>

Investigate and if he’s found guilty charge him to full power of the law and same with trump
Someone needs to visit Pence, Bush, Obama, Dick Cheney's homes and check for documents. >

Why let Carter off the hook so easy? Could be Top Secret peanut farming related documents >

You should probably look into Dan Quayle too. We know he's got some kind of top secret reports on potatoes >

*potatos >

It's part of the joke... >

Potatoes is the correct spelling of the plural. >

Perhaps we should use potato in the singular by saying “potatoe commodities” or something >

Oh FFS, I hate that word now. >

Wait. Couldn't Obama have declassified them by thinking about it? >

I’m pretty sure he could >

Man that's fast. >

Merrick was able to line those ducks up really fast. >

Terrible choice for AG, it's stupid to choose people Republicans will "accept" just to be bipartisan. >

Yeah I'm getting pretty sick and tired of seeing the "appeasement" strategy myself. >

I’m starting to think that many past presidents likely have some number of classified documents in their office or in their home.
The difference, however, is that Biden found the documents and turned them into the national archives. Then he found more in his house. He turned those in as well. And as far as we know, he only had a few. Trump had hundreds of classified documents spread across dozens of boxes and fought giving them back to the archives when requested. He ignored subpoenas. He did not cooperate and broke the law. >

Nobody seems to be mention that Biden is the acting President right now
iirc  executive privilege was basically Trump's whole defense >

While I think that this specific issue is wildly overblown, it's important to note that Biden wouldn't have had the security clearance to have those documents in his possession from 2016-2021.  So it would've definitely been a security infraction at the time.
Of course Biden forgetting to return these documents still isn't comparable to Trump intentionally stealing documents and obstructing the US government from retrieving them when they asked for those documents back. >

Crime. Call it a crime. >

Not all security infractions are prosecuted as crimes is the thing.  The classic "guy accidentally walks home with a classified folder in his briefcase, realizes his mistake, and alerts his supervisor while returning it immediately" situation for example isn't something that's prosecuted.  It's generally just an internal matter where the dude gets chewed out, fined, or in more egregious cases is fired or has their security clearance stripped. >

You may be right. I’m trying to find examples online if someone accidentally mishandling classified info and then being charged with a crime but most of the examples are fairly egregious. 
I’ll have to think about your comment for a bit and reflect on if it’s actually a crime or not. >

Which was nonsensical. Her leaked emails showed that she was instructing her housekeeper to print out classified documents for her. Not to mention that her secret email server to get around congressional oversight deliberately broke so many laws. Then she had the evidence destroyed after it was Congressionally subpoenaed. 
It was egregious and the fact she wasn’t charged was clearly political. If Donald Trump had been found to do those same things he surely would have been indicted. 
We know this because it’s basically happening now. >

That's not exactly a complete picture of what happened.  In reality, Clinton fucked up, but the issue was an administrative matter rather than a criminal one, and her personal culpability was more of an IT issue.  Technically, government officials WERE allowed to use private email servers so long as they get approved first.  The fact that Clinton didn't get this approval seems to be more of a bureaucratic hiccup than malfeasance.
In fact, numerous government officials on both sides of the political aisle have used private emails/communications systems for government communications, ranging from Colin Powell to Jared Kushner.  No one's going after their asses with criminal charges.
One assistant attorney for the George W. Bush administration also noted that prosecuting Clinton over this "would be entirely novel, and would turn in part on very tricky questions about how email exchanges fit into language written with physical removal of classified information in mind."
Finally, a large chunk of Clinton's emails that contained classified information weren't really the scandal people think they were either.  This is because:

For about half of them, the information wasn't classified at the time the emails were sent, but only became labeled as classified later on.
The classified information was embedded deep in longer email chains, which practically no one keeps track of when they're sending emails, so they couldn't have an act of willful misconduct.
In many cases, the classified information wasn't stuff that Clinton herself was managing, but rather things that were incidentally sent to her.

To quote the security specialist I cited above:

it's very clearly not the sort of thing the Justice Department prosecutes either. For the last several months, people have been asking me what I thought the chances of an indictment were. I have said each time that there is no chance without evidence of bad faith action of some kind. People simply don't get indicted for accidental, non-malicious mishandling of classified material. I have followed leak cases for a very long time, both at the Washington Post and since starting Lawfare. I have never seen a criminal matter proceed without even an allegation of something more than mere mishandling of senstive information. Hillary Clinton is not above the law, but to indict her on these facts, she'd have to be significantly below the law. >

Dude, you’re quoting fucking lawfare? That is a network of insurgent Democrat lawyers. 
Benjamin Wittes, David Ignatius, Marc Elias. 
Yes, Clinton’s personal lawyer, Marc Elias. 
Lawfare legitimately means to target and diminish political opponents through litigation. I don’t think you could have picked a more warped or biased source had you tried. 

Many, if not most, of the legal aspects connected to attacks against conservatives stem from inside this Lawfare network.  They operate inside government and outside in the private sector and compliment each other in their unified agenda.  An example was the attack against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh by both groups.
During her Senate testimony Kavanaugh accuser, Christine Blasey-Ford ,called the network her “beach friends” connecting the casual relationship they all carry.  The Lawfare group operate inside the DOJ, inside the FBI, inside the State Department and inside the institutions of government.  They connect ideologically to their allies in the private sector law firms and they share insider information to coordinate their attacks. >

I’m curious why they were there, but at the end of the day, Biden and his group turned them over as soon as they found them and have been cooperative. Trump fought them the whole way and purposely stole the documents.  We’re talking hundreds as well which is way more than they found with Biden.  Big difference. >

My best guess is extremely careless movers. >

Probably not far from the truth. I mean, he was vice president at the time. Even after that, he’s got staffers and other people that move stuff around. He’s not doing that on his own. A lot of people that you have to trust when you’re in that position.  Trump blatantly stole things and then tried to keep them. >

Yeah, I'm not sure why people are thinking that Biden himself had anything to do with what documents were moved. He has people who do that for him. >

Good. No one is above the law. You know what we haven't seen? Biden railing and calling the Special Counsel names and whining that he's a Republican that hates him because he was nominated by Trump. 
I'm looking forward to everyone seeing the differences in temperament between these two men and the differences between these two cases becoming readily apparent. >

Narrator: they wont >

I mean, we're seeing it already through Biden's absolute silence. I guarantee we won't get weekly news updates about Biden trying to fire the Special Counsel. >

I'm a Democrat who voted for Biden. This is good and he needs to be held accountable, same as any other President who was in office who has been caught in the same situation. Classified documents need to be kept in the respectful, safe, secure places. >

George W. is scrambling. >

He disposed of it all on 9/11. /s >

Or he rolled it up into joints. >

Good! Now we can see the difference between how the two act lmao, this is how democracy works. >

Obama just needs to come out and say he retroactively declassified them so it’s totally cool.
He’d wipe out half the GOP with heart attacks. >

Why was it only two weeks to investigate this situation and 2 years to investigate trumps?  I am so sick of making excuses f o r the delay in prosecuting trump.  C'mon Garland. >

The first documents of Biden were discovered on Nov 2nd,  strange that they didn't disclose these findings before the midterms which were a week later, also where did you get 2 years from? The National Archive first asked Trump's team about them in May 2022. >

Honestly I feel like the repubs  are playing right into the dems hands with this one. Any investigation is sure to absolve Biden of malicious intent. It will be seen as a simple mistake. While at the same time throwing the spotlight on Trump and his lies about what he had and when and why.  On top of that once the final report done by an sc comes out the dems can hold it up any time a repub cries because one of their own is being investigated for any issue. 
I would love to see Biden sign an EO that gives MORE power to investigate ANYONE caught with classified documents. That would truly make repub heads explode. >

I hope you're right but I don't have nearly enough faith in the publics ability to understand nuance or the media's ability not to both-sides this thing to death.
I hope this is fully investigated and Biden cooperates fully and let the chips fall where they may but I'm concerned that the public won't care either way. >

What's funny is that if you go over to /r conservative they can sense that something is off about this. 
But foolishly they seem to think it's a set up to oust Biden so that Harries can be POTUS. lol >

I bet Bill Clinton, Gore, Bush, Cheney, Obama and Pence are quite busy combing through boxes right now >

Every US citizen is now entitled to one classified document. The documents cannot be sold or traded and must be kept in a room surrounded by boxes of old Christmas decorations. It's the only fair way to resolve this mess. >

Ooo! Can I get the nuclear launch codes! I am 100% sure I am safer than half the other guys we elected. >

Dibs on the Master_Passwords.xlx spreadsheet I know the government employees use. >

Joke's on you: it's all "Password1" and "12345." >

Hey, that's the same as my luggage! >

For those struggling with the concept that the FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago but not Biden’s residence, the act of forgetting to return top-secret documents is negligent.  It is not a crime if you return them as soon as you realize you have them.  
The crime is knowingly taking, concealing, lying about and refusing to return the top-secret documents as Trump did.  Another example is when Sandy Berger, President Clinton’s former national security adviser, sneaked top secret documents out of the National Archives in his socks.  Yes, in his socks.  He knew he was doing something illegal, he tried to conceal it, pled guilty, and resigned as a policy adviser to Democratic presidential contender John Kerry.  
Should President Biden be held to the same standard as former presidents? Yes, of course. Are these two cases equivalent?  Not even in the same universe. >


It is not a crime 

Incorrect. The law doesn't care about your intentions. >

Fascinating to watch successful propaganda in real time. The constant flood of the same story has turned so many people that originally said “Biden didn’t do anything wrong” into Biden is a fool and has ruined the Democratic Party” in just a couple days.
Listen, this bears investigation. Here’s what we know so far: Biden’s attorneys found classified documents from when Biden was VP in locations they should not have been. They turned them in.
That’s all we know. It should be investigated, as should any classified documents found where they shouldn’t be. 
Did Biden personally take these and intentionally hold them for any reason, nefarious or not? We don’t know.
Did Biden tell a staffer in 2017 to return these and the staffer dropped the ball? We don’t know. 
Was Biden even supposed to have these documents where they were found? We don’t know. We don’t even know if they were SCIF documents or something else.
If Biden took SCIF documents away from their legally allowed location he should be prosecuted. But we don’t know any of that yet.
How is this different from Trump’s Mar a Lago documents? By admission Trump not only took the documents that we know were SCIF but also refused to return them when asked and, in fact, had attorneys sign documents saying there were no more when he knew there were. That’s criminal.
Prosecute crimes the same way for everyone.  But stop thinking that repeated stories make them any more true or nefarious just be cause they’re being repeated. >

Wow. No. >

No, I mean no as in “you can’t possibly believe that a basic storage room in a private citizens’ house/hotel is a SCIF, can you?” >

Mar-A-Lago had official SCIF designation in the past.  That much has been confirmed per reliable reporting (see article).
Biden’s locations in question could not have ever had that designation.  His garage couldn’t, and the think tank that was opened several years after his exit from office couldn’t. >


in the past

So no. Thanks. And Mar A Lago didn’t have it, a specifically set up controlled room may have, but temporary means temporary. >

The DOJ couldnt say they investigated their boss and found no crimes without looking like they were protecting him. They needed a special counsel to say it for them >

Yes... this is the way it's always been... >

As long as they indict Trump for something I don't care. >

“They are gonna get him this time……” >

My point is it gives him cover to indict Trump. I'm not optimistic. He's clearly a criminal and the system is clearly broken. >

What crimes has he committed? >

he literally directed Michael Cohen to do a crime that Michael Cohen went to prison for. >

I'm amazed at how poorly classified documents are controlled. Seems every paper copy should get a unique serial number, inventoried and be issued to a specific individual who is held responsible for its control. Those copies would have to be returned for shredding and record clearance. >

That sure was fast when it was a democrat compared with a Republican... Almost like, Garland's a piece of shit >

It's political cover for Jack Smith >

Think you've nailed it. It's certainly going to be a positive as we see both investigations pan out. >

Good pick. >

How would you know Biden's intent? You seriously think Biden hasn't been involved in corrupt activities? Just because Trump is worse doesn't mean Biden can do no wrong. >

Waiting for Biden to say “good thing my predecessor argued a sitting president can’t be charged with a crime or else this might suck!” >

It's kind of hysterical that all this noise from the GOP, and Fox News, makes this all into a bigger headline, because they're making it into a hysterical argument that stealing hundreds and hundreds of pages of classified information, knowingly taking it from the White House, and lying about having it, IS THE EQUIVALENT, to a dozen or pagea of classified material being placed in then Vice President Biden's documents.
Like, one guy literally took national secrets home with him 2 days before he was set to leave office, the other guy, nobody knew it was even there till his team contacted the DOJ / Archives to tell them it was there.
This victim complex the GOP cries to its supporters about is just so pathetic at this point. >

Good!   Do it.
No one should oppose it.   How did sensitive documents end up in a garage?