More classified docs found...

Mik · 24 Jan 2023, 17:54

Now do Obama. I would bet they all have them.

xenon · wrote on 24 Jan 2023, 17:40

jon-nyc · 24 Jan 2023, 17:56

@Jolly said in More classified docs found...:

I go back to what I said at the beginning of all this horseshit...It's time to let all this go. Trump, Biden, Pence, Obama...They've all done it, as I'm sure multiple executives have done before.

If it impacts national security, hang them by their thumbs. Otherwise, it's all peanut gallery stuff.

I think the very opposite - we seem to have slid into a situation whereby cabinet officials and above are forgiven as long as they cooperate once the docs are discovered and no ill intent is indicated.

Let’s charge and prosecute these two according to the letter of the law, insofar as it’s warranted under the law, and recalibrate what behavior is expected. Let’s also let the national archives do the labor of separating classified from unclassified when presidents pack up and leave, rather than leaving it to whitehouse staff. Or at least let them do it together.

Copper · M Mik 24 Jan 2023, 17:39

I assume that foreign actors can now buy classified presidential documents at going-out-of-business prices.

George K · wrote on 24 Jan 2023, 17:56

@jon-nyc said in More classified docs found...:

as long as they cooperate once the docs are discovered and no ill intent is indicated

Andy McCarthy has a slightly different take on cooperation:

The president, you’re to believe, is being fully cooperative.

The truth of the matter is that, like most criminal suspects as to whom there is already strong evidence of felony offenses, Biden consented to a search knowing that, if he did not, newly appointed special counsel Robert Hur would apply for a judicial warrant from a federal judge. Biden would then have been subject to the same political damage that has dogged former president Donald Trump since the Mar-a-Lago search in August: a judicial finding of probable cause to believe he has committed multiple offenses for which the penal code prescribes prison terms of up to ten years (for each offense).

This would promptly have been followed by a compulsory search in which the FBI ended up seizing even more incriminating evidence, thus making the case for criminal prosecution even stronger. That, in turn, would put have more pressure on the Justice Department to recommend an indictment (assuming, as I do, that the special counsel must follow longstanding DOJ Office of Legal Counsel guidance that forbids the indictment of a sitting president – i.e., the indictment must await the incumbent’s exit from office, consistent with the Constitution, see art. I, §3, cl.7).

The president did not consent to an FBI search of his home because he is unconcerned. He consented to it because he knew law enforcement had more than sufficient evidence to compel a search of his home. From his standpoint, with his 2024 reelection hopes now teetering, it was better to pose as a cooperative volunteer than be forced to open his door to federal agents brandishing a judicial warrant.

ETA: Also intent has nothing to do with the law, despite what former AG Comey told us.

Mik · wrote on 24 Jan 2023, 18:05

@jon-nyc said in More classified docs found...:

Let’s also let the national archives do the labor of separating classified from unclassified when presidents pack up and leave, rather than leaving it to whitehouse staff. Or at least let them do it together.

This.

jon-nyc · 24 Jan 2023, 18:35

George - did you even read my post? I specifically talk about that as being how the law has been interpreted for sufficiently high status politicians. I’m literally making the point that that’s not what the law is, and that we should return to the letter of the law.

As often, McCarthy is partially right. Intent matters not when it comes to possession, (though knowledge of the possession does, which could save Biden).

On the obstruction charges the fat man is facing, cooperation - or it’s lack - is key.

George K · wrote on 24 Jan 2023, 18:35

@jon-nyc said in More classified docs found...:

George - did you even read my post? I specifically talk about that as being how the law has been interpreted for sufficiently high status politicians. I’m literally making the point that that’s not what the law is, and that we should return to the letter of the law.

Yes, I did., and though I didn't respond to that point, I wholeheartedly agree. I assume @Jolly does as well. My bad for contrasting the ideas of McCarthy with what you said.

As often, McCarthy is partially right. Intent matters not when it comes to possession, (though knowledge of the possession does, which could save Biden).

On the obstruction charges the fat man is facing, cooperation - or it’s lack - is key.

If by lack of cooperation, you mean obstruction, then, perhaps. That will be interesting.

Axtremus · wrote on 24 Jan 2023, 18:41

@jon-nyc said in More classified docs found...:

I think the very opposite - we seem to have slid into a situation whereby cabinet officials and above are forgiven as long as they cooperate once the docs are discovered and no ill intent is indicated.

Let’s charge and prosecute these two according to the letter of the law, insofar as it’s warranted under the law, and recalibrate what behavior is expected. Let’s also let the national archives do the labor of separating classified from unclassified when presidents pack up and leave, rather than leaving it to whitehouse staff. Or at least let them do it together.

+1