New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

A comparison of the Biden and Trump documents issues…

EatTheRich

President
Yet another painstakingly dutiful call to shirk citizen critical thinking, civic stewardship, and accountability.

…in favor of Democrat politicians.

No, I’m sorry. Decent people will not abide such appeals to suspension and preemption of consistent application of standards. You extremist partisan radicals will, of course, continue down the path of 24x7 hackery. The decent will not. I suspect that if we were to survey the landscape, we’d find many, many instances of presidents, vice presidents, secretaries of state, etc. who have/possessed legacy documents that they should not. Whether or not Trump is/was a raging jackass about his instance - whether or not Trump lied or concealed, or tried to argue that such documents were rightfully his…this is all irrelevant noise in the matter of the security, proper storage, and rightful possession of such documents. Whether we like or dislike the guy mishandling or being negligent with such documents is irrelevant. Every noise-making attempt at dilution, mitigation, or extenuating circumstance…every claim of downstream cooperation or communication…all irrelevant to the facts of security, proper storage, and rightful possession of such documents. As we are bombarded with wave after wave of excuse-making, parsing, and apologetics, the good citizen must maintain acute focus on the facts of, in Trump’s case, presidential…and in Biden’s case, vice presidential CONDUCT, ACTIONS, EXECUTION TO LEGAL REQUIREMENTS as well as the laws governing each. Whether the Presidential Records Act (in Trump’s case)…or other laws in Biden’s.

We must specifically tune out the constant nonsense and intentional issue-blurring campaigns waged by partisan hack stooges and sycophant propagandists.

Thank you for the reminders. Again. And again.
Whether Trump broke the law turns largely on intent, which is why applying the same standard might mean prosecuting Trump and not Biden.
 

JohnJohnson

Council Member
Not even an effort to refute any factual assertions in the article.
It's an "opinion" piece by a guy who was counsel for House Democrats. That's not real. It has no "factual assertions". It's just an insane rant. It's like a Big Foot hunter claiming they've seen Big Foot. You cannot prove a negative. You can however claim them insane and everyone knows it true.

Facts are that Donald Trump could declassify anything he wanted for any reason he wanted when those documents were packed up. Biden had no such authority for the documents he removed to his personal property. Thus, we know for a fact that Joe Biden committed a crime. No such assured claim can be made about the documents Trump had.

That is your FACTUAL assertion. Refute it.
 

JohnJohnson

Council Member
In a box. Of course, with his XRAY eyes, he should have seen a few pages marked classified.
X-ray eyes? WTF does that mean? They were all viewed clearly when they packed (either by Joe Biden or his direction) and before they were moved to that location (either by Joe Biden or his direction).

They weren't stolen and secretly hidden in Joe's garage by the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus.
 
Last edited:

Bugsy McGurk

President
It's an "opinion" piece by a guy who was counsel for House Democrats. That's not real. It has no "factual assertions". It's just an insane rant. It's like a Big Foot hunter claiming they've seen Big Foot. You cannot prove a negative. You can however claim them insane and everyone knows it true.

Facts are that Donald Trump could declassify anything he wanted for any reason he wanted when those documents were packed up. Biden had no such authority for the documents he removed to his personal property. Thus, we know for a fact that Joe Biden committed a crime. No such assured claim can be made about the documents Trump had.

That is your FACTUAL assertion. Refute it.
Of course it has factual assertions. But your mind has been destroyed so you don’t know that. You’re a hopeless Trump cultist.
 

JohnJohnson

Council Member
Of course it has factual assertions.
Which is what again? Claiming Big Foot is real? That's not "factual".

Factual is Trump having the authority to declassify while Joe Biden did not. Insane rants from Obama's corrupt "ethics czar" is not factual. This, after all, is the guy who tweeted that Russian collusion was true and that Mueller was going to get him over and over. Yikes!



That aged well! Getting black eyes from their own stupidity must be a Democrat special.

 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Which is what again? Claiming Big Foot is real? That's not "factual".

Factual is Trump having the authority to declassify while Joe Biden did not. Insane rants from Obama's corrupt "ethics czar" is not factual. This, after all, is the guy who tweeted that Russian collusion was true and that Mueller was going to get him over and over. Yikes!



That aged well! Getting black eyes from their own stupidity must be a Democrat special.

No, he doesn’t mention Big Foot. You’re having seizures.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Exactly right, and what does this jerk Eisen say ? He says that trump had "obstructive conduct". The stupid fool doesn't even know if Trump ever knew of the documents being at Mar-a Lago, and he has no way of showing that.

And how can Eisen claim there was no "no pattern of obstruction that we know of at the moment — there is no evidence of that at all." ? he said. Were not these documents in Biden's possession for 7 years, with no reporting that to anyone ? Is this not a whole 7 years of "obstruction" ?

Eisen then says > " Biden’s team appears to have raced to turn in the documents when they found them," but 2 months went by, with no turning in all the documents.

The notion that the FBI may have planted documents in Mar-a-Lago, is still viable, and how could anybody prove that didn't happen ?
You think you are actually refuting anything here?
1. Negotiations with NARA went on from May 2021 to January 2022 to get Trump to return documents he should not have at Mar-A-Lago. That was obstruction.
2. You think Trump didn't know of documents in his desk? Even after he'd been told that there were documents missing? Why did his lawyers provide the NARA with a letter stating all government documents had been returned? Wasn't that also obstruction, given there were more than 20 boxes of documents in the storage area and more in his desk?
3. Yes, Biden's team didn't find all documents in November. They found some in December. Trump returned some documents in January 2022 and the rest were recovered in August 2022 by the FBI with a search warrant.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Sure, sure. Negligence isn’t a thing. Neither is lying.

What sycophantic propagandists you lefties all are.
As has been posted a number of times now...

1. The first potential crime is the removal of government documents. Who selected the documents to be packed up and removed?

2. The second is the improper storage of classified documents. Someone can only be prosecuted for this if they were also guilty of selecting documents to be taken.

Intent matters when it comes to finding someone guilty.

The investigations will figure that out. Your posts seem to be in a hurry to declare guilt and the hell with the investigation.
 

JohnJohnson

Council Member
You think you are actually refuting anything here?
1. Negotiations with NARA went on from May 2021 to January 2022 to get Trump to return documents he should not have at Mar-A-Lago. That was obstruction.
Trump said they were responsive to NARA's requests and returned the documents that applied to the request. If it continues beyond that point it becomes a document dispute.
 

EatTheRich

President
Which is what again? Claiming Big Foot is real? That's not "factual".

Factual is Trump having the authority to declassify while Joe Biden did not. Insane rants from Obama's corrupt "ethics czar" is not factual. This, after all, is the guy who tweeted that Russian collusion was true and that Mueller was going to get him over and over. Yikes!



That aged well! Getting black eyes from their own stupidity must be a Democrat special.

Collusion was amply demonstrated in Mueller’s report, which detailed dozens of instances. Mueller’s goal was not to “get Trump,” though, but to provide the DOJ with a report that they could make the political decision to act on or not … they chose not to.
 

JohnJohnson

Council Member
Collusion was amply demonstrated in Mueller’s report, which detailed dozens of instances. Mueller’s goal was not to “get Trump,” though, but to provide the DOJ with a report that they could make the political decision to act on or not … they chose not to.
Collusion was a hoax
 
Top