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.
“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.”
https://library.udel.edu/special/home/collections/joseph-r-biden-jr-senatorial-papers/
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.
If he donated his records, then the University owns them. But they’re still bound by any contract they signed.
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.
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?
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 .
Only with a warrant. And the odds of FBI getting the kind of General warrant they got for MAL are about ZERO
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.
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.
“That’s a fishing expedition . . .”
Veteran fishermen know that means: Fish there.
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.
It would be little surprise to me if the people who handle Biden are about to deep six his presidency as we get closer to 2024 for the sake of finding someone else easy to manipulate to do their bidding.
Biden essentially does nothing. His official schedule is often empty. He serves to sign orders he is told to sign and read from the teleprompter when required. For that, he gets to be called President of the United States.
“The people who handle Biden,” E.M.
It’s called the Deep Deep State “Swamp.”
It’s the current rendition of Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex.
______________________________________________________
“THE DISASTROUS RISE OF MISPLACED POWER”
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
– Dwight Davis Eisenhower
If they are doing something – they must do so quickly.
The democratic field has no clear successors to Biden.
If Biden drops out or appears too weak it will take a long time for Democrats to work out their next leader.
Republicans have a deep bench. Democrats do not.
Moochhell or the eminently cerebral Kim Kardashian.
If brain dead Biden can run, there exist no prerequisites or qualifications.
The point is singular, the hyphenates must conquer America and fundamentally transform Americans out of it.
American women love it, they are no longer burdened with their natural product, those pesky babies, oh, and their nurturing.
E.M.: You are a full-on disciple. I sometimes watch alt-right media just to see how far they can go, and this theme that Biden is “handled”, has no idea what’s going on, “does nothing”, and only does what he is told, comes from that source. E.M.: it’s all lies. Why do you believe these lies? Trump is the one who consistently had an empty schedule, who never came to the Oval Office before 10 or 11 in the morning because he was watching television coverage of his failed presidency, who ruled on the basis of “executive orders”, and who relied on a teleprompter because when he tried to ad lib, he always messed up.
Sadle Joe Biden has a 45 year history of not tellinng the truth. He has lied all his life.
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….Of course, the FBI does not need permission. They have ample reason to demand access in light of the president’s serial violations.
WTF!? How many blog posts has Turley written where an individual’s rights have been violated and it takes years to work its way through the courts to “possibly” get some relief. And yet here we are opining the various ways the FBI might maybe possibly perhaps ask pretty please to be granted permission to be able to get a peek at documents that potentially involve our national security. I say *uck that! If they can justify the MAL raid, then surely they can justify raiding the locations holding this “foreign agent’s” (Biden) tranche of documents.
We’re now stuck in a lawless hellscape. We failed in last years election to primary enough Rinos & the same with the Dimos.
And gains made many were lost in the general elections.
Going through some of the results some rotten people actual won as the opponent was worst or the good person wasn’t able to overcome the govt sponsored propaganda.
In the meantime we’ll all be suffering govt situation worst then since Lincoln F’up a deal that could have been struck in a different manner.
The case now is the people must remain non-violent as that would just play into what this govt is attempting to provoke the citizens to do.
Maybe I’m wrong but I think the evil b*stards running all this crap are back on their heals & people/biz just need to maintain peaceful pressure against them & only doing biz with pro-American businesses the best one can.
*********
One small piece at a time of what people can do.
6:39 minutes
Largest Chicken Farm Burns To Ground With 100,000 Dead Chickens As Farmers Warn Big Agra Chicken Feed Is Causing Egg Shortage
46,680 views
·
Jan 29, 2023
The Alex Jones Show
Largest Chicken Farm Burns To Ground With 100,000 Dead Chickens As Farmers Warn Big Agra Chicken Feed Is Causing Egg Shortage
https://banned.video/watch?id=63d7157ab8727720c819d8d4
The FBI would need probable cause to determine whether there are classified documents within Biden’s senatorial records. What if other senators also have classified documents squirreled away in their own records? Shouldn’t they all be searched to make sure everyone is on the up and up?
The FBI would need probable cause to determine whether there are classified documents within Biden’s senatorial records.
We already know Senator Biden absconded with Classified documents. Biden has Zero legal framework to posses those classified papers. Garland had nothing on Trump and he got a warrant to raid his home. He had to lie, but he got the warrant. But Biden has already admitted he broke the law.
I’ve lived through a lot of presidents, but I’ve never seen one lie with such casualness as Biden. It’s as though he were genetically incapable of telling the truth about anything. Even when the truth is so transparent that everyone can see it, he’ll tell you the lie and expect you to believe him over your own eyes. This is what the Democrats have become. No wonder the rest of the world is shifting away from America — no one can trust a people who peddle lies and crusade for falsity.
It is an attribue of the left, and we see it all the time here.
We get all kinds of absolutely ridiculous statements – like
“You cannot commit violence against a window or a car. Killing a human? Now that, that is violence, Shame on Atlanta’s leaders who fall into the same tired path of protecting property while our people are murdered by their police.”
In any other era such a remark would have ben bat$hit crazy.
Today we end up debating whether burning police cars is violence.
It is completely absurd.
The left does not care about reality.
Everything is an oppinion
all opinions are acceptable.
Except theirs which are truth.
I don’t know how you lived through a lot of Presidents but didn’t live through the one just before Biden. You must be a time traveler who can skip over some years.
“I’ve lived through a lot of presidents, but I’ve never seen one lie with such casualness as Biden. It’s as though he were genetically incapable of telling the truth about anything.”
You’re confusing Biden with Trump. Trump has the record as the biggest liar so far.
“My word as a Biden”. Has there ever been a more non-sensical, ironic, moronic, hypocritical, ridiculous, oxymoronic, juvenile, laughable self own in presidential utterings?
It is like Trump saying “you should be as self-controlled as a Trump”. Or Bill Clinton saying, “you should be as chaste as a Clinton”. Or Obama saying, “you should be as humble as an Obama”. Or Hillary saying, “try to be as honest as a Clinton”. Or AOC saying, be as mature as an Ocasio-Cortez”. Or Swalwell saying, “be as careful of honeypots as a Swalwell”.
“My word as a Biden” is an example of either a) how narcissistic he is, b) how demented he is or c) how dumb he things we are. It is actually a maddening statement that just makes the guy even more unlikeable.
I am far more conserned about Joe’s
“Nobody F#$k’s with a Biden” remark.
That is evidence that he would abuse his power.
Special counsel Hur is investigating the Biden documents issue so he should be deciding what additional document searches are appropriate under the circumstances, not President Biden or the White House. I think a classified document search of the UD records makes sense, but do not see a sufficient legal need or basis based on what JT has presented to search for other information that JT is looking for.
but do not see a sufficient legal need or basis based on what JT has presented to search for other information
The current legal need would be the same legal need standard, Biden/Garland used to raid an ex Presidents home.
The SC has far more grounds than that.
The locations where Biden’s docs were found is evidence of an actual crime.
The presence of a classified Doc from Biden’s tenure as senator is an actual crime.
The fact that a Hunter Biden memo to Burisma appears to include classified information is evidence of an Actual crime.
If DOJ had those things on Trump I would have signed the MAL warrant.
“The locations where Biden’s docs were found is evidence of an actual crime.
The presence of a classified Doc from Biden’s tenure as senator is an actual crime.”
No, they are not evidence of an actual crime. Neither one of those is. He had authority to have those documents at the time. Like Pence’s explanation. Staff may be the ones who forgot about the documents or didn’t take them back. Pence did exactly what Biden did. Promptly returned the documents when they were found. Trump didn’t do that. He actively refused to turn them over and obstructed their recovery.
Pence did exactly what Biden did.
No. Biden moved his papers to the Chinese Penn Biden Center. That’s all on Biden. Classified Material from his Senate days is theft, not an errant govt employee packing. We know Biden had materiel TS/SCI. Stored in violation of the law.
“He had authority to have those documents at the time.”
He did have the authoruty to have classified documents – As does Trump.
He did NOT have the authority to have those documents in his library, garage, Chinese funded Think tank.
He did NOT have the authority to have Classified documents that he acquired as Senator at any time.
“Like Pence’s explanation. Staff may be the ones who forgot about the documents or didn’t take them back. Pence did exactly what Biden did. Promptly returned the documents when they were found.”
Incorrect. Pence has an inadvertance argument. Pence’s documents were found in boxes that were sealed from the time he left the Naval Observatory. Pence never opened the boxes, there is no evidence that Pence was aware of their contents. Pence did not move them to an insecure location.
Had the Biden docs been found in cartons that were sealed fromt he time he moved out of the Naval Observatory – Biden would have the same inadvertance claim that Pence does.
But they were not. Biden’s docs were moved – multiple times – eitehr by him or at his direction.
It is in theory possible that Biden is “innocent” here – but there is sufficient a case that with an honest jury a conviction would not be hard.
Remember the Docs at the Biden Center were found in an envelope marked “Personal”
Other docs were found in stacks of papers in his library – with classified Binders.
You are going to have to convice a jury that Biden did not pack the documents at the NO – because while that does not make him Guilty of anything directly, if he packed them or ordered them packed, then he KNEW or should have known there were classified documents.
Your problem is that is it NOT credible to beleive that Classified documents were moving all arround Biden’s home and his office int he Biden Center without Biden EVER noticing.
And your next problem is that even if you get Biden off the hook – SOMEONE knew about these documents – they were moved multiple times.
There is a crime here no matter what.
And then there is athe document from his Senate Tenure.
An aide could not have gotten that from the Senate SCIF, and even if that was possible – which I doubt – Biden would still have had to order the aide to do so. That means he KNOWS about the document. And the moment Biden KNOWS he is in posession of a classified document outside a SCIF as a Senator he has an IMMEDIATE duty to deal with it.
There is zero chance anyone is going to prosecute Biden for this.
But your claim that he is somehow the same as Pence or Trump is complete baloney.
Trump had both the power to declassifiy, the power to declare documents personal, and the power to posess classified documents as ex-president. Biden had ONLY the latter.
Presuming that you can establish the Trump docs are actually classified – which is not established. Trump had a duty to protect them – which he did, and Biden did not. There is no duty to return them.
Even Pence failed at the duty to protect, BUT he is claiming and may prevail at a cliam that he did not put them in the boxes or order them in the boxes.
“Trump didn’t do that. He actively refused to turn them over and obstructed their recovery.”
All things he is legally allowed to do.
Lets review the ABJ decision – Even if JW was correct that the Clinton tapes were presidential not personal. and even if JW was correct that they were classified, and even if JW was correct that they were in Clinton’s sock drawer.
Neither NARA nor the courts have the power to take posession of them. LEgally the tapes are Clinton’s – Classified or not, presidential or not.
And EXACTLY the same is true of Trump.
You keep trying to ignore that.
If I understand what you are saying, you raise an interesting legal theory that Special Counsel Hur may want to look into factually and legally to determine if there is a broader problem than classified documents that goes to government records more generally and what belongs under NARA control versus UD control. I think Hur’s jurisdiction is limited and he may need to request expanded jurisdiction from Garland to achieve this.
Biden does not have presidential records at Udel.
I do not beleive he has VP records at Udel.
The records are Senate records and neither the PRA nor FRA, nor pretty much anything else apply.
However the presence of classified records from Biden’s tenure as senator would allow SC Hur to get a warrant to search the Udel records – but only for classified docs.
The presence of possibly classified information in a Hunter Biden memo opens an entire huge world of potential investigation regarding the Biden’s.
It makes all of the Biden familiy foriegn dealings and probably all business dealings period potentially discoverable.
I would also not be surprised if Garland does not widen Hur’s scope deliberately as a means to attempt to block or delay House Republican inquiries.
“The presence of possibly classified information in a Hunter Biden memo opens an entire huge world of potential investigation regarding the Biden’s.”
The GOP is pushing that allegation without evidence. All they are saying is the contents of the memo are suspiciously similar, that doesn’t mean it’s true.
It would only be discoverable if it’s actually corroborated. Mere allegation is not enough. I’m sure many GOP members want it to be true.
The GOP is pushing that allegation without evidence.
If Classified information matches the info in Hunters emails, that is proof Biden fed Hunter classified information to sell. We also have Bidens notes. If those notes represent classified information, thats a violation of law.
“The GOP is pushing that allegation without evidence.”
No the NY Post is pushing it.
And there is evidence.
You keep confusing evidence and proof.
“All they are saying is the contents of the memo are suspiciously similar”
Yes, that is called EVIDENCE
“that doesn’t mean it’s true.”
Correct
“It would only be discoverable if it’s actually corroborated.”
Nope – the Hunter Biden memo is sufficient to open an investigation.
“Mere allegation is not enough.”
Correct, but this is not a mere allegation, there is more than sufficient evidence for an investigation.
“I’m sure many GOP members want it to be true.”
I am sure they do – just as you want Trump to be guilty of anything you can think of.
Regardless, you are correct this is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
But it is way more than an allegation – we have had allegations for most of the past month.
This is evidence.
Not proof,
But evidence.
It is evidence of sufficient strength that DOJ/FBI can and really must investigate – though this will really be an SC matter.
It is also far more than enough for the House to address the matter. To subpoena records.
This is enough to dig into all the Biden deals in an entirely new way.
Hunter Biden selling access to VP Biden is one thing – as you noted very hard to prove a crime. Joe has to personally benefit – though we do now have losts of evidence of that.
But Hunter Biden selling information he got from classified sources is a far far far easier crime to prove.
Pretty simple actually.
You noted that the Hunter Biden Memo was similar to classified information.
What would need to be proven is that VP Biden had access to classified materials that contained information that was also in those memos;
AND that the same information was not available publicly.
That is it.
There is no need to prove that money changed hands.
There is a monor issue of Who is the criminal – if Joe Biden knowingly provided the information – that would be Joe,
If Hunter Biden accessed Joe’s files without permission – it could be Both of them. Joe for leaving classified docs lying arround and Hunter for illegally accessing them.
Joe Biden has 3 HUGE problems with all this.
1). He handled classified information recklessly as ex-VP – that is a crime.
2). He stole classified information as a Senator – that is a crime
3). He provided classified information to Hunter – that is a crime, made worse by the fact that Hunter gave/sold it to others.
The first two are established without any doubt.
The third has more than enough evidence to deeply investigate.
It is highly unlikely that Joe Biden will be prosecuted.
I would be shocked if he recovers.
If providing classified infomation to Hunter gets stronger – he will have to resign.
“1). He handled classified information recklessly as ex-VP – that is a crime.”
So did Trump and Pence.
“2). He stole classified information as a Senator – that is a crime”
Nope. There’s no evidence he intended to keep the documents once they were discovered just as Pence did. Trump literally refused to turn over classified documents that did not belong to him. That’s was theft. Pence and Biden have more credible evidence that their staff is more responsible for the handling of the documents. Trump personally ordered the documents be taken from the White House with no evidence he declassified them.
“3). He provided classified information to Hunter – that is a crime, made worse by the fact that Hunter gave/sold it to others.”
There’s zero evidence for that claim. Mere allegations are not evidence. You have no proof that it’s a fact Hunter Biden gave/sold classified information to other’s. If it’s a fact provide the evidence.
““1). He handled classified information recklessly as ex-VP – that is a crime.”
So did Trump and Pence.”
Nope, Pence did not touch what appears to have been delivered to him inadvertently.
If it proved that Pence ordered classified information into the boxes that were stored somewhere besides his SCIF/office
Then he too handled classified information improperly.
There is no evidence todate that Trump removed classified information from his SCIF or offices.
Absent such information there is no crime. And THAT presumes that the marked classified information is still classified
which is not actualy likely for Trump.
“”2). He stole classified information as a Senator – that is a crime”
Nope. There’s no evidence he intended to keep the documents once they were discovered just as Pence did. Trump literally refused to turn over classified documents that did not belong to him. That’s was theft. Pence and Biden have more credible evide
nce that their staff is more responsible for the handling of the documents.”
That is both incorrect and NOT the defintion of theft. Theft is taking what you do not own or are not authorized to poses.
As a Senator Biden did not and could not possess classified information anywhere but inside a SCIF.
Removing classified docs as a senator is both theft and a Clear violation of the espionage act.
No Pence and Biden do not have more credible evidence that a staffer was responsible.
They have no evidence that is true at all. Evidence is not speculation. It is not guesses.
Regardless, it is equally possible of all 3. There is ZERO difference.
The only difference at the moment is that Trump is not trying to blame this on the GSA or a Staffer.
Biden and Pence appear to be. In the specific case of Biden the staffer in question has already catagorically denied packing classified information. Regardless, specifically regarding Biden you have to beleive that a Staffer took the classified material from the Senate SCIF – without Biden’s knowledge, and that the Staffer then paked that into Biden’s papers for move elsewhere, and then the staffer moved the classified information into Biden’s library – all without Biden ever being aware. That is implausible.
I am presuming that Staffers had access to the Senate SCIF. That may not be True. In which Case Biden removed the docs from the SCIF – which is the most likely scenario anyway.
“Trump personally ordered the documents be taken from the White House with no evidence he declassified them.”
We do not actually know that Trump ordered them removed. We do not know that about Pence, or Trump or Biden.
It is possible. In Pence and Biden’s case so longe as they were moved to an ex-Presidents SCIF or office – that was legal.
In Trump’s case merely ordering the Documents to MAL late in his presidency would arguably be an Act that declassified them.
But even if it is not considered a declassifying act – All three could have legally ordered classified documents moved to the SCIF and official offices in their homes while they were still in power. That is perfectly legal.
Biden’s problem is that they were subsequently moved to an insecure location.
Pence’s problem is they were never moved to a secure location.
Trump has no problem here.
““3). He provided classified information to Hunter – that is a crime, made worse by the fact that Hunter gave/sold it to others.”
There’s zero evidence for that claim. Mere allegations are not evidence. You have no proof that it’s a fact Hunter Biden gave/sold classified information to other’s. If it’s a fact provide the evidence.”
Allegations are not evidence. The Hunter Memo is actual evidence. It is not currently proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but it is far more than enough to require an investigation.” And we do have actual proof that Hunter gave the information in the memo to others. What has not YET been proven is that he got that information from a classified document.
Allegation, evidence, proof – these are 3 Different things. There are allegations all over the place. Everything YOU claim regarding Trump is an allegation.
Todate what is PROVEN is that
Trump possessed Documents MARKED classified in his SCIF and official office.
Biden and Pence possessed Classified Documents outside their SCIF and official offices.
Biden Possessed Classified Documents from his time as Senator.
Hunter Biden sent a memo to others that APPEARS to be based on classified information.
Trump claims the Documents at MAL are his proprty and that some or all of them are declassified.
Nothing else is PROVEN.
It is yet to be determined exactly how any of them got the documents in question.
But their posession of these documents is EVIDENCE (not proof) that They requested the documents and took responsibility for them.
I think Joe gave all those classified documents to Hunter years ago to peddle on the foreign market. The document stashes being found all over the place are Hunter’s inventory.
“The current legal need would be the same legal need standard, Biden/Garland used to raid an ex Presidents home.”
Trump’s “raid” was due to his failure to obey the law. He lied to law enforcement which resulted in the search warrant. Biden and pence both cooperated and did what the law requires one to do. That’s why they didn’t get “raided”. They didn’t string along the DOJ for nearly two years either.
JT raises the legitimate question of who owns the papers of government officials.
That is relevant regarding Biden as ex-Senator, it is relevant regarding Trump as ex-president.
The PRA attempted to resxolve that issue regarding Presidents – but constitutional conflicts thwarted that.
There is a clear public interest argument that the documents of elected officials should be avilable to the public.
But an Argument is not a final legal conclusion.
As things currently stand – to MY knowledge – Biden can do as he is at Udel and protect his papers.
But right now the SC has more than sufficient grounds to get a warrant to look for Classified docs.
Biden should and likely will agree to search those docs in some way to avoid a search warrant.
I beleive Tara Reade has sufficient case to subpeona SOME of Senator Biden’s docs from uDel.
But she would have to have a lawsuit to do so.
Otherwise my personal wish that Biden’s docs should be made public does not trump the state of the law.
The same is true regarding Trump’s docs at MAL.
While NARA/DOJ have successfully avoided litigating the issue – the Doc’s are Trump’s. Whether Classified or not.
DOJ can ACCESS them via Subpeona. But it can not take posession.
NARA has no power to do anything.
The MAL warrant and raid were an end run arround the law and the constitution, and the 11th cir. Apeals court wrongly allowed it.
But Should DOJ ever try to prosecute – the issue while arrise again. Only the burden of proof will be on DOJ.
“The PRA attempted to resxolve that issue regarding Presidents – but constitutional conflicts thwarted that.”
Nope. The PRA’s legality is not in dispute. There are no constitutional conflicts. You believe there are because you’re incorrectly interpreting what article II does. It is not what you think it is. That’s where you keep going wrong.
“But right now the SC has more than sufficient grounds to get a warrant to look for Classified docs.
Biden should and likely will agree to search those docs in some way to avoid a search warrant.”
Trump should too. His other properties need to be searched given his clear pattern of obstruction and deception regarding classified documents. If trump has nothing to hide he shouldn’t have an issue with the FBI thoroughly searching his other properties.
“While NARA/DOJ have successfully avoided litigating the issue – the Doc’s are Trump’s. Whether Classified or not.
DOJ can ACCESS them via Subpeona. But it can not take posession.
NARA has no power to do anything.”
The DOJ already has them in possession. They don’t need a subpoena to access them. The SC already ruled on that issue. The DOJ certainly can take possession due to the fact that those documents ARE government property. Trump never proved they were not government property. When the special master actually ordered trump to prove just that’s it was trump who ran to judge Cannon to avoid having to prove his claims. Trump had the burden of proof. Not the DOJ/NARA.
“The MAL warrant and raid were an end run arround the law and the constitution, and the 11th cir. Apeals court wrongly allowed it.”
Nope. The MAL warrant and subsequent search were lawful and constitutional. Trump never challenged the validity of the search warrant in court. The 11th “allowed” it because it was within the law. There was probable cause and the affidavit had enough evidence to convince the judge. If trump gets indicted the full affidavit will become public. In a criminal trial the DOJ does have the burden of proof. Until then Trump has the burden of proof in any civil lawsuit he files. It’s interesting that he has not filed suit to get the documents back.
We have been through this repeatedly.
Echoing the same nonsense does not change the outcome.
The courts Saved the PRA from unconstitutionallity by essentially giving the president carte blanche to work arround the unconstitutonal provisions.
The PRA give the president to power to claim documents are personal.
The PRA defines what is a presidential record – but while providing the criteria for that determination it does not dictate WHO makes that decision. The courts solve the PRA’s constitutional problem by saying that the decisions is up to the president, and it is not reviewable by the courts – except for agency records.
One last time
JW v NARA
“The Court will grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) because plaintiff’s claim is not redressable.”
i.e. this court has no power to give the plantiff what they are asking for.
“NARA does not have the authority to designate materials as “Presidential records,””
If NARA does not who does ? The decision is the presidents and it is unreviewable. So the courts have no power to say – the president decided wrong.
“NARA does not have the tapes in question”
NARA did not have Trump’s records either.
“and NARA lacks any right, duty, or means to seize control of them.”
Regardless of whether we are talking Bush, Clinton, Obama or Trump.
There is no Trump exception to the caselaw.
“In other words, there has been no showing that a remedy would be available to redress plaintiff’s alleged injury even if the Court agreed with plaintiff’s characterization of the materials.”
This is the part you F’d up. The court RIGHT HERE says – it does not matter if the plantif is correct that the tapes meet the PRA definition of Presidential records, it is not in the COURTS power to review the decision of the president.
“Since plaintiff is completely unable to identify anything the Court could order the agency to do that the agency has any power, much less, a mandatory duty, to do, the case must be dismissed.”
The agency has no power to take posession of records, and the court has no power to decide whether the records are presidential or not.
The Above is the HOLDING. Everything else in the oppinon is suposed to be analysis that lead to the holding.
If you find something in the rest of the oppinion that you THINK contradict the holding – Great, you can go to court and challenge the decision.
But if you do not – the HOLDING is what matters.
You are free to beleive that ABJ’s holding is in error.
It is possible – though highly unlikely that you will get another court to agree.
The constitutional problem is present for any other holding.
But who knows, maybe by some miracle you get a new court to decide differently.
That does not alter one IOTA the FACT that Trump is legally entitled to act as if ABJ’s ruling is the FINAL word on the law – until a court with greater jurisdiction decides differently.
Further the same Standard applies to DOJ – they are OBLIGATED to follow ABJ’s decision – until they successfully challenge it in court.
That has not occured.
Further DOJ/FBI/NARA/the Biden WH went out of their way to Game the system to avoid having to go to court where they would LOSE.
BTW you said this had not happened.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/01/26/national-archives-ex-presidents-classified-documents/11128389002/
No John. You’re cherry picking the court’s statements to fit your narrative.
“The PRA give the president to power to claim documents are personal.
The PRA defines what is a presidential record – but while providing the criteria for that determination it does not dictate WHO makes that decision.”
The PRA defines what is presidential record and what is personal record. The PRA designates NARA as custodian and directs it to retain custody of said documents that are defined as presidential records. The president’s claim of what is personal has to meet the definitions set out by the PRA. NARA is charged with determining if such a claim does meet the PRA’s definition of personal. Trump claimed everything he took was personal which is obviously not true.
“NARA does not have the tapes in question”
NARA did not have Trump’s records either.
“and NARA lacks any right, duty, or means to seize control of them.”
You’re confusing two very different issues. Trump had records that were not his property. NARA by law is supposed to have custody of those records, not Trump. NARA does have a right, duty and the means ti seize those records. The PRA gives it authority to do so by authorizing NARA to use the FRA for that purpose as stated in court documents.
“The PRA provides:
When the Archivist considers it to be in the public interest, he may exercise, with respect to papers, documents, or other historical materials deposited under this section, or otherwise, in a Presidential archival depository, all the functions and responsibilities otherwise vested in him pertaining to Federal records or other documentary materials in his custody or under his control.
44 U.S.C. § 2112(c). In addition, the FRA grants the Archivist authority to:
notify the head of a Federal agency of any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal, defacing, alteration, or destruction of records in the custody of the agency that shall come to his attention, and assist the head of the agency in initiating action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records wrongfully removed and for other redress provided by law.
44 U.S.C. § 2905(a). ”
https://casetext.com/case/judicial-watch-inc-v-natl-archives-records-admin
That’s exactly what they did when they notified the DOJ about Trump’s refusal to turn over documents. That’s how they get the authority to retrieve them thru the DOJ by powers granted to them by the FRA.
Trump was issued a subpoena for those records and finally complied after 9 months of obfuscation and deliberate delays. When his lawyers falsely claimed they have all the required documents back the DOJ issued a search warrant legally which resulted in the DOJ seizing the documents he “neglected “ to give back.
“In other words, there has been no showing that a remedy would be available to redress plaintiff’s alleged injury even if the Court agreed with plaintiff’s characterization of the materials.”
This is the part you F’d up. The court RIGHT HERE says – it does not matter if the plantif is correct that the tapes meet the PRA definition of Presidential records, it is not in the COURTS power to review the decision of the president.”
Nope. You keep leaving out the full context of what the court was saying.
“The case was remanded to district court but appealed again, prompting the D.C. Circuit to clarify its earlier ruling. This time, the Court of Appeals explained that although judicial review was limited under the PRA, it was not precluded entirely. Armstrong II, 1 F.3d at 1293 (“The Armstrong I opinion does not stand for the unequivocal proposition that all decisions made pursuant to the PRA are immune from judicial review.”). Instead:
[C]ourts are accorded the power to review guidelines outlining, what is, and what is not, a ‘presidential record’ under the terms of the PRA. The PRA does not bestow on the President the power to assert sweeping authority over whatever materials he chooses to designate as presidential records without any possibility of judicial review.”
“No John. You’re cherry picking the court’s statements to fit your narrative.”
Nope. I am explicitly citing the entire text of the Holding.
That is the ONLY portion of the entire oppinion that constitutes an ORDER,
It is the only part of the entire opinion that is legally final and binding.
You are the one cherry picking.
The rest of your remarks have been debunked repeatedly.
You can refer o atleast half a dozen other posts that dismember your claims – sometimes word for word.
You also keep pretending that What ABJ has said, or other courts have said is MY opinion – it is NOT.
It is THEIRS and it is the CASELAW.
It is Binden until it has been superceded.
DOJ etc are free to cite the passages in the opinions that you cite in a challenge. And some other court MAY be persuaded by those or other legal arguments. But until that occurs the HOLDINGS are THE LAW. And Trump and others are ENTITLED to rely on that.
As I have Said – I really do not give a Schiff precisely how we handle this. The govenrmnent can own everything, it can own nothing.
There is not some foundational Truth to where the ownership of the documents of elected officials should be.
What is True with the constitution that we currently have is that for Exceutive branch documents related to duties of the president that are not delegated to the executive by congress – the President decides, and Congress can not change that by law, just as they can not make someone other than the president commander in cheif of the military.
This constitutional principle is why presidential pardon power is non-reviewable, and can not be altered by congress. It is why executive priviledge exists. It is why executive orders constrained exclusively to the powers of the president are not regulatable and not reviewable.
It is also why outside the exclusive powers of the president executive orders Are reviewable, and subject ot regulation by congress. And may even be com0pletely unconstitutional.
This is called separation of powers. Each branch of govenrment has powers granted it by the Constitution.
Some of those powers are shared. Some are delegated, some are subject to oversight. Some are exclusive to that branch.
It should be obvious even to YOU that the president can not by Executive order change election laws, or the rules under which Congress operates, or the makeup of the supreme court.
It is Self Evident that each branch of govenrment has powers reserved to it that are unique to it and out of bounds to the other branches.
Are you actually seeking to debate that ?
The only Question here is whether the ownership of WH documents is inside that domain. The courts have decided that it is.
That is the core to all the decisions that you keep trying to argue about.
You are free to beleive they are wrong. A higher court is free to decide they are wrong – though I doubt that will occur.
But today that is the state of the law.
It should be self evident even to you – that the PRA or any congressional law can not supercede the constitution.
That congress can not make laws outside its own constitutional powers.
“In its letter, the archives is asking all former presidents and vice presidents dating back to the Ronald Reagan administration to re-examine their files.
Besides Obama, Biden, Trump and Pence, other recipients of the National Archives request include the offices of former presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H. W. Bush, and Reagan – and former vice presidents Dick Cheney, Al Gore, and Dan Quayle.
Former President Jimmy Carter would not have received such a letter because, while he signed into law the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it did not go into effect until the start of the Reagan administration on Jan. 20, 1981.”
Please note the last Paragraph – you claimed that the PRA was about Nixon covering up his crimes.
The PRA does not apply to Nixon.
It does not apply to Ford.
It does not apply to Carter.
The courts did order Nixon to provide COPIES of evidence of crimes to DOJ – they did not need the PRA to do so.
The courts also issued similar orders regarding Reagan records and Bush records.
Again – not orders to take posession, But orders to provide Evidence, and these did not involve the PRA.
If the government credibly alleges it needs records of a president to investigate a crime – it can go to court and get an order to require the expresident to provide those records.
It can do that – without the PRA – as with Nixon,
It can do that with the PRA as with Reagan.
I beleive the first PRA specific case was Armstrong,
And that was because Bush sought to destroy NSA records on his way out the door as I recall.
The courts ultimately decided that Bush could not order the destruction of NSA records
because those were Agency records, not WH records.
This is what lead to the ABJ decision on the JW v NARA case.
Again read the holding carefully.
ABJ explicityly said that even if JW was entirely correct.
Even if the Clitnon tapes contained classified information
Even if the Clinton tapes were clearly presidential records as defined by the PRA.
That it was outside of NARA or the courts power to do anything anyway.
And I want to make it Clear that JW claimed in their lawsuit that the Clinton tapes were presidential records, not personal records, and that they contained CLASSIFIED information.
The JW v NARA case has EVERY Element of the Trump case.
There is no distinguishing Fact between the two cases.
The JW V NARA case was DIRECTLY on point.
Which is why DOJ/FBI/NARA never went to court to recover these documents.
It is why they “cheated” and used to warrant.
Let’s find the FBI team that raided M-A-L and set them to work on a late night raid on the University of Delaware.
What’s the probable cause for a warrant?
Biden is actually miss handling classified information. Has been for over years. Way more more probable cause.
This just puts a spotlight on Biden/Garland raid and new precedent Biden/Garland established to raid the home of current and ex Presidents.
See above iowan2. Same probably cause as used to raid Trump’s home.
No, in Trump’s case there was a witness who’d seen that Trump failed to return many documents that had been subpoenaed.
Not relevant and not a crime.
Warrants require Crimes.
And AGAIN you can not subpeona documents for Possession.
You subpeona for Evidence – that is access to the information for use at a trial.
The warrant identifies the alleged crimes, and the grand jury subpoena was properly issued. Trump could have tried to have it quashed, but he didn’t.
“The warrant identifies the alleged crimes”
It does, but Granting a warrant REQUIRES law enforcement to provide evidence of probable cause that said crimes have been committed – not merely to assert them. And Law enforcement MUST swear to the truth of the information in that affadavit.
What little we have seen of the affadavit is neither Truthful, nor sufficient.
Further a Warrant is an ExPArte process and the rules of ethics REQUIRE that the party in a ExParte procedding MUST
provide all exculpatory information. There is ZERO chance that DOJ/FBI provided Reinhardt with the caselaw that Trump OWNS these documents. Or that they may be declassified.
Errors or ommission on a warrant application are lies under oath too.
“The grand jury subpoena was properly issued.”
Possibly, my read of the acutal subpena is that it is far to broad to be valid, and has no firm basis relative to the proceedings.
Grand Juries do not investigate whether the moon is made of green cheese, They investigate crimes.
You can not subpeona information that is out of the scope of the GJ investigation.
Finally, Subpeona’s STILL seek EVIDENCE to be presidented at a hearing.
They are not orders of possession.
“Trump could have tried to have it quashed, but he didn’t.”
Absolutely true.
AND DOJ could have sought a court order to enforce the subpeona if they thought it was both valid and that Trump failed to comply with it.
We can only guess why Trump did not move to Quash.
We can only Guess why DOJ did not seek a court order.
AG James subpeon’d Trump in NY, She claimed he failed to comply. She got the court to find him in contempt and order his lawyers to search high and low for what James claimed Trump fialed to provide.
Trump’s lawyers conducted that search, and provided the court with an afadavit that they found nothing responsive to the Subpoena, and the Judge cleared the contempt finding.
THAT is the normal process for a subpena.
YOUR Belief that a subpeona was not complied with does NOT constitute evidence of a crime.
It does not even if you are correct.
I would further note that you go to court regarding Subpeona’s because there are a whole raft of possile outcomes, ranging from quashing the subpeona to narrowing the scope to finding of contempt, to directing the target of the subpeona that they will NOT be able to use any of the evidence they failed to provide in their case.
I have subpoena’s people – not to get their documents – because I already had them, but to contrain the scope of their case, because they failed to comply.
Regardless,
a subpeona is not enforceable except by a separate ORDER from a judge.
It is not a means to gain posession of anything.
Finally it is not the basis for a warrant.
No, in Trump’s case there was a witness who’d seen that Trump failed to return many documents that had been subpoenaed.
Who exactly is this person?
You don’t know that the affidavit is partially redacted?
The evidence from FBI/DOJ thus far has been that redacted information is information that embarrases them rather than strengthens their case.
Regardless todate we have no credible evidence that such a person exists.
News stories based on government leaks are pretty much always false – otherwise they are a crime.
Yes. Redacted.
Because Garland has made such a dogs breakfast out of being the Democrat Party secret police, by raiding Trump, he has redacted all the lies. He is NEVER going to charge Trump. He can’t. He won’t open himself to discovery and witness cross examination. He will not make a charge of possession of Classified documents to have Trump show up in court with documents proving, as President he declassified everything.
Even before, Garland was on the wrong side of the law. But now, Biden, and Pence are in such worse shape, Garland is thoroughly screwed.
That evidence is mounting that what everyone assumed is being proven true. ALL administrations leave with Classified documents. Obama is playing the “no comment” game, but we already have his letter to the NARA he has “Presidential records and classified documents.”
There are lots of claims that have made the news, that we do not have evidence of.
The same thing happened with the “collusion delusion”.
A wise person would note that GJ and DOJ and FBI leaks of ACTUAL facts about an investigation are crimes.
But US Attonry’s and FBI Agents can LIE to the press with impunity.
It is therefore highly likely that anything in the press that came from an unnamed government source is near certain false.
I would further note that the FBI is KNOW (and has even addmitted) to leaking false information about an investigation to try to get a defendant to react and provide them further evidence.
Mary. There are no classified documents at MaL. PRA has no power to demand possession of any papers. They can only ask for very specific items, and then a Judge would rule on the application of PRA.
Biden’s self evident mishandling of classified docs as Senator.
This is trivial.
As Senator Biden had no authority to posess a classified doc outside of the Capitol SCIF.
Yet classiffied docs from his years as senator were found at his home.
This is a much easier case than MAL – where Trump as both president and Ex-president was legally allowed access to Clasisifed docs,
Though obligated (as Ex-president) to keep them in his presidential office or SCIF – which he did.
Biden had similar access as ex-VP – but his docs were found outside his ex-VP office and SCIF.
Biden has actually mishandled classified documents
Trump has not.
Aparently A request was made to conduct a polite search of Obama’s residences for Classified Docs and he told them to Pound Sand.
The FACT is that All ex-VP’s and Ex-Presidents have classified docs. They may even have classified docs that are “personal papers” and therefore their property.
One of the reasons that Ex-Presidents and VP’s and other ranking officials preserve their security clearance is that so long as they have their clearances their DUTY to handle classified docs remains.
It has been repeatedly claimed here that Biden completely revoked Trump’s security clearance.
That is highly unlikely, as that would also end any duty on Trump’s part to protect classified information in his posession regardless of who owned it.
Prior to Assange – who DOJ is trying to claim is not a journalist and purportedly aided in Manning’s accessing classified docs, do journalist has even been charged with violating the espionage act.
Possessing classified documents is not a crime. What you do with them and how you got them MIGHT be.
Hillary Clinton forwarded Classified docs to Sydney Blumenthal who used them to profit in his consulting in the mid east.
Clinton committed a crime. It is not likely Blumnthal did.
It is now being alleged that Hunter Biden accessed Classified documents and provided information fromt hem to Burisma as evidenced by some of his emails.
If True – Hunter Biden did not committ a crime – but who ever shared classified information with him did.
If Biden revoked all Trump’s security clearances while Trump posessed classified documents – Biden effectively declassified them – that is how presidential declassification works.
“Aparently A request was made to conduct a polite search of Obama’s residences for Classified Docs and he told them to Pound Sand.”
False. The president has only said that they have nothing to say at this time.
translation – “Pound Sand”.
And Frankly Obama is being smart.
Obama should say nothing. Personally make sure that he has no classified Docs outside of his SCIF and ex-presidential offices.
And Shut the F up.
He is legally allowed to have classified docs. If he is ever found out, he is in the same position that Trump is – except that no one is going to raid
him. And in all probability no one will find out unless he is stupid enough to invite lawyers to search his homes.
Obama is NOT an idiot.
GEB,
Well said and I agree.
Democrats are clear fascists using every tool to increase their power and wealth…while destroying opponents. Using the media, gov., law enforcement, tech, education, healthcare, etc
Prog/leftists lie – contintually and without qualms. Take that to the bank.
I fail to see how any public record generated in performance of one’s job as an elected official, appointed official, or employee of any governmental entity could ever be “property” of the official or employee.
In the private sector leaving an employer with records of that company that you might have generated as an employee and on the job can be quite serious and can cause the loss of your job or worse charges of theft.
Comparable might be a private physician who cares for someone in the hospital but the physician is not employed by the hospital. The records generated belong to the hospital and not the physician and dire consequences can follow if you leave with those records or even copy them without hospital and patient agreements.
A physician who has their own practice owns the records generated there, in conjunction with the patients that are the subject of the records. It varies from state to state but basically all patients have the right to immediately have access to and review their own records although they cannot take possession of them but can require copies to be made.
I fail to see how individuals elected to govern us should be held to any less scrutiny.
These governmental individuals occupy an office, they do not own the office, even though some seem to think they do, republican or democrat. I think this all would apply to senator’s offices as well as presidents and vice-presidents offices.
Classified documents are another discussion entirely but I don’t think any documents, classified or non classified should be owned by anyone except the people of the United States.
I fail to see how any public record generated in performance of one’s job as an elected official, appointed official, or employee of any governmental entity could ever be “property” of the official or employee.
It comes down to power. Constitutional power. Lacking any direction from the Constitution, the papers generated by individual office holders remains theirs. Congress could pass legislation dictating the handling of said papers, for Congress. The PRA is in questionable Constitutional territory, for just this reasoning. Congress is bound by Separation of Power, trying to dictate what actions the President is “required” to take.
Amen.
While Biden has serious problems – because he has given the SC probable cause to search the Udel records,.
Biden is still entitled to the same protections of his rights as Trump.
I personally have no problem with the concept that the records of elected officials are government records.
But we have to change the law and constitution to get there.
In the meantime we much operate under the law we have.
The MAL raid was unconstitutional.
At this time a Udel warrant can be constitutionally justified. But it would be limited to searching for Classified docs.
I badly want to know what is in Biden’s Udel docs.
I am absolutely certain he is hiding things.
But my voyeurism is NOT grounds to violate Biden’s rights.
The left has made all kinds of excuses to violate Trump’s rights.
We need to STOP this nonsense.
We need to get past the idiocy that Trump is somehow different and not protected when others are.
We have one constitution for all of is.
This Administration would make Grant and Harding blush
At least Grant drank!
Maybe someone should file a class action suit on behalf of, you know, we, the American people, to open the files to prove our national security isn’t at risk.
Did he take a tax deduction for the contribution to the U of D? I bet he did.
Sigh. Serial liar for decades. Tried to remind my libtard brother that Joe was in the Senate before he was VP, and he didn’t know Joe was ever in the Senate. For real. 🙄 My brother is 55, and he votes in most every election. This is what we are dealing with. Al Capone was much more elegant in his thuggery. I do not know how we arrived at a point in history where literal clowns, who grew up with nannies wiping their bums, are calling the shots. Could we take a look at ‘The Biden’s’ feet? I am almost certain they are polka dotted clown flippers.
There are not words to express how weary I have become of ‘The Bidens’. They make Trump look like an archangel, which he wasn’t, and it is getting very, very tiresome. We have never been asked to work out the dysfunction of a less deserving family on such a public scale in history, and if we weren’t talking about the President of The United States, it might matter less. Back in the 90s, Jerry Springer had people on his show less abhorrent who likely deserved the attention more. This is a sh** show. Thank you Clintons, thank you Obamas, thank you Soros, thank you millennial Silicon Valley. I’m beginning to think you all are not evil, just privileged and preternaturally stupid, so extraordinarily stupid, in the literal sense. Sub-100 IQs. But by all means, keep voting dem, voters. 🙄
If Desantis runs in 2024 it will be 1981 all over again, and the Dems will pay for *years*. For *decades*. And I don’t like that, I believe in polemic, dialogue, and bipartisanship. The modern Dem party has become so literally insane and criminal, though, there may be no other way, They may just have to be phenomenally and quite literally marginalized and/or crushed, just like Al Capone.
The Biden’s are like the Snopes of Faulkner’s novels.
“I’m beginning to think you all are not evil, just privileged and preternaturally stupid….” Yes and…they are evil, too. To continually cover up, collude, scheme and lie is one thing, to publicly blame it on someone else and spend north of $40m of taxpayer funds to not be able to prove it is another, and should be subject to criminal punishment. There are more clowns in this sh*t show than the Biden’s, but let’s start there.
My sister is a Dem.
She does not want to either acknowledge what a sh** show the Biden admin is, or willfully ignorant of the sh** show.
At this point, with the Doomsday Clock at 90 seconds to Midnight, I wonder if we are going to make it to 2024.
Just read the OIC of AMC, a four star General, sent a memo warning all under his command of a war with China in 2025. He cited the 2024 presidential election would have the US distracted. Hard to argue with that logic. And, with such a weak admin, makes sense to attack then.
He also directed them next month to, “fire a clip into a 7-meter target with the full understanding that unrepentant lethality matters most. Aim for the head.”
As a Rifleman, I find this comment rather disturbing as the last time the US military used a “clip” was the M1 Garand i.e. en bloc clip.
Second, 7-meter target? 1-meter is 39.37 inches. I am 6’1″ tall or 73 inches, 7 inches short of 2-meters. A 7-meter target with a head?
What are they feeding those Chinese troops?
Sounds like he is talking about transition (switching from rifle to pistol) drills. The course of fire calls for a man-sized target at 7m range. Couldn’t tell you scoring criteria as I’ve been out for 15 years. Ref: AFMAN 36-2655.
SafeSide824,
Thank you for that explanation.
However, 7-meters is still 21 yards give or take a few. I can tell you this, I can take head shots at 25 yards with a pistol, but not under pressure or transitioning from rifle to pistol in a firefight situation. And, you do not bring a pistol to a firefight. I saw some with chest rigs in Afghanistan, but if you get to the point you have to use your pistol, that would be a last stand, expend all ordnance on my position situation.
My wife is a officer in the Air NG. Sorry to say, no offense intended, but their training has a lot to be desired. That would be coming from a former Marine, Expert rating with the M16A2 service rifle.
No offense taken. It is the bog-standard qualification table. I’m sure it’s cross-service, Mission dictates…some units get more trigger time, some the bare minimum, and some might pencil-whip it (though that would be monumentally stupid).
I said right from the first notification in January of the documents that were found in November that the records at UDel should be looked at. Something I read last year, before all of this, said they are locked up for no one to look at.
Also, isn’t it a little late to now want to search the beach house, after the government let the family go there while searching his home after the family had been there. This is like the dog chasing its tail.
I can imagine the comments on this from the usual coterie of left-wing “progressives”; Biden deserves privacy. Trump, Trump, Trump. Biden is a nice old man. Trump, Trump, Trump. Anything at the U of Delaware is outdated or misclassified anyway. Trump, Trump, Trump.
I’m a progressive. I think Biden should invite the FBI to look through his U of DE papers to check for classified/PRA documents (and if the university formally owns them, then I think the university should invite the FBI to do it). I also think both Biden and Trump should invite the FBI to look through documents at ALL of their properties for classified docs and PRA docs. The question is: will you fixate only on Biden or will you join me?
Bush, Clinton, Obama, Trump and Biden.
This is a tit for tat situation. Right now, It is Biden with mounting evidence of espionage. There was never any evidence concerning Trump.
NARA already sent a letter last Thursday to representatives of former Presidents and VP from all administrations covered by the Presidential Records Act (the Reagan WH on), asking them to re-check all records for any classified documents or other presidential records.
There is no “evidence of espionage” on Biden’s part.
There is no “evidence of espionage” on Biden’s part.
There was never any evidence for Trump.
Emails from Hunter to Russia containing information that would meet the requirements for classification exist.
If HB has committed crimes, he should be indicted.
It appears that Trump may finally be indicted for his 2016 campaign finance law violation (the one that also contributed to Michael Cohen’s conviction).
We keep hearing this nonsense regarding Trump forever.
I do not recall anyone ever being indicted over a campaign finance law.
Campaign finance laws are not criminal.
If they were they would probably be unconstitutional.
They probably are anyway.
Nearly every presidentical campaign is found to have violated campaign finance laws.
They a pay a fine and return money – often to people who just donate it back.
Clinton had to return enormous amounts of money in 2017.
“I do not recall anyone ever being indicted over a campaign finance law.”
And yet, it’s one of the crimes that Michael Cohen served time for. That you do not recall something does not imply that it’s nonexistent.
Cohen plead guilty to something that is not a crime. That actually happens quite frequently.
This has all been addressed before.
Non-disclosures are perfectly legal.
Even using campaign contributions which is not the case here to pay for non-disclosures is not illegal.
See the Johnathon Edwards case were a Leading Democratic presidential candidate paid hush money from his campaign to hism mistress.
We do not need more idiots trying to manufacture new Trump specific law from whole cloth.
Cohen pleaded guilty to multiple things, all of them crimes.
Thanks for underscoring why I have zero trust in your legal judgment.
Correct and people pleade guilty all the time to crimes they did not commit or even to crimes that do not exist.
I favor eliminating our drug laws. That said the argument that we have large numbers of people incarcerated for trivial crimes – like posession of sale of small amounts of Pot. is a distortion of the reality of our justice system, and reality. People are arrested and charged – often with very serious crimes, and plead guilty to lessor offenses even ones they are not guilty of.
The point is that guilty pleas tell you nothing about either what a person actually did wrong, or whether a conviction could possibly be obtained or upheld for the crime plead to.
You are free to trust or not trust my Judgement. I would suggest that you spend some time in real courtrooms. Or with real criminal attorneys.
In the Cohen case that Campaign finance charge was tossed in by the DA for political purposes. It had no effect on his sentence – which was extremely light for even one of the many things he plead to.
Cohen was not even part of the Trump campaign.
Actually there is “evidence of espionage”
Hunter Biden’s letter to Burisma contains information that likely was obtained from classified docs or briefings.
While that does not reach Proof beyond a reasonsable doubt, it is sufficient to open an expionage act investigation.
That needs to be added to the SC’s invesigation – because the problem is NOT Hunter Biden – he is a private party and does not have a security clearance. If Hunter Biden received classified information – the violation was by the person who provided it.
Separately Ex-VP Biden had classified information in places he could not possibly legally do so,
That is an expionage act violation.
Ex-Senator Biden took Classified Docs from a congressional SCIF to his home. That is an espionage act violation.
Joe Biden had classified docs in insecure locations where people who were not allowed to access them could have.
That is evidence of espionage.
Evidence is not the same as proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
But evidence – probable case, is what is required for a warrant.
Trump invited the FBI back to MAL so your point is without meaning. Biden has been keeping his records hidden for almost 50 years and illegally had classified documents in his possession. As usual, when faced with evidence and no holes to squeeze through ATS agrees to have Biden’s records looked into. He is disingenuous for he links it to something else.
First time in memory that I joined a “progressive” in anything.
They always accuse you of what they are guilty of.
I think that we all know the answer.
Lefties were morally outraged at Trump’s actions.
Much less so at Biden’s.
Turns out that many lefties are situationally moral.
I find Leftists, generally, to be immoral.
Moral, as it has been understood for millenia in the West, is not in their skill set.
“Situationally moral” is the meaning of the term “Politician.”
Bob Lawblaw,
Good one!
Two thumbs up!