Joe Biden 2023: The Dark Brandon Rises

[C-Man 27029]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

Good. Appoint a special counsel. Charge him if he committed a crime. 

I’m so tired of no accountability. I don’t give a fuck which side it is. 

follow the rules or get fucked

You know how I know you're not a GOP'er?

 

4 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Good news fiscal conservatives!!!

 

Biden will likely have that to zero by 2024, then he'll get beat and whichever Republican wins will fuck things up all over again and the Dem that is elected to follow that person will be blamed for it. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

[Pato del Muerto 52336]

Maga is really rooting for this deep state plot to install the ultra liberal vp as potus.  Surprising. 

[Js1 85085]

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

Garland appointed a special counsel.  Not seeing a link yet, but it's in my alerts.

GOD DAMN POLITICAL DOJ PROTECTING BI---

Oh wait. 

[Ghost of LL 15469]

2 hours ago, immamac said:

Exactly - Joe Biden isn't exactly a fucking "good guy" he's a lifelong politician. He's got plenty of stains on his record, but generally speaking he has put America first. 

This is every bit as illegal as trump having the docs though and every bit as fucking stupid. 

It's not "every bit as illegal as Trump" because intent is a huge part of the crime.  We don't know if Biden had a culpable mens rea.  That ought to be investigated.  But you sound stupid when you say shit like this.

[jimmyjazz 45538]

18 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

So you think they were intentionally taken because  Joe said lI didn’t do it on purpose”, and you believe him?   Jesus.  That’s a fucking stupid as taking SCI documents to your garage in Delaware.  

Look, I know this is hard for you to understand:  you're making absolutely no sense whatsoever.  I mean, try again, because this is nonsensical garbage.

[closetohumping 17386]

1 hour ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

season 3 already getting spicy

When will the show end though?  Next year or 2028?

[Trey3216 15325]

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Look, I know this is hard for you to understand:  you're making absolutely no sense whatsoever.  I mean, try again, because this is nonsensical garbage.

That's what I get for using my phone while multi-tasking.  

[Incredulity 11541]

21 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

We don't know if Biden had a culpable mens rea.

1.) lord loves a working man.

2.) don't trust whitey.

3.) see a doctor and get rid of it.

[elfenix 34169]

42 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Good news fiscal conservatives!!!

 

see, the republican congress is already hard at work

/foxnews nytimes

[elfenix 34169]

36 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

It's not "every bit as illegal as Trump" because intent is a huge part of the crime.  We don't know if Biden had a culpable mens rea.  That ought to be investigated.  But you sound stupid when you say shit like this.

1: tom comes home and sees his wife fucking bob, the neighbor across the street, through the window.  he goes to a bar, and hatches a plan to wait in the bushes the next day for bob to cross the street, and shoot him.  next day, tom waits in the bushes and kills bob as he comes up to the door of tom's home.

2: tom comes home and sees his wife fucking bob.  tom pulls out his gun and shoots bob dead right there

3: tom, driving home, checks his phone and doesn't see bob crossing the street, having just fucked tom's wife.  tom runs over bob, killing him.

4: tom comes home, takes off his gun belt, and puts it down.  the gun goes off, fires through the closet door, where bob is hiding having just fucked tom's wife, killing bob.

 

every one of these scenarios ends up with a dead bob.  yet only one of them is murder (at least, traditionally).  and the whole question is intent. 

Edited January 12, 2023 by elfenix

[Hermanator 6928]

[DixonHur 11154]

Maybe I'm missing something, I've been traveling a lot and haven't been following everything as closely as others on this board.

Has there been any proof that Trump took the documents on purpose or are people just assuming that because he's been obstructing the investigation?

In my opinion, obstruction is Trump's default regardless.  He simply can't admit he's wrong.  

That in and of itself does not prove intent.

Edited January 12, 2023 by DixonHur
Phone typing

[Red Five 40627]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

Has there been any proof that Trump took the documents on purpose or are people just assuming that because he's been obstruction the investigation?

Considering that he has boxes and boxes of the shit in his home in Florida, and refused to give them back ("they're mine!") I think it's a fairly safe assumption. 

[DixonHur 11154]

1 minute ago, Red Five said:

Considering that he has boxes and boxes of the shit in his home in Florida, and refused to give them back ("they're mine!") I think it's a fairly safe assumption. 

But, like I said, that's his default position regardless of the circumstances or evidence.  Even with things that don't matter, like "I didn't know that person", etc.

On multiple occasions he could have easily just said, I knew that person but I didn't know they were doing anything illegal.  But he sticks to his guns

I think it's entirely possible that he's just stupid and trying to cover it up by claiming they were his, or whatever.

Not saying he didn't mean to take them (it's entirely plausible) but I haven't seen actual proof, for example, evidence he was trying to sell the information, etc.

That proof may exist, I just have seen it in the media or anything.

[Red Five 40627]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

But, like I said, that's his default position regardless of the circumstances or evidence.  Even with things that don't matter, like "I didn't know that person", etc.

On multiple occasions he could have easily just said, I knew that person but I didn't know they were doing anything illegal.  But he sticks to his guns

I think it's entirely possible that he's just stupid and trying to cover it up by claiming they were his, or whatever.

Not saying he didn't mean to take them (it's entirely plausible) but I haven't seen actual proof, for example, evidence he was trying to sell the information, etc.

That proof may exist, I just have seen it in the media or anything.

When you get to the point where he's hiding documents, lying about having them, refusing to give them all up, etc. does it really matter?

[Neonmoon 38127]

Coverup is always worse than the crime 

(**assuming we lived in a world where people were held accountable for their actions)

[RomaVicta 29769]

40 minutes ago, elfenix said:

1: tom comes home and sees his wife fucking bob, the neighbor across the street, through the window.  he goes to a bar, and hatches a plan to wait in the bushes the next day for bob to cross the street, and shoot him.  next day, tom waits in the bushes and kills bob as he comes up to the door of tom's home.

2: tom comes home and sees his wife fucking bob.  tom pulls out his gun and shoots bob dead right there

3: tom, driving home, checks his phone and doesn't see bob crossing the street, having just fucked tom's wife.  tom runs over bob, killing him.

4: tom comes home, takes off his gun belt, and puts it down.  the gun goes off, fires through the closet door, where bob is hiding having just fucked tom's wife, killing bob.

 

every one of these scenarios ends up with a dead bob.  yet only one of them is murder (at least, traditionally).  and the whole question is intent. 

Bob is remarkably resilient.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Lol Wray and Garland are part of the problem. It’s sad to watch this play out. It’s all theater until the fascists takeover again. 

Edited January 12, 2023 by Hugo Stiglitz

[wildcat09 29213]

12 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

But, like I said, that's his default position regardless of the circumstances or evidence.  Even with things that don't matter, like "I didn't know that person", etc.

On multiple occasions he could have easily just said, I knew that person but I didn't know they were doing anything illegal.  But he sticks to his guns

I think it's entirely possible that he's just stupid and trying to cover it up by claiming they were his, or whatever.

Not saying he didn't mean to take them (it's entirely plausible) but I haven't seen actual proof, for example, evidence he was trying to sell the information, etc.

That proof may exist, I just have seen it in the media or anything.

Cognitively speaking, Trump isn't capable of distinguishing between something that belongs to an organization he was part of or a position he once held and something that's personally his. E.g., when first running for President he got really furious about some campaign expenditures because he considered campaign funds his own personal money.

He didn't walk out of the White House with classified documents accidentally and later claimed he thought they were his to cover his tracks. He walked out of the White House with classified documents because in his mind he really thought they were his and he had the right to keep them.  

[elfenix 34169]

24 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Bob is remarkably resilient.

i forgot one, where bob has a heart attack while fucking tom's wife, and dies.  right then, tom comes home, sees the situation, and starts shooting bob's corpse. 

/caitlin fucking the dead guy

Edited January 12, 2023 by elfenix

[sidis 9731]

59 minutes ago, elfenix said:

next day, tom waits in the bushes and kills bob as he comes up to the door of tom's home.

tom waits is in the bushes just singing for bob?

[Don Johnson 4745]

27 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Coverup is always worse than the crime 

No....no it isn't.

 

[ChiTownDoc 21097]

3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

 

I feel better about my garage organization after seeing that.  

You hired Beard's wife, didn't you?  

[Bateshorn 9897]

22 minutes ago, Don Johnson said:

No....no it isn't.

 

It often is in the court of public opinion in politics. 

[TexArcher 37506]

42 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Cognitively speaking, Trump isn't capable

Bingo

[RomaVicta 29769]

4 hours ago, Don Johnson said:

Trump and his team acted like clowns after he was caught with the docs, no doubt.  Probably committed additional crimes. 

But let's be honest, most of the outrage/send him to prison talk was due to the fact that he had the docs in the first place.

 

4 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Well, he has proven time and again to be a threat to national security so...

Yep

4 hours ago, DixonHur said:

Anyone who raged against Trump for keeping classified documents (myself included), but doesn't equally hold Biden accountable is a complete hypocrite. 

Sorry, but this is a big deal.

Nobody is giving Biden a walk.

4 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I'm sure Biden would welcome the DOJ appointing a Special Counsel.  Anyone with a functioning brain will reasonably conclude that he probably wasn't keeping these documents with nefarious intention, unlike that other walking void.  And if the Special Counsel finds otherwise, well then there should be consequences.  

A well expressed view of the pro-republic side of the political spectrum.

4 hours ago, immamac said:

anyone acting like Biden having TS/Classified docs being a nothingburger because it's Joe Biden is a fucking asshole braindead moron. The fact that he had them in 3 different places regardless of security without permission or knowing they were there is a huge fuckup and the same level of fuckup as Trump doing it. 

You can say obstruction is a bad thing, and it is which Biden isn't obstructing, but at the end of the day it's the same shit and it's wreckless and fucked up. It's a very very bad thing. 

Nothingburger was a mantra of Trump's GOP. I don't think Biden had any bad intentions, but we won't know for sure until the matter is explored and investigated by the proper authorities. 

I don't think it's apt to compare anyone president who has been subjected to law enforcement scrutiny to Trump's myriad and open transgressions. Any Dem or GOP suspected of crime or misdemeanor deserves investigation and cosequence where warranted. They also deserve the benefit of the doubt until the investigation is concluded. Trump does not deserve that benefit.

Trump has made it a point to cheat and break laws whenever and wherever he sees fit. He lies evidently for the sheer joy of it because he does it even when it's unnecessary. He's on video and tape doing terrible things. We've seen the evidence put before the Select Committee mostly from GOP witnesses.

That is unprecedented. A political party devoting itself to protecting such a miscreant is also unprecedented as far as I know.

I don't know why you had to invent the absurd straw man that you do. Nobody is calling this a nothingburger. Nobody should be comparing Biden at this point with a pus-distended bubo such as Donald J. Trump. 

[Ghost of LL 15469]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

Maybe I'm missing something, I've been traveling a lot and haven't been following everything as closely as others on this board.

Has there been any proof that Trump took the documents on purpose or are people just assuming that because he's been obstructing the investigation?

In my opinion, obstruction is Trump's default regardless.  He simply can't admit he's wrong.  

That in and of itself does not prove intent.

The crime isn't merely taking the documents.  It's also in retaining them.  And irrespective of whether Trump knowingly took the documents, it's very clear that he knowingly retained them.  NARA asked for the documents back, and he said "fuck off."

[DixonHur 11154]

13 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

The crime isn't merely taking the documents.  It's also in retaining them.  And irrespective of whether Trump knowingly took the documents, it's very clear that he knowingly retained them.  NARA asked for the documents back, and he said "fuck off."

In my mind that is a separate issue.

Both had/have documents they shouldn't. Period 

[Ghost of LL 15469]

38 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

In my mind that is a separate issue.

Both had/have documents they shouldn't. Period 

Well, ok.  But possessing classified documents is not necessarily criminal.

[Dbeasy 14962]

The Trump vs Biden document situations are very different. However, having had a high level security clearance for many years, I can say that you have to be either an idiot or worse if you keep classified docs. 

Every time a classified doc is checked out of a secure location, the person taking the doc, and the person responsible for the doc both have to ensure the doc remains accounted for and securely stored at the end of every day. 

That means that two parties were either incompetent or worse for each of those docs. It shows that classified material is being grossly mishandled in the White House and probably elsewhere. The China female spy caught at Mar-A-Lago obviously knew the docs were there. 

[Celery Man 20881]

23 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Well, ok.  But possessing classified documents is not necessarily criminal.

He said period.

[TwiceHorn 31240]

4 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

This is a whole separate issue. How shitty is the classified document system? 

NARA is not responsible for classified documents.  They're responsible for Presidential Records.  Classified material could qualify as Presidential Records, but it's really not supposed to become part of that set of documents.

The volume of Presidential Records is too huge for NARA to have some inventory of them and a checklist of things they have and don't have.

So, I am not worried about NARA.  I am concerned that the agencies that generate classified information and give it to the President lose track of it.  That much is pretty clear.

As I said in my prior post, given this apparent weakness in classified document handling once they get to the White House, it is almost inevitable that some of this stuff gets "home" or to another wrong place with a departing administration, and certainly a healthy quantity of Presidential Records that belong at NARA, too.

It is Trump's extraordinary effort to wrongfully retain possession of both Presidential Records and classified materials that differentiates the two cases.  And, Trump's overwhelming self-interest to the derogation of everything that's good and right and legal that makes his personal possession of classified information worrisome.

If Trump committed a crime, it most likely occurred between NARA seeking the return of documents in May 2021 and the Mar A Lardo search warrant, or possibly after.

[TexArcher 37506]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

In my mind that is a separate issue.

Both had/have documents they shouldn't. Period 

True, but the degrees of classification matter, and so does the intent.

We can say that a burglar and a murderer both broke the law, but they're not the same kind of criminal, etc.

[elfenix 34169]

9 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

True, but the degrees of classification matter, and so does the intent.

We can say that a burglar and a murderer both broke the law, but they're not the same kind of criminal, etc.

what if the burglary was to commit a murder?

[TexArcher 37506]

13 minutes ago, elfenix said:

what if the burglary was to commit a murder?

Was it Trump?  Is there video, please?

[Biff Tannen 45491]

6 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Was it Trump?  Is there video, please?

You really think video would matter?

[DixonHur 11154]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

Well, ok.  But possessing classified documents is not necessarily criminal.

I'm not a lawyer, so I can't speak to the criminality, but my understanding is that civilians without proper clearance should not have classified documents.  Both did.

36 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

True, but the degrees of classification matter, and so does the intent.

We can say that a burglar and a murderer both broke the law, but they're not the same kind of criminal, etc.

Totally agree that level of classification matters, but I haven't seen any evidence of intent in either case. 

45 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

He said period.

[TwiceHorn 31240]

The statute most often bandied about and cited in the MAL search warrant was this:

(d)

Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; 

 

18 USC 793.  This is also the crime most of the "classified document crooks" are charged with, Reality Winner, etc.

 

So, the mere possession of "information relating to the national defense" is not a crime for those initially having lawful possession of it (e.g. a proper security clearance as in POTUS or VPOTUS or other official).  It's either giving it to someone else or willfully retaining it that makes it a crime.

[Ghost of LL 15469]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

I'm not a lawyer, so I can't speak to the criminality, but my understanding is that civilians without proper clearance should not have classified documents.  Both did.

Totally agree that level of classification matters, but I haven't seen any evidence of intent in either case. 

A big difference is that Biden has always had clearance. Trump’s was revoked when he left office.

[DixonHur 11154]

1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

A big difference is that Biden has always had clearance. Trump’s was revoked when he left office.

He left office in 2016, why would he have still had clearance.  Mine was taken away the minute I separated from the Navy.

[jimmyjazz 45538]

1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

A big difference is that Biden has always had clearance. Trump’s was revoked when he left office.

Well, Biden presumably didn't have sufficient clearance from Jan 17 - Jan 21.  When did he received the classified documents?  I'm also not clear whether clearance is automatically revoked upon leaving office (which is not to say that a POTUS leaving office is granted permission to take whatever classified documents he wants to his home resort).

[Ghost of LL 15469]

9 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

He left office in 2016, why would he have still had clearance.  Mine was taken away the minute I separated from the Navy.

Former presidents and vice presidents typically retain clearance so that they can be used as a resource by the current president to provide advice and counsel.  Trump’s clearance, however, was revoked because (1) nobody wants his advice and (2) he’s a fucking security risk.

[atomheartbevo 89396]

10 hours ago, Don Johnson said:

Trump and his team acted like clowns after he was caught with the docs, no doubt.  Probably committed additional crimes. 

But let's be honest, most of the outrage/send him to prison talk was due to the fact that he had the docs in the first place.

Much of the outrage was that Trump has a shitload of ties to a lot of shady people overseas, as well as various bank accounts/holdings overseas, he admires Putin, Lil' Kim, and the Saudis, his son-in-law got a nice little $2 billion loan/gift/whatever from said Saudis, etc. and in other words, was extremely compromised.

[atomheartbevo 89396]

6 hours ago, elfenix said:

every one of these scenarios ends up with a dead bob.  yet only one of them is murder (at least, traditionally).  and the whole question is intent. 

5 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Coverup is always worse than the crime 

5 hours ago, Don Johnson said:

No....no it isn't.

Tell us you've never gotten rid of a corpse of somebody who died of an overdose because of something you had laying around your apartment, without telling us you've never gotten rid of a corpse of somebody who died of an overdose because of something you had laying around your apartment

 

[TwiceHorn 31240]

24 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Much of the outrage was that Trump has a shitload of ties to a lot of shady people overseas, as well as various bank accounts/holdings overseas, he admires Putin, Lil' Kim, and the Saudis, his son-in-law got a nice little $2 billion loan/gift/whatever from said Saudis, etc. and in other words, was extremely compromised.

And, he is a piece of shit. 

[StassneyHorn 6535]

Things are so good we decided to ignore inflation and talk about gas stoves.

Thank God for Joseph Biden

[HornOnTheBayou 8879]

7 hours ago, elfenix said:

1: tom comes home and sees his wife fucking bob, the neighbor across the street, through the window.  he goes to a bar, and hatches a plan to wait in the bushes the next day for bob to cross the street, and shoot him.  next day, tom waits in the bushes and kills bob as he comes up to the door of tom's home.

2: tom comes home and sees his wife fucking bob.  tom pulls out his gun and shoots bob dead right there

3: tom, driving home, checks his phone and doesn't see bob crossing the street, having just fucked tom's wife.  tom runs over bob, killing him.

4: tom comes home, takes off his gun belt, and puts it down.  the gun goes off, fires through the closet door, where bob is hiding having just fucked tom's wife, killing bob.

 

every one of these scenarios ends up with a dead bob.  yet only one of them is murder (at least, traditionally).  and the whole question is intent. 

[TwiceHorn 31240]

Also I am seeing a bunch of bullshit about how this happened in November and wasn't talked about, conveniently avoiding an issue during midterms.

Well, Trump's bullshit went on for a year and a half, including a grand jury subpoena, which meant a criminal investigation was in full swing and we didn't hear about until titty baby started screaming about a raid.

The feds don't talk about criminal investigations.  This is a real thing and a point people keep forgetting.

[956 Worldwide 34412]

7 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

The Trump vs Biden document situations are very different. However, having had a high level security clearance for many years, I can say that you have to be either an idiot or worse if you keep classified docs. 

Every time a classified doc is checked out of a secure location, the person taking the doc, and the person responsible for the doc both have to ensure the doc remains accounted for and securely stored at the end of every day. 

That means that two parties were either incompetent or worse for each of those docs. It shows that classified material is being grossly mishandled in the White House and probably elsewhere. The China female spy caught at Mar-A-Lago obviously knew the docs were there. 

This is all true but the reality is that at a certain level, no one will tell a principal “no.” And the briefings on handling are…let’s say “cursory” once you’re in the rarified cabinet air. 
 

It’s almost certain that these were properly packaged and accounted for. VPOTUS or someone on his staff decided to take them home to look at later and didn’t return them. And no one said “no, those can’t leave the SCIF” because no one tells VPOTUS no except POTUS. No one is going to be the briefer to tell VPOTUS or even VPOTUS staff to leave the stuff behind. 
 

This is indicative of how far our rules extend and the level of deference high-level officials and their staffs receive. It’s absolutely different than Trump taking boxes of shit and then claiming it’s all his and he won’t give them back. 

[956 Worldwide 34412]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The statute most often bandied about and cited in the MAL search warrant was this:

(d)

Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; 

 

18 USC 793.  This is also the crime most of the "classified document crooks" are charged with, Reality Winner, etc.

 

So, the mere possession of "information relating to the national defense" is not a crime for those initially having lawful possession of it (e.g. a proper security clearance as in POTUS or VPOTUS or other official).  It's either giving it to someone else or willfully retaining it that makes it a crime.

The statute is there as an add-on to get a charge on spies when you don’t have enough for actual espionage or when you don’t feel like showing what you have in court. 
 

There’s an argument to be made that if you’ve got it outside of a proper facility and/or properly packaged for transit— you do not have it “lawfully.” 
 

The ordinary worker bee who does that with no intent gets his clearance yanked and that usually means separation. But you can’t do that to VPOTUS. 
 

That said, it is really difficult/unusual for a worker bee to walk off with stuff and NOT have intent. It takes a level of carelessness you rarely see. The vast majority of violations are things like staying logged into a terminal and walking away, or leaving something on your desk in a cleared area overnight, or not fully spinning a safe dial in a cleared area. That is the level of scrutiny that regular assholes get— which is why no sympathy from me. 

Edited January 13, 2023 by 956 Worldwide