hokiewolf said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, respectfully I disagree with your stance. Of the documents we know about that were in a locked storage container in his UPenn office, the classified documents were in a manilla envelope in a folder marked "personal". They have been missing for 6 years. And then only called the National Archives AFTER the mid-term election. We do not know yet what manner the classified documents found next to Biden's Corvette had been stored securely or not.

So, having documents illegally stored for 6 years and then calling the National Archives saying hey, we found these documents is not a question of intent. You are excusing the concerning handling of secret documents because you think he did a better job of cooperating than Trump did.

Here's the analogy I'll make. If your predecessor was convicted of robbing banks, that doesn't mean that all crimes that have a punishment standard below robbing banks are all of a sudden legal.

I still maintain that there is a lot of information still not known that needs to see the light of day, but intent of either party is a distraction to the real issues here.

---

I've been clear that both Trump and Biden's mishandling of classified documents is equally wrong and concerning. If criminal liability for either could be proved under the "willfulness" standard then they should be prosecuted. I'm not excusing either.

However, intent (i.e., willfulness) is a factor in the criminal statute. The difference is that so far there is little to no evidence for willfulness for Biden - just supposition. There is more evidence for Trump, as well as evidence applicable to other statutes, given the amount of notice he was given. It would be great if all of the underlying facts (who knew what when) would come to light, but that seems unlikely in either case. So, we're left making conclusions based on what happened after the point where we know that each was aware of the documents, because that's all we have (and probably all we'll ever have).

If people on the right want to prosecute Biden based on the current facts then they have to be willing to prosecute Trump, too.

packgrad said:

---

The differences between Mar-A-Lago and Car-A-Lago:

-One had the authority to declassify whatever he wants, the other did not

-One was raided, the other was not

-One had an FBI photoshoot, the other did not

-One story was rushed out before the midterms, the other was buried

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 13, 2023

---

"Car-A-Lago."

Well-played.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

If people on the right want to prosecute Biden based on the current facts then they have to be willing to prosecute Trump, too.

---

Yep. And I fully support both being thoroughly investigated and prosecuted if the facts and applicable law warrant it.

I agree that proving intent and willfulness is a high bar to clear and I think it's fairly unlikely any serious legal repercussions will arise for any of the involved parties.

My main conversational objection is with all the "just a political witch-hunt" Trumpers. Didn't it take two years to appoint a special counsel, after much foot dragging and misleading and inaccurate communication from Trump's team to the Archives about the docs he had? And it took only took what, two months to appoint a special counsel to investigate the Biden doc handling?

How many years were the Feds supposed to wait and how much misinformation were they supposed to receive before investigating and definitively retrieving what was at Mar-a-Lago, without it being considered a witch-hunt?

Biden's getting investigated after several weeks and seemingly absent the years-long complete run-around Trump's team gave the Archives. Is that a witch hunt too? (Cary seems to be arguing yes, in fact it is, with the intent of pushing Biden out to pasture).

Thanks much for the detailed and extensive legal context you're providing, Manny. Interesting and helpful.

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, as I understand it... there were compartmented documents, in this group. These compartmented documents were to be maintained in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) Also, as I understand it... these documents will come to the person directly, not to the person office.

So, these people will have sole responsibility for the documents. Anyway you look at it, documents found, as compartmented, have a custody requirement.

Now, how all this applies to the two people (Trump and Biden) is beyond my understanding...

---

There are two separate issues of possession/knowledge:

• Did the person ever knowingly have possession of the document at a time when they were authorized to do so?
• Did the person knowingly "take and carry way" the document after the time when they were authorized to do so? (That would be a willful violation of the PRA and the criminal enforcement mechanism.)

The fact that, for Trump and Biden, the documents include the kind of document you mention really only answers the first question. Even if we assume that the documents were delivered to them personally at one time, that doesn't mean that at a later time those documents weren't packed in a box by someone else and then moved to another place. If neither Trump nor Biden were aware that there were classified documents in the boxes that were moved, then that would go against the "willfulness" standard in the statutes.

Again, I'm all for prosecuting either one of them if the "willfulness" standard in the statute could be satisfied.

packgrad said:

---

Maybe Hunter Biden packed them and moved them into the garage. He lived in the house after all.

---

Doesnt matter, Hunter has no ties to Ukraine…

LOL, you're delusional my friend. You'll be in that 10%.

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, as I understand it... there were compartmented documents, in this group. These compartmented documents were to be maintained in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) Also, as I understand it... these documents will come to the person directly, not to the person office.

So, these people will have sole responsibility for the documents. Anyway you look at it, documents found, as compartmented, have a custody requirement.

Now, how all this applies to the two people (Trump and Biden) is beyond my understanding...

---

There are two separate issues of possession/knowledge:

• Did the person ever knowingly have possession of the document at a time when they were authorized to do so?
• Did the person knowingly "take and carry way" the document after the time when they were authorized to do so? (That would be a willful violation of the PRA and the criminal enforcement mechanism.)

The fact that, for Trump and Biden, the documents include the kind of document you mention really only answers the first question. Even if we assume that the documents were delivered to them personally at one time, that doesn't mean that at a later time those documents weren't packed in a box by someone else and then moved to another place. If neither Trump nor Biden were aware that there were classified documents in the boxes that were moved, then that would go against the "willfulness" standard in the statutes.

Again, I'm all for prosecuting either one of them if the "willfulness" standard in the statute could be satisfied.

---

Manny, Manny, Manny...

STOP, please, just STOP!!!

I just learned of this Compartmented nomenclature. The word SCIF was new to me as well. So, I looked it up. Compartmented is the "C" in SCIF.

I heard a Military General speak this morning and he explained the process of documents classified with compartmented. That actually (I think) makes it even more secure than Top Secret. Meaning, it is the sole responsibility of the receiver.

Again, I don't know how this applies to either Biden or Trump...

---

Documents containing such compartmented information would be designated "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information" or "TS/SCI". If you were paying attention during the Trump document saga over the summer you might have recognized the term. The Trump documents included several such documents.

The presence of such documents in each case should be very concerning. Hopefully one or both of the investigations will shed more light on this.

President Biden is a complete hypocrite.

No American should be shocked at the brazen double standard from the corporate media – we’ve seen this play out time and time again. pic.twitter.com/P5tSnriMg7

— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) January 13, 2023

Car ah lago,funny,but u left out Crime ah lago!!While yall MAGA maniacs waiting on tha result of Bidens Documents investigation,go down 2 Georgia and found those 11,780 votes tha conman was lookin 4!Now that's funny!#

Unlike conman,he co operating!!No antics,no name calling and no dog whistles!!Not gon side wit ole Joe on this and sure as hell not gonna side wit conman!!Both r wrong,1 gon b found guilty!#Guilty DOG barks the loudest!!Trumpeters!!

Some nice reporting from the news down under…

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, as I understand it... there were compartmented documents, in this group. These compartmented documents were to be maintained in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) Also, as I understand it... these documents will come to the person directly, not to the person office.

So, these people will have sole responsibility for the documents. Anyway you look at it, documents found, as compartmented, have a custody requirement.

Now, how all this applies to the two people (Trump and Biden) is beyond my understanding...

---

There are two separate issues of possession/knowledge:

• Did the person ever knowingly have possession of the document at a time when they were authorized to do so?
• Did the person knowingly "take and carry way" the document after the time when they were authorized to do so? (That would be a willful violation of the PRA and the criminal enforcement mechanism.)

The fact that, for Trump and Biden, the documents include the kind of document you mention really only answers the first question. Even if we assume that the documents were delivered to them personally at one time, that doesn't mean that at a later time those documents weren't packed in a box by someone else and then moved to another place. If neither Trump nor Biden were aware that there were classified documents in the boxes that were moved, then that would go against the "willfulness" standard in the statutes.

Again, I'm all for prosecuting either one of them if the "willfulness" standard in the statute could be satisfied.

---

Manny, Manny, Manny...

STOP, please, just STOP!!!

I just learned of this Compartmented nomenclature. The word SCIF was new to me as well. So, I looked it up. Compartmented is the "C" in SCIF.

I heard a Military General speak this morning and he explained the process of documents classified with compartmented. That actually (I think) makes it even more secure than Top Secret. Meaning, it is the sole responsibility of the receiver.

Again, I don't know how this applies to either Biden or Trump...

---

You are (or were as of 2000) correct. That was the last year I held a TS.

FWIW-as of January 21, Kamala Harris can take over as President and serve 10 years

In roughly 12 hours, half (or more) of the state’s county sheriffs have released statements (backed by the IL Sheriffs Association) of complete defiance (non-enforcement) of the gun/mag ban signed into law by JB Pritzker and passed by the Dem legislature. https://t.co/CIChCeypLY pic.twitter.com/NDlJc1eCoL

— President Non_Fudd (@Non_Fudd) January 12, 2023

Werewolf said:

---

In roughly 12 hours, half (or more) of the state’s county sheriffs have released statements (backed by the IL Sheriffs Association) of complete defiance (non-enforcement) of the gun/mag ban signed into law by JB Pritzker and passed by the Dem legislature. https://t.co/CIChCeypLY pic.twitter.com/NDlJc1eCoL

— President Non_Fudd (@Non_Fudd) January 12, 2023

---

Related to…Gov semi auto ban Tuesday
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/gov-j-b-pritzker-signs-illinois-assault-weapons-ban/3041967/

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, as I understand it... there were compartmented documents, in this group. These compartmented documents were to be maintained in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) Also, as I understand it... these documents will come to the person directly, not to the person office.

So, these people will have sole responsibility for the documents. Anyway you look at it, documents found, as compartmented, have a custody requirement.

Now, how all this applies to the two people (Trump and Biden) is beyond my understanding...

---

There are two separate issues of possession/knowledge:

• Did the person ever knowingly have possession of the document at a time when they were authorized to do so?
• Did the person knowingly "take and carry way" the document after the time when they were authorized to do so? (That would be a willful violation of the PRA and the criminal enforcement mechanism.)

The fact that, for Trump and Biden, the documents include the kind of document you mention really only answers the first question. Even if we assume that the documents were delivered to them personally at one time, that doesn't mean that at a later time those documents weren't packed in a box by someone else and then moved to another place. If neither Trump nor Biden were aware that there were classified documents in the boxes that were moved, then that would go against the "willfulness" standard in the statutes.

Again, I'm all for prosecuting either one of them if the "willfulness" standard in the statute could be satisfied.

---

Manny, Manny, Manny...

STOP, please, just STOP!!!

I just learned of this Compartmented nomenclature. The word SCIF was new to me as well. So, I looked it up. Compartmented is the "C" in SCIF.

I heard a Military General speak this morning and he explained the process of documents classified with compartmented. That actually (I think) makes it even more secure than Top Secret. Meaning, it is the sole responsibility of the receiver.

Again, I don't know how this applies to either Biden or Trump...

---

Documents containing such compartmented information would be designated "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information" or "TS/SCI". If you were paying attention during the Trump document saga over the summer you might have recognized the term. The Trump documents included several such documents.

The presence of such documents in each case should be very concerning. Hopefully one or both of the investigations will shed more light on this.

---

Manny, you really need to start asking the different questions…

Why did Biden attorneys start looking for documents at this Biden think tank?
If said attorneys found the documents, did they have clearance?
The movement of these documents, who did this?
Did they have clearance?
Why hasn't Obama come out said anything, yet?
Why did this become news, as soon as the house changed hands?
Did anyone leak this news to a house member?
Why has the media taken a little (I say little because it's all relative) harder stance on this, starting today?
Why did a Garland use an attorney, without past political impartiality, to probe this?

Listen, I don't believe in conspiracies; however, I don't think things are coincidental either…. Oh, I don't know the answers, to the above questions. I just would like to know the answers.

My speculation (only an opinion) is that this is an establishment hit job, on Biden. This is not to get him removed from; rather, it's to get him to step aside by weakening him…

FinsUp said:

---

FWIW-as of January 21, Kamala Harris can take over as President and serve 10 years

---

That's honestly about the last thing that any of us have to worry about, because there's zero chance of that ever happening... not even the dems are that dumb.

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, as I understand it... there were compartmented documents, in this group. These compartmented documents were to be maintained in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) Also, as I understand it... these documents will come to the person directly, not to the person office.

So, these people will have sole responsibility for the documents. Anyway you look at it, documents found, as compartmented, have a custody requirement.

Now, how all this applies to the two people (Trump and Biden) is beyond my understanding...

---

There are two separate issues of possession/knowledge:

• Did the person ever knowingly have possession of the document at a time when they were authorized to do so?
• Did the person knowingly "take and carry way" the document after the time when they were authorized to do so? (That would be a willful violation of the PRA and the criminal enforcement mechanism.)

The fact that, for Trump and Biden, the documents include the kind of document you mention really only answers the first question. Even if we assume that the documents were delivered to them personally at one time, that doesn't mean that at a later time those documents weren't packed in a box by someone else and then moved to another place. If neither Trump nor Biden were aware that there were classified documents in the boxes that were moved, then that would go against the "willfulness" standard in the statutes.

Again, I'm all for prosecuting either one of them if the "willfulness" standard in the statute could be satisfied.

---

Manny, Manny, Manny...

STOP, please, just STOP!!!

I just learned of this Compartmented nomenclature. The word SCIF was new to me as well. So, I looked it up. Compartmented is the "C" in SCIF.

I heard a Military General speak this morning and he explained the process of documents classified with compartmented. That actually (I think) makes it even more secure than Top Secret. Meaning, it is the sole responsibility of the receiver.

Again, I don't know how this applies to either Biden or Trump...

---

Documents containing such compartmented information would be designated "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information" or "TS/SCI". If you were paying attention during the Trump document saga over the summer you might have recognized the term. The Trump documents included several such documents.

The presence of such documents in each case should be very concerning. Hopefully one or both of the investigations will shed more light on this.

---

Manny, you really need to start asking the different questions…

Why did Biden attorneys start looking for documents at this Biden think tank?
If said attorneys found the documents, did they have clearance?
The movement of these documents, who did this?
Did they have clearance?
Why hasn't Obama come out said anything, yet?
Why did this become news, as soon as the house changed hands?
Did anyone leak this news to a house member?
Why has the media taken a little (I say little because it's all relative) harder stance on this, starting today?
Why did a Garland use an attorney, without past political impartiality, to probe this?

Listen, I don't believe in conspiracies; however, I don't think things are coincidental either…. Oh, I don't know the answers, to the above questions. I just would like to know the answers.

My speculation (only an opinion) is that this is an establishment hit job, on Biden. This is not to get him removed from; rather, it's to get him to step aside by weakening him…

---

I know that you've said it several times already... or probably more than that even, but I'm just not buying the "establishment hit job" angle...

I can answer two of those questions based on news reports

1. They were moving out of the offices and the documents were discovered.

2. The National Archives was called (eventually) and the documents were retrieved by the proper authorities.

Still not understanding how they can sit in an office for 6 years without any scrutiny by anyone however. That needs to be answered.

And Garland is probably high-fivingeveryone he meets because this takes all the pressure off him. Also pretty awesome to have a Trump appointee who was requested to remain on staff at transition by the Illinois delegation because he was working on a current case. Hope Garlands been buying lotto tickets!

hokiewolf said:

---

I can answer two of those questions based on news reports

1. They were moving out of the offices and the documents were discovered.

2. The National Archives was called (eventually) and the documents were retrieved by the proper authorities.

Still not understanding how they can sit in an office for 6 years without any scrutiny by anyone however. That needs to be answered.

And Garland is probably high-fivingeveryone he meets because this takes all the pressure off him. Also pretty awesome to have a Trump appointee who was requested to remain on staff at transition by the Illinois delegation because he was working on a current case. Hope Garlands been buying lotto tickets!

---

By the attorneys?

Rasmussen is a free and independent poll? Ya think? Just like our corporate media, this is a corporate-owned poll.

President Biden ended the polling week with a daily job approval of 47%.https://t.co/K0PyR8vsPe pic.twitter.com/iaM5Dyw5GC

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) January 15, 2023

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, as I understand it... there were compartmented documents, in this group. These compartmented documents were to be maintained in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) Also, as I understand it... these documents will come to the person directly, not to the person office.

So, these people will have sole responsibility for the documents. Anyway you look at it, documents found, as compartmented, have a custody requirement.

Now, how all this applies to the two people (Trump and Biden) is beyond my understanding...

---

There are two separate issues of possession/knowledge:

• Did the person ever knowingly have possession of the document at a time when they were authorized to do so?
• Did the person knowingly "take and carry way" the document after the time when they were authorized to do so? (That would be a willful violation of the PRA and the criminal enforcement mechanism.)

The fact that, for Trump and Biden, the documents include the kind of document you mention really only answers the first question. Even if we assume that the documents were delivered to them personally at one time, that doesn't mean that at a later time those documents weren't packed in a box by someone else and then moved to another place. If neither Trump nor Biden were aware that there were classified documents in the boxes that were moved, then that would go against the "willfulness" standard in the statutes.

Again, I'm all for prosecuting either one of them if the "willfulness" standard in the statute could be satisfied.

---

Manny, Manny, Manny...

STOP, please, just STOP!!!

I just learned of this Compartmented nomenclature. The word SCIF was new to me as well. So, I looked it up. Compartmented is the "C" in SCIF.

I heard a Military General speak this morning and he explained the process of documents classified with compartmented. That actually (I think) makes it even more secure than Top Secret. Meaning, it is the sole responsibility of the receiver.

Again, I don't know how this applies to either Biden or Trump...

---

Documents containing such compartmented information would be designated "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information" or "TS/SCI". If you were paying attention during the Trump document saga over the summer you might have recognized the term. The Trump documents included several such documents.

The presence of such documents in each case should be very concerning. Hopefully one or both of the investigations will shed more light on this.

---

Manny, you really need to start asking the different questions…

Why did Biden attorneys start looking for documents at this Biden think tank?

The office was no longer needed and the boxes were being moved elsewhere for storage. As for why attorneys were reviewing the contents, I don't know.

If said attorneys found the documents, did they have clearance?

There was no belief or expectation that there was anything classified there, so no reason that those people would have clearance. However at least one of Biden's attorneys does have a security clearance and he was involved in returning the documents to the Archives and notifying DOJ.

The movement of these documents, who did this?

Excellent question for Biden and Trump. Hopefully the Special Counsels will find out (and report) more about this.

Did they have clearance?

Excellent question for Biden and Trump. Hopefully the Special Counsels will find out (and report) more about this.

Why hasn't Obama come out said anything, yet?

Why would he and what would he say?

Why did this become news, as soon as the house changed hands?

I honestly think that many people/organizations faced with a potential PR problem try to ignore it and put it off, but that rarely works.

Did anyone leak this news to a house member?

No idea. You have someone in mind?

Why has the media taken a little (I say little because it's all relative) harder stance on this, starting today?

More questions raised by the additional documents and the timeline of discovery and public disclosure.

Why did a Garland use an attorney, without past political impartiality, to probe this?

He is a former Trump appointee, confirmed unanimously by the Senate, is endorsed by a Republican givernor, has experience working with a Special Counsel while serving under Trump, and, less importantly, he's based in the right place to conduct the incestigation. Seems like a lot of good reasons to pick him. Other than his association with Rosenstein while overseeing the Meuller investigation, how has he demonstrated a lack of impartiality? Had you ever heard of him before?

Listen, I don't believe in conspiracies; however, I don't think things are coincidental either…. Oh, I don't know the answers, to the above questions. I just would like to know the answers.

My speculation (only an opinion) is that this is an establishment hit job, on Biden. This is not to get him removed from; rather, it's to get him to step aside by weakening him…

---

Some comments inline above.

As I said this information was going to come out. Not sure how it benefits the Democrat "establishment" to leak this at this time.

Also, I mentioned before that my firm has boxes of client documents that nobody has looked at in way more than six years. The fact that boxes that were believed to contain pretty mundane papers weren't examined in that time is no suprise to me.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

caryking said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Biden had classified info in multiple locations and Manny is hanging his hat on "he didn't know" defense. Lol. Poor fella.

---

If you have or know of a paper trail or witnesses showing that Biden knew about the contents of the boxes prior to the discovery of the classified documents, that would certainly be noteworthy. Nothing like that has been made public for Biden or Trump, so I'm skeptical.

Trump had classified documents scattered all over Mar-a-Lago, including in an unsecured desk in an office frequently open to guests. What's his defense?

---

Manny, as I understand it... there were compartmented documents, in this group. These compartmented documents were to be maintained in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) Also, as I understand it... these documents will come to the person directly, not to the person office.

So, these people will have sole responsibility for the documents. Anyway you look at it, documents found, as compartmented, have a custody requirement.

Now, how all this applies to the two people (Trump and Biden) is beyond my understanding...

---

There are two separate issues of possession/knowledge:

• Did the person ever knowingly have possession of the document at a time when they were authorized to do so?
• Did the person knowingly "take and carry way" the document after the time when they were authorized to do so? (That would be a willful violation of the PRA and the criminal enforcement mechanism.)

The fact that, for Trump and Biden, the documents include the kind of document you mention really only answers the first question. Even if we assume that the documents were delivered to them personally at one time, that doesn't mean that at a later time those documents weren't packed in a box by someone else and then moved to another place. If neither Trump nor Biden were aware that there were classified documents in the boxes that were moved, then that would go against the "willfulness" standard in the statutes.

Again, I'm all for prosecuting either one of them if the "willfulness" standard in the statute could be satisfied.

---

Manny, Manny, Manny...

STOP, please, just STOP!!!

I just learned of this Compartmented nomenclature. The word SCIF was new to me as well. So, I looked it up. Compartmented is the "C" in SCIF.

I heard a Military General speak this morning and he explained the process of documents classified with compartmented. That actually (I think) makes it even more secure than Top Secret. Meaning, it is the sole responsibility of the receiver.

Again, I don't know how this applies to either Biden or Trump...

---

Documents containing such compartmented information would be designated "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information" or "TS/SCI". If you were paying attention during the Trump document saga over the summer you might have recognized the term. The Trump documents included several such documents.

The presence of such documents in each case should be very concerning. Hopefully one or both of the investigations will shed more light on this.

---

Manny, you really need to start asking the different questions…

Why did Biden attorneys start looking for documents at this Biden think tank?

The office was no longer needed and the boxes were being moved elsewhere for storage. As for why attorneys were reviewing the contents, I don't know.

If said attorneys found the documents, did they have clearance?

There was no belief or expectation that there was anything classified there, so no reason that those people would have clearance. However at least one of Biden's attorneys does have a security clearance and he was involved in returning the documents to the Archives and notifying DOJ.

The movement of these documents, who did this?

Excellent question for Biden and Trump. Hopefully the Special Counsels will find out (and report) more about this.

Did they have clearance?

Excellent question for Biden and Trump. Hopefully the Special Counsels will find out (and report) more about this.

Why hasn't Obama come out said anything, yet?

Why would he and what would he say?

Why did this become news, as soon as the house changed hands?

I honestly think that many people/organizations faced with a potential PR problem try to ignore it and put it off, but that rarely works.

Did anyone leak this news to a house member?

No idea. You have someone in mind?

Why has the media taken a little (I say little because it's all relative) harder stance on this, starting today?

More questions raised by the additional documents and the timeline of discovery and public disclosure.

Why did a Garland use an attorney, without past political impartiality, to probe this?

He is a former Trump appointee, confirmed unanimously by the Senate, is endorsed by a Republican givernor, has experience working with a Special Counsel while serving under Trump, and, less importantly, he's based in the right place to conduct the incestigation. Seems like a lot of good reasons to pick him. Other than his association with Rosenstein while overseeing the Meuller investigation, how has he demonstrated a lack of impartiality? Had you ever heard of him before?

Listen, I don't believe in conspiracies; however, I don't think things are coincidental either…. Oh, I don't know the answers, to the above questions. I just would like to know the answers.

My speculation (only an opinion) is that this is an establishment hit job, on Biden. This is not to get him removed from; rather, it's to get him to step aside by weakening him…

---

Some comments inline above.

As I said this information was going to come out. Not sure how it benefits the Democrat "establishment" to leak this at this time.

Also, I mentioned before that my firm has boxes of client documents that nobody has looked at in way more than six years. The fact that boxes that were believed to contain pretty mundane papers weren't examined in that time is no suprise to me.

---

Manny, I didn't realize you are a paralegal…

Watch the expression on the face of the lady in pink seated directly behind Peter Doocy... 🤣 pic.twitter.com/lM9CJrxAOJ

— Lido Key Dude (@LidoDude) January 12, 2023

Psaki calls Trump's handling of docs 'horrifying,' still defends Biden https://t.co/nMPWKWJGhH

— Fox News (@FoxNews) January 15, 2023

PackDaddy said:

---

What happened to the thread that had the titties in it?

---

Use the search function and type in "Motorboating"... it's several pages back, but it's still around.

TheStorm said:

---

PackDaddy said:

---

What happened to the thread that had the <removed> in it?

---

Use the search function and type in "Motorboating"... it's several pages back, but it's still around.

---

This has no business in this thread nor on this site. I have flagged original post and quote.