Does the “Word of a Biden” Extend to the Biden Delaware Documents?

Below is my column in the New York Post on the pledge of transparency by President Joe Biden in the classified documents scandal. Yesterday, President Biden assured the public that it could take “the word of a Biden” on their bright future. That would be more reassuring if he would fulfill his pledge to be “very transparent” on his storage of documents from his time as senator and vice president.

Here is the column:

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has repeatedly assured the public that President Biden is committed in the classified-document scandal to move forward in “a very transparent way.” Putting aside the refusal to share any information beyond a desire to be fully transparent, Biden has one major test awaiting him on his pledge: his senatorial records.

There has been much discussion of a classified document being found in his personal library in Wilmington, but there is a huge library of Biden documents sitting in the University of Delaware. The university is sitting on Biden documents due to a cynical 2012 arrangement made by Biden when he was vice president and contemplating a run for the presidency.

The president effectively locked away his records by giving them to the university, which has claimed for a decade that it is still working to organize and catalog the documents. He has refused to allow the public or the press to see the documents. With the recent reports that Biden may have included classified information in notebooks found at his residence, the status of the University of Delaware documents is becoming more and more untenable for the White House.

University ‘lockbox’

The University of Delaware has been used for years to shield potentially embarrassing documents from public review for the Biden family, including allegations that the president engaged in sexual harassment or assault as a member of the Senate. The university effectively agreed to serve as a type of lock box for the Bidens to prevent a review of his senatorial records as he ran for higher office.At great public cost, the university has fought efforts by the media and the public to allow access to the documents. It is a troubling position for any institution of higher education to fight access to historical materials . . . for years.

Now, however, there is growing concern that the files may not only include incriminating information on past sexual-assault allegations but actual classified information. There is already confirmation that Biden removed classified information from the Senate more than 14 years ago. It now appears he also may have transferred classified information from briefings and documents to his notebooks. That raises the question of whether such information is contained in the notebooks and papers housed at the university.

If President Biden is ready to embrace transparency, he can start by finally dropping his opposition to any review of his senatorial documents. At a minimum, the FBI should request access to determine if his violation of classified rules extends to this mountain of material given to the university.

No way to secure files

For decades, I have written and testified on why public servants should not be able to claim records from public service. This work includes a work on presidential papers published by Cornell in 2003 where I traced the flawed arguments of public servants that such documents are entirely their property.

Biden is the poster boy for how the claim of private ownership can run against principles of good government and the public interest. Biden became hugely wealthy while in public service as did his family. The Bidens have long been accused of open influence peddling to garner millions of dollars and choice jobs or contracts for family members. These documents could shed light on that corrupt history.

More importantly, the university is now actively involved in stopping inquiries into whether Biden may have assaulted a staff member or engaged in a pattern of sexual harassment of female staffers. It could also be shielding classified information from being located.

The “very transparent way” should also extend to other matters of great public interest. Even if Biden is not willing to give the public and press general access to these records, he should be willing to allow an independent third party to remove any documents related to matters of great public interest, including allegations of sexual misconduct and influence peddling.

Biden has yet to come up with a plausible reason why he is using the University of Delaware to prevent review of the documents. Indeed, the University of Delaware continues to expend public funds by making technical arguments against access while ignoring questions about the use of an academic institution to shield potentially embarrassing records.

Of course, the FBI does not need permission. They have ample reason to demand access in light of the president’s serial violations. Indeed, past discoveries form a perfect overlaid map of where the president has lived or worked in the past decade. Yet although there is new interest in searching his other residence, there has been little discussion of the largest trove of documents sitting in the bowels of the University of Delaware.

Presumably, this is one question that Jean-Pierre could actually answer. If the president is truly striving to be “very transparent,” he should be able to tell the University of Delaware that his records should be open to outside review. Otherwise, Biden’s pledge is being nothing but transparently dishonest.

160 thoughts on “Does the “Word of a Biden” Extend to the Biden Delaware Documents?”

  1. This the first real test of whether Special Counsel Robert Hur is truly conducting his investigation without fear or favor.

    With classified documents being found in 5 different tranches in 5 different locations thus far, there’s every reason to believe that the University of Delaware Biden archives may harbor classified information and it is the Special Counsel’s job to determine if that is the case. If the situation was reversed and this involved Trump, there would have been an FBI raid long ago. No holds barred.

    If a search and investigation of the University of Delaware Biden archives never occurs, then it is abundantly clear that this is not a serious investigation–a scenario that is widely expected already.

    After all, as Joe has made clear: “nobody f**cks with a Biden” and that is one thing you definitely have Biden’s word on.

  2. The University of Delaware restricting access to the Biden documents is doing nothing different than Merrick Garland’s FBI letting Biden’s attorneys “search” for documents. Nothing to see here……

  3. “President Biden assured the public that it could take ‘the word of a Biden’ . . .”

    Trust a serial plagiarist, congential liar, and life-long grifter?! Please tell me that is a misquote.

  4. Jonathan: Boy, it’s beat up on the Biden family this week and I think I know why. You, the GOP and Trump’s allies are pushing the false narrative that there is no difference between the Trump and Biden docs found at their residences–and no difference between the allegations of sexual misconduct by Trump and those alleged against Biden. And your job, apparently, is to provide an echo chamber for this narrative. A few of your allegations: (1) the “files [Biden’s material at Delaware University]] may not only include incriminating information on past sexual-assault allegations but actual classified information”, and (2) “Biden became hugely wealthy while in public as did his family. The Biden’s have long been accused of open influence peddling to garner millions of dollars and choice jobs or contracts for family members. These documents could shed light on that corrupt history”. Breath taking allegations for someone who considers himself a legal academic who has to cite sources when publishing articles in law journals. But when you have to use words like “may” and “could” so often, I raise my eyebrow. And it’s curious you apply a double standard. You never complained about all the “influence peddling” in the Trump administration and the “choice jobs” given to Ivanka and Jared Kushner. Funny you could just ignore all that and now claim Biden is doing much worse.

    So let’s address just one of your “allegations”–that Biden “may” have engaged in sexual misconduct. One of the allegations arose when Tara Reade, who was a staffer in Biden’s Senate office, made a complaint in 2019 about sexual assault against Biden re an incident in 1993. There was a lot of media coverage during the presidential campaign. Strange but Trump never mentioned this allegation by Reade during the campaign–probably for good reason. Anyway, no former member of Biden’s Senate staff recalls Reade saying anything about such an incident in 1993. In a long article in the NY Times (4/12/20) it reviewed the Reade allegations but could no corroborate them. The Times article does mention that Reade tried to get legal and PR support for her allegations from the “Times Up Legal Defense Fund”. The Fund referred Reade to a list of lawyers dealing with sexual assault cases. Reade says she contacted every lawyer on the list but none would take her case. Kind of revealing when no lawyer would agree to represent her. No woman has sued Biden for sexual misconduct. Now I am one who believes every claim of sexual misconduct must be treated seriously. But after Reade left Biden’s Senate office and moved back to California she has encountered serious financial difficulties and friends and acquaintances say Reade was always proud of her work with Biden and his efforts on behalf of women. She didn’t mention the alleged incident in 1993 until 2019 when she first made her allegations. Which raises Qs about Reade’s motivations in waiting so long to bring her charges –at the beginning of the 2020 presidential campaign.

    It’s strange you would raise charges of sexual misconduct against Biden when you have ignored all the same allegations against Donald Trump who is now facing a sexual assault lawsuit by E. Jean Carroll. So I ask myself this Q. Why would you raise allegations of sexual misconduct against Biden in the context of the the controversy over his mishandling of classified docs? And why would you urge the FBI to conduct a search of the University of Delaware’s archives containing the Biden material? Do you really think the FBI could find probable cause to go on what would be a fishing expedition? Do you really think a judge would authorize a search warrant based on your allegations? That’s how bizarre your arguments have descended into when it comes the Biden family. It seems the whole purpose of your column is to stir the pot of, so far, unproven allegations about the Bidens’–in hopes something will stick. It’s a fools errand–but then that is what you are paid to do. As to your claims of “influence peddling” by the Biden family I will address in another comment.

    1. Dennis – First, Ryan Grim of the Intercept was able to find corroboration of Reade’s allegations. She says she filed a complaint with her superior about harassment (not mentioning the rape allegation) by Biden. If that report was filed, it should be among his records at the U of D. Second, it is clear that Biden was grossly negligent in mishandling classified documents going back to his Senate days. That is a crime. If he has left a trail of classified documents wherever he has traveled, and apparently done so “inadvertently”, does not the government have an interest in insuring that he has not “inadvertently” deposited classified docs at U of D?

      1. edwardmahl: Yes, I read the Intercept article but nothing in the article actually confirms Reade’s allegations, certainly not the “anonymous” call to the Larry King Live show. No former member of Biden’s Senate staff recalls Reade making a complaint. And we are talking about a claim of serious sexual assault so you would think Reade would report that all the way up the line. I’m not saying Biden is a saint. He may have engaged in conduct that made staffers feel “uncomfortable” But Reade’s claim is a different animal. As a retired attorney who worked for a large corporation I had a few occasions to review sexual harassment complaints referred to me by our human resources department. We took each one seriously. But based what I have seen in the reporting I have serious Qs about Reade’s claims.–especially since she didn’t raise the issue until 2019 when the presidential campaign was in full gear. When no attorney would take her case that’s telling for me.

        Now as to your claim Biden committed a “crime” you are referring to 18 USC 19924. But, based on the DOJ guidelines on prosecution, I doubt either Biden or Pence will be prosecuted because they voluntarily disclosed and returned the classified material and cooperated with the FBI/DOJ. That’s not the case with Donald Trump and why Special Counsel Jack Smith is vigorously investigating Trump’s obstruction of the FBI investigation.

          1. And E. Jean Carroll admits that at the time, she did not report being raped by Trump to the police, only to friends.

            In a couple of months, though, Carroll will have her day in court, as her defamation suit against Trump is going to trial.

            1. Carroll has the coat dress she was wearing, and there are reports that there is DNA on the dress. She has asked for a DNA swab from Trump, who has, so far, refused.

        1. Today’s little Turley turd piece is just a deflection away from Marjorie Taylor Greene’s latest antics–to wit: she claimed that COVID relief funds went to pay for “Drag Queen Hour” with drag queens reading “confusing” books to school children. Not true, of course–the grant went to a library which has allowed, in the past, men in drag to read to school children, but the grant was put to use for the usual purposes for COVID relief–financial losses resulting from the pandemic not to support “Drag Queen Hour”. Another MTG big fat whopper: that a school in Illinois was given $1.6 billion to push CRT, which she says is to teach white children to be ashamed of their skin color. This sum is more than a full years’ budget for the entire Chicago school system. It’s a lie, of course, but where’s the Turley outrage over a member of Congress uttering nothing but outright lies? Instead, Turley chooses to use his platform to push claims about what “may” have happened, what is “alleged” to have happened, in re accusations against Joe Biden, all because he’s paid to do so. He knows there’s no actual proof, but for the disciples, no proof is necessary.

    2. Reade lost a part of her life when she had to leave employment with then Senator Biden, she said her dreams and future were crushed. On Aug 11, 1993 a few months after Biden sexually assaulted Tara, her mother, Jennette, was positively identified in a live TV broadcast on Larry King Live, calling from San Luis Obispo, California, where Reade’s mother lives. “Hello,” King begins. “Yes, hello. I’m wondering what a staffer would do besides go to the press in Washington? My daughter has just left there, after working for a prominent senator”. “You are nothing to me. You are nothing.” Biden said according to Reade after she rejected Biden following his non-consensual penetration of her vagina. Reade told her brother at the time, and also officially indicted in a legal court document during a divorce that she was sexually molested while working for Biden. Her life was destroyed a classic You become a scum bag when you lie, distort the truth when you carry water for a scum bag.
      There is strong evidence that the Bidens are lying their meeting and matters of an affair while Jill was married to another man. Jill Biden’s former husband stated he found that Joe Biden wrecked (then) Jill Stevenson’s corvette. Sometime later Jill’s then husband, Bill Stevenson, kicked her out of the house because of the affair and they divorced. Jill and Joe were married afterwards, the romance story is a sham. That Joe Biden was having an affair with the wife of one of his supporters wives is not a good look. Bill Stevenson has maintained this since before his divorce with Jill.

      Remember, just like you, Tara Reade and Bill Stevenson were both Biden supporters when these events occurred.

  5. I believe NARA’s handling of Obama’s records have never been adequately examined. It is hard to find information on the internet, as controlled by Google, about the handling of the Obama Presidential Records and his cllassified documents. Goolge seems to want to direct us to the CYA letters and press releases issued by NARA saying that NARA has been in control of these documents since Obama left the WH. But we know that they were sent to an ex-warehouse (Hoffman Estates) in Chicago that seems to have been actually controlled by Obama’s people.
    Per the Daily Beast (March 4, 2019) “Further contributing to the Obamas’ woes has been the awful, piecemeal, and still-incomplete rollout of the plan by the foundation and the National Archives and Records Administration, the federal agency charged with preserving and making available presidential records, to handle Obama’s records. Under the plan, the Obamas will not build and donate to the government what would have been the 14th presidential archival facility, and the National Archives will not make the Obama paper records available for public review. Instead, the foundation will select and pay a private vendor to digitize the records—helping to decide the order in which those records are scanned—and NARA will make them available online.”
    There is also an agreement online between the Obama Foundation and NARA making it clear that the Foundation would hire the contractors for this work, and control the conditions for the work.
    Per Reuters (9/30/22): “The Hoffman Estates facility once stored classified records, “in an appropriately secured compartment within the facility,” according to NARA. But since the Obama Presidential Library will be digital ( (, the agency transferred Obama classified records to another facility maintained by NARA in Washington, DC.”
    I cannot find any information online on where the Washington DC facility is, nor can I find any information about the nature of the security measures in Chicago (where vendors were coming and going) or the Washington DC facility to which all of the classified records were supposedly sent. Also, were they sent before digitization or before. If the former is true, are they going to be digitized too?
    In brief, Obama seems to be operating in a cloud of unknowing. There are no journalists (unless I have missed them) who have investigated the Obama records. The official pablum is enough for our ever vigilant press.
    A final point: if the Presidential Records are property of the government, how can they be held by Obama for any purpose?

    1. “I believe NARA’s handling of Obama’s records “

      Ed, all your suspicions are justified. I don’t have time to find my data on this subject and am not sure how it pertains to what you desire.

      I have more somewhere, but perhaps you know everything I know.

      ATS continuously provides proof of his contentions, but the proof he provides was written long after the events and was created to protect the left. He repeats himself knowing what he says is a lie. ATS is the guy who checks spelling mistakes but misses the medical examiner’s report that Ashli Babbitt was murdered.

      Obama was supposed to make the records available to the public by digitalizing them per agreement. Has that been done? No. One time I looked up enough to find out that 10 high speed printers could do the job in a month and they weren’t expensive (from memory)

      Classified Obama documents were stored in an abandoned furniture warehouse that didn’t meet NARA’s standards. That might be in the letter I linked to.

      MAL was much safer.

      1. It appears from your first link that PJ media has determined that the story is incorrect after further research and a statement by NARA.

          1. I assume the abandoned warehouse story — click on your first link and scroll down the page.

            1. This is interesting. What disturbs me is why there is no explanation for the error. The original article is completely gone. I remember information on Obama’s web site. I don’t have time to search more than a quick one and not enough time to figure out what is going on.

              Take a look at and if you wish you can render an opinion.

              Link 2 copies from the second link:
              The above new link states: “The letter, available on the Obama Foundation website and dated Sept. 11, 2018, reveals that the Obama Foundation not only acknowledged possessing classified documents but also admitted that they kept them in a facility that did not meet NARA standards for the storage of those documents.

              That link seems to have a picture which appears from the Obama web site and conforms with the letter.

              Thank you for pointing out the change in link 1 that I didn’t know about, but what does that leave you with and what point are you trying to make?

              1. The Biden Presidential Library documents were held in a warehouse rented or owned by the NARA, which at all times had the care, custody and control of the documents–the documents were NOT under Obama’s control. This lie has been repeatedly debunked, so why do you keep on repeating it?

            2. There are some initial details of the story that are incorrect – “stored in an abandoned warehouse” is incorrect.

              But the actual records do not seem to indicate that NARA took full custody until 2018 I beleive.

              1. John Say – I question that NARA had “full custody” in 2018. In February 2019, the Obama Foundation (OF) and NARA signed a Memorandum of Understanding for digitization of the Obama Presidential Records. The introduction states in part:
                “The Records are owned by NARA and currently held at a NARA-controlled facility located in Hoffman Estates, Illinois (“Hoffman Estates”).” But Memorandum makes it clear that the OF will fund and control the project. For example, P. 6 states in part:
                “The Foundation and the Vendor will enter into a separate contract (the “Vendor Agreement”) whereby the Foundation will engage the Vendor to perform the scope of work defined in the RFP (the “Work”). The Foundation will administer and manage the contract, provide whatever contract oversight it deems necessary to protect its interests, and retain responsibility at all times for signing contract amendments, changes, and modifications, as well as other contractual documents that would result in the expenditure of the Foundation’s funds.”
                This makes it clear that the actual party controlling the PRs is the OF.
                Based on a posting by the OF, It appears that it intends to transfer the paper records to the Obama Presidential Library after that monument is constructed: “The Obama Presidential Center, to be located on Chicago’s South Side in Jackson Park, will be a privately operated, non-federal organization that includes a presidential museum. NARA will not have a Library or staff presence at this site.” The paper records will not be freely open to the public. “Original documents and artifacts will be available for loan as part of our ongoing loan program.”
                In a May 2017 Press Release, NARA announced that it agreed to this arrangment; “The National Archives and Records Administration announced today a new model for the preservation and accessibility of Presidential records. This follows an Obama Foundation announcement of its commitment to fund the digitization of all of the unclassified Presidential records created during the administration of President Barack Obama. Instead of constructing a building to house the textual and artifact records, existing NARA facilities will house the original materials. In this new model, NARA will administer neither a museum nor a traditional “Presidential Library,” and will instead focus its resources and personnel on preserving and making accessible the Presidential records of the 44th President of the United States in digital format to the greatest extent possible.” The NARA facility is the Hoffman Estates. The records are still at the Hoffman Estates. See Crains Chicago Business, December 7, 2022 article entitled: “Landlord poised to rofit big time after government renews Obama records lease.”
                So, Obama and NARA are playing a game. Obama has, and will keep, the paper records and NARA will post them onlineafter Obama is done digitizing them. NARA will pretend that it is in control.

                1. As I said – this is a mess.

                  One of the things one must take into account is not what the documents “say” but what they do.

                  I can sign a contract that says I am the president of the united states – that does not make me president.

                  This is essentially the same as the legal significance of “signing statements” – i.e. they have ZERO legal significance.

                  This constract acknowledges that NARA is the owner – but unless the contract actually transfers ownership – that remark is meaningless.

                  Regardless – I am operating from recollection, but as I understand it what the paper trail does is confirm that Documents WERE stored in privately owned and maintained fascilities and LATER transfered to NARA’s custody.

                  More relevant is that I beleive GSA lists these buildings are Rented by the federal Government previously.

                  Regardless, what is with abslute certainty True is that these documents were not in NARA’s posession and control from the start – or there would be no agreement needed. NARA does not need to Contract with the Obama Fundation regarding documents that is owns and controls.
                  It can do whatever the H311 it pleases.

                  The documents are significant – not for what they say as much as what they DO
                  They give NARA something it did not have previously – custody and control.

                2. .”So, Obama and NARA are playing a game. Obama has, and will keep, the paper records and NARA will post them onlineafter Obama is done digitizing them. NARA will pretend that it is in control.”

                  These are good thoughts.

                  Obama’s records were supposed to be digitalized and opened to the public. Has that happened? My recollection tells me ten high-speed printers running 24/7 could do the job in a month. It’s been longer than that? Why? Why is there no pressure to do what the memorandum said?

                  Again, none of this is important to the issue. Trump legally had some records in his possession. The government had a legal recourse to get them. Go to court. They didn’t and used force like the little dictators they are. I do not doubt that Obama has similar records in his possession, but NARA and the government do not care because as with Trump, those records are legal, and Obama is on the left.

                  Why was the government interested in Trump’s records? Could it have to do with the actions of the FBI that were declassified for the public to see, but withheld?

                  1. One thought is the clue/clues the Trump lawyers peppered the lawsuit against Hillary. I think it was that one. It was believed thrown out because someone didn’t want discovery to happen, but the clue/s are now matter of public record.

                    Obama/Hillary/others off the record communication system?

                    I’m still trying to figure out which set of rabbit tracks to follow. 😉

                  2. I do not mostly care about Obama’s promise

                    EXCEPT that it PROVES that ownership and control of a presidents papers are with the PRESIDENT.

                    Obama can not scan and make documents available if he does not own them.

                    We are not going to see that anytime soon – but only because at this time the value of having his docs publicly on the internet is LESS that the value of NOT having them public on the internet.

                    Over time that will change.

                    Regardless, it is inarguably Obama’s RIGHT to publish or NOT – because he OWNS them

                    Just as Trump does.

                  3. One of the reasons that government did not go to court is because the court would have granted ACCESS.
                    It would have done that trivially. there is lots of case law on that.

                    It would NOT have granted POSSESSION,

                    And that is what DOJ/FBI/NARA/WH are after.

                    The house is not after the actual classified documents – from all of them,

                    Expect DOJ to fight tooth and nail – though there is ZERO basis for denying them to congress.

                    DOJ does not want anyone to know what these documents are about – not Trump documents, not Biden docs.

              2. That is the question. When did NARA take custody? I don’t think it matters because the findings, errant or not, were to show that the records under Obama weren’t so secure. Trump’s personal records were secure and the rest I assume are with NARA.

                In the past I saw conflicting data. Why shouldn’t the data be clear? Why didn’t PJ Media clear up the data and their error?

                1. I do not think PJ MEdia made a clear error.

                  I beleive they got confised by the paperwork that the OF produced – reading too much into what it SAID and not understanding so much what it DID.

                  The NARA/OF contract as an example is completely unnescescary if NARA had custody from Day one, and if NARA had clear ownership from Day one.

                  You do not write a contract to give another something they already have – control and ownership.

                  I would not go to my neighbor and say – lets write a contract that give you ownership and control of your garage.

                2. There are some facts that ARE relatively Clear.

                  The Docs are in Chicago, because then President Obama Ordered that.
                  They are STILL in Chicago – so OBVIOUSLY presidents have the power to do that.

                  Trump did not as President try to go rummaging through the Obama Docs in Chicago.

                  Neither NARA nor DOJ were called in because millions of documents and thousands of classified documents were improperly and insecurely stored in Chicago.

                  Obama had and continues to have access to these docs.
                  Obama decided where they were going to be stored – Not NARA.

                  Ultimately after some conflict and negotiations NARA took over MANAGEMENT of the documents – they are taking steps to secure them and to meet NARA’s Archival storage standards.

                  But the Documents REMAIN where Obama ordered them.

                  So WHY doesn’t this apply to MAL ?

                  NARA did not demand to remove documents from the fascility that OBAMA chose in Chicago.
                  All that has occured is that NARA is now securing and preserving them in a Fascility of OBAMA’s chosing.

                  Trump Chose MAL for some small portion of his documents.
                  There are cetainly Millions elewhere.

                  If Obama is entitled to chose an old food store in Chicago For millions of documents – including classified ones.
                  Trump is entitled to chose his offices and SCIF at MAL for 10’s of thousands.

                  Either Obama is egregiously in violation of the law that Svelaz etc repeatedly rant about.
                  Or ex-presidents have at the very least control of not merely where SOME of their documents go, But ALL of their documents,
                  and that includes Classified docs.

                  There are some issues with this contract that I do not understand – Why is the OF paying NARA ?

                  That is STRONG evidence that Obama/OF OWN the documents.

                  If you read the PRA the way Svelaz is trying – this contract is unnecescary.
                  NARA would be 100% respnsible for paying for everythign regarding these docs.
                  They could rent any building they wanted anywhere they wanted and aside from allowing Obama’s designated representatives access,
                  they could otherwise do as they please.

                  But that is CLEARLY not the case.
                  The documents are being stored WHERE Obama wants them.
                  His people have substantial access to them.
                  But NARA is being payed to care for the documents.
                  To secure them, and to store them conforming to govenrment standards.

                3. The documents stolen by Trump were never secure–they were in all sorts of locations on the property to which all sorts of people had access–a pool locker, Trump’s office and a storage area in a basement. Trump took them on purpose, claiming “they’re mine”. Security footage showed people going through boxes, moving the contents around and shifting the boxes to other locations. Trump refused to return them, forced the NARA to get a subpoena, returned some, lied about all having been returned, and then forced the NARA to obtain a search warrant. Then, he portrayed himself as some kind of “victim” of the “deep state”, and fundraised over it. Pence and Biden voluntarily welcomed a search of their offices and homes and the return of any classified documents to the NARA. The warehouse in the Chicago suburb containing Obama’s papers was always under the care, custody and control of the NARA, which operated the facility. Alt right media consistently lied when they portrayed the facility as an abandoned furniture warehouse under Obama’s control. There’s no comparison here. No matter how many shades of lipstick you try to smear on this pig, it’s still a pig.

        1. This is somewhat more complex. PJ MEdia did back down.
          But the facts appear to indicate that the Docs are or were not in NARA custody – they might be now.
          That for some time they were stored in a privately owned fascility and not under NARA supervision.

          But it is Messy because though the building was privately owned, it was at some time Rented by GSA.

          At some point – I beleive in 2018 NARA took over Fully, there is a contract between NARA and Obama’s private foundation, Dealing with custody, handling and payment for transport of the docs.

    2. All of you commentators amply justify why Obama needs to be called Obummer. He’s giving Americans the head fake now just as he always has going back to his election to the Illinois legislature before being elected to the U.S. Senate. Now the Obummer “presidential library” has turned into a 250′ selfie taking up 20 acres in Chicago’s historic Jackson Park, which is right on the Mississippi Flyway for spring and fall migrating birds.
      Actually, it’s a scheme for gentrification so that Valerie Jarrett and others can make a buck out of gentrifying Woodlawn while ruining Federick Law Olmsted’s masterpiece Columbian Exposition park on Olmsted’s bicentennial. Obummer’s out for Obummer. Period. No one else.

    3. Thank you, Edward Mahl, for delving into this topic. I have not heard any mention of Obama records in all the recent chatter about Trump and Biden. Of course, as you note, the media has had little curiosity about the topic.

  6. Can we have the FBI look through ex-Republican Congressmen’s records just to see if there is any classified documents in there, or any sexual harassment allegations?

    Shouldn’t say, Devin Nunes offer his records up for scrutiny such as this? In the interest of transparency? Do you think he ever would if he was not forced to by a court (and then an appeal of that court decision and maybe another appeal)?

    Nope, Turley never asks Republicans to be transparent about anything.

    1. When you find a GOP congressmen with a clasified document in his home – you can get a warrant to search their entire lives.

  7. “The University of Delaware has been used for years to shield potentially embarrassing documents from public review for the Biden family, including allegations that the president engaged in sexual harassment or assault as a member of the Senate. The university effectively agreed to serve as a type of lock box for the Bidens to prevent a review of his senatorial records as he ran for higher office.At great public cost, the university has fought efforts by the media and the public to allow access to the documents. It is a troubling position for any institution of higher education to fight access to historical materials . . . for years.”

    The institution is legally obligated to abide by Biden’s wishes. They can’t grant access unless Biden allows it. The university does not own the records.

    “President Biden donated his Senatorial papers to the University of Delaware pursuant to an agreement that prohibits the University from providing public access to those papers until they have been properly processed and archived. The University is bound by, and will comply with, the agreement. Until the archival process is complete and the collection is opened to the public, access is only available with President Biden’s express consent.”

    Turley seems to be making assumptions in what those records contain based on allegations. That’s a fishing expedition looking for incriminating information that he does not know is true.

    Turley omits the fact that those records are not public records according to law. Senators records are owned by the Senators. Not the government. Now if they were VP records they would be because they fall under the PRA.

    1. If he donated his records, then the University owns them. But they’re still bound by any contract they signed.

      1. then the University owns them

        No idea how politicians handle their papers when leaving office. But I cannot imagine circumstances that I would turn over ownership. Grant custody. Like “loaning” a piece of art to a museum.

    2. You are 100% correct. However, since he pledged to have the most transparent White House, let’s not play the “loophole game” and release it all.
      In addition, since they found secret documents among his papers from when was a senator, don’t you think he should prove once and for all that there is “no there there”. After all, he is Mr. Transparent, correct?

    3. With Biden hiding documents all over U of Delaware could not stop the FBI from searching through his documents . Regardless of what the wishes of Biden .

      1. Only with a warrant. And the odds of FBI getting the kind of General warrant they got for MAL are about ZERO

    4. Turley understands better than any of us that the University cannot itself grant the access. That is why it is asked of Biden to demonstrate his regard for transparency by granting the access himself.

    5. We have been through this – and to a small extent Turley addresses it.
      The PRA does not help you.

      The parts of the PRA you keep trying to rely on are unconstitutional.

      Regardless, Turley is making a public policy argument.
      It is NOT one that I agree with.

      I may WANT to see Trump’s records and Biden’s records.

      But I do not have the RIGHT to do so.

      Congress can BTW pass laws that make Senators records publicly accessible or government property/
      If can not pass laws that do that to presidential records.

      You CONSTANTLY ignore the fact that the Courts have saved the PRA from unconstitutionality by:
      Finding it limited to Documents created by Congressionally created executive agencies.
      Making the President the sole decider of what is personal and what is not,
      and making the presidents decision not judicially reviewable.

      Again – it does not have to be that way.
      It just is according to our current constitution and law.

      If you want Biden’s senate records to be government records change the law.
      If you want ex-presidents records to be govenrment records – you are going to have to change the constitution.

      In the meantime

      Trump AND Biden are ENTITLED to rely on the law and constitution AS THEY ARE NOW.

      As such Biden, Biden’s DOJ, NARA, FBI all violated Trump’s constitutional rights,
      and they did so with the blessing of the 11th cir ct of appeals.

      That is WRONG, and that is IMMORAL.

      Just as it would have been Wrong for Trump to go after Biden’s Udel records.

    6. Almost all subpoenas for documents or civil document requests are “fishing expeditions”. You just have to know where to fish and what you are fishing for.

Leave a Reply