The Biden Administration..V3

149,036 Views | 3158 Replies | Last: 10 min ago by TheStorm
metcalfmafia
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
metcalfmafia said:



Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
I do think Trumps name is talked about way too much. Too many people, like Ben Shapiro, bring his name up, for whatever reason. If Ben doesn't want to talk about Trump, and thinks others should quit talking about Trump, then Ben needs to lead by example.

He shouldn't have made that tweet! Just let it go…. The Problem, for Ben, and other Republicans, is that Trump is believed to be the best representative, by the majority, of the Republican Party. There really is no two ways about it.

If Trump runs, he will win the nomination; so, Ben should get onboard and quit trying to sabotage the election, by bad mouthing Trump. If Ben, and people like him, believe that a Biden Presidency is better than a Trump Presidency, then keep it up. We will all get more of what we have.

BTW, I do agree that we should be pointing out the failings of this administration and beating them down completely. At the same time, we should also try and educate people on why the SC decision was correct, from a constitutional perspective. If we don't, we will set our kids up for one crappy country.. I'm confident in that, as I've seen this country change, not for the good (meaning constitutionally run), since I've been born.
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'd be curious to know why he thinks the FBI raid looks like a political hit when the illegality and danger of Trump's confidential document mishandling seems obvious. I don' think for a second Trump will be prosecuted but he or his team willfully mishandled classified information upon his exit from the White House and then concealed what later became the second tranche of documents the FBI had to seize to get back after the first tranche was demonstrated to be incomplete.

What is the FBI or Justice Department supposed to do after they receive word from a confidential informant or whistleblower that there are still more confidential documents just sitting at Mar-a-lago that weren't previously turned over?

Ask Trump to return all-all of them this time, pretty-please with sugar on top?

That said, Shapiro's overarching electoral points are dead on it.

a. The left has overshot the mark with conspicuous wokeness
b. Independents and Pubs voted more against-Hillary than for-Trump in 2016 and independents and Dems voted much more against-Trump than for-Biden in 2020
c. Pubs have now overcommitted to the Trump-as-savior strategy even in the face of fairly clear and mounting evidence that, especially post-Dobbs, making Trump central to their messaging or focus is not a winning strategy for the party electorally.

I'd say more broadly too that the right wasted two years on stopping the fake steal when they should have moved on and put all their energy into relentlessly attacked the many *****s in Biden's armor.

If the Dems somehow hold the Senate and maybe even the House, a result which was unthinkable a year ago but looking increasingly plausible, they'll mostly have their Trump-induced myopia to blame.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

metcalfmafia said:



Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
I do think Trumps name is talked about way too much. Too many people, like Ben Shapiro, bring his name up, for whatever reason. If Ben doesn't want to talk about Trump, and thinks others should quit talking about Trump, then Ben needs to lead by example.

He shouldn't have made that tweet! Just let it go…. The Problem, for Ben, and other Republicans, is that Trump is believed to be the best representative, by the majority, of the Republican Party. There really is no two ways about it.

If Trump runs, he will win the nomination; so, Ben should get onboard and quit trying to sabotage the election, by bad mouthing Trump. If Ben, and people like him, believe that a Biden Presidency is better than a Trump Presidency, then keep it up. We will all get more of what we have.

BTW, I do agree that we should be pointing out the failings of this administration and beating them down completely. At the same time, we should also try and educate people on why the SC decision was correct, from a constitutional perspective. If we don't, we will set our kids up for one crappy country.. I'm confident in that, as I've seen this country change, not for the good (meaning constitutionally run), since I've been born.

Roe v. Wade was always dubious judicially. The real surprise may be that it lasted as long as it did.

Dems have themselves to blame for not locking in woman's right to an abortion when they had the chance over the last several decades and instead lazily relied on a weak judicial case.

But Dobbs galvanized the left to some extent and Republicans are making a huge mistake if they're not honest about the risk of running Trump.

I think DeSantis v. Biden, or vs. any other uninspired water-carryer Democrat like Kamala, is a sure-fire win for Pubs. 90%+ chance of winning.

If they run Trump again, that turns into a coin flip at the very best.
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civ what are your thoughts on the comparisons of Trump's document issues compared to Hillary's?
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

Civ what are your thoughts on the comparisons of Trump's document issues compared to Hillary's?

That's the obvious and reasonable question Steve.

The short answer is I think they're similar in some ways but different in a few key ways.

Comey made it clear that with the Hillary email server issue he didn't think any prosecutor worth their salt could demonstrate the willfulness, quantity; disloyalty; or obstruction necessary to warrant criminal charges.

With Trump's mishandling, I think it's fairly easy to demonstrate his or his team's conduct was willfull, i.e. not inadvertent, since they were physically moving boxes and documents clearly marked as confidential/top secret and then that they obstructed when they did not turn over all the documents the first time.

But again, I don't think he'll be prosecuted unless new and even more damning evidence emerges. I just think that - his questionable motivations aside - it's fairly obvious that Trump could not be relied upon to return all the documents himself since he'd clearly failed doing so once already. The feds had a need to go seize those documents and search the premises to try to ensure that this time all the confidential documents were collected.
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civ what are your thoughts on the comparisons of Trump's document issues compared to Hillary's?

That's the obvious and reasonable question Steve.

The short answer is I think they're similar in some ways but different in a few key ways.

Comey made it clear that with the Hillary email server issue he didn't think any prosecutor worth their salt could demonstrate the willfulness, quantity; disloyalty; or obstruction necessary to warrant criminal charges.

With Trump's mishandling, I think it's fairly easy to demonstrate his or his team's conduct was willfull, i.e. not inadvertent, since they were physically moving boxes and documents clearly marked as confidential/top secret and then that they obstructed when they did not turn over all the documents the first time.

But again, I don't think he'll be prosecuted unless new and even more damning evidence emerges. I just think that - his questionable motivations aside - it's fairly obvious that Trump could not be relied upon to return all the documents himself since he'd clearly failed doing so once already. The feds had a need to go seize those documents and search the premises to try to ensure that this time all the confidential documents were collected.


"his or his team's conduct was willful? How so?
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The midterms have changed from a referendum on the current administration to a referendum on both the current administration and Trump.

GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The communist Democrats are ramping up their rhetoric to attempt to falsely paint Republicans as "domestic terrorists". You have Biden and other Democrats smearing "MAGA supporters" as "fascists", "supporting dictators", "threats to the rule of law", etc.

Of course this is all projection, and the reality is the 100% opposite. It is the communist democrats who are ACTUALLY promoting a draconian tyrannical agenda, acting as dictators, openly defying and undermining the Constitution and rule of law.

https://instagr.am/p/Ch3EFsgDR3O

Quote:

The extreme Washington Bolshevik agenda aka the Democrat Party's agenda is a threat to America, so there's that. What exactly about the "MAGA agenda" is a threat to the rule of law? Secured borders? Securing trade? Bringing jobs back? (Real jobs, not lockdown/reopen jobs) what about bringing production back, is that against the rule of law too? What exactly is your rule of law? Total control over every aspect of an American's life? I would say that 87k new IRS agents, a radical DOJ being used as Biden's personal Gestapo is more of a threat to the rule of law then whatever this lady is rambling on about
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Shapiro, and the talk of the "Democrats gaining in the polls" is all total BS.

They are just scripting the narrative that they want you to believe. You actually believe that the far Left communist Lamestream media (including controlled opposition Faux News) is going to give you real polling? Lmao. No. They're going to give you rigged, doctored, and outright fabricated fake "polling", to push their agenda.

There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the communist Democrats would win these midterm elections. They are absolutely destroying the country, and by design. If we have real polling and real elections, the Democrats would lose in a landslide in these elections.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civ what are your thoughts on the comparisons of Trump's document issues compared to Hillary's?

That's the obvious and reasonable question Steve.

The short answer is I think they're similar in some ways but different in a few key ways.

Comey made it clear that with the Hillary email server issue he didn't think any prosecutor worth their salt could demonstrate the willfulness, quantity; disloyalty; or obstruction necessary to warrant criminal charges.

With Trump's mishandling, I think it's fairly easy to demonstrate his or his team's conduct was willfull, i.e. not inadvertent, since they were physically moving boxes and documents clearly marked as confidential/top secret and then that they obstructed when they did not turn over all the documents the first time.

But again, I don't think he'll be prosecuted unless new and even more damning evidence emerges. I just think that - his questionable motivations aside - it's fairly obvious that Trump could not be relied upon to return all the documents himself since he'd clearly failed doing so once already. The feds had a need to go seize those documents and search the premises to try to ensure that this time all the confidential documents were collected.
Civ, you do know that GAO officials packed the boxes at the White House. It was not his staff doing that. Also, one thing you are not factoring in: a president can declassify anything they want. A SOS can not!!

So, Hillary's actions were the only actions that violate laws, including espionage.
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
Packchem91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

metcalfmafia said:



Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
I do think Trumps name is talked about way too much. Too many people, like Ben Shapiro, bring his name up, for whatever reason. If Ben doesn't want to talk about Trump, and thinks others should quit talking about Trump, then Ben needs to lead by example.

He shouldn't have made that tweet! Just let it go…. The Problem, for Ben, and other Republicans, is that Trump is believed to be the best representative, by the majority, of the Republican Party. There really is no two ways about it.

If Trump runs, he will win the nomination; so, Ben should get onboard and quit trying to sabotage the election, by bad mouthing Trump. If Ben, and people like him, believe that a Biden Presidency is better than a Trump Presidency, then keep it up. We will all get more of what we have.

BTW, I do agree that we should be pointing out the failings of this administration and beating them down completely. At the same time, we should also try and educate people on why the SC decision was correct, from a constitutional perspective. If we don't, we will set our kids up for one crappy country.. I'm confident in that, as I've seen this country change, not for the good (meaning constitutionally run), since I've been born.
No, people in power to sway the people who do not want another Biden (or worse) presidency should be piling up on Trump right now.
Because while you think people speaking badly about him will garner another Biden win....I think Trump winning the GOP will ensure another Biden presidency.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

metcalfmafia said:



Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
I do think Trumps name is talked about way too much. Too many people, like Ben Shapiro, bring his name up, for whatever reason. If Ben doesn't want to talk about Trump, and thinks others should quit talking about Trump, then Ben needs to lead by example.

He shouldn't have made that tweet! Just let it go…. The Problem, for Ben, and other Republicans, is that Trump is believed to be the best representative, by the majority, of the Republican Party. There really is no two ways about it.

If Trump runs, he will win the nomination; so, Ben should get onboard and quit trying to sabotage the election, by bad mouthing Trump. If Ben, and people like him, believe that a Biden Presidency is better than a Trump Presidency, then keep it up. We will all get more of what we have.

BTW, I do agree that we should be pointing out the failings of this administration and beating them down completely. At the same time, we should also try and educate people on why the SC decision was correct, from a constitutional perspective. If we don't, we will set our kids up for one crappy country.. I'm confident in that, as I've seen this country change, not for the good (meaning constitutionally run), since I've been born.
No, people in power to sway the people who do not want another Biden (or worse) presidency should be piling up on Trump right now.

Because while you think people speaking badly about him will garner another Biden win....I think Trump winning the GOP will ensure another Biden presidency.
Chem, if anyone thinks that enough Trump supporters will switch to another primary candidate, then, I think you're wishful thinking. Too many people support Trump and will vote for him, in the primaries. So, my point is, if he runs, he will win the primary. That's why I'm saying, people like Shapiro, need to be careful what they say.

People like Shapiro, will not be able to cause enough Trump supporters to switch to a DeSantis…
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anybody that thinks the R primary goes anything other than Trump is delusional........and they need to turn off Corporate Media for truth.

Here's what happens in the coming months, maybe weeks.....Trump will be indicted on something...whatever it takes to take him out. Whether its some document that found or planted or something else, Trump will be indicted. He will not be convicted. The DC crowd sure wants to take Trump out......I just wonder why :-)

Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civ what are your thoughts on the comparisons of Trump's document issues compared to Hillary's?

That's the obvious and reasonable question Steve.

The short answer is I think they're similar in some ways but different in a few key ways.

Comey made it clear that with the Hillary email server issue he didn't think any prosecutor worth their salt could demonstrate the willfulness, quantity; disloyalty; or obstruction necessary to warrant criminal charges.

With Trump's mishandling, I think it's fairly easy to demonstrate his or his team's conduct was willfull, i.e. not inadvertent, since they were physically moving boxes and documents clearly marked as confidential/top secret and then that they obstructed when they did not turn over all the documents the first time.

But again, I don't think he'll be prosecuted unless new and even more damning evidence emerges. I just think that - his questionable motivations aside - it's fairly obvious that Trump could not be relied upon to return all the documents himself since he'd clearly failed doing so once already. The feds had a need to go seize those documents and search the premises to try to ensure that this time all the confidential documents were collected.


"his or his team's conduct was willful? How so?

I think it's fairly hard to argue that boxes of sensitive material ended up in a storage room in Mar-a-lago inadvertently. They had to be handled several times and physically moved around. Physically moving big boxes containing documents you shouldn't have to a place they shouldn't be feels like conscious, willful conduct.

Also earlier this year a Trump lawyer told the Justice Department in writing that all the material marked classified in the boxes had been turned over when that statement was demonstrably untrue.

But again, I'm not saying these things meet the burden of bringing prosecution.

I just think Shapiro's remark that the FBI raid was a "political hit" rings hollow when Clinton was the subject of an FBI investigation for what seemed less willfully and/or obstructive, AND there was reason to believe (and it proved to be true) Trump was actually still in possession of many classified documents that we needed to get back.

Basically if Clinton was deserving of an FBI investigation, Trump's similar conduct warrants one also. I think that's a fairly objective conclusion not a partisan one.

Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civ what are your thoughts on the comparisons of Trump's document issues compared to Hillary's?

That's the obvious and reasonable question Steve.

The short answer is I think they're similar in some ways but different in a few key ways.

Comey made it clear that with the Hillary email server issue he didn't think any prosecutor worth their salt could demonstrate the willfulness, quantity; disloyalty; or obstruction necessary to warrant criminal charges.

With Trump's mishandling, I think it's fairly easy to demonstrate his or his team's conduct was willfull, i.e. not inadvertent, since they were physically moving boxes and documents clearly marked as confidential/top secret and then that they obstructed when they did not turn over all the documents the first time.

But again, I don't think he'll be prosecuted unless new and even more damning evidence emerges. I just think that - his questionable motivations aside - it's fairly obvious that Trump could not be relied upon to return all the documents himself since he'd clearly failed doing so once already. The feds had a need to go seize those documents and search the premises to try to ensure that this time all the confidential documents were collected.
Civ, you do know that GAO officials packed the boxes at the White House. It was not his staff doing that. Also, one thing you are not factoring in: a president can declassify anything they want. A SOS can not!!

So, Hillary's actions were the only actions that violate laws, including espionage.

Maybe he didn't pack them. But his staff were going in and out of the office they were in in Mar-a-lago, and one of his attorneys said he returned all the classified docs earlier this year when in fact he hadn't.

There's a process for declassifying docs. Trump didn't follow the process and the documents at Mar-a-lago weren't declassified.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

metcalfmafia said:



Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
I do think Trumps name is talked about way too much. Too many people, like Ben Shapiro, bring his name up, for whatever reason. If Ben doesn't want to talk about Trump, and thinks others should quit talking about Trump, then Ben needs to lead by example.

He shouldn't have made that tweet! Just let it go…. The Problem, for Ben, and other Republicans, is that Trump is believed to be the best representative, by the majority, of the Republican Party. There really is no two ways about it.

If Trump runs, he will win the nomination; so, Ben should get onboard and quit trying to sabotage the election, by bad mouthing Trump. If Ben, and people like him, believe that a Biden Presidency is better than a Trump Presidency, then keep it up. We will all get more of what we have.

BTW, I do agree that we should be pointing out the failings of this administration and beating them down completely. At the same time, we should also try and educate people on why the SC decision was correct, from a constitutional perspective. If we don't, we will set our kids up for one crappy country.. I'm confident in that, as I've seen this country change, not for the good (meaning constitutionally run), since I've been born.
No, people in power to sway the people who do not want another Biden (or worse) presidency should be piling up on Trump right now.
Because while you think people speaking badly about him will garner another Biden win....I think Trump winning the GOP will ensure another Biden presidency.

Trump getting the nomination and then four more years of Biden?

Chem I'm only going to ask you once to shut that dirty ***** mouth of yours.

You're going to be seeing a lot more of all of us on the All Things Bourbon thread if that actually happens. Good God living through another Trump-Biden campaign and then actually having to vote for one of them again is months-long nightmare fuel.
PackFansXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I highly doubt that Biden runs again.
I hope Trump does not run again.
I want DeSantis to defeat Newsom or a player to be named later in 2024.

Regardless of who wins the GOP nomination, the "mainstream media" will work overtime trying to destroy that candidate using ANY means necessary.
Packchem91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

metcalfmafia said:



Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
I do think Trumps name is talked about way too much. Too many people, like Ben Shapiro, bring his name up, for whatever reason. If Ben doesn't want to talk about Trump, and thinks others should quit talking about Trump, then Ben needs to lead by example.

He shouldn't have made that tweet! Just let it go…. The Problem, for Ben, and other Republicans, is that Trump is believed to be the best representative, by the majority, of the Republican Party. There really is no two ways about it.

If Trump runs, he will win the nomination; so, Ben should get onboard and quit trying to sabotage the election, by bad mouthing Trump. If Ben, and people like him, believe that a Biden Presidency is better than a Trump Presidency, then keep it up. We will all get more of what we have.

BTW, I do agree that we should be pointing out the failings of this administration and beating them down completely. At the same time, we should also try and educate people on why the SC decision was correct, from a constitutional perspective. If we don't, we will set our kids up for one crappy country.. I'm confident in that, as I've seen this country change, not for the good (meaning constitutionally run), since I've been born.
No, people in power to sway the people who do not want another Biden (or worse) presidency should be piling up on Trump right now.
Because while you think people speaking badly about him will garner another Biden win....I think Trump winning the GOP will ensure another Biden presidency.

Trump getting the nomination and then four more years of Biden?

Chem I'm only going to ask you once to shut that dirty ***** mouth of yours.

You're going to be seeing a lot more of all of us on the All Things Bourbon thread if that actually happens. Good God living through another Trump-Biden campaign and then actually having to vote for one of them again is months-long nightmare fuel.
Well thats why I said "Biden (or worse)", because if anything, the Dems will shift more left.
It would be a lose-lose-lose situation.

I can completely appreciate those who think Trump's economic results were good and that we would be better off economically than we are with Biden --- individually and nationally. And who think this business / negotiation acumen runs circles around Biden.

But how anyone can watch the crap-fest that has occurred since Nov '20 -- which he has coordinated above all else, and think "yeah, he's still the guy to bring together America (or even the right)" is beyond me. He's not fighting for Americans....he's fighting for Trump legacy, power, etc.
Packchem91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackFansXL said:

I highly doubt that Biden runs again.
I hope Trump does not run again.
I want DeSantis to defeat Newsom or a player to be named later in 2024.

Regardless of who wins the GOP nomination, the "mainstream media" will work overtime trying to destroy that candidate using ANY means necessary.
They will, but Trump will give them the cake, the icing, and a whole bowl of that delicious left-over cake batter your mom let you lick out of the bowl worth of ammunition to destroy any chance.

At least DeSantis can point to how FL did things during Covid, with gun control (that should be a national model), on state v federal governance, and on other things management related that should appeal to many
Packchem91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

metcalfmafia said:



Absolutely spot on thread here from Shapiro.
I do think Trumps name is talked about way too much. Too many people, like Ben Shapiro, bring his name up, for whatever reason. If Ben doesn't want to talk about Trump, and thinks others should quit talking about Trump, then Ben needs to lead by example.

He shouldn't have made that tweet! Just let it go…. The Problem, for Ben, and other Republicans, is that Trump is believed to be the best representative, by the majority, of the Republican Party. There really is no two ways about it.

If Trump runs, he will win the nomination; so, Ben should get onboard and quit trying to sabotage the election, by bad mouthing Trump. If Ben, and people like him, believe that a Biden Presidency is better than a Trump Presidency, then keep it up. We will all get more of what we have.

BTW, I do agree that we should be pointing out the failings of this administration and beating them down completely. At the same time, we should also try and educate people on why the SC decision was correct, from a constitutional perspective. If we don't, we will set our kids up for one crappy country.. I'm confident in that, as I've seen this country change, not for the good (meaning constitutionally run), since I've been born.
No, people in power to sway the people who do not want another Biden (or worse) presidency should be piling up on Trump right now.

Because while you think people speaking badly about him will garner another Biden win....I think Trump winning the GOP will ensure another Biden presidency.
Chem, if anyone thinks that enough Trump supporters will switch to another primary candidate, then, I think you're wishful thinking. Too many people support Trump and will vote for him, in the primaries. So, my point is, if he runs, he will win the primary. That's why I'm saying, people like Shapiro, need to be careful what they say.

People like Shapiro, will not be able to cause enough Trump supporters to switch to a DeSantis…
If those same supporters decide to not get behind DeSantis (or whomever) the GOP puts up against Biden, then they are a whole lot dumber than the Dems they criticize all the time.
I didn't want Trump either time, but when it was Trump v HRC or Trump v Biden...i showed up (early) and voted for him.

I'm not sure a ton of Dems were behind Biden (polls and early primaries said they were not), but the anti-Trump movement galvanized them, and the DNC did a great job of coordinating with locals in the heavily Dem areas in cities of ensuring they'd get out to vote. "Go vote, or deal with Trump for the next 4 years" was a great motivation for the people they were trying to get out.

Likewise, I'd hope the RNC would say "hey America First -- go vote, or deal with Biden or Newsome for 4 more years". Make it about them, if you have to.
Oldsouljer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
People in pain will vote against people in power. Trump will win if there's much pain and won't if things improve.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldsouljer said:

People in pain will vote against people in power. Trump will win if there's much pain and won't if things improve.
You are spot on.
packofwolves
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Should have been fired.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-agent-accused-political-bias-suppressing-hunter-biden-laptop-leaves-bureau
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here's the problem I have with that comparison. And this is totally based off of my own research and things I've heard.

Clinton had 30-something thousand emails questioned in her investigation. Trump had boxes of documents.

When the investigation was under way, Clinton's lawyers turned over the emails "they deemed" relevant. Trump turned over 15 boxes.

Clinton's emails were on an insecure server and personal email address. Trumps documents were placed in a locked place at his home at the request of the agency. One of those is hackable by anyone in the world with ill intentions and the other is in a place that is secured by the Secret Service and would have to be physically stolen.

Clinton used the excuse of not knowing what a "C" on an email meant. Trump had the power to declare documents not classified.

After turning over the emails they deemed relevant, Clinton destroyed Blackberries, servers and computers. James Comey them deemed that things nightcap been mishandled but there was no intent.

After turning over 14 boxes and placing a lock to further secure the documents, Trumps house is raided and items taken from his home.

Now, you say Clinton is not like Trump because Trump and his people have been "willful" in how they've handled this situation. But, only one destroyed potential evidence. The FBI, it seems, never even got a chance to view the evidence in the Clinton case. It's more like they just took her team's word for it.

From where I sit, one of these things is not like the other. I don't think it's being handled in a similar fashion at all.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

Here's the problem I have with that comparison. And this is totally based off of my own research and things I've heard.

Clinton had 30-something thousand emails questioned in her investigation. Trump had boxes of documents.

When the investigation was under way, Clinton's lawyers turned over the emails "they deemed" relevant. Trump turned over 15 boxes.

Clinton's emails were on an insecure server and personal email address. Trumps documents were placed in a locked place at his home at the request of the agency. One of those is hackable by anyone in the world with ill intentions and the other is in a place that is secured by the Secret Service and would have to be physically stolen.

Clinton used the excuse of not knowing what a "C" on an email meant. Trump had the power to declare documents not classified.

After turning over the emails they deemed relevant, Clinton destroyed Blackberries, servers and computers. James Comey them deemed that things nightcap been mishandled but there was no intent.

After turning over 14 boxes and placing a lock to further secure the documents, Trumps house is raided and items taken from his home.

Now, you say Clinton is not like Trump because Trump and his people have been "willful" in how they've handled this situation. But, only one destroyed potential evidence. The FBI, it seems, never even got a chance to view the evidence in the Clinton case. It's more like they just took her team's word for it.

From where I sit, one of these things is not like the other. I don't think it's being handled in a similar fashion at all.

I hear you.

I'm not defending Hillary. She was found to have been careless and negligent with her email protocols.

Presidents have the power to declassify documents but Trump didn't declassify these and clearly should not have had them in Florida. It's not a hit job to investigate what he had and retrieve them.
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wait... how do you know he didn't declassify them?
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

Wait... how do you know he didn't declassify them?

Because there are established procedures to declassify documents that even the President must follow and there's no evidence he followed them. This has been upheld by courts as recently as 2020.

He can't just wave his hand and declassify stuff. He's got to notify departments that also possess that information so they can act accordingly, etc.

Regardless in Mar-a-lago the FBI warrant didn't cite laws relating to classified documents. It cited the Espionage Act that protects info pertaining to national defense (classified or unclassified, doesn't matter).
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Wait... how do you know he didn't declassify them?

Because there are established procedures to declassify documents that even the President must follow and there's no evidence he followed them. This has been upheld by courts as recently as 2020.

He can't just wave his hand and declassify stuff. He's got to notify departments that also possess that information so they can act accordingly, etc.

Regardless in Mar-a-lago the FBI warrant didn't cite laws relating to classified documents. It cited the Espionage Act that protects info pertaining to national defense (classified or unclassified, doesn't matter).


That being said, you don't know that things weren't declassified. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. You just seem to be 100% sure on that. Do you have inside info we don't, or is that what the media is saying. Also you realize that things don't stay classified forever, right?

Another thing I wanted to ask, was regarding your statement, "What is the FBI or Justice Department supposed to do after they receive word from a confidential informant or whistle-blower that there are still more confidential documents just sitting at Mar-a-lago that weren't previously turned over?"

What are your thoughts regarding the whistle blowers saying that federal agencies have been squashing the Hunter Biden laptop? If all whistle blowers are equal, what are Americans to do when things like this happen?
Packchem91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Here's the problem I have with that comparison. And this is totally based off of my own research and things I've heard.

Clinton had 30-something thousand emails questioned in her investigation. Trump had boxes of documents.

When the investigation was under way, Clinton's lawyers turned over the emails "they deemed" relevant. Trump turned over 15 boxes.

Clinton's emails were on an insecure server and personal email address. Trumps documents were placed in a locked place at his home at the request of the agency. One of those is hackable by anyone in the world with ill intentions and the other is in a place that is secured by the Secret Service and would have to be physically stolen.

Clinton used the excuse of not knowing what a "C" on an email meant. Trump had the power to declare documents not classified.

After turning over the emails they deemed relevant, Clinton destroyed Blackberries, servers and computers. James Comey them deemed that things nightcap been mishandled but there was no intent.

After turning over 14 boxes and placing a lock to further secure the documents, Trumps house is raided and items taken from his home.

Now, you say Clinton is not like Trump because Trump and his people have been "willful" in how they've handled this situation. But, only one destroyed potential evidence. The FBI, it seems, never even got a chance to view the evidence in the Clinton case. It's more like they just took her team's word for it.

From where I sit, one of these things is not like the other. I don't think it's being handled in a similar fashion at all.

I hear you.

I'm not defending Hillary. She was found to have been careless and negligent with her email protocols.

Presidents have the power to declassify documents but Trump didn't declassify these and clearly should not have had them in Florida. It's not a hit job to investigate what he had and retrieve them.
It is crazy that one of the things that clearly propelled Trump to victory over HRC -- her carelessness with classified emails that led Trump, the entire GOP and all of us here to want to "lock her up", is going to bite him now. Its one of those things that was such a big deal, you think you'd be 100% squared away on it.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Wait... how do you know he didn't declassify them?

Because there are established procedures to declassify documents that even the President must follow and there's no evidence he followed them. This has been upheld by courts as recently as 2020.

He can't just wave his hand and declassify stuff. He's got to notify departments that also possess that information so they can act accordingly, etc.

Regardless in Mar-a-lago the FBI warrant didn't cite laws relating to classified documents. It cited the Espionage Act that protects info pertaining to national defense (classified or unclassified, doesn't matter).


That being said, you don't know that things weren't declassified. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. You just seem to be 100% sure on that. Do you have inside info we don't, or is that what the media is saying. Also you realize that things don't stay classified forever, right?

Another thing I wanted to ask, was regarding your statement, "What is the FBI or Justice Department supposed to do after they receive word from a confidential informant or whistle-blower that there are still more confidential documents just sitting at Mar-a-lago that weren't previously turned over?"

What are your thoughts regarding the whistle blowers saying that federal agencies have been squashing the Hunter Biden laptop? If all whistle blowers are equal, what are Americans to do when things like this happen?

Obv I don't have inside info.

But if Trump had declassified the docs through appropriate channels he and his team would have been quick to say so. Instead his statement talked about the legally dubious "standing order" he said he had to declassify all documents that left the building. That's a made-up way to declassify documents.

I think we're losing the forest for the trees to some extent with the Trump documents. Broadly, is it in America's best interests for him to handle classified or sensitive docs the way he did? Regardless of the legality, that answer is definitively 'no'. We should just say that - that the standing order declassification black voodoo magic is BS, he ****ed up and shouldn't have had the documents after he left office, and that's it.

Re: Hunter Biden, pull on the sweater string and see where the information goes. If it leads somewhere real, deal with the parties appropriately.

Nobody wins when we excuse bad actors no matter which side of the fence they're on.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Packchem91 said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Here's the problem I have with that comparison. And this is totally based off of my own research and things I've heard.

Clinton had 30-something thousand emails questioned in her investigation. Trump had boxes of documents.

When the investigation was under way, Clinton's lawyers turned over the emails "they deemed" relevant. Trump turned over 15 boxes.

Clinton's emails were on an insecure server and personal email address. Trumps documents were placed in a locked place at his home at the request of the agency. One of those is hackable by anyone in the world with ill intentions and the other is in a place that is secured by the Secret Service and would have to be physically stolen.

Clinton used the excuse of not knowing what a "C" on an email meant. Trump had the power to declare documents not classified.

After turning over the emails they deemed relevant, Clinton destroyed Blackberries, servers and computers. James Comey them deemed that things nightcap been mishandled but there was no intent.

After turning over 14 boxes and placing a lock to further secure the documents, Trumps house is raided and items taken from his home.

Now, you say Clinton is not like Trump because Trump and his people have been "willful" in how they've handled this situation. But, only one destroyed potential evidence. The FBI, it seems, never even got a chance to view the evidence in the Clinton case. It's more like they just took her team's word for it.

From where I sit, one of these things is not like the other. I don't think it's being handled in a similar fashion at all.

I hear you.

I'm not defending Hillary. She was found to have been careless and negligent with her email protocols.

Presidents have the power to declassify documents but Trump didn't declassify these and clearly should not have had them in Florida. It's not a hit job to investigate what he had and retrieve them.
It is crazy that one of the things that clearly propelled Trump to victory over HRC -- her carelessness with classified emails that led Trump, the entire GOP and all of us here to want to "lock her up", is going to bite him now. Its one of those things that was such a big deal, you think you'd be 100% squared away on it.


That's the irony, right?

Given how much he knows he fanned the "Lock her up" flames, you would have thought he'd be smart enough to not get too close to the same fire himself.
High Travoltage
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

Here's the problem I have with that comparison. And this is totally based off of my own research and things I've heard.

Clinton had 30-something thousand emails questioned in her investigation. Trump had boxes of documents.

When the investigation was under way, Clinton's lawyers turned over the emails "they deemed" relevant. Trump turned over 15 boxes.

Clinton's emails were on an insecure server and personal email address. Trumps documents were placed in a locked place at his home at the request of the agency. One of those is hackable by anyone in the world with ill intentions and the other is in a place that is secured by the Secret Service and would have to be physically stolen.

Clinton used the excuse of not knowing what a "C" on an email meant. Trump had the power to declare documents not classified.

After turning over the emails they deemed relevant, Clinton destroyed Blackberries, servers and computers. James Comey them deemed that things nightcap been mishandled but there was no intent.

After turning over 14 boxes and placing a lock to further secure the documents, Trumps house is raided and items taken from his home.

Now, you say Clinton is not like Trump because Trump and his people have been "willful" in how they've handled this situation. But, only one destroyed potential evidence. The FBI, it seems, never even got a chance to view the evidence in the Clinton case. It's more like they just took her team's word for it.

From where I sit, one of these things is not like the other. I don't think it's being handled in a similar fashion at all.
She was smashing devices with hammers cause she was worried about following the rules....
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

Wait... how do you know he didn't declassify them?

Because there are established procedures to declassify documents that even the President must follow and there's no evidence he followed them. This has been upheld by courts as recently as 2020.

He can't just wave his hand and declassify stuff. He's got to notify departments that also possess that information so they can act accordingly, etc.

Regardless in Mar-a-lago the FBI warrant didn't cite laws relating to classified documents. It cited the Espionage Act that protects info pertaining to national defense (classified or unclassified, doesn't matter).


That being said, you don't know that things weren't declassified. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. You just seem to be 100% sure on that. Do you have inside info we don't, or is that what the media is saying. Also you realize that things don't stay classified forever, right?

Another thing I wanted to ask, was regarding your statement, "What is the FBI or Justice Department supposed to do after they receive word from a confidential informant or whistle-blower that there are still more confidential documents just sitting at Mar-a-lago that weren't previously turned over?"

What are your thoughts regarding the whistle blowers saying that federal agencies have been squashing the Hunter Biden laptop? If all whistle blowers are equal, what are Americans to do when things like this happen?

Obv I don't have inside info.

But if Trump had declassified the docs through appropriate channels he and his team would have been quick to say so. Instead his statement talked about the legally dubious "standing order" he said he had to declassify all documents that left the building. That's a made-up way to declassify documents.

I think we're losing the forest for the trees to some extent with the Trump documents. Broadly, is it in America's best interests for him to handle classified or sensitive docs the way he did? Regardless of the legality, that answer is definitively 'no'. We should just say that - that the standing order declassification black voodoo magic is BS, he ****ed up and shouldn't have had the documents after he left office, and that's it.

Re: Hunter Biden, pull on the sweater string and see where the information goes. If it leads somewhere real, deal with the parties appropriately.

Nobody wins when we excuse bad actors no matter which side of the fence they're on.
Civ, I think you have a delusional view on reality. Trump, the person, will absolutely wave his magical hand and make documents declassified. It's up to people around him to go through the proper channels. In fact, one of the attorneys said exactly this.

If you think anybody gives a damn about these documents, you're kidding yourself. You absolutely know what the objective is!!!
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
High Travoltage
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yall are semi-facists - Joe Biden

-while hiring 90 thousand armed IRS agents
-while mandating a vaccine that didnt stop the spread
-while waiving off student loans by saying we are still in a pandemic
-while ending title 42 in part because we are no longer in a pandemic
-while having the fbi take documents marked client priveldge from his main political opponent
-while using the fbi to keep facebook from spreading the laptop story that details how 'bought he is'

I could keep going of course. We need a new leader ASAP
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.