January 10, 20232 yr 7 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Credit to CNN for this helpful chart Our new speaker says it's political. A man who has been a public servant for over 40 years found with less than a dozen documents, while the other one was President for 4 years and had over 300. While I understand BBE is saying regarding the penalty being the same, one just can't help comparing the two. One a most likely error, and the other a ish show.
January 10, 20232 yr if they're both guilty of crimes, lock them both up! joe already has legit street cred after handling corn pop without even breaking a sweat. he'd be fine. cheeto wears diapers & craps his pants...i doubt the other inmates would want anything to do with that so he should be...umm....okay too.
January 10, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, DiPros said: Our new speaker says it's political. A man who has been a public servant for over 40 years found with less than a dozen documents, while the other one was President for 4 years and had over 300. While I understand BBE is saying regarding the penalty being the same, one just can't help comparing the two. One a most likely error, and the other a ish show. I am not saying the penalty should be the same. Trump obstructed and there are additional statutes that he may have violated meriting additional sentences. My issue is that any other person with a clearance would be prosecuted, have their clearances revoked, and never be able to hold a clearance. People have gone to jail for less and now politicians who have violated the same statute to greater extent are held harmless because of inequality in application of the governing law.
January 10, 20232 yr 8 minutes ago, BBE said: I explained why intent was moot for violation of the statute using the statutory language more than you have where you intentionally misrepresented material facts. I did not once resort to a lie, unlike yourself. What have I lied about?
January 10, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: What have I lied about? Minimum level of classification of the documents. So quickly you forget.
January 10, 20232 yr Just now, BBE said: Minimum level of classification of the documents. So quickly you forget. 1 hour ago, we_gotta_believe said: No, if the material was classified at the lowest level and wasn't improperly disclosed, he will not be investigated for violations of the espionage act. Trump had more than 20 boxes of materials classified at the highest levels and reportedly included extremely sensitive information like details of human intelligence and nuclear capabilities of foreign nations. Biden reportedly had 10 documents, found and surrendered voluntarily, none of which were reported to be of the same nature. I get it though, much like how you repeatedly downplayed Trump's attempt to subvert democracy, you really want to paint this as being the same thing Trump did so you can both sides it, but it's just not. Trump is F'ed, Biden is fine. Come back in 2028 with someone who doesn't bootlick a reprehensible traitorous moron if you want to win the presidency again. I clearly was speaking in hypothetical terms because the report from Reuters didn't state classification level of the documents. I then conceded that point once you pointed out the CNN report where it was stated.
January 10, 20232 yr 30 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: You're sadly mistaken if you think 10 documents classified at the lowest level found in a locked closet endanger him for being charged with the espionage act. The rest of my post provides the necessary context for the purpose and framing of your argument. You're reaching on this for obvious reasons. You desperately want this to make Biden look bad so that it can make Trump's transgressions appear slightly less horrible by comparison. You've gone to this well so many times before, lest I remind you about your contentions over whether Trump submitted false slates of electors to try to overturn the results of a free and fair election. This is quite the affirmative statement, liar.
January 10, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: I clearly was speaking in hypothetical terms because the report from Reuters didn't state classification level of the documents. I then conceded that point once you pointed out the CNN report where it was stated. Guess you need better sources before making statements that are readily proved to be lies.
January 10, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, BBE said: This is quite the affirmative statement, liar. He already said he was wrong on that. I'm not sure what point you think you're making. Thankfully, CNN put out a helpful chart so we all understand the situation. Edit: I'd like to a have a beer with the guy on the left
January 10, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, BBE said: This is quite the affirmative statement, liar. Oh, I get it now. You don't understand the meaning of the word "if". 1 minute ago, BBE said: Guess you need better sources before making statements that are readily proved to be lies. CNN is a better source than Reuters, is not the burn you think it is.
January 10, 20232 yr Just now, we_gotta_believe said: Oh, I get it now. You don't understand the meaning of the word "if". CNN is a better source than Reuters, is not the burn you think it is. No, you misrepresented material facts which makes you a liar.
January 10, 20232 yr 48 minutes ago, GreenReaper said: Yeah, he's only had it since 2017 or whatever. Why did he have it in the first place? Probably no need to look into it though, even though he shouldn't have had it in the first place. Nobody knew they were even there. This appears to be a case where a folder of 10 classified documents got mixed in with unclassified inadvertently, and were just now discovered. As soon as they were discovered they were returned to the archive and the DOJ is investigating. The right is trying to draw some nonsense equivalence. It's not even close to what Trump did. Trump knowingly took boxes of classified documents then fought with the DOJ and archives for a year for them. It's not even close to the same thing.
January 10, 20232 yr 39 minutes ago, mikemack8 said: Repug president does something, Dems are outraged Dem president does something, Repugs are outraged Second verse, same as the first Pretty much.
January 10, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, BBE said: No, you misrepresented material facts which makes you a liar. The word "if" was in both posts.
January 10, 20232 yr 41 minutes ago, mikemack8 said: Repug president does something, Dems are outraged Dem president does something, Repugs are outraged Second verse, same as the first yeah, except there's no equivalence. it's like comparing first degree murder to a traffic violation.
January 10, 20232 yr 45 minutes ago, DiPros said: The DOJ is looking for that answer. There is a need to know. No one is arguing that. Honestly, it would be interesting to know why, but it's not a massive deal. All this seems to be from both sides is a reason to **** or demonstrate hypocrisy.
January 10, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Nobody knew they were even there. This appears to be a case where a folder of 10 classified documents got mixed in with unclassified inadvertently, and were just now discovered. As soon as they were discovered they were returned to the archive and the DOJ is investigating. The right is trying to draw some nonsense equivalence. It's not even close to what Trump did. Trump knowingly took boxes of classified documents then fought with the DOJ and archives for a year for them. It's not even close to the same thing. SCI materials cannot be even viewed outside of a SCIF. The ability to mix with unclassified materials requires taking the materials outside of the SCIF which is a security violation.
January 10, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: The word "if" was in both posts. But your if in the second post was addressing a perceived equivalency. Specifically "if I think..." It did not address the statement regarding classification. Continue to try to defend your lies, please.
January 10, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, BBE said: But your if in the second post was addressing a perceived equivalency. Specifically "if I think..." It did not address the statement regarding classification. Continue to try to defend your lies, please. Clearly continued from the context of my previous post that I already pointed out, which you obviously read and replied to. Now who's the liar?
January 10, 20232 yr Just now, JohnSnowsHair said: yeah, except there's no equivalence. it's like comparing first degree murder to a traffic violation. The entire issue on both sides is a bunch of crap. He did it...but he did it worse...nah uh...whatever. Biden had papers. Whatever. Trump is a baby and Biden isn't. Both did it. Both sides love pointing at the other.
January 10, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Nobody knew they were even there. This appears to be a case where a folder of 10 classified documents got mixed in with unclassified inadvertently, and were just now discovered. As soon as they were discovered they were returned to the archive and the DOJ is investigating. The right is trying to draw some nonsense equivalence. It's not even close to what Trump did. Trump knowingly took boxes of classified documents then fought with the DOJ and archives for a year for them. It's not even close to the same thing. Somebody knew they were there because they put them there. We can guess all we want about how they got there but it's only a guess mostly driven by political leaning. People on the left 'Oh, they were just misplaced documents that nobody even knew about' and people on the right 'Top secret documents, what was he going to do with them, trade them for jobs for Hunter?' I'm just saying it shouldn't be dismissed outright because nobody knows why he's had them or what his intent might have been. Maybe there was no intent to do anything but maybe there was but either way it should be investigated at least a little, not totally dismissed as nothing. There appears to be no good reason for them to be there.
January 10, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Clearly continued from the context of my previous post that I already pointed out, which you obviously read and replied to. Now who's the liar? No, not really. But, continue to twist, liar.
January 10, 20232 yr Just now, BBE said: No, not really. But, continue to twist, liar. Sure thing, bud. All part of your track record on these matters. Just like when you tried to claim false slates of electors were never submitted. Then tried to correct me on the name by calling them "alternate electors".
January 10, 20232 yr 4 minutes ago, Diehardfan said: The entire issue on both sides is a bunch of crap. He did it...but he did it worse...nah uh...whatever. Biden had papers. Whatever. Trump is a baby and Biden isn't. Both did it. Both sides love pointing at the other. Prosecute the lot for any and all related offenses.
Create an account or sign in to comment