• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lol, how can you possibly square these two statements? And how can you feel able to pronounce very important facts in determining culpability as “immaterial”? The things you said are two of the more significant factors in investigating and potentially prosecuting an offense relating to the retention or mishandling of classified documents.

Regarding Mar-a-Lago, Trump ceased to be president on January 20th, 2021. He similarly had zero lawful entitlement to retain such government documents as a civilian who formerly served in office. Any pronouncements you make about the feloniousness of retaining classified documents must apply equally.

And of course, just to anticipate and knock down any claim that he declassified them with his mind or whatever, they were still “defense information”, and illegal to retain regardless of classification or purported declassification.

Whether or not Trump is in fact criminally culpable for documents retrieved from his residence, and for obstructing that investigation is, as I’ve said before, yet to be determined- as it is for Biden in the case of these newly found and turned over ones from his former office. But the latter case will not excuse or vitiate any criminality in the former. Each is a fact set that exists independently of the other, and which must be independently investigated and, if appropriate, prosecuted.
Big skirt around the Biden fiasco, by railing against Trump, as usual. You don't like the guy and usually go into huge narratives, chewing on old media coverage to prove your point. The DOJ couldn't make their case against Trump, so they brought in the Zealot to try find something. If it was as simple and clear cut as you espouse, they would have charged him by now, IMO.

If the documentation was in bidens office, and he had no business with it, he broke the law. He didn't have the authority to declassify or hold them. Simple. He had just spent 8 years as VP, ignorance is no excuse. And then there's the ChiCom angle, that I don't know enough about to comment on.

As for Trump, you have no idea what he was holding. You just read the internet like everyone else and draw whatever conclusions suit your narrative. You believe in the legacy media to give you the truth, then shout it as gospel, when for the last two years they have proven themselves dishonest and PR for the left.

You're good at laying down legalities and procedures, even if your applying your Canadian expertise to an American jurisdiction. I'll give you that to you. Its always welcome. However, that's where your knowledge stops. Everything else is pure conjecture on your part using the 'facts' as you decipher them from your readings. We aren't very different in that. We're just drawing our info from different sources. Neither is wrong, but neither is right. The DOJ and the FBI are as crooked as a dog's hind leg. I suppose maybe, it's professional courtesy that makes you want believe their lies and disinformation.

Perhaps I was wrong to bring Trump into it. I won't again, unless it's warranted. Let's stick with Biden and his purported illegality. Deal?
 
Last edited:
This is how I picture Biden's office cleaning lawyers. Seriously, who sends lawyers over to close out a office.
Janitor GIF by Family Guy
 
If he has TS documents at a personal residence that is not secured for it and he obstructs and fails to comply with requests and subpoenas then yes. Taxes are already published.

I’ll be curious if he claims he can declassify things with his mind though. Apparently he can according to some.

As I understand it,

The number of documents is about 10 versus over 300.

The Biden documents were found in a professional office. The Trump documents were found at a personal residence doubling as a pay-to-play club and event hosting space.

The Biden documents were immediately returned to NARA, and did not require an FBI raid to be recovered.
 
As I understand it,

The number of documents is about 10 versus over 300.

The Biden documents were found in a professional office. The Trump documents were found at a personal residence doubling as a pay-to-play club and event hosting space.

The Biden documents were immediately returned to NARA, and did not require an FBI raid to be recovered.
None of that negates that Biden had them for at least 6 years and it was illegal for him to do so.
 
Big skirt around the Biden fiasco, by railing against Trump, as usual. You don't like the guy and usually go into huge narratives, chewing on old media coverage to prove your point. The DOJ couldn't make their case against Trump, so they brought in the Zealot to try find something. If it was as simple and clear cut as you espouse, they would have charged him by now, IMO.

If the documentation was in bidens office, and he had no business with it, he broke the law. He didn't have the authority to declassify or hold them. Simple. He had just spent 8 years as VP, ignorance is no excuse. And then there's the ChiCom angle, that I don't know enough about to comment on.

As for Trump, you have no idea what he was holding. You just read the internet like everyone else and draw whatever conclusions suit your narrative. You believe in the legacy media to give you the truth, then shout it as gospel, when for the last two years they have proven themselves dishonest and PR for the left.

You're good at laying down legalities and procedures, even if your applying your Canadian expertise to an American jurisdiction. I'll give you that to you. Its always welcome. However, that's where your knowledge stops. Everything else is pure conjecture on your part using the 'facts' as you decipher them from your readings. We aren't very different in that. We're just drawing our info from different sources. Neither is wrong, but neither is right. The DOJ and the FBI are as crooked as a dog's hind leg. I suppose maybe, it's professional courtesy that makes you want believe their lies and disinformation.

Perhaps I was wrong to bring Trump into it. I won't again, unless it's warranted. Let's stick with Biden and his purported illegality. Deal?

Well no, I draw info from publicly accessible court filings, like probable cause affidavits and exhibit inventories, and from commentaries by lawyers who’ve worked in that realm. I also have actually taken the time to dig up, read, understand, and share relevant sections of statute. I have the necessary knowledge and experience to make reasonably decent sense out of these things. If you want to show me where I’m leaning on legacy media on this, go ahead, it you aren’t going to find it. I’ve shared a few news articles just as a “hey, here’s an update”, but that’s about as far as I’ve taken any of those.

If you don’t agree with my interpretations or analysis, everything I’ve relied on is open to you or anyone else to examine. You’re as free as I am to say what you think, what you base it on, and why.

As for the documents found in and returned from Biden’s office, you’re just as able as anyone else here to see the several times now where I’ve said that should be investigated and, if the evidence supports it, prosecuted. I’ve been completely consistent in applying that standard. I don’t believe in anyone getting freebies due to politics.

None of that negates that he had them for a few years and it was illegal.

As is the case with Trump or whomever else may have been responsible for the documents at Mar-a-Lago, there’s a significant amount of work to be done to prove possession, knowledge, and intent to the point that it can be conclusively attached to a specific individual. A lot of work goes into determining what happened well enough that it can be useful in judicial proceedings.
 
These cases can't really be compared. A president has authority to declassify documents, even by simple word of mouth, and exactly how broad that authority is hasn't been tested much in court.
 
Well no, I draw info from publicly accessible court filings, like probable cause affidavits and exhibit inventories, and from commentaries by lawyers who’ve worked in that realm. I also have actually taken the time to dig up, read, understand, and share relevant sections of statute. I have the necessary knowledge and experience to make reasonably decent sense out of these things. If you want to show me where I’m leaning on legacy media on this, go ahead, it you aren’t going to find it. I’ve shared a few news articles just as a “hey, here’s an update”, but that’s about as far as I’ve taken any of those.

If you don’t agree with my interpretations or analysis, everything I’ve relied on is open to you or anyone else to examine. You’re as free as I am to say what you think, what you base it on, and why.

As for the documents found in and returned from Biden’s office, you’re just as able as anyone else here to see the several times now where I’ve said that should be investigated and, if the evidence supports it, prosecuted. I’ve been completely consistent in applying that standard. I don’t believe in anyone getting freebies due to politics.



As is the case with Trump or whomever else may have been responsible for the documents at Mar-a-Lago, there’s a significant amount of work to be done to prove possession, knowledge, and intent to the point that it can be conclusively attached to a specific individual. A lot of work goes into determining what happened well enough that it can be useful in judicial proceedings.
I've done law enforcement investigations before. I know timelines. I also use lawyers and judges opinion and and statements to draw my conclusions. Just not your sources, obviously.

Please DM me all the DOJ and FBI court filings including annexes and subpoenas, concerning Trump, that you used or have on file. I'm interested in what is exactly in there and what your basing your conclusions on. Your googlefu, apparently, is much better than mine in finding these, so links will be fine.
 
Last edited:
These cases can't really be compared. A president has authority to declassify documents, even by simple word of mouth, and exactly how broad that authority is hasn't been tested much in court.
It's that one niggly little point that some don't believe exists or don't want to believe exists or even try to understand. It doesn't fit the narrative so they ignore it.
 
Last edited:
I've done law enforcement investigations before.

Please DM me all the DOJ and FBI court filings including annexes and subpoenas, concerning Trump.
No, they’ve been broadly reported on. If you’re genuinely interested you can find and gather them yourself; I don’t have them all saved to a folder or anything. I linked several either directly or via articles in the course of this thread, but I’m not gonna go to the effort to reassemble them for the sake of this. The database for federal filings is called ‘Pacer’. Judge Aileen Cannon’s case in the Southern District of Florida will be the source of several, along with Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart. Raymond Dearie was the special master involved in that privilege examination. Those start points should get you there with some searching.

These cases can't really be compared. A president has authority to declassify documents, even by simple word of mouth, and exactly how broad that authority is hasn't been tested much in court.
Classification isn’t a requisite element of the offenses known to be under investigation regarding the Mar-a-Lago docs. Back in August I did quite a dive into the specific offenses referenced in the Mar-a-Lago search warrant materials. I’ll link it at the bottom here so you can review if you wish. Classification will be useful evidence, but isn’t critical.

What was true months ago remains so: so far no lawyer from Trump’s team has actually claimed, in any of the related filings, that those documents were in fact declassified. Doesn’t mean they might not later; just that so far they haven’t. Kash Patel’s Grand Jury deposition (for which he received some criminal immunity) is likely to shed some light on this, as he was promoting the declassification claim.

I don’t think it’ll matter. Let’s do a dive into the specifics of the three offences named so far, and then I’ll ‘so what?’ Sorry guys, law nerding here, feel free to scroll and skip.


18 USC 793- Multiple subsections, and they don’t specify in the warrant, but I suspect investigators are looking at d) and or e). In short, if someone:
  • Has lawful or unlawful possession, access to, or control of;
  • Information related to the national defense;
  • That could be used to the injury of the US or advantage of a foreign nation, and;
  • Attempts to or does communicate it to anyone not entitled to receive it, OR wilfully retains and fails to deliver it
Other subsections require intent to basically hand it over to an adversary, but d) or e) are met if someone has the stuff (lawfully = d unlawfully = e) and fails to hand it over or deliver it to the person entitled. The section does not require the information to be classified. Even if declassified, the definition of “defense information” could easily be met.


18 USC 1519- This is an obstruction of Justice offence. Elements:
  • Knowingly;
  • Alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies or makes a false entry in any record, and;
  • With intent to impede investigation or proper administration of a federal matter.
So if you were to falsely say you’ve handed everything over, or that you never had it, or try to alter it, and the intent is to obstruct justice, elements are met. Likewise, does not stipulate classification as a requirement.


18 USC 2071- Concealment, removal, or mutilation:
  • Wilfully and unlawfully;
  • Conceals, mutilates, removes, obliterates, destroys any record, document, thing, etc, OR removes them with intent to do so.
  • Either the materials are in that person’s custody, or they’re in the proper possession of any officer, clerk, public office etc of the US.
Again, no classification requirement.

All three of these offences criminalize, among other things, different misdeeds with respect to the mishandling or destruction/concealment/retention of documents, records etc. declassification does not equate to transferring lawful possession of what are still US government records that are still subject to a legal safeguarding and archiving process. The first offence in particular concerns information pertinent to the national defence- and investigators had PC to believe they would find documents that specifically ticked that box.

Taking this a step further- 18 USC 1924- specifically does criminalize unauthorized removal or retention of classified material. This offence was not named on the warrant but could very much be ‘in play’ in the event that any of the documents recovered were not or could not be (more on that in a sec) declassified.

I don’t know the mechanisms of declassification as a presidential power. I suspect it’s not as simple and I stand as Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy, nor of course could it be retroactive once he lost legal authority. My educated guess is that it requires at least some documentary record which of course would itself become a presidential record. I won’t take bets on whether or not any proper declassification process was followed for the material recovered in the MAL search warrant.

Finally, my understanding is that presidential declassification is not absolute. I place no stock in the talk of ‘nuclear secrets’ until and unless proper government authorities confirm that. Indulging the hypothetical, however, declassification of such matters is a power not vested in the President, but rather held by the Department of Energy. If, hypothetically, materials related to nuclear technology classified as restricted data by DOE could not be unilaterally declassified by the president and he could not make it not an offence for him to retain them outside of proper storage and handling.

So… Classification a) may not matter, b) may not have been properly waived, c) could simply add additional offences rather than negating the ones believed to be supported already by probable cause, and d) might in very limited cases be outside the reach of even a current president to waive.
 
No, they’ve been broadly reported on. If you’re genuinely interested you can find and gather them yourself; I don’t have them all saved to a folder or anything. I linked several either directly or via articles in the course of this thread, but I’m not gonna go to the effort to reassemble them for the sake of this. The database for federal filings is called ‘Pacer’. Judge Aileen Cannon’s case in the Southern District of Florida will be the source of several, along with Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart. Raymond Dearie was the special master involved in that privilege examination. Those start points should get you there with some searching.


Classification isn’t a requisite element of the offenses known to be under investigation regarding the Mar-a-Lago docs. Back in August I did quite a dive into the specific offenses referenced in the Mar-a-Lago search warrant materials. I’ll link it at the bottom here so you can review if you wish. Classification will be useful evidence, but isn’t critical.

What was true months ago remains so: so far no lawyer from Trump’s team has actually claimed, in any of the related filings, that those documents were in fact declassified. Doesn’t mean they might not later; just that so far they haven’t. Kash Patel’s Grand Jury deposition (for which he received some criminal immunity) is likely to shed some light on this, as he was promoting the declassification claim.
As to the files, that's fair. I didn't want you to go to great lengths. I thought you had them handy.:salute:
 
As to the files, that's fair. I didn't want you to go to great lengths. I thought you had them handy.:salute:
All good, and sorry that I don’t. I’ve been reading them as they come to light and are reported on, which in turn leads to others. Though their politics would not at all be to your liking, Allison Gill, Andrew Weissmann, and Kyle Cheney have done a good job covering developments in the various court matters. Helpfully, this has usually included linking to copies of new filings such as affidavits that get unsealed, written submissions by both sides, the search inventory, etc.

There hasn’t been much that’s new and significant in a little while now, mostly since the court battles over the Special Master appointment wrapped up. With that matter closed, there hasn’t been much out in the open. The grand jury and the special counsel are both doing their thing behind closed doors; occasionally we learn of someone having been subpoenaed by the GJ. It’ll likely stay quiet until the special counsel makes a recommendation to the AG and the AG has to make a decision regarding any indictment(s). As the same special counsel is handling both the Mar-a-Lago case and the higher level January 6th stuff, I won’t try to guess how long that may take.

Bed time for me… Got my own stuff to work on in the morning. 😣
 
Early times on this report of a second batch classified in another location. The administration didn't return a request for comment so we will need confirmation from the horse's mouth so to speak. Seems the White House Press Corps are asking questions of what happened with the first batch and not only Fox News. Is it time for the FBI to do a search or should the country rely on the efficiency of Biden's lawyers?
WASHINGTON — Aides to President Joe Biden have discovered at least one additional batch of classified documents in a location separate from the Washington office he used after leaving the Obama administration, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Since November, after the discovery of documents with classified markings in his former office, Biden aides have been searching for any additional classified materials that might be in other locations he used, said the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide details about the ongoing inquiry.


The White House did not return a request for comment. The Justice Department had no comment.
Story Link
 
The Ivy League university think tank/Biden/China connection warrants a look.
 
Is it time for the FBI to do a search or should the country rely on the efficiency of Biden's lawyers?

Story Link
Not sure that group is a trusted institution any longer.

Not as much handwringing and breathless condemnation for these outrageous crimes just yet 😂. I wonder why?
 
Not as much handwringing and breathless condemnation for these outrageous crimes just yet 😂. I wonder why?

Could be because, like the Mar-a-Lago investigation, it can take considerable time for the investigation to reach certain points? NARA sent the criminal referral for Trump retaining certain documents in February 2022. It wasn't until August that there was a search warrant and the whole thing blew open.

I suspect that, at present, early steps will include gathering and figuring out exactly how many documents there are and what they are; where they came from; who had had possession of them that could have conveyed them to given places, and then the physical manner in which they were stored, and who actually would have had knowledge that they were there. There will be quite a number of staffers and employees over quite a span of time, any of whom potentially could have had partial or full and sole involvement at some stage or another. Being able to assign responsibility to specific, identifiable individuals will take a lot of work.
 
Yes, that's the methodical plodding legal side. But people want entertainment. Where's all the speculation about NUKULAR SECRETS and stuff?
Shrug dunno. Classification terminology related to nuclear data did not appear in the Mar-a-Lago probable cause affidavit, nor the inventory- but that said, they also only described seized documents by classification level, without further describing the applicable control systems or subcategories. I have no ability to say with any confidence whether there’s anything to substantiate the claim that documents pertaining to a foreign country’s nuclear capabilities were in fact seized in the search.

Hopefully that’s a degree of detail we never get; we aren’t entitled to know, and it would be a degree of detail beyond what would be needed for prosecution of the currently known offenses anyway.

Some secrets should stay secret, even at the expense of successful investigation or prosecution.
 
Some stuff gets spun up to high speed in the media before an election. And some stuff is held back from release until after an election. Hard to work out the underlying principles which determine what gets revealed and what doesn't, and what gets hyped and what gets understated. A puzzlement, I tell you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top