The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

[fishonjazz]

The difference is Biden didn't have to be subpoenaed to return them to the National Archives. He stepped up and contacted them. He didn't claim they were "his". He didn't lie about them. He didn't stash them in his house. They were in a government office.

 

[fishonjazz]

One thing to remember is that the documents in question NEVER left a controlled entry government office building. They were kept in a locked closet and probably forgotten. Trump illegally removed the highest security documents from a controlled environment and placed them in an unsecure location with zero control or security, then continually lied about them, and when his lies were dispelled, he refused to give them back. We STILL have no reason for why he took them to begin with.

 

[fishonjazz]

Also there were 10 documents misplaced. Trump took hundreds. There are so many differences between the two situations that comparisons are laughable.

 

[Bucknutz]

You do realize that mishandling and intentionally taking are two different things right?

How do you know the intent of each person… Biden, Trump, Hillary, Berger, Deutch ect. Berger literally stuffed documents in his clothes and walked out. Biden has had the documents for 6 years. Why did he take them? What was his intent. I don’t know, I’m not going to speculate. Same with Trump, I don’t know and I’m not going to speculate.

Also that returning them promptly and trying to keep are two different things right?

Yes, I stated this reason multiple times already, including my initial post. Except the word promptly, I don’t think you can use that with keeping documents for 72 months.

Also there definitely is a difference between a secure office building and mara lago where they werent even locked up for a long time and just about anyone had access to them.

You don’t think the private residence, protected by federal agents, of a former President is secure. It’s not like it’s an average person’s house. On a gated and guarded property. Where were Biden’s? In a federal approved locatio? In a Safe? Biden didn’t turn the documents in, his lawyers did. Doesn’t sound like they were that restricted.

You cant both sides this thing no matter how much you want to

So tell me what’s worse, Hillary’s home server with classified information, when she was actively working for the government. She has no declassification power. Then got caught and tried to scrub the servers clean. A former president who took classified hard copies with him home. Which he can declassify before hand which none of us know if he did it or not. Then didn’t follow the rules and obstructed. Then you have a current POTUS, that took with him classified documents and didn’t report it to anyone. He also did not have declassification powers at the time. His lawyers found them and they followed the rules.

If you can’t see that it is both sides that mishandled classified information, in different ways, I can’t help you. You absolutely can both sides this.

 

[Bucknutz]

Also there were 10 documents misplaced. Trump took hundreds. There are so many differences between the two situations that comparisons are laughable.

A sailor took a few photos of a submarine, for personal use, no intent to give or sell it; got removed from the Navy, went to prison ,probation and fines. Why is that so different than a person taking 10 classified files without telling anyone and just brush it off because he plays for your team?

 

[Bucknutz]

My question was, "How many people have been prosecuted for just mishandling?" The words "prosecuted" and "just" were not accidental. All of your examples had additional efforts/sharing/etc. beyond simple mishandling.

They all plead guilty to mishandling information. It literally says it on each of the links. You want to expand it to fit your narrative.

If you have evidence Biden did more than mishandle, that would acceptable for claiming a double-standard. If you had another case of mishandling being the sole reason for prosecution, that would also be acceptable.

I didn’t think I needed to state the same thing for everyone on the left here… Thriller, Fish, One brow, Gandalf. I just need Log and Red to ask the same question.
For all the people in the back…
From my initial post, the difference between the two situations is that Bidens lawyers cooperated.

Do I have to answer that again????
I will, in case you don’t read my posts.

My point is they both mishandled classified information. When they got caught with it, one followed the rules and the other did not.

I agree they would have gotten off easier if they were, but both did more than mishandle documents.

Did Hillary do more than mishandle classified information? What was her punishment?

 

[Bucknutz]

This is what a national security expert has to say about it: https://www.yahoo.com/news/theres-key-difference-between-classified-004201530.html
"The reason Donald Trump is in criminal jeopardy right now isn't just because of the documents being improperly stored. It was the obstruction," Moss said. "That is why it has gotten to the point it has, where we're looking at the real possibility of a criminal indictment."

Please go re-read my initial post, I literally said that. I again answered the same question 5 other times. I have never argued against this point. He didn’t follow the rules.

 

[One Brow]

They all plead guilty to mishandling information. It literally says it on each of the links. You want to expand it to fit your narrative.

Perhaps you've heard of the concept of "pleading down"?

My point is they both mishandled classified information. When they got caught with it, one followed the rules and the other did not.

I agree, and have not thought you claimed otherwise. I thought you were making a claim about unfair choices in who was prosecuted, but perhaps I misunderstood.

Did Hillary do more than mishandle classified information? What was her punishment?

I have stated many times that the only reason Clinton was not prosecuted was because half of Congress (everyone who got a tainted email from her personal server, and responded to it or forwarded it) would have had to be prosecuted also.

 

[One Brow]

A sailor took a few photos of a submarine, for personal use, no intent to give or sell it; got removed from the Navy, went to prison ,probation and fines. Why is that so different than a person taking 10 classified files without telling anyone and just brush it off because he plays for your team?

That sailor tried to destroy the evidence afterwards.

There's over 20K sailors of rank E1 and E2 (typically 19-22 years old, as I understand it). I would think at least 10 a year or so take pictures of the wrong thing. I would guess most of them just hand over their camera or phone when they're asked to, as opposed to destroying evidence.

@Gameface might correct me here. Maybe it really is rare.

 

[Gameface]

That sailor tried to destroy the evidence afterwards.

There's over 20K sailors of rank E1 and E2 (typically 19-22 years old, as I understand it). I would think at least 10 a year or so take pictures of the wrong thing. I would guess most of them just hand over their camera or phone when they're asked to, as opposed to destroying evidence.

@Gameface might correct me here. Maybe it really is rare.

I can't really correct anything. I never heard of anyone being punished for mishandling sensitive info.

I guess what I can say is that the locations and status of our submarines is one of the Navy's most secret bits of info. I'm sure that sailor knew what they were doing was against the rules.

 

[fishonjazz]

Comparing these two things would be like seeing 2 headlines. 1 saying “bucknutz shoots a guy”. The other one saying “fishonjazz shoots a guy”. Now looking at these headlines you would say they are the same or similar.

Then you read the article about bucknutz shooting someone and find that he was hunting pheasants and flushed one and shot at it and missed but some of the bb’s in the shotgun shelled traveled 100 yards and hit another hunter who bucknutz didnt know was there. The bb’s barely pierced the skin and the hunter who was shot didnt even need to be hospitalized.

Then you read the article about fishonjazz and find that he was mad about his neighbors dog pooping on his lawn so fishonjazz broke into the neighbors house and shot him in the head and killed him. (My neighbors don’t even own a dog and this is completely hypothetical btw.)

Ya they both shot someone but to compare the two would be stupid and nonsensical.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[LogGrad98]

Comparing these two things would be like seeing 2 headlines. 1 saying “bucknutz shoots a guy”. The other one saying “fishonjazz shoots a guy”. Now looking at these headlines you would say they are the same or similar.

Then you read the article about bucknutz shooting someone and find that he was hunting pheasants and flushed one and shot at it and missed but some of the bb’s in the shotgun shelled traveled 100 yards and hit another hunter who bucknutz didnt know was there. The bb’s barely pierced the skin and the hunter who was shot didnt even need to be hospitalized.

Then you read the article about fishonjazz and find that he was mad about his neighbors dog pooping on his lawn so fishonjazz broke into the neighbors house and shot him in the head and killed him. (My neighbors don’t even own a dog any more and this is completely hypothetical btw.)

Ya they both shot someone but to compare the two would be stupid and nonsensical.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

FTFY