Lock him up indictment FL

[Anonymous]

peace

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Video here:

He had clothes in document boxes?

Our former President is a bag lady.

He got kicked out of his house, and now he's carting all of his belongings from place to place, wherever he goes. He finds a safe place to keep them for a few weeks or so, but then someone says he has to move them. From time to time somebody tries to touch his boxes and he scares them off because they are his boxes. They fall over and he has to put everything back in. Sometimes people try to take his boxes and he goes into a rage. The boxes contain the proof that he is really important. So even though it's been two years and he has yet to go through them, having them gives him peace because the truth is somewhere in there.

Sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Video here:

He had clothes in document boxes?

Our former President is a bag lady.

He got kicked out of his house, and now he's carting all of his belongings from place to place, wherever he goes. He finds a safe place to keep them for a few weeks or so, but then someone says he has to move them. From time to time somebody tries to touch his boxes and he scares them off because they are his boxes. They fall over and he has to put everything back in. Sometimes people try to take his boxes and he goes into a rage. The boxes contain the proof that he is really important. So even though it's been two years and he has yet to go through them, having them gives him peace because the truth is somewhere in there.

Sad.

He seems very confused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Video here:

He had clothes in document boxes?

My thought was that Maralago needs more storage space. You would think a place that large would have enough.
Our former President is a bag lady.

He got kicked out of his house, and now he's carting all of his belongings from place to place, wherever he goes. He finds a safe place to keep them for a few weeks or so, but then someone says he has to move them. From time to time somebody tries to touch his boxes and he scares them off because they are his boxes. They fall over and he has to put everything back in. Sometimes people try to take his boxes and he goes into a rage. The boxes contain the proof that he is really important. So even though it's been two years and he has yet to go through them, having them gives him peace because the truth is somewhere in there.

Sad.

He seems very confused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

So what you’re saying is that you can’t provide that cite.

I honestly don’t know what you are looking for

A citation to the statute that makes it a crime for a senator to inadvertently retain classified information.

There’s no such thing as inadvertent retention for a senator because the classified information should never have left the SCIF in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

What Blumenthal said is true for TS/SCI. But not necessarily true for other types of classified documents. "Rated half true" https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2023/scif-skiff-classified-documents-removal-biden-trump-pence/

But note we are not told fully what Biden had

They’re not even done investigating. You wanted it all now because it somehow might negate what Trump has been doing? That’s some magic eraser thinking right there.

Negate? No. Equal application of justice? Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

So what you’re saying is that you can’t provide that cite.

I honestly don’t know what you are looking for

A citation to the statute that makes it a crime for a senator to inadvertently retain classified information.

There’s no such thing as inadvertent retention for a senator because the classified information should never have left the SCIF in the first place.

Not all classified briefings are in a SCIF. Senators travel with military liaisons, meet with military officers, diplomatic staff, etc. and receive classified briefings. I worked for a Member of the House Armed Services Committee and there were classified briefings in the committee room and in his office after it had been swept and cleared. There should not be any classified documents left behind but it’s possible on travel that background briefing documents that discuss classified matters get mixed with non classified briefing material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

So what you’re saying is that you can’t provide that cite.

I honestly don’t know what you are looking for

A citation to the statute that makes it a crime for a senator to inadvertently retain classified information.

There’s no such thing as inadvertent retention for a senator because the classified information should never have left the SCIF in the first place.

Not all classified briefings are in a SCIF. Senators travel with military liaisons, meet with military officers, diplomatic staff, etc. and receive classified briefings. I worked for a Member of the House Armed Services Committee and there were classified briefings in the committee room and in his office after it had been swept and cleared. There should not be any classified documents left behind but it’s possible on travel that background briefing documents that discuss classified matters get mixed with non classified briefing material.

Wow such casual handling of classified documents. You and your boss need to be investigated. Wonder how many people have died because of your incompetency and willful disregard in handling documents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

So what you’re saying is that you can’t provide that cite.

I honestly don’t know what you are looking for

A citation to the statute that makes it a crime for a senator to inadvertently retain classified information.

There’s no such thing as inadvertent retention for a senator because the classified information should never have left the SCIF in the first place.

Not all classified briefings are in a SCIF. Senators travel with military liaisons, meet with military officers, diplomatic staff, etc. and receive classified briefings. I worked for a Member of the House Armed Services Committee and there were classified briefings in the committee room and in his office after it had been swept and cleared. There should not be any classified documents left behind but it’s possible on travel that background briefing documents that discuss classified matters get mixed with non classified briefing material.

Wow such casual handling of classified documents. You and your boss need to be investigated. Wonder how many people have died because of your incompetency and willful disregard in handling documents.

Np- if the above concerns you, you must by apoplectic about Trump’s behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

What Blumenthal said is true for TS/SCI. But not necessarily true for other types of classified documents. "Rated half true" https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2023/scif-skiff-classified-documents-removal-biden-trump-pence/

But note we are not told fully what Biden had

They’re not even done investigating. You wanted it all now because it somehow might negate what Trump has been doing? That’s some magic eraser thinking right there.

Negate? No. Equal application of justice? Yes

How had justice been applied unequally? Be specific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

So what you’re saying is that you can’t provide that cite.

I honestly don’t know what you are looking for

A citation to the statute that makes it a crime for a senator to inadvertently retain classified information.

There’s no such thing as inadvertent retention for a senator because the classified information should never have left the SCIF in the first place.

Not all classified briefings are in a SCIF. Senators travel with military liaisons, meet with military officers, diplomatic staff, etc. and receive classified briefings. I worked for a Member of the House Armed Services Committee and there were classified briefings in the committee room and in his office after it had been swept and cleared. There should not be any classified documents left behind but it’s possible on travel that background briefing documents that discuss classified matters get mixed with non classified briefing material.

Wow such casual handling of classified documents. You and your boss need to be investigated. Wonder how many people have died because of your incompetency and willful disregard in handling documents.

DP... It's clear you don't even know what a SCIF is for. It's for compartmentalized information. Not all classified material meets the requirement of having to only be viewed inside a SCIF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulsi Gabbard on Trump's Indictment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVmQarG44QE

If she thinks it's fine for any public servant to walk out with hundreds upon hundreds of our country's most sensitive national security documents which are NOT Presidential records, which are documents that do not belong to him, but which belong to the government, and to conceal them, lie about them, to obstruct any investigation into them, to enlist others to lie about them - she is unfit to serve in government and is unfit to hold a military commission.

Presidential records? That has nothing to do with it.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2, Section 2.

Article 2 Section 2 has nothing to do with it either. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it confer any right for the President to take government assets

By your bizarre reading, Trump could have flown Air Force One to Florida and declared it to be his own personal property. He is not entitled to it, just as he is not entitled to take official agency documents, particularly some of the most sensitive ones in US government. The only things he was entitled to take were his own personal notes, his own personal correspondence and other personal items.

Wrong. As head of the executive branch, he had the authority to do exactly what he did.

Actually he was a fired employee. You aren’t allowed to take company property when you leave. Period.

I’ll just leave this right here as an example of the stupidity of leftists

Actually, you were just hoisted by your own petard.

Is an employee who is no longer employed allowed to keep corporate property?

No.

Former President Trump left office. He was not entitled to keep the property of the US public.

He was entitled to keep his own property.

The items in question were not his property.

This isn't hard.

Substitute Biden for Trump. Biden was never President. Was Biden entitled to keep that property?

No but he freely gave it back when it was discovered. The law says “willfully retains”. Where Trump screwed up was fighting the return of material, which is proof of his intent.

He kept it for years. That’s willfully retaining it. In addition, he out and out stole it as he had no legal right as a Senator to have those documents.

Members of Congress have clearance to see classified/hear classified briefings by virtue of their office. Need to know principles apply and they can't just waltz into the FBI or CIA and demand to read everything, but saying he had "no legal right as a Senator" is simply incorrect. Additionally, there are levels of classification and even administrative matters may be classified. Not everything marked SECRET is a national defense secret. It is incredibly unlikely that Biden had any documents anywhere near the level of classification that Trump had in his possession for one simple reason: the intelligence agencies rarely give out paper copies to members of Congress. The White House operates separately with its own level of control (or seemingly lack thereof).

They can’t take them home with them. So now we are admitting, yeah, Biden had them, but Trump is worse?

Inadvertent retention isn't a crime. Which is the ENTIRE point.

By a Senator? Yeah it is.

I’m sure you can cite the statute the .

Still waiting for that cite.

Let’s start with a quote:

Blumenthal told us: “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription. And I think that kind of practice prevailed when then Senator Biden looked at them as well."

A senator cannot take classified documents home? That’s fact. It’s law. He should never have had those documents. That’s he’s not being prosecuted is a gift. There is nothing in any statute or law that states anything about ‘inadvertent retention’ or ‘they gave them back right away’. That’s just a courtesy extended, one that was not extended to Trump. They were cooperating but the FBI raided anyway. It was for show.

FWIW, Pence should never have had documents either.

So what you’re saying is that you can’t provide that cite.

I honestly don’t know what you are looking for

A citation to the statute that makes it a crime for a senator to inadvertently retain classified information.

There’s no such thing as inadvertent retention for a senator because the classified information should never have left the SCIF in the first place.

Not all classified briefings are in a SCIF. Senators travel with military liaisons, meet with military officers, diplomatic staff, etc. and receive classified briefings. I worked for a Member of the House Armed Services Committee and there were classified briefings in the committee room and in his office after it had been swept and cleared. There should not be any classified documents left behind but it’s possible on travel that background briefing documents that discuss classified matters get mixed with non classified briefing material.

Wow such casual handling of classified documents. You and your boss need to be investigated. Wonder how many people have died because of your incompetency and willful disregard in handling documents.

You are intentionally being a dumbass. These are not TS documents or nuclear secrets or raw intelligence or documents that name sources. Just background briefings that include details that are considered classified or came from classified sources. Not national security secrets that get people killed. Just inside details that they don’t want in The NY Times or Washington Post. Similar to the case of State Dept. staff sending unclassified emails to the Secretary of State fact-checking a NY Times article about drone strikes. No harm/no foul emails that you a**holes think was somehow an act of treason by the Secretary.

[Anonymous]

We have a trial date set. August 14th. Obviously some delay to be expected (maybe one of our resident prosecutors or defense attorneys can weigh in), but we are moving!

[Anonymous]

Oh please.

[Anonymous]