affinity to China and HK is not adequately defending itself.
Your point ?
The UK returned all of HK to china because the portion with a permanent lease was not independently sustainable.
I do nto care if HK is defendable – I am not asking anyone to defend it.
I do not care is 30% of those in HK wish to be part of China – that is fine.
What I have said is that Commonwealth Countries plus the US should grant legal residence status to anyone with an UK/HK passport (as opposed to a CN/HK passport) that is most HK residents – if they want it.
That would require China to decide whether they wanted to risk losing these people, or whether they would respect their political freedom.
Trump should have done that.
Sorry I have been tied up and wrote the note when I was doing something else. It was not HK but Taiwan I was referring to. I rewrote the statement using Taiwan instead of Hong Kong, but you created another question. I won’t deal with it, but why did Britain give up HK? It may not have been sustainable, but there was an agreement which was broken by the Chinese. What did Britain get out of this?
According to one of the best China experts 3+milliion Taiwanese have a strong affinity to China and Taiwan is not adequately defending itself.
It was argued that a substantial portion of Ukrainians particularly in Crimea have a strong affinity to Russia.
But during the Russian occupation of Crimea that number has steadily declined.
Further though SOME people in the Donestck have clearly sided with Russia, for the most part Russia has found that it is not wanted even in the parts that are most heavily tied to Russia.
It is amazing what happens when your country is attacked.
The US misunderstood this in Iraq.
Other things with Taiwan are complex.
Prior to Xi Taiwan was ACTIVELY engaging China – initilaly through HK but eventually more directly through Shanghai.
Soem of the most significant foreign investment in China has been from Taiwan.
Prior to Xi this was an excellent strategy, likely to lead EVENTUALY to unification
But Xi changed that.
Xi also changed Taiwans defense posture – as well as that of the entire region.
You are correct that prior to Trump Taiwan’s millitary was less prepared than it should have been
Xi came to power in 2013. Trump in 2016. That is not long to change directions.
Even Biden is providing increased military aide to Taiwan.
Japan is rebuilding its military – particularly its navy
and has declared an attack on Taiwan to be an attack on the Japanese mainland.
That is a huge huge huge deal.
I noted that Xi has likely lost the military window – that was in Oct 2022.
But there are other problems.
We have addressed many of china’s immediate problems.
I belive we also discussed the collapsing populations of Japan and Russia.
But I missed the fact that the worst population collapse EVER is happening in China and it is very close to immediate.
China’s 1 child policy will prove to be the most disasterous government policy EVER.
350m chinese were aborted during those decades – many late term or even infanticide.
That is more abortions than the entire population of the US.
More recently the Chinese admitted there 2020 Census was Wrong by 100M people.
China has 100M less people that it thought.
The error is 100% in YOUNG people.
Currently China’s birth rate is 1.1 for each woman.
China’s population is already in actual decline.
It is now estimated that declining population ALONE will prove a massive economic crisis for China by 2030 – that is 7 years.
China’s economy is facing something that has really never happened before anywhere in the world.
But Russia and Japan are only a bit behind.
China’s workforce is in decline – with no prospects of improving.
I am revising my future assessment of China.
The other problems we have talked about can be overcome.
The population problem can not be.
If every man woman and child in Brazil moved to China the problem would still be insurmountable.
China has a western dependant export driven economy that imports food.
Without production it can not feed itself.
You have written a lot that is off-topic, but this was my response.
“According to one of the best China experts 3+milliion Taiwanese have a strong affinity to China and Taiwan is not adequately defending itself.”
I accidentally changed the ‘country’ involved, but what I said has importance when talking about Taiwan.
Concerning HK, my question was: “What did Britain get out of this?” (giving up HK early)
What will happen in China ? That is a given, as it is in Iran. Ultimately authoritarian government will collapse.
The question is not what will happen – but When. Xi had to cave on Zero Covid.
That was the right thing to do. But it was also a huge sign of weakness. Protestors GOT something they wanted.
That has whet their appetite. They KNOW that protests in China CAN work. They did not in Hong Kong.
Regardless, Iran, China, the questions are when and how, not whether. China and Iran WILL move towards more truly representative government. It is merely a question of time.
It may be gradual. I may be sudden as with the collapse of the Berlin Wall. But it WILL happen.
Xi is also restructing leadership in a way that suggests he is moving away from the confrontations with the US.
“China and Iran WILL move towards more truly representative government. It is merely a question of time.”
Or the US may become more totalitarian in that time span. When one makes such predictions one has to have a time line in order for reasonable discussion to occur.
In that interim we might have a war and even a nuclear war so I don’t bother with such predictions.
Today and in the reasonable future both nations endanger world peace and one of them, if given the power, will start a nuclear war in the mid east.
In any event, about the Republicans voting for the Omnibus Bill, you said, “a mistake far beyond comprehension.” It appears such mistakes are not uncommon so human nature is a big factor that expands the longer the time line.
“Or the US may become more totalitarian in that time span.”
Not “or”, and/or. They are independent.
“When one makes such predictions one has to have a time line in order for reasonable discussion to occur.”
Not tomorow, and probably closer to now than 2100.
you really need not do better than that.
“In that interim we might have a war and even a nuclear war so I don’t bother with such predictions.”
Or an asteriod might strike.
A nuclear war probably would not effect China or Iran. But it would wipe out the west.
“Today and in the reasonable future both nations endanger world peace and one of them, if given the power, will start a nuclear war in the mid east.” Probably not. Iran wants the power that Nukes give them. The most dangerous regime with nukes right now is Russia.
Failing global powers backed into a corner are very dangerous.
““Or the US may become more totalitarian in that time span.”
Not “or”, and/or. They are independent.”
Of course they are. I added an extra variable and some additional variables that could happen in-between.
“Not tomorow, and probably closer to now than 2100.
you really need not do better than that.”
One-hundred years from Mao’s intention places the date at 2049. We are in 2023.
Buy 2049 it is highly unlikely that China will be anything like now.
The economic and population problems China faces are gargantuan.
And can not be solved by totalitarianism – if they can at all.
It is likely that China’s military is close to peak – because they will not have the population to sustain it.
“Buy 2049 it is highly unlikely that China will be anything like now.”
Over time does any developed or developing nation look the same?
Anyway, why does that matter regarding what I said?
“And can not be solved by totalitarianism”
Disagreeing with the CCP, I think it has proven that tremendous change and advancement can occur under totalitarianism.
“It is likely that China’s military is close to peak – ”
I do not know what your statement means, but China’s military is about twice as large as ours.
China’s military is not near as capable as ours.
Look at US military engagements in your lifetime.
As I noted regarding Korea and Chosen River – China required almost a 100:1 advatage to force US forces to retreat,
Suffering casualties that nearly got Mao overthrown.
The entire Chinese navy can not take on a Single US CBG – without massive air and antiship missle support from the mainland.
It is likely the Chinese airforce in particular is better trained than the Russians, but they are more poorly equiped
China’s economic and demographic problems mean their military is unlikely to truly improve. They will not have the money or the manpower.
That does not mean they will disappear, it does not even mean they will not grow at all.
But they will not grow as fast, raining will decline, maintanence will decline.
I would further note that the Chinese military has almost no battle experience. The US military is the most experienced in the world.
While I would personally prefer that we were less experienced – we have stuck our noses in too many places they do not belong,
The lemonade is that we have massive experience. No one is close at combined arms.
China has no naval experience at all. And it takes a century to build a navy.
As I have said before Japan will be able to quickly build a more actually formidable navy than China. They have a multi-century naval tradition.
China has no aircombat experience at all – though they are atleast engaged in some facsimilie of US air training – they have their own TopGun/RedFlag equivalents.
China has no consequential land fighting since Korea.
And by far the greatest portion of Chinese military is in the Army.
“China’s military is not near as capable as ours.”
Your claim is dependent on how one looks at things. You forget important things such as the will to fight, leadership spirit, etc. Were we not superior to the Afghans and the Vietnamese?
Based on what you say, Israel should never have existed. No airforce, no tanks, few weapons, few in numbers, attacked from three sides by significant armies and an airforce (Jordan) that was the best outside of a few major powers. Israel proves what you say are factors aiding a victory, but they are not as significant as you seem to believe.
John, look at history, The battle of Thermopylae, Massada, and many others. You are incorrect because you base your arguments on pure numbers lacking an understanding of human nature.
You constantly say that I have forgotten something when I offer a generalization that is with a high probability true.
It is a presumption that I have forgotten something is a naked assertion without proof.
You mentioned afghanistan – a very small number of US soldiers were capable of thwarting over 100,000 taliban – so long as those few thousand remained.
Absolutely there are other factors. We did not belong in afghanistan and should have left 9months after we arrived.
A very common POLITICAL problem with the US military is that we keep trying to use it for tasks that militaries are not for.
We also do not seek to be a colonial power, and yet, we can not figure out when it is time to leave.
With respect to the issues we are discussing:
The purpose of a military is to defeat other militaries. Not to colonize.
The US military can defeat any other military in the world – on their own teritory, given either a blue water border or US ally as a neighbor.
As well as the political will to do so.
That does not mean we should do so.
Nor does it mean that having done so we should subsequently stick arround and engage in nation building.
“You constantly say that I have forgotten something when I offer a generalization that is with a high probability true.”
High probability of trueness? Philosophically you might believe so, but disagreement exists even though our agreements are plentiful.
Merging your previous statements with the present one, “China’s military is not near as capable as ours,” etc., etc.
You are setting up the argument as to why we need not worry and spend or create more military investments. That is what you have said in the past and indicate in the present.
Those statements are why I brought up Massada and will now bring up the Israeli War of Independence. Israel had a small fraction of the relative strength of China (China v US), yet Israel prevailed. It makes the context of your statement wrong (“China’s military is not near as capable as ours.”)
Reread what I wrote. It is correct. Why is the recognition of what I said above important? Previously, you discussed markedly reducing our military capability to fight and said it left us with more than enough. The incomplete picture you draw leads to an important reason for a potential defeat.
Here you add a factor often left out.
“The US military can defeat any other military in the world … given … the political will to do so.”
What is understandably unmentioned is how does one maintain political will? That is too complex to go into now, but what is the best defense? A strong offense. That is what frequently deters war. What is enough offense? More than just an offense that looks like it will win a war.
China is ultimately going to challenge the US on the world stage. That is all you history etc. really tell us.
They do not tell us what China will be like when that occurs.
If it continues in the direction Xi has headed, that challenge will be violent, and china will likely lose – though at the cost of many lives.
If China becomes more free eventually – many many years from now they could eclipse the US – and that would be fine.
A world made of multiple super powers behaving as the US does most of the time would be fine.
“China is ultimately going to challenge the US on the world stage. That is all you history etc. really tell us.”
Wrong, I discussed China from the perspective of what they believe and their ancient history. I even provided a date that has been used. I won’t predict the future, but what we are saying shows China is close to that timeline.
“They do not tell us what China will be like when that occurs.”
We cannot predict the future, but we know what is in their eye at the present, hegemony.
“A world made of multiple super powers behaving as the US does most of the time would be fine.”
There has been lots of discussion elsewhere about a multi-polar world. Human nature will determine how that works out if and when it occurs.
I am not selling this particular guy. I do not know much about him,
But his facts are very solid.
His analysis is reasonable given the facts.
Regardless, the core point is that China has ALOT of very large problems and what has been done under Xi has not worked
It has arguably made them worse.
Some parts of this I do not agree with – but the fact that the argument is being made is significant.
This author is essentially saying that China is so weak as a naval power that they are dependent on the US Navy for their own economic and trade security. I am not sure that is the case.
But it is inarguable that in the event of a conflict China can be isolated from most of the world in a way no other consequential nation can, and the chinese economy is entirely dependent on the rest of the world.
China could not survive more than days what we have done to Russia.
“the core point is that China has ALOT of very large problems and what has been done under Xi has not worked”
So? Problems exist all over. The world didn’t begin with Xi, and won’t end with him.
“China is so weak as a naval power”
America’s determination is presently weak.
“the chinese economy is entirely dependent on the rest of the world.”
Isn’t the US economy dependent as well? China lost tens of millions under Mao, and Mao didn’t blink. How many American deaths will cause America to blink?
“China could not survive more than days what we have done to Russia.”
How much did we accomplish with Russia?
The length of the supply chain is a minor issue when the duration of the conflict is long.
There is zero doubt that the US can produce far more and superior military materiel in a relatively short time frame than China.
The Current problem is that in the opening days of any conflict what the US has onboard Carrier Battle Groups will be expended Much more Rapidly than it can be resupplied, while China will not have that problem.
Any conflict that does not result in China taking out a couple of Battle Groups in the opening Days, and gaining air superiority quickly – China Loses. Even a Conflict in which China accomplishes all of that – So long as the US and Japan chose to remain in the fight and accept losses
China WILL Lose. To win, China must take out all local US CBG’s. It must take out All Taiwan airforces. It must takeout all airfeilds in Taiwan and nearby. AND it must KEEP them out of action until they are occupied.
This would not be a conflict resembling Ukraine. If it starts to look like Ukraine – China loses.
If it is drawn out – China loses. China can not replace weaponry and ammunition nearly as quickly as the US, and allies. And its economy would be in deep $hit quickly. China like Japan in WWII imports a vast amount of essential raw materials.
China MIGHT be able to gain air-superiority out to about 300km quickly, MIGHT, but it can not maintain that.
And the US Will ultimately gain airsuperiority going into the Chinese mainland for about 100+km.
And the US will be able to maintain it.
“The length of the supply chain is a minor issue when the duration of the conflict is long.”
Supply chains are always a major issue.
Taiwan is not as prepared as you think. The people aren’t either.
The world has always been amazed at America’s production and strength.
The taiwanese people are not prepared.
I am not that worried about that.
Attack a country and the people come together.
Taiwan has sufficient military to make crossing the taiwan straight a bloodbath – If the airspace over the taiwan straight is not controlled by China.
Taking Taiwan would be possibly the most difficult amphibious landing ever attempted.
In the pacific and Normandy the Allies had unquestioned naval and air superiority. Otherwise those landings would have been impossible.
Possibly the biggest deal is Taiwans airfields. So long as they exist and are operable, the airspace over the straights can not be controlled.
From Taiwan airfields the battle is a few km away. The US can resupply Taiwan with aircraft. Okinawa is less than 500 miles from Taiwan.
That is at the edge of a combat aircrafts round trip range, but easily inside a one way trip.
US and japanese aircraft can be fed to Taiwan continuously so long as the airfields remain usable.
The simulations I have seen have China succeeding in damaging 50% of the Taiwan airfields – repairable within 48-72 hours,
But at the loss of all attacking aircraft. So it would take China a couple days to replace losses too.
With in-air refueling the entirety of the US airforce can reach Taiwan in a few days – probably staging to Okinawa first.
A couple of squads of F-22’s are essentially invincible against everything china has over the straights of taiwan.
Just keep feeding them amo and they take pretty much everything out.
China has a small number of maybe F35 equals, but nothing close to an F22.
The US has a far larger force of F35’s and these can operate off carriers, But they only have about a 3:1 advantage over chinese craft.
The F22 is 7:1 over pretty much everything – and RTB when it is over. F35s are 3:1 and dead at the end.
I have seen similations where an F16 beats and F22 – 1 time out of 3, but that is ONLY where the F16 can hide in ground clutter and wait for the perfect oportunity. There is no ground clutter over the straights of taiwan.
In open air, you can not even shoot down and F22 unless the pilot makes a mistake. It can out maneuver ever anti-air missle in existance.
You only get it if the pilot screws up.
But the US has limited F22’s – they are 3 times the cost of the F35, we did not make a Carrier capable model – thought we could have.
And they have no VTOL/STOL capability. But they are 5 times as stealthy as an F35. and more maneuverable than anything in existance.
They do not lose in aerial combat, they just eventually run out of ammunition or fuel and must RTB.
I would further note that the Chinese abilty to take out 1/2 of Taiwan’s airfeilds requires the element of surprise.
Once a hot war is started, 2-3 times the number of chinese aircraft would be needed to accomplish the same thing.
You take a lot of things for granted.
The threat of a war over Taiwan decreased radically with Russia’s prolong failure in Ukraine. That threat will continue to recede in the near future.
I beleive I have demonstrated – as has Ukraine that what you are afraid of is not happening. In fact the opposite is happening.
The US is moving further and further ahead particularly in the military area.
But lets leave military.
While you China or Russia steals argument is piss poor – again without the skills stealing is useless.
And with the skills stealing merely buys you a few months.
More important the development of skills elsewhere int he world is GOOD for all of us.
Everyone is better off because of the amazing things the US has developed and produced.
But we are even more better off if the rate at which things are being developed increases.
You are worried that China will copy something. They really can not successfully copy anything without also having the skills to create it – given enough time.
I am hopeful that China is/will be developing new things – things americans have not created.
I have a significant amount of home automation widgets in my home. Nearly all of these are from China. That are not Chinese copies of US products. There are no competing US products. While the US has the technology to produce the same things – we do not. Because today we can not do so for a price people will pay. The Chinese did not steal the technology from the US. They developed it on their own. And I benefit.
China is way way way behind the US (and even Taiwan) in semiconductor technology. But they are NOT idiots that do not know what they are doing. Unlike Russia, they are designing and building their own microprocessors. Mostly based on US designs that they BOUGHT.
They are many generations behind the US cutting edge – and they do not even seem to be going after that.
Instead they are going after markets the US can’t and as a result in certain areas they are AHEAD of the US
And again all of us benefit.
The entire world is better off the more productive the people in ANY country are.
Japan was supposed to advance beyond the US. That never happened. They got close and stalled.
But the US and the world has benefited the more productive Japan has become. And the Japanese did get ahead of the US in several areas, and still are.
“I beleive I have demonstrated – as has Ukraine that what you are afraid of is not happening.”
You didn’t, and your comments have little relationship to what I wrote.
“In fact the opposite is happening.
The US is moving further and further ahead particularly in the military area.”
If you are talking about Russia, I agree.
“But lets leave military.
While you China or Russia steals argument is piss poor – again without the skills stealing is useless.”
I wrote about China, not Russia. China is moving forward rapidly. While we teach CRT type of BS, China produces about 250,000-300,000 engineers yearly, while we ~50,000.
“More important the development of skills elsewhere int he world is GOOD for all of us.”
Elevating the skills of the world is better for the world while doing the same for China’s ability to dominate the world is a bad recipe for freedom.
“The Chinese did not steal the technology from the US. They developed it on their own. And I benefit. ”
The Chinese steal and create. The creation part is acceptable. Stealing is not, and it is costly to America.
“Japan was supposed to advance beyond the US. That never happened. They got close and stalled. ”
That doesn’t mean the same will happen to China. You pretend to know, but you don’t. I don’t know, but I prepare for all possibilities.
“If you are talking about Russia, I agree.”
Russian aviation is ahead of Chinese significantly. The chinese are just far more numerous.
Russian Tanks – old and new are superior to chinese – how well is that going for Russia ?
Russian SAM systems are superior to everyone’s except the US.
It is probable that russian ground forces are significantly superior to chinese. They have far more experience.
How well are Russian ground forces doing in Ukraine ?
Russia’s submarine force is only inferior to the US.
China has been building a navy. But they remain significantly inferior to the US in both equipment and much more important experience and training. Japan is re-arming and will likely have a navy superior to China’s within a few years. Not because it is better equiped, but because it takes 100 years to truly build a navy and people with the skills to fight a navy – Japan has that tradition. China has not had a navy in 5 centuries.
They have not fought a naval war ever that I know of. Experience REALLY matters.
The Nascent US navy was a thorn in the side of the globally dominant british navy because the US had a centuries long seafaring tradition even in 1776.
China does not. There navy is inferior on paper and likely many times worse in practice.
China’s massive army size is only relevant if they can get where they are going. India is ready for them.
Getting to Taiwan means crossing the Taiwan straight. Hitler had a better shot crossing the english channel.
The one area that China is probably ahead of Russian meaningfully militarily is in pilot training. They are still far inferior to US pilots.
But Chinese pilots have 3 times the airtime of Russian pilots and an increasing number of them have experience with programs similar to US top gun or Red Flag. We KNOW that makes a huge difference.
Separately the chinese economy is the most trade dependent economy in the world today.
The sanctions that have yet to Cripple Russia might take China out in Days.
We are probably in the most dangerous period with respect to China right now.
Trump reoriented US policy to Asia facing. I do not want to give Trump full credit, that was coming for a while.
Further there was no rush prior to Xi as China was NOT showing agressive intentions before that.
But Trump gave the shift a sense of urgency.
As soon as the kinks in energy weapons – the first being rail guns, are worked out, China can not challenge the US navy – even near its own coast.
There is a short window – Right now, where MAYBE china can take Taiwan.
Maybe is always incredibly dangerous.
The piss poor withdraw from Afghanistan made us and Biden look weak and increased the odds.
Had Russia walked over Ukraine in 96 hours it is highly likely China would have tried for Taiwan in the fall of 2022.
What is self evident from Ukraine is that China MUST take Taiwan quickly or they will lose.
Nor is the situation improving.
Little has been said about it. but it is my understanding that Trump re-invigorated the US space based ABM program.
That is useless against Russia, but it closes the door on North Korea, and Iran and probably China.
Between THAAD, Spaced based ABM and the pacific rim Ground based ABM. the odds of a successful nuclear strike by any country but Russia are small.
What we are seeking in Ukraine also previews what Future global conflicts where the US takes sides will look like.
Any nation that can survive the inital attack by a beligerant. Can with US support stop most any enemy.
And a conflict with China is the only conflict that would cost more than Ukraine Russia.
US military contractors are getting fabulously weatlhy right now.
Further the US is burning through enormous stockpiles of old munitions and weaponry.
In GWI the US featured Smart weapons on the news. But most of the war was fought with iron bombs and older weaponry.
GWII was fought with smaller numbers of troops but much smarter weaponry.
I am not advocating for war, but it is still a fact that it is very useful to the US to have a big conflict every now and then to use up old weapons and replenish OUR stocks with new ones.
I am honestly surprised that we did not send A-!0’s to Ukraine. The Ukrainians would need training. But there has been time.
We have hundreds of mothballed A10’s, and they would be a devastating weapon in Ukraine.
The Ukraine war is also benefiting former USSR Nato countries as they send Soviet weapons to Ukraine and replace them with US weapons.
This is an arms dealers bonanza.
The country may be headed into Recession – but Rockwell Collins is in glory days.
John, many of your points don’t reference an argument I have made. If you reference them, I can better respond.
“Separately the chinese economy is the most trade dependent economy in the world today. The sanctions that have yet to Cripple Russia might take China out in Days.”
The Chinese learned that lesson early, but are not ready for a war with the US today. They are increasing manufacturing capabilities in the center of China and elsewhere. They are looking for new relationships in Asia. Finally, though there are more points, they do not worry about a massive death to their civilian population.
If one derives the GNP of China based on a PPP basis, they exceeded the US a few years ago, and their economy continues to grow. They are a tremendous threat.
“Further there was no rush prior to Xi as China was NOT showing agressive intentions before that.”
China’s way of thinking is foreign to you. They practice ambiguity, deception and do not show their hands until they are ready. They think long-term.
The chinese are not supermen. Some chinese think as you claim. Some americans do too.
Regardless, the Chinese can think as far ahead as they please.
They have an immediate and unanticipated set of problems at home that are not going to be quickly sovled.
“The chinese are not supermen. Some chinese think as you claim. Some americans do too.”
Do you know how I think? I provided some accepted facts and opinion. I think those few things represent the thinking of our best China minds.
I do nto think China will mirror japan – because they will fall far short.
The chinese inflection point is NOW. Japan came far closer.
As I noted the core to US success is Freedom. So long as we are the freest large nation in the world we have little to fear.
No one can catch up.
But lets suppose that by some miracle China became freer than the US.
It would within a few decades eclipse the US.
It would also not be dangerous.
While this is unlikely the resurgence of the UK as a global power eclipsing the US would not be harmful to the US.
The danger is being eclipsed by an unfree power. That is highly unlikely.
Japan is only slightly less free than the US, yet it was unable to accomplish what was thought to be inevitable.
You can attack my argument by saying I am wrong about freedom.
If that is so that changes very little. Why do you care if China eclipses the US if Freedom is NOT an incredibly important value ?
Why do you care if China eclipses the US if Freedom is NOT an incredibly important value ?
I think you answered your own question.
Ultimately the US dominance of the world is likely to end. My national pride makes me push back against that.
Further I do not think there is a chance of that – until some nation is more free than we are.
In the past I though that meant they would have to adopt the freedoms of the US.
Increasingly it looks more like we will lose ours.
If the US loses its edge in individual freedom – our standard of living will decline to match that of nations in the world with similar levels of freedom.
And THAT is what you should be worried about.
I have cited statistics here before
Freedom = rate at which standard of living improves = the actual rate at which productivity and technology improve.
“Ultimately the US dominance of the world is likely to end. My national pride makes me push back against that. Further I do not think there is a chance of that – until some nation is more free than we are. In the past I though that meant they would have to adopt the freedoms of the US.
Increasingly it looks more like we will lose ours. If the US loses its edge in individual freedom – our standard of living will decline to match that of nations in the world with similar levels of freedom.And THAT is what you should be worried about.”
One worries about internal factors and external factors. In our last 3 discussion we dealt with external factors. Based on those debates, I show deep concern while you are advocating a policy where one doesn’t look for the things that are likely to undo the American lifestyle.
I honestly beleive we are past or very close to “peak woke”.
But if I am wrong and the nonsense of the modern left continues to survive and thrive and grow – we are SOL.
If the US adopts the left wing nut values of Europe – or worse – because in many areas the US woke today make Europe look tame.
Covid Censorship in the US was far worse than Europe.
Regardless, if the US becomes like Europe or worse – that will result in the US being eclipsed.
While I beleive we are past peak woke. Even if I am wrong I beleive we will ultimately see a huge woke backlash.
I am actually worried about that – not right now. But because the fastest way to actually cause all the problems the left seems to think are endemic in the US – white supremecy, racism, anti-gay, anti-trans is to keep up the nonsense that the left is doing now.
The fastest way to some modern permutation of a hitlerian leader is overreach and failure by the left.
There are two ways to actual fascism. The first is that the left becomes more and more fascist as it fails in order to hold power.
The 2nd is that some hitler like character arises promising to make everything better as the left fails – the weimar republic scenario.
Those are not impossible, but I do not think the are likely here.
Trump was the backlash against the Obama years. And despite nonsense from the left Trump was not even close to fascist.
Frankly despite some of his failures, he was one of the least authoritarian presidents we have ever had.
I find DeSantis more authoritarian than Trump. Not alot though.
Things can rapidly change, so trying to predict the future isn’t productive, unless one is discussing specific trends
Some things can change rapidly.
The greatest danger to the US right now – is the Woke in the US.
The greatest danger to China is the demand for greater freedom that comes with rising standard of living.
“Some things can change rapidly. The greatest danger to the US right now – is the Woke in the US.”
As I have told you many times when discussing events and elections, sometimes things happen so fast that they can be irreversible for those alive in the present. You disagreed then and probably now.
Take note because Professor Turley is starting to recognize it in his earlier op-ed. He says: “The anti-free speech movement in the United States continues to grow with alarming speed”
Take note of the words, alarming speed.
I am noting that Turley was slowly and is more rapidly becoming red pilled.
As I have said – the tied is turning on Woke.
There is no reasoning with the Gigi’s, Svelaz’s, ATS’s and DM’s.
But lots of people are shifting away from the Woke left.
When Adam Schiff and Ilhan Omar are starting wo Question Biden on the Sunday news – there is trouble on the left.
A big deal for me is whether house republicans were going to defend Trump/MAL and J6.
They could have limited the scope of their attacks on Biden.
But they are including J6 and Trump/MAL in the weaponization of the DOJ/FBI.
That does not assure Trump anything, But it is a sign of unity and a warning to “rinos”
I have warned that the GOP has to find a place for the non-MAGA.
But there are several converse problems.
Those unhappy with the woke left. may not be MAGA – but they are NOT Romney or Sasse or Kaisich friendly either.
There is a large independent base in the US, Neither party has a real grip on them. And “moderate” republicans are thoroughly unappealing to them.
The GOP needs republicans that can win purple states. But the current class of Moderates is NOT the right people.
You can not compromise with Woke.
You can not compromise with those who would shut down free speech.
You can not compromise with those who would rig elections.
“”But lots of people are shifting away from the Woke left.”
Republicans passed the Omnibus bill. They didn’t wait for the new house.
a mistake far beyond comprehension.
That is why I say your predictions of what will or will not happen do not take in the human factor.
Predictions are always difficult and nearly always inaccurate.
We still make lots of decisions based on our predictions.
No I have not omitted the “human factor”
Your raising it does not mean it was missing.
Mao was nearly overthrown when he sent Chinese to NK during the Korean war.
During the famous US retreat from the Chosen Resevoir there were likely almost a million chinese soldiers killed.
Despite the fact that US casualties were enormous – 80%+ of those leaving the Chosen were wounded or dead.
Less than 50K US marines mostly – But army on the west side were the fighting was merely horrible and not one of the worst bloodbaths in US history.
The Chinese are proud of their heritgage – rightfully.
Xi has been actively encouraging chinese nationalism.
It is likely that support for a war to retake Taiwan in China is High – until there are casualties. Until the economy fails.
Further the existance of a strain of nationalism is China is not the same as the dominance of that strain.
Xi is working towards fascism – Socialism + Nationalism. He is not there yet.
And quite recently he has done a major reshuffle that reflects recognition that China is dependent on the goodwill of the west.
That does not go well with nationalism.
The nationalists have been sidelined.
Good. Then you agree with me that the human factor creates considerable doubt when one makes predictions, especially when based on one theory or when the predictions are long term.
Decisions about the future are not really an option, they are a necessity.
Regardless of the degree of doubt.
I would further note that predictions are not about perfection.
I got lots of things regarding Covid wrong.
I have still be 1000 times more accurate than Fauxi.
Had the world followed my advice – things would have been less than perfect.
But far better than they are now.
One of the most fundimental errors of the left is the failure to understand that the absence of absolute truth, is not the absence of truth, and does not make every view equal.
As an example we can debate whether homosexuality and transsexuality are valid and moral. But there is ZERO debate that they must be rare.
Otherwise humanity fails.
In mathematics we have axioms – these are things we can not prove as true byt must assume are true.
These must have an incredibly high probability of being true or everything would collapse.
The things we can prove based on axioms are to an enormous extent probably true.
Put simply even if we can not know absolute truth we can map all possible truths by probability and interdependance.
I may not be perfectly right about China. But I am probably mostly right.
“Decisions about the future are not really an option, they are a necessity.”
To make good decisions for the future, one must know what is in the mind of others.
I provided some insight into China.
Everything about China is qualfied with – as best as we can tell.
Absolutely, but by knowing a bit of Chinese history that the present leaders read, informs us of their aims.
We immediately see the expected non-action from the media, as is done with any development that is bad for the Democrats: confuse the issue with comparative dissimilarities and then drop the matter from coverage. This is how our controlled information society works. Independent, non woke media is our only hope.
Constructing a probable timeline here is easy and one needs only to consider one or two possibilities. The “lawyers” Biden dispatched to his old office at the Penn-Biden Center do not sound like “Government lawyers” but private ones. After all, Biden was a private citizen when he occupied that office. Chances are someone in the WH directed GSA to move the president’s belongings from the BP Center to the WH and the GSA movers, skilled and knowledgeable in such important work, noticed immediately that there were hot items in the move and called back to their WH point of contact to say that they found classified materials. That created a crisis in which because the records were in a private location and belonged to Biden when he was a private citizen and had no right to them or to store them, the decision was made that Biden’s “lawyers” would move in, not look at the materials (yeah, right) and send them toute de suite to the Archives. End of story, full stop, period! Except…there are felonies here that need to be investigated. Hunter’s laptop and the use of the office at PBC for the Biden crime family activities and the money laundering escapades by University of PA (“Penn State”) that received $50 million from China and gave a million dollars in salary to Joe Biden when he was employed as head of the Penn-Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement. Turley likes using Movie lines for dramatic effect. I prefer Dr. Seuss: “The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you’ll go.” (“I Can Read With My Eyes Shut” by Dr. Seuss) One of those places may (should) be Leavenworth.
“Chances are …” that you have zero basis for assessing the likelihood of your imagined scenario.
Jonathan,
…”There are clear differences in the two scandals”…
Perhaps if we were to quit calling these “Violations-of-Law”, SCANDALS.
That would begin to bring “clarity” to the Criminal situations.
There is a ‘Difference’.
Alas – There are no *Consequences* in Washington D.C.,
Day-In/Day-Out that is being proven. There is no Pointing-the-Finger as both the Pot and the Kettle are Black.
Since the Pot and Kettle’s Lives Matter and Yours and Mine don’t, it continues to go on.
There is a bit of “Soldier of Fortune” in these Men & Women that Represent Our Government.
Holding: “Superior Fire Power” i.e.: Intelligence advantage like that held in Confidential Documents,
“Superior Position” i.e.: Office advantage like that of President and V.P. Clearances.
And “Superior Power over the Press” i.e.: The ability to control the Narrative (Propaganda and Distraction).
Add “Greed” to lubricate the motive and there you have it: Criminal Government Inc.
https://sofmag.com/
Tucker Carlson had a brilliant monologue on this last night. A transcript is on the Real Clear Politics website.
More generally, contrast the absence of a special counsel to investigate Biden’s influence peddling operation with the special counsel investigation into Trump under Mueller launched by Trump’s DOJ. The latter was staffed by hyper partisan Democrat-supporting lawyers. Trump provided virtually every document they requested and ordered his staff to cooperate in interviews. At the time of its launch, the FBI had not been able to corroborate any of the allegations of collusion in the Steele dossier and had been advised by the primary source that they were untrue. As has been shown, the collusion narrative was an invention of the Clinton campaign.
By way of contrast, the laptop documents are genuine, and Bobulinsky has confirmed that Biden was deeply involved in the business arrangements and in fact that access to Biden was the whole basis for the money spinning operation.
Will Garland appoint a special counsel who staffs his investigation with hyper partisan Republican-supporting lawyers? Of course not.
“Tucker Carlson had a brilliant monologue on this last night. A transcript is on the Real Clear Politics website.”
Daniel, somehow I must have missed where that transcript is. Can you post it?
As I have said this until I’m blue in the face…
Knowing the verifiable historical pattern of propaganda narrative lies coming from the political left and their Pravda media, we can easily conclude that we are only being told what they’re willing to tell us about this newly released Biden classified document scandal that has been intentionally hid from the public until now, leaving us to ponder once again, what are the other facts that they’re intentionally hiding behind their Pravda veil.
But of course this time they are being completely transparent and truthful with their narrative. If you believe the narrative they’re presenting about this classified document scandal then you’re an partisan sheeple and an idiot. There’s not a chance in hell that I’m gonna buy this narrative either.
The political left has shown us over and over again since 2016 that two of their core foundational tactics that seem to be supporting everything they do and say are the ends justify the means and most importantly the whole truth be damned.
The political left and their Pravda media are the epitome of the boy who cried wolf.
Responding to Steve Witherspoon
What about the Bush DOJ attorneys (Conservatives) violating Ronald Reagan’s Torture Treaty? What is leftist about that?
To refresh your memory, that was when top Bush officials were ultra-liberal on interpreting the U.S. Constitution and it’s subordinate federal criminal laws, which they swore an Oath of Office to uphold.
America’s best legal minds, from America’s Ivy League colleges, committed legal malpractice by simply “renaming” torture techniques as non-torture. Not honest mistakes, not for the national interest – they knowingly broke federal criminal law.
Getting really conservative. Article VI (Sections 1,2,3) of the U.S. Constitution legally requires Merrick Garland to investigate violations of Ronald Reagan’s Torture Treaty. Reagan’s treaty also makes “cruel treatment” also a federal crime. Garland is legally required to enforce these laws.
At the time, Democrats were actually more “conservative” on the U.S. Constitution and Law & Order than the Bush top officials.
In over 20 years, none of the top Bush officials have been held accountable. None of the Bush DOJ torture attorneys have even been disbarred from practicing law.
At very minimum, we should pardon and compensate the lower level government officials under a 14th Amendment litigation (equal justice under the law).
People like former CIA officer John Kiriakou who served years in prison for actually being too loyal to his Oath of Office – refusing to torture and refusing illegal orders. How can we penalize people like Edward Snowden, Reality Winner, Thomas Drake and many others if the “elites” simply get a pass? Biden should immediately make these subordinates whole again.
Ashcroft’s Zersetzung
I’m not going to engage in your whataboutism deflection.
The fact is that absolutely nothing I wrote absolves what some Conservatives have done in the past and absolutely nothing you wrote contradicts a word of what I wrote.
End of discussion.
Responding to Steve Witherspoon:
My point is there are 2 justice systems: one for the “elite” and another for the rest of us.
If the elites aren’t required to follow laws, then under the 14th Amendment we should pardon the “subordinates” that actually were loyal to their constitutional Oath of Office.
Under Article VI (Sections 1,2,3) of the U.S. Constitution (a wartime governing charter). Ronald Reagan’s Torture Treaty is “the supreme law of the land” and requires Merrick Garland to provide equal justice under the 14th Amendment.
In the past 20 years, we now know the Bush officials intentionally lied to the American people and they knew it at the time. These weren’t honest mistakes and not done in the national interest.
As of 2023, about 90% of the so-called “worst of the worst” have been released without charge. Bush officials told us they were so dangerous, they couldn’t be detained in Supermax prisons but only in a Cuban gulag (which costs about $11 million per year per inmate) – about 9x the taxpayer cost of a Supermax prisoner.
Seems to me Garland can either criminally prosecute the elites -or- make subordinates punished, imprisoned and ruined whole again. Either way it creates a “deterrent effect” against future law breaking perpetrated by elites.
Ashcroft’s Zersetzung
I’m simply not going to engage in your deflections.
With all due respect, you’re beating a dead horse.
Steve Witherspoon– Excellent. The Pravda media has taken a page from the George W. Bush play book: “You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.”
Honestlawyermostly, You will not be surprised to read from me that Cubans viewed and labeled the Miami Herald as Granma, Fidel Castro’s communist controlled Cuban state media. My father and many Cubans back in the mid-1970s had bumper stickers on their cars that proclaimed brazenly in simple words Yo no creo El Herald (I do not believe the Herald). And how the Herald owners hated Cubans for daring to question their leftist rag, have an opinion different from theirs and compare them to Marxist Cuban Pravda, la prensa amarilla (the yellow press). It was one of our many endearing qualities as Cubans
😉
Estovir– I was unaware. Up in West Palm Beach, we never read the Miami Herald (back then 60 miles was a long ways away) but your comment proves that ordinary people were capable of discerning the Herald’s propaganda, just as I think the rest of us ordinary Americans see through the party line “reported” by the MSM. This post about Biden’s classified documents perfectly illustrates the point. There is no difference between most of the MSM reports I have read and the White House’s talking points.
Yes that relatively true but I think it’s a bit more like the media overall has allowed the absolute power talked about in the following quote to completely corrupt them into becoming pure partisan activists…
“The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses.” Malcolm X
Both sides of the media have become partisan activists, but it’s the left’s near complete domination of the main stream media complex and their control and delivery of the political left’s narratives that’s made their side very Pravda like.
What we once called “journalism” and culturally revered as a solid foundation of our representative democracy has become a pure propaganda and a quaint anecdote of history.
No one should “blindly accept any narrative” from the political left OR the political right OR any “lapdog media” on either side.
Anonymous wrote, “No one should ‘blindly accept any narrative’ from the political left OR the political right OR any ‘lapdog media’ on either side.”
I agree.
Once “journalists” set real journalism aside in favor of pure activism and parroting partisan propaganda, you have to compare & verify, compare & verify, compare & verify because trust is the fourth estate is gone.
Your trust is gone. I trust some and not others, based on each specific reporter’s history of trustworthy reporting or lack thereof.
Anonymous wrote, “I trust some and not others, based on each specific reporter’s history of trustworthy reporting or lack thereof.”
I’m just curious; in your opinion, who is the most trustworthy reporter out there. Also, who do you think is the most trustworthy media outlet?
Offhand, I trust Marcy Wheeler for this kind of reporting. She’s on top of details, she’s forthright about what’s known versus not-known, and she corrects her mistakes when she makes them. But there is no objective trustworthiness scale; judgments about trustworthiness are always matters of opinion.
Thanks for sharing.
Same garbage as Holder. See the pattern here?
“. . . the discovery of highly classified documents in a closet in the private office used by President Joe Biden before 2020.” (JT)
Cue the phony distinctions (from the Trump case) and the deflections (to the Trump case) in 3, 2, 1 . . .
Where is the official Pinnochio website listing all Biden’s lies? Seems we are due one about now.
Turley himself brought up the Trump case and identified non-phony distinctions.
Cue your desire to pretend that Turley didn’t do that.
Start trying to understand what is going on. Skip trying to prove you are a law and order, rule of law guy. You aren’t.
“Turley himself brought up the Trump case and identified non-phony distinctions.”
With these two obvious differences, Dishonest One: i wrote “phony” distinctions. And his distinctins are not motivated by a desire to rationalize Biden’s actions. The Left’s are.
Svelaz
Save you some work.
“Influence peddling is not a crime.”
“Turley works for Fox News.”
“Orangeman bad.”
Now you don’t have to waste our time with all your posts.
Monumentcolorado, Thanks for setting things straight. Good job.
Excellent analysis. The more we see the panic o after the House flip, the more we understand why.
There are two justice systems: one for the elite and another for the rest of us.
The only time the “elite” are held accountable is when they rip off a fellow elite, it’s perfectly fine to rip off the little people (ie: Bernie Madoff, Enron, etc).
If we aren’t going to hold the elite accountable, then the real issue is “future reforms”. Is the justice system even capable at preventing future abuses by elites?
The answer appears to be “No” to future reforms also. In 2023, Congress still hasn’t implemented all of the “9/11 Commission” recommendations.
That was the heavily taxpayer financed “independent” commission. The reason independent commissions are created, composed of retired government experts, is to provide “political-cover” to sitting members of Congress. A politician running for re-election can avoid making hard decisions by deferring to the independent commission.
In 2023, the elites that engineered the Bush Torture program have been rewarded and promoted. Only the low level subordinates have faced penalties.
There are two justice systems: one for the elite and another for the rest of us.
Yes I have bemoaned the two justice systems. The rich, elite, political conected getting special preference. But for some reason, this morning reading your post, it rubbed me the wrong way and it took me a bit to figure out why.
Obama and Biden have created a 3 tiered system.
The 3rd tier is political persecution. Using the power of the federal govt to seek revenge against your political foes. That’s yet another swampy activity President Trump has exposed to sunlight. It is a corrupt power exercised exclusively by Democrats.
Making the assumption the Biden Penn Center Think Tank, is not Chinese is a stretch. Penn is possibly the University that is more enmeshed with China than any other University. Also, with the announcement of Biden locating at Penn, the Chinese donations to Penn, went up 400%. That is for the new building to house the Biden Pen Center think tank.
Vice Presidents cannot declassify.
All of Tumps documents are declassified
All of Bidens are actually CLASSIFIED.
“Vice Presidents cannot declassify.”
False: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information
Neither Trump nor Biden have revoked this EO. See Sections 1.3(a) and 3.1(b). The VP has original classification authority and therefore also declassification authority.
“All of Tumps documents are declassified”
Maybe, maybe not. We won’t know unless he presents evidence of it in court. We know that over 150 Trump documents are still *marked* as classified.
“All of Bidens are actually CLASSIFIED.”
Maybe, maybe not. We won’t know unless he presents evidence of it in court. We know that ~1 dozen Biden documents are still *marked* as classified.
A word search of the EO does not yield the Vice President with power to declassify anything other than documents he originates.
But I am more than willing to be proven wrong. I have heard the media make the same observation as I.
I told you which sections to read. You should be able to find and read sections 1.3(a) and 3.1(b).
Nope. The Vice President is not identified is a person with power to declassify.
Yes if the VP generated the document, the VP can declassify the document
“Yes if the VP [or anyone he supervises] generated the document, the VP can declassify the document”
Thanks for admitting that you were wrong.
Iowan was not wrong, you were. You don’t know who classified the documents but you are creating a non-existent fact by assuming Biden classified the papers. That is deceptive and incorrect.
Dishonesty and deflection. You have pointed out links that were wrong and links on topic but didn’t prove your case. Once again you supply a link but no data. Such continuous actions demonstrate you do not know what you are talking about.
You could have copied what you considered relevant, but then you would have to defend the statements by proving yourself incompetent.
I also heard the dog that does not bark
No Democrat is making the claim the Vice President has the power to declassify.
“Biden, while vice president, had the right to declassify material if he had classified the material in the first place.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/11/biden-trump-classified-documents-an-explainer
Is Kessler a Democrat? He omitted that the VP can also declassify material that was classified by anyone he is a supervisor for.
He omitted that the VP can also declassify material that was classified by anyone he is a supervisor for.
Other than the VP office staff, the VP supervises no other people
Thanks for admitting you were wrong.
Again you are using the same deceptive tactics you used elsewhere.
You lied when you said Biden could declassify, when he could declassify only those things he classified.
Mr. Garland is unlikely to do anything that may hurt his chances at the Supreme Court. Some of those Justices don’t look very healthy so he could still get there. On the other hand, he could piss off the Boss and become even more significant in history.
At least we can thank McConnell from preventing progressive clown garland from becoming a SC justice
it is the CRIME that worries me….a LIFETIME of crime that he and his family have gotten away with.
Would we be fighting a WAR for Ukraine if they didn’t pay BRIBES to Hunter?
💯no!! Bidens are totally being blackmailed by Ukraine. The money cannot stop!