All The President’s Men: Biden’s Use of Lawyers Raises Additional Concerns Over Handling Classified Material

Below is my column in the New York Post on the curious use of lawyers by President Joe Biden in the classified document controversy. There was a clear decision made to rely on his own counsel rather than the FBI or security officers after the discovery of highly classified documents in a closet in a private office. The decision clearly brings greater control and protection for the President, but it can itself be viewed as additional evidence of gross mishandling of classified material. In the movie “All The President’s Men,” Woodward chastises his colleague Bernstein that “I don’t mind what you did; I mind how you did it.” President Biden may face the same objection in his decision to use counsel to search for classified material.

Here is the column:

The discovery of a fourth set of classified documents, at the Biden residence in Delaware, has further undermined the White House’s virtual mantra that the president “takes classified documents very seriously.”

Putting aside the repeated movement of highly classified documents over six years, one curious element has emerged in this scandal: the use of private counsel.

Not only did President Joe Biden enlist lawyers to clear out his private Washington office; he then used them — rather than security officers or the FBI — to search for additional classified documents.

The initial use of lawyers is notable. While it seems a fairly pricey moving crew, Biden could argue a trove of documents might require a judgment on where they should be sent and whether they belong to Biden, the Penn Biden Center or the government.

But why was a legal team sent in six years after Biden took the documents on leaving as vice president? Were the lawyers specifically selected because they had clearances, an acknowledgment there might be classified material unlawfully housed in the office?

After the fourth batch of documents was discovered this week (the third found in Delaware), Richard Sauber, referred to as the “special counsel to the president,” stressed that he has a clearance. Sauber admits the lawyers who found the first batch at the residence didn’t have clearances but says he found the later documents.

It remains unclear which lawyers were involved in which discoveries, whether they had clearances and (if so) at what level. In fact, it seems to suggest Biden continued to use uncleared lawyers after his team found highly classified documents Nov. 2 in the Penn Biden office closet in Washington.

That itself could be viewed as gross mishandling of classified information.

It’s strange Biden did not use security officers or the FBI to conduct further searches. The president has a host of people who regularly handle classified material. So why use the lawyers?

The answer appears the same as in the case of Hillary Clinton’s emails: control. Using private counsel allows Biden to raise attorney-client privilege. Trump also used counsel, but eventually the FBI raided his home to search and remove not just classified material but documents found in boxes with that material.

While that attorney-client privilege can be overcome under a “crime/fraud exception,” it adds a level of initial protection. It also allowed Biden to control the discovery and initial record of the discovery of classified information.

The key to any investigation will be the chain of custody extending back to the documents’ removal in 2017 when Biden left office. How these documents appeared in their discovered locations is known only to his lawyers. It’s a link in the chain of custody that Biden effectively controls.

With Mar-a-Lago, the FBI was criticized for staging documents to be shown in the storage room. The photos were then leaked to an eager media. There will be no staged photos of documents alongside Time magazine covers for Biden.

Nor were documents he housed with classified documents removed. Indeed, it’s not clear if the FBI will know what documents were stored in the same boxes.

What was potentially lost is significant. Classified documents are generally supposed to be in folders with a thick, colored border and large printed classification warnings. Were some of those folders observable before they were moved? If so, anyone could tell a pile contained classified material, including the president and passersby.

Likewise, the initial discovery could show the context of surrounding material. The FBI at Mar-a-Lago carefully photographed that context and its search. Here, we’re relying on counsel to have kept such a record when most lawyers would be reluctant to do so given the risk to their client.

The key is that unlike FBI agents, these lawyers are not acting on behalf of the public interest but for the president’s personal interests.

If there are criminal charges, the key witnesses will be lawyers representing the president as an individual. They are more likely to minimize incriminating or embarrassing elements.

And they are themselves under scrutiny. Since they may not have had sufficient clearances to do this work, it is in their interest to downplay any expectations or warnings of additional classified material scattered around Biden’s home or office.

Concern over the use of lawyers has only grown with time. Biden not only continued to have his lawyers search after the first discovery, but did so for months through subsequent discoveries.

After finding highly classified material in Biden’s garage Dec. 20, private counsel — not the FBI — found another document in an adjacent room Jan 11. Sauber found more classified documents the next day.

Those last two findings followed White House assurances that the “thorough” search was “completed.” It obviously wasn’t thorough enough.

They raised another question. It would seem unlikely a document with a proper classified cover could be missed. The folder has thick red or yellow borders running around the edges and large black classifications like “TOP SECRET” emblazoned across the top. If that was missed, the earlier searches were clearly negligent.

Alternatively, and more concerning, the internal documents might have been removed from the folders and stored without cover. That would indicate someone removed and reviewed them — an act showing knowledge of the classified status. If they were removed at Biden’s residence, he would be the chief suspect in such use.

It would utterly destroy the “inadvertence” defense.

Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.

198 thoughts on “All The President’s Men: Biden’s Use of Lawyers Raises Additional Concerns Over Handling Classified Material”

  1. If, in fact, the DOJ was notified in November (before the election) about these documents, why didn’t the FBI go in at that point to search for more documents? Why keep using the lawyers unless you wanted to cover things up? At 1,500 per hour per attoerney vs. free FBI, it makes more sense to use the FBI. A second thought is that Biden could use his claim of “complete transparency”.
    This is a Dem hit to take Biden out of the running in 2024. They want him gone and are sending the signals they will dig up his dirty laundry to achieve that goal.

  2. January 16th. It’s mot just Martin Luther King day, it’s the first day of five days of fun in Davos Switzerland. The WEF is trying to decide how they want us to live.

    1. Feels like something out of a James Bond movie like when Blofeld gets all the bad guys together discuss world domination.

  3. President Biden and Hillary Clinton must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for gross mishandling of classified materials.

    President Biden was not president when he committed the crime of mishandling and Hillary Clinton has never been president.

    President Trump’s classified material at Mar-a-Lago was and is under the scrutiny and security of the secret service and decisions on classification, declassification and archiving of classified material are the jurisdiction and purview the president.

    No act of the legislative branch may usurp the power of the executive branch and no act of the legislative branch to usurp the power of the executive branch is constitutional.

    1. I wonder what kind of a couple the big guy and Hilary would have made. Could you marine their offspring!

    2. Expecting Hillary Clinton to be prosecuted by the Washington DC establishment for anything is like expecting the Pope to be excommunicated by the College of Cardinals.

      1. Absolute power corrupts the Deep Deep State absolutely and the Deep Deep State IS absolutely corrupt.

        Dang! Why don’t Americans ever get mad about losing their republic, their freedom and their nation?

        1. George,

          I believe I can tell you the US Citizens are Absolutely P*issed off, but govt, old media is doing everything they can to cover up true public sentiment.

  4. Take Exit 8C – Interstate I-395 Southbound in Virginia Crystal City.

    Look to your right, Underground/Underneath that lush green lawn is a multi-story Server Farm.
    There you will find acres of Data-Server, Repeat ACRES of Data Servers.

    VOIP, Document Storage, Tracing, etc. etc. are Stored there. Foggy Bottom, the D.C. Complex, Langley, Pentagon, digitally flows through it.
    It’s a digital Pandora’s Box.

    There is a Database Manager that know where to find information about your Documents (Biden’s Classified Documents).
    In addition there are several places around the U.S. that store this Information (redundancy/back-up).

    This is not Sci-FY, it’s been this way for years. Y2K was a huge data-collection year, it even prompted Bill Gates to say “There’s to much information out there”.

    It’s 2023 – Wake Up!
    It’s not where we have been – It’s where we are going.

    The Ghost in the Machine

  5. Watching NFL teams “huddle” before each play (no, I don’t normally watch, but these playoff games are getting pretty exciting!),
    I imagine the Biden team huddling for days/months, as in Andrew Jackson’s backroom “kitchen cabinet,” making sure everyone is on the same team, dotting all their “eyes,” crossing all their tees, covering for each other, for the perfect drive/kickoff!… is it possible that they could lose the game? I can hear them in the stadium/stands, Let’s go Brandon!

  6. “The key is that unlike FBI agents, these lawyers are not acting on behalf of the public interest but for the president’s personal interests.”

    And what public interest were the Mara Lago raiders acting on behalf of? Don’t let a legal point obscure the ugly reality. They were serving only the Democrat Party and no other ‘public’.

  7. Turley seems to be up to his usual disingenuousness. He’s asking why private lawyers are searching for classified documents and asking if any of them have security clearances. Apparently he missed the interview with James Tapper and Comer.

    “ Well, my concern is that the special counsel was called for, but yet, hours after that, we still had the president’s personal attorneys, who have no security clearance, still rummaging around the president’s residence looking for things,” Comer said, adding that he believed the residence was “essentially a crime scene, so to speak.”

    Comer’s answer, however, neglects the fact that the documents were discovered while White House lawyer Richard Sauber, who holds a security clearance, was supervising the search of Biden’s home and while Department of Justice officials were present, Sauber said in a statement on Saturday.

    “While I was transferring it to the DOJ officials who accompanied me, five additional pages with classification markings were discovered among the material with it, for a total of six pages. The DOJ officials with me immediately took possession of them,” the statement said.”

    It seems Biden’s handling of the issue is far more professional and cooperative than Trump ever was. Even the DOJ was present which is something Turley neglected to mention in his criticism.

    1. The problem with Biden’s arguments omit his possession of these documents, whatever their “secret” status, for the intervening years when he had no right to possess them — given what the public knows now. Further, Sauber was not present – certainly, he has not admitted to being present – when initial documents were found. And finally, while former FBI Director Comey wrongfully added language to the statute requiring “intent” in the Hillary email server matter, the statute referenced by Comey (and in the present case) does not require intent.

      1. @Stock73
        Correct that the statute doesn’t require intent. You can accidentally lose the docs and still be found guilty.

        But you’re incorrect.
        Hillary had intent to commit a different crime.
        So Comey was wrong again.


    2. Incorrect and incomplete. The initial discovery at UPenn was conducted by Biden’s lawyers and Sauber was not present. Sauber was present later at the Delaware crime scene.

      1. That is true, BUT that does not detract from the fact that those lawyers did exactly what they were supposed to do. Which is report it to the proper authorities and hand them over. All that happened within 24hrs. It shows that Biden’s lawyers are competent and know what they are doing. There are those insinuating things with no evidence to merely raise suspicions. Trump’s lawyers can be accused of the same thing, but republicans never bothered to ask, only when a democrat is involved do they become concerned.

        1. “It shows that Biden’s lawyers are competent and know what they are doing.”

          You comments show you to be incompetent and a fool.

            1. Not every anonymous comment to Svelaz and you that is anonymous is mine, though you assume all are.

              Svelaz probably notes that I don’t bother communicating with him. He initiated my comment today and a reply. I responded to both without my name because he is not worth the respect and is a waste of time.

              I haven’t been responding to his idiocies as they are so frequent and stupid that there is no purpose except to improve Turley’s numbers. I thank you and Svelaz for doing so in the Professor’s name, though I have no authority.

              1. ATS, upon looking at all your responses to me by your pretend friends and the many that you self-delete, I am beginning to wonder if you are posting comments assumed to be by myself, solely to fight a straw man.

                I have seen many such postings over the months, and since I generally agree with them, you can continue doing so and attribute them to me. That being said, you are very weird.

                1. ATS, I also note an increase in the frequency of pretend friends and self-deletions whenever you are having a meltdown. It seems you have one today, and I quote a few of the self-deletions you sent. Generally, if you have a leg to stand on, even if it is only a LEFT leg, you can maintain your composure. Your postings today reveal you have no legs left to stand on.

                  Here are some of the self-deletions.

                  “Turley and his twits are fiddling while Rome burns.”
                  “Stay in your own lane, S.Meyer/A non @ 11:20. And taking the day off would do you a world of good.”
                  “+100 (It’s S. Meyer, posting anonymously, of course.)”

        2. BUT that does not detract from the fact that those lawyers did exactly what they were supposed to do. Which is report it to the proper authorities and hand them over. All that happened within 24hrs.

          The fact you say. Hmmm. You know for a fact they reported their discovery within 24 hours because what, it’s on video? Controlled access logs? Visitor logs? There were approximately 2,190 other 24 periods since Biden left office that no one within his orbit including Joe Biden; not partners, family, lawyers, secretaries, janitors, etc. ever reported anything to the proper authorities. Since you are assuming facts of total professionalism and responsibility with Biden’s lawyers, then you have to also assume his lawyers and others were doing exactly what they were told to do by not reporting the presence of classified documents. That is assuming you don’t believe only sleepy Joe packed, transported, stored and had access to these documents.

          1. Olly, it’s what they did. The DOJ is not contesting that claim and neither are Biden’s critics. The lawyers who were searching notified NARA and the DOJ.

            It was not their place to report it to the public. Their only job was to report it to the authorities which is what you’re supposed to do. Garland initiated an investigation and since it’s DOJ policy not to comment on ongoing investigations the public didn’t know. Also there’s the policy of not announcing such investigations so close to an election for fear of influencing it. That’s what Comey did wrong with announcing an new investigation on Hillary Clinton. They certainly learned that lesson and avoided it this time.

            1. Olly, it’s what they did. The DOJ is not contesting that claim and neither are Biden’s critics. The lawyers who were searching notified NARA and the DOJ.

              That as usual doesn’t address my comment. Notification to NARA and the DOJ is not contested. However, you said it was a fact they reported it within 24 hours of their discovery. I’m a Biden critic and I’m contesting that claim. What proof do you have that they discovered these documents within 24 hours of their report to NARA and the DOJ? And given the fact Biden had been out of office long before their recent “discovery”, what proof is there that that was the first discovery of these documents by anyone with authorized access to that office? Nevermind those not authorized access.

              It was not their place to report it to the public. Their only job was to report it to the authorities which is what you’re supposed to do.

              I never suggested it was.

              1. I’m no lawyer but isn’t a lawyers job to defend a client. Not turn him in to the cops. The big guys lawyers could have at least told him to put these documents in a more secure location. I’ve seen some really sleazy lawyers, but they are sleazy in defending their clients.

                1. IB, I am 100% confident that what has been made public is strictly a narrative crafted to minimize the damage to Biden.

                  I had to laugh when KJP said that It is important for the American people to know that the President has said he takes classified documents and information very seriously

                  He seriously does. The problem is when he takes them, he isn’t serious about securing them and he apparently had no interest in giving them back.

                2. Lawyers want to limit their client’s legal exposure. In this case, promptly notifying NARA and the DOJ, and turning over any classified docs, limits Biden’s legal exposure.

                3. Not always. They often confer with their creep colleague on the other side to keep the whole shambles as profitable as possible.

            2. There is no evidence Bidens lawyers “found” anything.
              We are supposed to believe not a soul had run across those classified documents in 6 years.

              No. Bidens lawyers wrote the script and are following the script. Facts are not part of the script.

              There is no way Bidens lawyers should have released the garage docs instead of the AG lawyer finding them

              1. We are supposed to believe not a soul had run across those classified documents in 6 years.

                Clearly someone “discovered” these documents at least 1 year after Biden left office, when the Penn-Biden office was opened.

                The fact documents have now been found at 3 separate locations means at a minimum, someone separated the documents into 3 different batches.

                The obvious questions are who separated them, why were they separated and who had access to them?

        3. Svelaz – You don’t really know what the lawyers did since this story is being told by the lawyers themselves. But it really does not matter. It is not they who are facing impeachment or prosecution.

    3. My dear Svelaz, I would like to present for your viewing pleasure a New York Times article concerning the search for classified documents by Trumps attorney. Alex Cannon, a lawyer who had worked with Mr. Trump in various capacities, became involved last fall and tried to help archives officials retrieve the material.

      Mr. Cannon warned others in Mr. Trump’s circle not to go through the boxes themselves because it was unclear what was in them, and people might require security clearances. Once again your argument turns to ashes. You could have easily found the same article before you honored us with information within your head that you want to so badly to believe. Same deal different day.

      1. “Alex Cannon, a lawyer who had worked with Mr. Trump in various capacities, became involved last fall”

        Last fall was after last summer’s FBI search warrant was executed.

      2. “I would like to present for your viewing pleasure a New York Times article”

        But apparently you couldn’t bring yourself to do it.

    4. Svelez – Biden’s handling of these documents does not start on November 2, 2022. He was handling them recklessly for the preceding six years.

    5. More of Turley’s paid disingenuousness, endless harping about Biden while ignoring Trump and his lies and deliberate theft of classified documents.. Notice that when he re-posts something, it’s usually from The New York Post or Fox–pro-Trump media. No doubt about it: Turley has jumped the shark.

  8. Has anyone considered the possibility that Joe passed the classified documents on to Hunter who – as is his way – carelessly left them lying around? Now that investigations in Congress are about to begin, Joe is trying to make sure that the mess is cleaned up.

  9. Having held a Top Secret clearance and routinely reading classified documents, I don’t believe the claim that special covers are required is correct. My recollection is that documents were simply marked by their classification. (Even though I was cleared for Top Secret, I never saw anything above Secret.) Even non-classified documents such as technical orders.were marked but they were all in the same covers. If they’re using special covers now, it’s a more recent policy.

    1. It is DOJ policy not to indict a sitting President. The SC could write a report, but will it be made public? If he indicts anyone else he could name Biden as an unindicted co-conspirator.

      Given that the legal consequences for Biden will necessarily be limited, at least while he is President, the function of the appointment may be to shield Biden from investigation by the House.

      Before he leaves office, Biden could also pardon himself and Hunter.

      1. The SC appointment cannot shield Biden (or Trump) from investigation by the House, or by the Senate, for that matter. Both chambers of Congress should investigate the clearly problematic nature of the government’s tracking of classified info and IMHO, also the problem of overclassification of material.

        1. Anyone asked to produce documents or answer questions will say that they can’t respond because of the ongoing investigation.

          1. Nothing prevents Biden or Trump or their non-lawyer employees from answering questions, though they may invoke their 4th Amendment rights, which would be an especially bad look for Biden and Trump.

            And the SC investigations do not prevent Congress from investigating the more general and clearly problematic nature of the government’s tracking of classified info and the problem of overclassification.

          2. And I don’t see why documents cannot be produced by other agencies (e.g., Secret Service visitor logs to Biden’s Wilmington home and Trump’s Mar-a-lago home, video surveillance tapes).

            The DOJ isn’t going to answer questions about an ongoing investigation, but the DOJ is not the only entity that has relevant information.

  10. Who’s the bookkeeper of classified documents and their whereabouts? Is there not a record of how many copies of a document there are, and who has them? This is indeed both outrageous and terrifying. The slipshod nature of the revelations of recent makes one wonder, what else is out there floating around without a care?

    1. Indeed. You would have thought that, at least for Top Secret SCI documents, there would be numbered copies which are closely monitored.

        1. Biden is reported to have had TS SCI documents for six years. So what happened to the tracking system?

          1. Trump is also reported to have TS/SCI documents, as well as HCS (clandestine human sources / human intelligence activities).

            Clearly the tracking system failed for both of them. As I’ve already said, I think Congress needs to hold hearings about these failures.

            1. Anonymous – how do we know that “the tracking system failed” in the case of Trump? It appears that NARA was requesting documents from Trump as early as May 2021. Perhaps they knew or suspected from the government data base what classified documents were in the boxes. In the case of Biden, no demand for missing classified documents was ever made.

    2. There is no single “bookkeeper.” There are lots of Executive Branch agencies that each classify material, and the government generates millions of classified documents annually. People can be punished for failing to classify something that should be classified, but there is no punishment for classifying something that shouldn’t be classified, so there’s a lot of overclassifiation.

      Should they be keeping good track of all classified docs? Yup. If they’re not worth tracking, they’re not worth classifying. Each agency can track the items that its employees classify, just like each of the many separate library systems each tracks the items in their own system.

      I’ve written my members of Congress to work on this oversight.

  11. (Six days ago, I made the following comment. Svelaz quickly responded, -criticizing why I put quotation marks around “attorneys.”)
    “lin says:
    January 11, 2023 at 11:08 AM
    “…(2) Why were Biden’s “attorneys’ the ones who “discovered” the documents? Why were Biden’s “attorneys” tasked with retrieving records and old files, not anticipating anything classified in there? And why now (Nov 2022) after all these years?
    Am I missing something here? I dunno, there could be very simple, plausible answers. There is a plethora of possible scenarios.”

    1. Lin, why did you need to put quotation marks on the words? Why not say attorneys instead of “attorneys”. The latter implies you’re making air quotes suggesting an ulterior motive without proof. In this column Turley is questioning the use of private attorneys in searching for documents. Trump also used private attorneys to search for documents, but Turley never questioned it. Turley is deliberately sowing suspicion by asking these questions that he never asked in Trump’s case which also involved the use of private attorneys to conduct searches. It’s the hypocrisy of his inquiry that stands out and those of us who follow these cases note how obvious it is.

      1. Svelaz: Thank you, I was hoping to rely on your near immediate response, -and you did not let me down. Now, those who missed our exchange back then can get a better understanding of your position/opinions. Thanks again.

        1. Lin, you have not answers my question. Why did you need of use quotation marks around those words when you really didn’t need to? As I noted most of the time when someone does that they are implying there’s’ ‘more to it’ than it appears by putting certain words in quotation marks as in making air quotes when speaking to someone.

        2. Svelaz: Thank you, I was hoping to rely on your near immediate response, -and you did not let me down.


          Lin, your class, elegance and cerebral touch remind me of a scene in the 1990s movie “Point of No Return” with Anne Bancroft and Bridget Fonda. I never did mind about the little things

          Svelaz has no idea how dangerous you are for xis/xer/xem brain

      2. Biden used his private attorneys to search for classified documents in order to keep the fact that he had such documents in his possession from the public. The question that now must come to mind is which one of his private attorneys leaked the story to the press? Just like with Nixon the coverup is what has caused his down fall. As the evidence mounts Biden’s effectiveness as president declines further. Unlike the RussiaGate hoax this coverup by Biden is real. The jig is up. Now even ABC and CBS are asking why Biden’s attorneys without security clearances were handling the secret documents. They’ve done their best to cover for Joe in the past but they now realize that the mound of dirt swept under the carpet has become to large not to be noticed. They say Joe we done you good and you done us dirty. The thing is that the MSM knew who they were dealing with all along but they did their best to keep you from knowing who Joe Biden really is. Do you feel violated cause you didn’t even get a kiss?

        1. TiT, Trump used his private attorneys to search for documents too. None has a security clearance. Biden’s attorney does. He supervised other attorneys in the search along with an agent from the DOJ who promptly took possession of the classified documents. In Trump’s case none of that happened. He engaged in obstruction rather than cooperation.

  12. Dear Prof Turley,

    The full Biden quote is: Everybody knows … “I take classified materials very seriously”. Just so you know.

    ABC news published a piece this morning on ‘What to Know about classified materials and how they’re handled: ANALYSIS’ which, I believe, is rife with errors and misinformation. It suggests Obama EO 13526 provides a Uniform system
    “for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Under this order, classification levels, standards, handling and declassification procedures are spelled out and subjects everyone in the federal government, including the president, to following these standards.”

    While President Obama may, or may not, have followed this ‘Uniform System’, clearly both President Trump and Biden have not.

    In fact, I don’t believe Obama’s EO imposed upon future presidents could withstand constitutional muster. As I understand it, the sitting president is the sole authority on ‘classifying, safeguarding and declassifying national security information.’?

    Imho, within the bounds of wise discretion very few things, including Sources and Methods, should be classified (i.e. held ‘secret’) beyond the reach of the general public or their elected representatives. And, of course, nothing ‘illegal and/or unconstitutional’ should ever be classified TS/SCI for obvious reasons.

    There is no [good] reason information about, just for e.g., the JFK assassination that should still continue to be classified ‘secret’. That’s absurd.
    Or take more the more recent disclosures of TS/SCI information concerning various wars (e.g. Iraq WMD), Wikileaks U.S..FP disclosures and, of course, the Snowden Files. .. the ‘crown jewels of national security’.

    “One way of resolving all these secret-document scandals is to acknowledge that after 75 years of experimentation, the chief accomplishment of the “classification system” has been to make our government less trustworthy and our country less free.

    Abolish and reform it. All of it.”

    *better late than never

    1. “I don’t believe Obama’s EO imposed upon future presidents could withstand constitutional muster.”

      It stands unless a subsequent President amends or reverses it. So far, that has not occurred.

      Agreed that the current classification system overreaches and needs to be reformed.

      1. @ Anon#1

        Well, we’re doomed then. . I wouldn’t let Trump or Biden walk my cat, much less determined the standards of so vast and complicated an issue as ‘national security’.

        *all of it.

        Snowden for President 2024 ‘The Crown Jewels of National Security’

        1. p.s. Obama EOs must not be worth too much.

          I vividly remember Obama’s first EO, his first official act as president iirc, to close Gitmo (A stain upon American honor!) .. . and, clearly, his own VP Biden in no way followed the ‘Uniform System’ of Obama EO 13526

  13. I find this column today deeply disturbing (and depressing) and feel that we have been truly let down by our elected officials. The president is now looking more like an incompetent old man, hanging on for his own edification and not the health of our country. People lie for him, make excuses for his behavior and that of his family. Our border incursions looks like an invasion in which we end up paying for the housing and care of the illegals while giving billions to keep the Russians from totally destroying the Ukraine and crossing their border. How does all of this square off when the President and his AG don’t play fair with ALL the citizens of our country. If politics is a game of power, then we the people are looking like serfs in a medieval system How do we trust and defer to these people? We should expect the best of our leaders and certainly the President of the United States.

    1. Actually I amend my other comments about the president being incompetent. He actually is a smart old fox. He knows the public well … ‘ disarm us with smiles, handshakes and hugging babies; speak like the common man/women and that will convince people you are ‘real’ and on their side. It has worked for 50 years so why change anything now — so close to the finish line! Amazing isn’t it?!

  14. How much longer are we going to let this guy (Joe Biden) get away with this crap — this is SERIOUSLY out of control. This isn’t another Biden gaffe: this is violating the clearly written laws on the books, laws less than six months ago applied to DJT —- and so, how much longer??

  15. Biden and his handlers have squandered their credibility. When the Far Left Jacobin magazine admits that Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 because of Hillary Clinton, and not Russian bots on Twitter, it is time to impeach Joseph Biden as many times as it takes to defang Biden and the DNC forevermore. As expected the GOP will not because they lack the gravitas. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

    It Turns Out Hillary Clinton, Not Russian Bots, Lost the 2016 Election
    In a different kind of world, November 2016 might have inspired some actual introspection on the part of those implicated in said failures. Instead, it became an occasion for hyperbolic and often flimsy partisan narratives that rather conveniently avoided asking the necessary questions…

    1. Clinton was not likeable in the first place.
      She is the embodiment of the establishment/swamp.
      Insulting half of the electorate as “deploables,” not an ideal way to win the hearts and minds.
      She ran a bad campaign.
      Running on, “But its her turn!” not an effective slogan.

      1. “Insulting half of the electorate as “deploables,” not an ideal way to win the hearts and minds.”

        She didn’t. She called half of Trump’s supporters “deplorables,” which is less than 1/4 of the electorate.

      2. Mark Steyn said for Hillary to write a book about “What Happened” in 2016 was like OJ searching for the real killer.

        Won’t it be historic to have the first AAPI BIPOC XX POTUS?

  16. We get the picture, the prog/left has identified its weakest link and is now in the process of sh*tcanning him before 2024. All the details of his miserable grifting career were readily available for the last how many decades. To act surprised as this point is to insult the intelligence of decent Americans.

      1. They are already printing the newsome bumper stickers. Their only remaining problem at this point is how to rid themselves of cameltoes harris and the still nascent investigation of hunter biden

      2. UpstateFarmer: When you look at what Newsome did in his recall, he slaughtered his opponent. They love the way he looks, he has the massive ego that is necessary to run and win. I cannot stand him, but you know the MSM will slobber all over him. Must check in with the kingmaker Cliburn to see what he thinks.

  17. Watching the WH press secretary try and fail, at spinning this one would be funny if it was not so painful to watch.
    It is so bad, she ignored Fox news Peter Doocy.
    Had she called on him, his question was: “Why is President Biden going to Wilmington today, isn’t that a potential crime scene?”

    1. That’s a good question. Who in his orbit told him that was a good ideal? An FBI profiler would likely conclude returning to the scene of a crime shows a sense of arrogance and a belief he is smarter and will never be prosecuted. Smarter? No. But arrogant and unaccountable? Absolutely.

        1. “Trump, who lives at a potential crime scene.”

          What is the potential crime scene? Is it the DOJ’s violation of the fourth amendment?

      1. honestlawyermostly,
        If I may make a suggestion to your reply,
        “As any experienced law enforcement officer will say, a career criminal frequently returns to the scene of the crime.”

  18. All interesting concepts here but I have to think how much this looks like the FBI, NCIS, Blue Bloods. The alleged perpetrator has “Lawyered up” and when the defense attorney shows up during questioning we now strongly suspect the alleged perpetrator is guilty. Interesting that the Professor and Defense Attorney has suggested this somewhat humorous (to me) look at all of this. I will leave serious discussion to the rest of you today. Seems classified documents are breaking out all the way from Florida, to Delaware to D.C. God only knows what is in my garage. The question is should I clean it up myself, get an attorney to clean up, or call the FBI (Nah, I don’t think so). A good MLK Jr day to all of you today.

  19. Need to launder money? Be like the Bidens.

    As the bagman, you “rent” a house owned by your partner in crime (say, your father). Then you pay that fellow kleptomaniac $50k/*month* in “rent.” (Well, actually $49,910/month).

    You can always claim that the “rent” was so exorbitant because classified documents were stored there (as was a priceless Corvette). As the recipient of that laundered money, when asked about it, you feign ignorance and act “surprised.”

    (Don’t bother asking. The evidence is out there.)

Leave a Reply