comment: >
  
  in light of how detached from reality the right has become, "everything wrong with my establishment politician is an enemy conspiracy" is really not the angle to be taking
context: Dammit, is there a Classified Document fairy leaving them randomly strewn about? >
  
  It's paper. How often have you accidently shuffled something important into a pile you didnt mean to? He was the VP at the time. Nothing has been found in any non-work area. I'd bet this happens every 4 yrs but it's making news cycles now because it's being looked for to be an issue.  I'm not saying if documents were mishandled out of the ordinary there shouldn't be repercussions. I'm just saying we elect humans. >
  
  As part of my job, I have to carry somewhat sensitive paper documents from location to location. If I left them somewhere, I’d be fired instantly and possibly sued. Why lower expectations for government officials? >
  
  Ehhh, stating that your company has a better way to handle sensitive documents than the government isn't the brag you may think it is. Government isn't the playground of the smart. It's the playground of the rich and nepotism. >
  
  I mean. Investigate it obviously. We're not a cult. If he did something wrong, charge him. >
  
  Well since he's president, impeachment and removal would be the remedy here not charges, but agreed. If he did wrong he deserves the consequences. >
  
  He wasn't president at the time. He was VP. He can absolutely get charged legally. They would, however, defer the charges until he was out of office as they always do. >
  
  I wasnt implying he couldn't face charges after he's out of office, that is always an option. But at this point since he is president, the only course of action is impeachment, that was more my point >
  
  There's no actual law that says that. It's been a policy of the DOJ not to indict a sitting president, but there's no law preventing it. >
  
  The oddest thing about this is that no one else found this stuff until now.  I would have thought that you would have a sweep for such things, rather than relying on one person to comply.  (Common sense ain't...) >
  
  
  The oddest thing about this is that no one else found this stuff until now
  
  The real issue here is why the fuck doesn't the national archives know where its documents are >
  
  ..11 million documents are a lot to keep track of >
  
  Plus they were extra busy taping together the documents Trump routinely tore up during his tenure. >
  
  I say it should definitely be investigated and if charges are warranted then they should be put on record and levied. 
  Just remember that the Orange guy is first in line and Didn’t cooperate and obstructed actively. >
  
  Thank you >
  
  Aides are doing their work, and as usual this is not going to be a problem because he didn’t do anything wrong. >
  
  Blame the help. Stellar leadership >
  
  ? "blame"? I thought this was praise. >
  
  The difference between this case and Trump is that Biden is fully cooperating to give back any classified documents. >
  
  The guy recently said he a conversation with Helmut Schmidt and Francois Mitterand about January 6th at the G7 meeting in 2021, both of whom had been dead for 6 and 15 years respectively.
  He can just say they took it and everyone will go along with the story.
  Source 1
  Source 2 >
  
  You just wasted 10 minutes of my life. Between both your sources, we have him accidently saying "Schmidt" instead of "Scholz" and "Mitterand" instead of "Macron"  
  I read through the whole first source because I thought I had missed something. That is a lot of political drool to read. They are all shitty candidates and elects, but you don't have to exaggerate. >
  
  It's almost like we shouldn't keep having 80-year-olds running our country..... >
  
  His lawyers had the documents. Its not like Biden just forgot about them, he delegated it to a team that fucked up, but self reported. Its his responsibility, but the misplacement of the documents wasn't done because he just left them somewhere. >
  
  Yeah, and when asked about it he stares blankly into space. Sure, it's miles better than conman Trump, but still. We can do better. >
  
  Why would he know anything about random papers from years back? He sees and is exposed to probably hundreds of thousands of documents a year. Sure, he's old. But no human could be expected to retain knowledge at that level of where his lawyers placed all the secret documents he sees. >
  
  It was his job. >
  
  It's not his job to keep track of secret documents, that is his clearance level custodial team of lawyers jobs. Which is why their the ones who found them and are handling this mistake. It would be like expecting Jeff Bezos to know why your specific Amazon package was late. >
  
  It is his responsibility then. Period. 
  Both cases are way over blown. There are too many classified documents and designations. A leftover from WW2 and the Cold War. There should be one classification, and it should just be secret with a hard time limit. 
  But it is a fact that there is a direct equivalence between the Chump case and this new one. With one major exception. Trump had the authority to declassify with an utterance. Joe didn't. Chump doesn't have to prove he did. If you think he does, you are badly mistaken. If you think he should have to..well, who cares what someone "thinks" is right.
  So we are down to withholding documents from the archive. A crime with no statutory punishment.
  Let us move along, eh? >
  
  This is one of the dumbest, least informed comments I've seen on the subject so far. Having been involved with secret documents myself, I can definitively say you have no god damn clue about what you're talking about. >
  
  Brilliant reply. What comment was the dumbest? >
  
  All of it was pretty dumb. The part about having a single classification was particularly dumb, but only because I know in depth why it's dumb. 
  Equivocating holding secret documents months after the government told you to give them back to self reporting the finding of misplaced secret documents and immediately returning them was also pretty dumb. 
  Honorable mention goes to the concept that, without evidence, Trump could say he declassifies something after having left office, otherwise being likely guilty of a crime. >
  
  Wouldn't be surprised if he literally forgot about them. America really needs to stop putting senile geriatrics in charge of the country lol. >
  
  I love Joe but old and forgetful is natural. No more old candidates please! >
  
  How about NO draft dodgers are eligible to run for President period. They don’t seem to care about national security . Serving might make them take their oath a little more seriously . >
  
  Rigggghhhttt. Looking back on all the meaningless death in American Wars, I wouldn't want to be drafted either. Look how well veterans are being treated now. How do you equate that with being a political leader? >
  
  guess who runs to Canada when the draft occurs?   last time it was the liberal hippies.  They all dodged up north >
  
  Good. Fuck fighting and risking your life for a country that can't even feed their children or provide us proper Healthcare in return. I used to want to enlist fresh out of highschool but I'm sure glad as hell I was talked out of it. >
  
  Who cares? Was a crime committed? Nope.    This what IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN when you are a responsible person, surrounded by responsible people -- YOU TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.  This is only like Trumps document stealing in that both incidents use the word "documents" >
  
  Yes. Classified documents were included. >
  
  Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho Joe has got to go. 
  The US needs new leadership. Biden was so much better than Trump but that's not saying much. >
  
  Sayings like this always remind me of a Lithuanian woman I met, who was 10 when the nazis rolled into her village. She says they were so happy, because the nazis left the family a few loaves of bread a week. 
  Now, we know now that the nazis were trying to starve them to death. However, we also know that the Soviets were trying to starve them to death harder. But by no means is better "good" >
  
  They were planted by the GOP’s goons to muddy the waters in the trump case. I guess.