>

So NARA seemed to know that there were missing documents and tried to work for months with dt's team to get them back.
It has obviously been awhile since biden was vp, was NARA attempting to find these documents all this time? 
I assume that there is a database of all confidential documents and that they are tracked, which is how they knew trump still had certain documents in his possession.
Did NARA not know these docs were missing? Or they didn't care? That's what I'm curious about.
“We’ve been investigating since November.” 
I’m more curious about NARA dropping the ball. >

Yeah, that's my issue mainly too. They should know if documents are missing. >


They should know if documents are missing.

I have a friend who works at State; he told me that the sheer volume of classified material generated by the WH makes it hard to control.
I don't care if it's hard to control, it needs to be controlled anyway. >

100% I've heard the same. Sheer volume. Over classification of documents. I don't care. Hire more people and develop new systems to manage it better. It needs to be under control. >

Your realize that rhe modus operandi of the GQP is to not fund places it doesn't want to do their jobs?
Post office?  Refuse to budget them, then say they're useless so they can try to privatize or get rid of it again.
IRS?  Keep under funding them, so they cannot have the manpower necessary to investigate  and litigate rich people and corporations for tax fraud/evasion.
Stop blaming the institutions being eroded, blame the assholes breaking it on purpose so they can get away with their  crimes >

Biden should just declassify the documents with his mind, problem solved. >

Maybe the FBI planted them! And if they didn’t then he already declassified them. >

Investigate and if anything improper is found then prosecute.  It's not rocket science.  This goes for Trump or Biden.  This is the difference between Republicans and Democrats.  Democrats don't give a shit if you go after a Democrat... if they did something wrong they should be punished. >

You can't prosecute a sitting president. That has been clearly established. The House can--and probably will--impeach him. >

They were going to impeach him anyway. They said as much. >

But I was really looking forward to articles of impeachment being brought because Disney cast a dark skinned woman as the little mermaid, or because Joe fell off his bike.  
It's kind of a bummer that they now have something that sounds a bit more legitimate to waste time with. >


a bit more legitimate to waste time with.

I voted for Joe and I plan to vote for him again if he runs again. That said, if there was a significant crime here, then it isn't a waste of time. I wouldn't even want the Democratic majority to just acquit him in a Senate trial. If he did something that warrants being removed from office, then remove him from office (If somehow this was true, it would mean he wouldn't be getting my vote in 2024). >

Someone else needs to run in 2024, and someone needs to start explaining that to Biden now. >

He's going to run. People need to get over the idea that he may not run. Baring some huge legal or medical issue he's going to run. >

Yes he is going to run.
A lot of people who voted for him don't want him to run again and may not vote for him again.
These two things can both be true. >

I voted for Biden.
I don’t want him to run again.
If Trump is the nominee, I’ll vote for Biden again.
If Desantis is the nominee, I’ll vote for Biden again.
Republicans are self proclaimed party of domestic terrorists.
As an independent, I will treat them as such and vote blue until they get their shit together.
Fuck the GOP.