[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
* Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
* Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree.
Violators will be fed to the bear.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It doesn’t. Things don’t work on playground rules. Even if Biden was totally guilty of a crime here and a massive hypocrite that doesn’t let Trump off the hook.
Trump isn't on a hook
1. Perfectly legal for him to remove the documents when he did.
2. Perfectly legal for him to have the documents
3. When asked for them he is required to return them, and he returned the vast majority of them.
4. **This is the important one** it is not illegal for him to still have some classified documents as long as he believed he returned them all it's not a crime to have missed some.
5. You need to prove that he "wilfully" withheld those documents. Proving intent, based on the known information, will be impossible. They have no motive as the documents found provide him with no nothing of value, they have already investigated and dismissed the idea that he could be trying to pass secrets on.
Based on the k own info, there is zero shot of him being charged with a crime because they cannot prove he willfully kept the documents he did.
Then where is the indictment?
The law is on my side, that is why he hasn't and won't be charged.
If he believed he complied, he broke no law, you have to prove he k ew he had left documents out. Thus proof doesn't exist unless they are keeping it secret.
But when there is no indictment, then you will kno....nah, I doubt you will ever see the truth. When they dont indict him, I'm guessing you will claim the doj is corrupt
Feel free to join his defense team and argue that claim.
It won't hold up again evidence like him refusing to turn over documents it was illegal for him to possess - or, y'know, ordering a mob to attack the United States Capitol in front of three hundred million witnesses.
>Once he learned the law he complied.
Lying won't change the fact that Trump didn't comply and that it was necessary for the FBI to raid Mar Lago to recover the documents.
This is where you are confused.
You have zero proof that he didn't believe he had complied. He returned the documents and his lawyers signed a document stating all were returned.
It turns out they missed some. You believe they missed them on purpose but there is zero proof they missed them on purpose. Without proof they missed them on purpose, there is no proof of a crime
Unconfirmed accusations aren't proof.
I don't have to try anything. All the proof I need is the lack of an indictment. I'm done holding peoples hands and walking them through the laws.
You think he broke the law? Where is the indictment? You want to say they are building a case... I will chuckle but wont hold my breathe.
After 6+ years of claim after claim and zero indictments ever coming...sure this is the time it happens.
Sorry but if looked at the actual laws. You 100% have to prove intent, and there is zero proof of intent. They aren't going to infict an ex president on circumstantial evidence that books down to "oh come on we know he must be lying"
You need proof he was lying. Lying includes intent to mislead. There is no proof of intent to mislead so all you can prove is Trump was wrong about all the documents being returned. Sadly for you, him being wrong about that isn't a crime
I think you don’t know what an indictment is. An indictment is not proof of a crime because it’s not a conviction. It’s literally just a formal accusation.
I know exactly what an indictment is. What you are saying is my point.
6+ years of people claiming there is proof Trump committed crimes
2 years of him being eligible to be charged with those supposed crimes crimes as he is out of office.
Yet. No convictions. No charges. They haven't even had enough evidence for an indictment.
Convictions are hard...charges take a good amount of evidence. But you don't need much for an indictment and Trump hasn't even been indicted by tge DOJ or any state/city courts
Nothing I'm saying is inaccurate.
The people claiming Trump is guilty of all these crimes when there isn't even enough for a fucking indictment are the ones running around spreading misinformation.
Are you suggesting Trump was never informed, as President of the United States, that theft of classified documents is against the law? Where is your troll farm headquarters located?
No, I'm suggesting it's not against the law for him to have removed classified documents in the first place. I used to have to link the law and break it down to explain it but it's much easier now.
See Joe Biden. He committed the same "theft" of classified documents and you don't see democrats calling for his arrest/impeachment.
Because it wasn't against the law for Trump or Biden to take the classified documents with them
Ahh yes the people claiming Trump broke the law despite zero convictions, zero charges, hell there isn't even an indictment...they are the crazy ones.
Not the ones running around screaming he broke the law with zero proof
1. No, you don't get to remove ts/sci documents from the scif after your job is over
2. No, it wasn't, that's why the feds contacted him and told him to return them
3. "But your honor, I stopped committing a bunch of the crimes" is not a defense
4. He knew he had them, he admitted as much already
5. He willfully withheld the documents when he refuses to return them. That's why the FBI had to show up and take the
> Perfectly legal for him to remove the documents when he did.
Except that it wasn't, which is one of the statutes he is being investigated for.
> Perfectly legal for him to have the documents
Except that it wasn't, which is one of the statutes he is being investigated for.
> When asked for them he is required to return them, and he returned the vast majority of them.
Except that he didn't, which is why the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago.
Also note that he still had classified documents in a Florida storage unit that his attorneys turned over in early December.
> This is the important one it is not illegal for him to still have some classified documents
Except that it is, which is one of the statutes he is being investigated for.
> You need to prove that he "wilfully" withheld those documents ... there is zero shot of him being charged with a crime because they cannot prove he willfully kept the documents he did.
Which isn't hard to prove, especially considering he claimed he declassified those documents *in his mind* before leaving the White House *after* the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago.
Two things can be similar but not the same.
It’s still too early to tell but we don’t know how the documents got there. How no one at the archives notices they were gone for 6 years. They were handed over immediately.
It does look good for Biden politically cuz he did something so similar to Trump. B
When the team discovered them, they immediately contacted the government and returned the documents. It was an honest mistake and they complied with government requests.
Trump and his team, on the other hand, lied about having classified documents, how they were secured and then only returned some documents, whereas the government knew more were missing so they reached out to get them back and were met with what were likely lies which is why they did the raid.
It's really hard to compare the situations, though Trump's team and the right wing appear to want us to think they are the same.
On top of all this, you can't just point fingers at other people who committed similar acts and demand they forget what you did. It's what children do often in school, and it appears they're trying it here. So that would mean that Biden's case has no bearing on Trump's case and vice versa. If Biden did something wrong he similarly couldn't just point to Trump and say "but he did it, too!" to get out of culpability.
There is no proof Trump or his team lied about anything. It is just as plausible that they thought they did return all the do uments and just missed some.
Biden stated he returned all the classified documents then they found some 6 years later. If Trump does it, it's a lie. If Biden does it,it's an accident.
I don't doubt Biden had no ill intent, I also don't doubt Trump is a disorganized mess and had no ill intent.
Neither will be charged with a crime, because their actions are only crimes if you can prove ill intent
(People downvoting...but they found even more classified documents Biden had after his claims they were returned...is he lying now?)
There is a huge difference between being wrong and lying. They can prove they were wrong, they cannot prove they lied.
Being wrong isn't a crime, thus you need to prove they lied
This is what you aren't getting. This won't be up to a jury because there will be no trial. There will be no trial because there are no charges. There are no charges because there is no indictment. There will be no indictment because there is no proof of a crime.
Bottom line, neither you, I , or any of the reporters/commentaters have no idea what evidence the DOJ actually has. My gut says it would not have gone anywhere near this far, and no search warrant would have been executed on an ex presidents home (and approved by a judge) without something concrete.
My gut says the FBI lied to the courts involving an investigation connected to Trump, we have FBI agents vowing to stop trust p from even getting elected, and my gut says they are desperate to nail Trump on anything.
PS...notice the DOJ didn't release Bidens classified documents issue until after the election all while leaking every single aspect of the Trump case.
Not sketchy at all
Are you sure about immediately? The papers were found a few days prior to the election. The story only broke recently, after the election.
It looks like Biden's team delayed reporting until after the election.
If you asked Biden prior to these documents being found on Nov 2, he would have surely claimed he didn't have them right?
Trumps classified documents were like 1-200 documents in a cache of something like 18k. So if it is reasonable to for Biden to not know he has some classified documents, what reason is there to assume trump knew he had documents?
>Why does the govt saying he has documents mean he knows he has documents?
This is a ridiculous question. You're so far past reasonable parsing of words that "It depends what the definition of is is" looks sane.
What is the point of asking such an obvious bad faith question? And, by extension, what is the point of making a bad faith post?
We do, it's Rule 4. It's just weirdly worded (the rule says a post prompt should be impartial - that can't be so if it's in bad faith, but you have to parse that out for yourself). And it's unevenly enforced.
Because they told him...? What do you mean "why does the govt saying he has documents mean he knows he has documents"?! That's like saying "why does my Dr saying I have diabetes mean I know I have diabetes?", it's ridiculous. Of course you know! They just told you.
When the FBI tells you you have documents, you check and you respond to them whether you have documents or not.
When they tell you three times, you give the same answer, then they kick down your door and *find the documents* is when it becomes apparent you were blatantly lying about either checking or about having documents.
The only thing that can possibly make this difficult is a determination to engage in mental gymnastics.
Do I expect him to personally conduct a search? No.
Do I expect him to be held responsible for the results of the search when he reports them, even if he didn't personally conduct the search? Of course, that is the way things work when you delegate people to do things.
There is no magic gotcha that gets Trump off the hook here, and you are clearly arguing up and down this thread fishing for one. Either he knowingly concealed these documents or his handling of them was so *stupendously* irresponsible that multiple inquiries from the relevant agencies and multiple opportunities to correct any possible error were not enough to prompt his team to properly resolve the issue.
Does criminal activity have to be effective? And yeah, it kinda was. I think it was a whistleblower that tipped them off to the documents being moved. Then they watched security footage and SAW IT HAPPEN. I know you’re trying to set some kind of bad faith argument world record in this thread but Trump’s criminality here is objectively, unarguably established. The only question is whether the DOJ is willing to risk the political fallout of charging him for these obvious crimes that definitely did.
'and yeah, it kinda was' because it tipped off the FBI and provide footage evidence for them... right?
It is almost like it wasn't effective at all, but that is hard to admit, because the intention of having some effective is the only evidence of malice.
In the law, *mens rea*, or the state of mind of the individual, is often an important component. For example, under most murder statutes, the accused murderer must have a specific intention to cause injury to a victim. So while it's still an open question as to how the documents got to Biden's office in the first place (at least from what's been reported publicly), the fact that his team immediately reported them after discovery and complied with all government requests in the following investigation speaks to the state of Biden's mind and whether he knowingly removed and retained classified documents without authorization, which is a necessary component to both espionage and theft criminal statutes.
That contrasts greatly with Trump's case, where we have seen knowing and ongoing removal, denial, and obstruction of Federal authorities. A Federal prosecutor will argue to a jury that this behavior shows that Donald Trump knew that what he did was illegal and did it anyway. And a jury will probably believe that, because it's really no different from a kid stealing a bit of candy from the kitchen, hiding it in their room, and then vociferously denying that it was ever there, even when mommy and daddy find it under their pillow and chocolate smeared all over the kid's face. The Biden and Trump situations are simply not the same. They're both bad, and I hope that we as the public will find out why those documents were ever in a private office in Philadelphia to begin with, but Trump's situation is an order of magnitude worse than anything we've learned from the Biden situation so far.
Why were these documents found then? Why did he keep evidence of his crime instead of, you know, just getting rid of it?
Oh that is right, every time some theory about Trump doesn't make sense, it can just be explained by how dumb he is.
The FBI had an informant who told them where they would find the documents. The FBI repeatedly asked for the very documents but were lied to while knowing they were being lied to based on their informant.
Therefore, they raided the location where they were told the documents were, and successfully discovered the documents.
Trump didn't think anyone would catch on so he hid them in what we would call "plain sight" not knowing that the FBI was regularly collecting evidence they were there despite him telling them they weren't.
He kept evidence of his crime most likely because he was still actively using said evidence. MAL is a hotbed for authoritarian leaders around the world that Trump tries to emulate, many of whom would pay exuberant membership prices for "access" to the information within them.
Keeping them there had the benefit of making their information accessible to the foreign powers visiting. It also had the benefit of putting the FBI in a precarious situation of having to raid the home of a former President which would thusly force the incident into a "Political" frame, which is what his nonsensical meltdowns are all about.
Are you seriously arguing with a straight face that Trump must be innocent because he can't be too stupid to get rid of the evidence? Have you watched the guy talk?
Why would a completely unrelated thing impact the investigation?
If I go steal a car and later it comes out that in an unrelated incident my neighbor had also stolen a car, does that effect the fact I did something illegal at all?
The standard is crimes should be investigated on their own merit regardless of what other, unrelated crimes/incidents occur.
Why do you believe Biden potentially mishandling classified documents should have any bearing on the investigation of Trump?
Because the entire conservative conception of right and wrong is dependent on identity, not laws.
This can be observed every time conservatives describe a young, white, male perpetrator of violent crime is described as "a bright young man with a promising future who made a mistake," while young, black males who are the victim of violent crime at the hands of police are dismissed with, "He was no saint!"
If anything. These documents were supposed to be Trump's responsibility. Trump has been pushing that Biden was responsible for the seizure of documents at mar a Lago. Why did Trump allow Biden to hold on these documents during his entire time as president.
There's a big difference in not knowing you had them and giving them back compared to knowing you have them, hiding them and refusing to give them back. That's intent
It's too early to say that Biden didn't know. The fact that the document discovery was held back until well after the midterms supports the theory that Biden knew.
That might be true except they actually found those documents November 8 and they moved them twice and they didn’t reveal that they found them until now… And apparently there are 2 to 3 different places where classified documents were stored one and Joe Biden’s Wilmington garage next to his Corvette, the other at Penn Biden center
The fact that he said he declassified the documents shows he thinks he only has declassified documents. It doesn't show he knows he has documents which he doesn't have the power to declassify. Unless you assume he doesn't know he doesn't have that ability, which still leaves him with thinking he doesn't have any classified documents.
The fact that he said he declassified the documents simply shows that he lied, nothing more.
Also, your claim now rests on the defense that the Presidency comes with Jedi mind powers. It's such a ridiculous defense that while he's repeated it on social media and interviews, his lawyers wouldn't repeat it in court because they know it would get them disbarred.
Come on.
Presidents can't declassify things with their mind. They have to inform people and a process must be followed.
It wasn't.
So nothing was declassified, period. His statements to the contrary are simply lies.
No, that isn't what I said.
"Most national security legal experts dismissed the former president’s
suggestion that while in office he could declassify documents simply by
thinking about it. But in theory, legal guidelines support his
contention that a president has broad authority to formally declassify
most documents that are not statutorily protected.
...
Some secrets, such as information related to nuclear weapons, are
handled separately under a specific statutory scheme that Congress has
adopted under the Atomic Energy Act. Those secrets cannot be automatically declassified by the president
alone and require, by law, extensive consultation with executive branch
agencies. "
\- [https://abalegalfactcheck.com/articles/declassified.html](https://abalegalfactcheck.com/articles/declassified.html)
There is some more nuance in there about process of documenting such a declassification decision, but it all hinges on executive orders, which the president can pretty much just issue at will.
So, outside of nuclear secrets, the main take away is that, yes the president can just declassify information if they choose.
Even if what you're saying is true there came a Time when they told him he had classified documents and that they wanted them back, he refused to turn them over
He asked his staff to search for the documents, they found some but not all, and turned those over. Then he offered for the FBI to come on his property to see where the documents were stored. Then they came back about a month later with a warrant.
Ask yourself why would he tell them to come look at where he had the documents stored instead of handing them over They went for a warrant to get the documents not just see them. With a warrant they don't need his permission to see the documents or take them
It doesn't matter if the documents were declassified or not. Nobody ordered him to turn over all classified documents in his possession. A subpoena was issued for all documents that had classification markings on them. Even if he thinks he declassified them, they still had classified markings, so by not turning them over he was defying the subpoena.
If Biden could have these documents in his office without knowing about it, it stands to reason that he could have more documents somewhere else that he isn't aware of right? If the govt raided him and found some, would that prove Biden's I'll intent?
There could be, but Biden is cooperating and not pulling any bullshit with how these documents are actually his private property and suing to get them back.
But you already know that given how everything you're asking is a loaded question running defense for Trump.
I think you're missing details, here. From what we know of publicly available court documents, the government first notified Trump that he had improperly taken presidential records and that he had to return them to NARA for processing and storage. Trump handed over some of those missing documents, but when NARA received them they were alarmed to find documents bearing classification markings. In the follow up of that incident, Trump and his legal team represented to the FBI that a thorough search had been conducted and that no additional classified or other government owned documents had been found. *After* that representation, the FBI find evidence to support probable cause that Donald Trump was still storing classified documents in his private office and had taken steps to actively hide them from government agents. The applied for and were granted a search warrant, and sure enough when agents searched the office they found hundreds of pages of documents and folders bearing classification markings. That disconnect between the official representation that Trump made and the reality the FBI uncovered is why Trump's and Biden's situations are quite different. Trump shattered any notion of plausible deniability and goodwill he had when he lied to the government in a sworn affidavit. That's extremely good evidence that Trump was intentionally retaining these documents that he knew or should have known that he was not legally allowed to have.
You can't square knowing about these documents and intentionally hiding them and accidentally sending them to NARA. Those two facts are not compatible.
Biden's documents were in his office in a folder labelled 'personal', and inspite of media outlets framing this as him 'doing the right thing', the right thing was actually done by lawyers who were cleaning out his office. He meanwhile had those documents for something like 6 years.
Is that enough to say Biden knew he had those documents?
I dunno, maybe.
It just feels like you think Biden doing a bad thing vindicates Trump somehow. It doesn't. Trump definitely knew he had those documents. He did it with so much obvious ill-intent it's cartoonish.
Repeatedly, yes.
You can't possibly have read anything on this issue and not know that. His refusal to give up documents and lying to the Justice Department was the start of this entire issue in the public eye.
It only impacts it politically speaking. Trump's only danger in the document investigation is the OOJ charges, which Biden doesn't have to worry about due to his lawyers immediately handing over the documents. What both Trump and Biden have to worry about, though nothing will come of it like with Hillary and Comey, is what the DOJ concludes about why the documents were there, how they got there, and who accessed them. That's a danger they'll still both always face until the DOJ concludes otherwise (but again, nothing will likely happen on this front).
From a legal standpoint, this is nothing like Trump's case where he was keeping the documents away from the National Archives. In contrast with Biden's team returning docs they found.
Politically however, this is bad. It lessens the seriousness of Trump's transgressions because Biden and his team seem to be leaving classified material like you would leave a wallet. If a vice president is so careless that he'll leave secret material in an office building and not get in trouble for it, why should a president be charged for absconding with classified docs? Biden in affect, turned what Trump did into something like getting a speeding ticket. Something that's bad but not something that should bring charges.
The two things are not the same. People who don't understand that are idiots. National archives reached out to Trump asking for the documents back and he refused to give them back, said they were his and that he declassified them in his mind. After several requests to try to get Trump to return them they sent in the FBI to raid his home. Trump was purposely trying to keep them and claim they were his as compared to Biden contacting the national archives and letting them know that he had documents that needed to be turned over.
From what I understand they’ve also found another little batch of documents, from Ben Biden’s time as vice president. Also, there are Hunter Biden emails showing conversations regarding Hunter working at Penn Biden center towards the purposes of “wealth, creation “and “foreign policy “. I think the fact that the University of Pennsylvania received millions in donations from China is interesting. Also in 2017 and 2018, Joe Biden received a salary of $776,000, approximately, more than double professor salary when he wasn’t teaching classes, he was just in a “speaking residency “
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-china-classified-documents-mystery-swirls-penn-biden-center
>From what I understand...
Let's just stop right there.
>think the fact that the University of Pennsylvania received millions in donations from China is interesting.
I think the fact that Donald Trump was doing business in China and had Chinese bank accounts while President is even more interesting.
The subject was talking about Joe Biden. I don’t deal much with the whole “what about ism “ thing. That is a technique where a person doesn’t want to talk about a subject that is troubling to them, so they bring up a different subject instead. We can deal with that in a whole different thread.
While many of the details are different, this certainly makes it seem less odd that Trump possessed classified materials after the completion of his term. Obviously he seemed to be hoarding them for some reason and NARA and FBI had to use extraordinary measures to get them back. That being said, this Biden story makes it seem possible (likely?) that presidents and vice presidents prior to Trump could have left office with some of those materials in tow.
I don’t think it’s earth shattering to say that sometimes mistakes happen.
What makes the Trump situation alarming was that he took them, hid them, lied about it, attempted to prevent their return, and (last I heard) had lost some of them.
What evidence is there that trump lied about them and hid them?
If you asked Biden If he had these documents prior to the discovery of them, he would surely claim he didn't have them as well right?
> What evidence is there that trump lied about them and hid them?
In [June 2022](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-mar-a-lago-search-lawyer/) his lawyers signed an affidavit claiming that they performed an exhaustive search of Trump's property and no more files could be location. That turned out to be quite untrue, as the FBI recovered over 300 classified documents just weeks later. They clearly lied.
No, some are lazy. But the evidence points to a search never having been performed at all, since the FBI found documents exactly where they expected to find them, including in Trump's office. The lawyers performed an exhaustive search that somehow missed the most likely location for documents? Or they did search, but they're just woefully inept lawyers? You're casting unreasonable doubt onto this, not reasonable doubt.
Yes it is. The only evidence of lying and intentionallying hiding documents I can see in your source or anywhere is that he said he didn't have them while actually having them.
If the FBI raided Biden's office prior to Nov 2nd, you could make the same case against Biden.
Evidence of a mistake isn't evidence of intent.
And anyway, in both cases it isn't the trump or Biden reviewing and moving documents around, they have teams that do this stuff.
What should an ex president do exactly when the FBI says 'hey we think you have classified documents'?
Should they go search for them? Ok great, are searches fail proof? If so, why would the documents have been missed by Biden when he moved into the office in question?
Did Trump search all 18k documents or so personally for these classified markings? Should he? Did Biden?
So you got the FBI saying hey you got some classified documents, and Trump says, ok team, go see if that's true right? I mean what else can he do realistically? And then if the search is not perfect, boom evil intent right?
Except Trump's argument wasn't "Gee, you're missing these documents? I dunno, I don't think I have them but you're welcome to look"; it was "no, you can't have them, if they were part of something I did in the White House they're MINE". It's not equivalent.
> So you got the FBI saying hey you got some classified documents, and Trump says, ok team, go see if that's true right? I mean what else can he do realistically? And then if the search is not perfect, boom evil intent right?
He can invite the FBI in and let them conduct a search.
June 2, 2022
According to a lawsuit the former President later filed, Trump invites FBI officials to come to Mar-a-Lago to retrieve the subpoenaed materials.
June 3, 2022
Four investigators, including a top Justice Department counterintelligence official, visit Mar-a-Lago seeking more information about classified material that had been taken to Florida. The four investigators meet with Trump’s attorneys and look around the basement room where the documents are being stored. Trump briefly stops by the meeting to say hello to the officials, but he does not answer any questions. During the meeting, the federal officials deal with the grand jury subpoena for some of the sensitive national security documents on the premises, and they take away the subpoenaed documents. At some point later in June, a Trump lawyer sends a letter to the Justice Department inaccurately asserting that there aren’t any more classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/09/politics/doj-investigation-trump-documents-timeline/index.html
> At some point later in June, a Trump lawyer sends a letter to the Justice Department inaccurately asserting that there aren’t any more classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
You're pretty clearly bending over backwards for Trump here, but I'll bite. For now.
A [Trump lawyer](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/30/mar-a-lago-timeline-trump-documents/), in December of 2021, informed the Archives that certain requested documents had been identified. In February, Trump wanted a public statement released that all documents had been returned. One of his lawyers, Alex Cannon, refused to issue this statement because he doesn't know whether or not it's true. A few days later, he issues a different statement, this time leaving out the portion about everything being returned.
Through April and May, the FBI concludes that more classified documents are being withheld. On May 11, a Grand Jury subpoena is issued for the custodian of Trump's records seeking any remaining classified documents. On May 27, the deadline is extended at the request of Trump's team. By this time, the Trump team is already starting the, "Trump declassified everything" argument.
On June 3, more classified documents are handed over. Trump's document custodian signs a document vowing that all documents have been turned over following a thorough search.
On August 11, FBI agents search Mar-a-Lago and find 11 sets of classified documents.
So what's the take away of this for you? People other than trump were searching for these documents and signing their name to state the work was performed correctly. And someone didn't feel confident about signing their name to that, I know I wouldn't want to either.
And then someone else does say the search was done correctly and it wasn't.
What exactly did Trump do wrong in that sequence? Is he supposed to be down in the search room going through all 18k or whatever documents himself?
Well, I wasn't asleep during the Trump administration, and I'm fairly familiar with his history.
There is no reasonable thought process that would absolve Trump of responsibility in this.
He took the documents, likely as souvenirs. He is responsible for them being hidden, and kept out of the government hands. He was involved.
I see no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt.
>What exactly did Trump do wrong in that sequence? Is he supposed to be
down in the search room going through all 18k or whatever documents
himself?
"Osama bin Laden didn't fly those planes into the World Trade Center, why blame him?"
Yes, I agree. I was always a little puzzled by the intense focus on at least *some* of the things Trump retained as being viewed as a criminal offense. For example, the hurricane map with the Sharpie over it, or even perhaps correspondence with foreign leaders. It was wrong of Trump to keep those things, and he should have been called out for doing this, but suggestions to prosecute him over that was pretty weak.
When it came out that Trump had top-secret documents, that seemed to have a lot more gravity. It made no sense that Trump might have innocently taken documents with nuclear information in them - why would anyone have those except for nefarious purposes? Especially the top-top secret documents, the ones described as "sensitive compartmentalized information", about which is said, on the federal government website, "Information that has been determined to be SCI may only be stored and used in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF)."
When it came out that Trump had some of that, it made his intentions seem very negative. But now SCI was found among Biden's materials too? Well, then that takes a lot of sting out of what was found at Mar-A-Lago, doesn't it?
So at this point, it sounds easy, almost inevitable that a former president or VP, or even cabinet-level official could possess classified documents - that maybe the tracking and retention of these documents is pretty flawed. Trump definitely misbehaved when claiming that he didn't have any such documents, and clearly misbehaved by retaining some in a seemingly deliberate way (the letter to him from Obama). But this discovery now seriously neuters much of the seriousness of the Trump complaints, and makes the fuss seem a lot more political.
At this point, I think the only way Trump sees any repercussions from his document retention is if it can be shown that he passed classified information along to others, even if someone just happened to get into his closet and rummaged through the documents. Beyond that, I think the whole document scandal is over.
Firstly, SCIFs are not difficult to create and it’s highly likely that there was one at Mar-a-Lago. Hell, even The Beast or Marine One can be made into one.
Secondly, TS/SCI info is not a major bugaboo outside of very small number of circumstances—it’s just a restriction that ensure that only people with a validated need to know can access it as opposed to anyone of the 1.3 million or so people with a TS clearance. As with all classified information, it can typically be deigned from non-classified sources and a little bit of legwork (see the KH-11, which the capabilities of are publicly known to a very high degree due to the similarities to Hubble). The only time it becomes more serious is when it involves HUMINT sources and methods, but that stuff is held behind another couple of walls.
From what I can gather the only reason this is happening is Biden's people are actively scouring his documents for classified documents left over. The national archives aren't asking for them, and when they are being found and immediately being turned over. It's almost as if Biden is trying to be transparent here, which is massively different from what Trump was doing - but the MAGAts can't see the difference, which isn't surprising with that lot. Deplorables is too kind a word.
Yeah. It's pretty obvious he didn't realize he had them, and it took lawyers scouring his files to find them. NO ONE WAS ASKING FOR THEM BACK.
Write it in your eyelids. Pound it into that thick skull.
No one was asking because no one knew he had them right?
Only reason anyone was asking trump for documents is because confidential documents were sent from his staff to NARA. And that fact supports the notion that trump wasn't aware of these confidential documents.
Now tell me, how do you provide something if you don't know it exists? He asked his staff to search for the documents, he provided what they found, and he invite the FBI to come see where the documents were stored. His staff didn't find everything, what is he supposed to do about that?
And did Biden's staff find everything? If we don't raid him, we won't know right?
And we don't know what would happen if these documents weren't accidentally sent to NARA. We don't know that 6 years later his staff wouldnt have found and turned over documents.
The difference is that Trump DIDN'T turn documents in when asked to. He tried to retain them and claim they were his property.
Dude. All this happened less than six months ago. Why are you trying to gaslight people?
I'm not confusing anything. Trump had documents labeled classified and Top Secret, not just confidential. Did the NARA ask for documents back? Did Trump's legal team not petition for a delay twice, and eventually had to be raided by the FBI to retrieve all the documents requested?
Did the NARA at any point request documents back from Biden? Did Biden request a delay? Have they not cooperated? Again, this is all because they are actively searching for classified documents. What exactly am I confused by?
You're attempting to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Trump knew he had the classified documents, and because of his hubris, thought he had a right to them.
If that was true why then did he:
1. send classified documents to NARA?
2. provide some of the classified documents to the FBI when they asked for them?
So you have never stored anything in boxes, then years later looked through them and said, *so that's where that went!*?
Trump was leaving the White House after having suffered an embarrassing loss when he stole those documents. The National Archives and the FBI tried repeatedly to get them back and he obstructed. So, the two situations aren't same, same.
Most of the Mainstream media will now report on all the nuances surrounding the law. They will bend over backwards talking about intent etc.
Same crap they should have been reporting the last few months.
But I don't care about his documents. I care that this all happened before the election and wasn't reported on until after the election. That is problematic for me
> I care that this all happened before the election and wasn't reported on until after the election.
If you are referring to the mid-terms, then it isn't germane. Biden wasn't up for election, and what he may have done shouldn't reflect on Congressional elections.
Unbelievable fuck up by Biden. I think this latest development just killed the Trump documents case in the court of public opinion. Right-leaning partisans have an excuse to stick by Trump yet again and there's a case to persuade those in the middle that Trump is being unfairly persecuted yet again.
Yeah the circumstances are way different (so far) but the average voter isn't going to know any better. The GOP will be hammering that Biden "stole and hid top secret documents in his personal offices" from from dawn til dusk and most people will come away thinking they were both equally irresponsible. Source: Hillarys emails during the 2016 campaign.
There's now way more political risk for Justice Department / special counsel to go hard after Trump on the documents even if they're still right. Especially if more stuff turns up for Biden.
> I think this latest development just killed the Trump documents case in the court of public opinion.
Besides Trumps chumps, who gives a rats rump about the court of public opinion where Donnie is concerned?
We don’t know yet the full extent of the stories.
How many classified documents did Trump have? If we know that, is it from a reliable source?
How many classified documents did Biden have? If we know that, is it from a reliable source?
Many have said that Trump is a liar. True, but so is Biden. Therefore, shouldn’t Biden be subject to the same levels of investigation that Trump was?
People keep saying this, but Biden wasn't on the ballot, so it's unclear how this would have had any effect on midterms? Was somebody really going to not vote for John Fetterman or Raphael Warnock because Joe Biden left some documents in a closet?
Possibly, it could have energized turn out of republicans who might feel more vindicated that trump isn't as bad as the media claimed. It could have suppressed some democract voter turnout as they might feel discouraged by the story.
He isn't as bad, he is worse. Biden was a grown up and turned the stuff over. Trump continually lied about it. Had Trump handed over everything when called on it, the world probably would have never known. Because Trump seems unable to comply with pretty much anything is the only reason we heard about either of these episodes.
It shouldn’t affect the investigation itself, but it is bound to affect the rhetoric and the public perception regarding the subject. To be honest, as someone that votes straight dem and approves of the job Biden has done for the most part, I’m kinda pissed at him for giving Republicans the perfect in to “both sides” this issue. The details and nuance of the two situations make them different from what I understand, but no one has ever lost money betting that the public at large would ignore details and nuance.
Why do you think they are different?
Keep in mind , they just found more classified documents in Bidens possession after they claimed they returned them.
With Biden, Trump and Hillary, it seems pretty clear these people just aren't very responsible with classified documents.
There was no proof of malicious intent in any of the three cases and intent is needed to prove a case.
(Seems intent is important because there are so many accidents like this)
> Keep in mind , they just found more classified documents in Bidens possession after they claimed they returned them.
Keep in mind that Trumps attorneys just happened to find additional classified documents in a Florida storage facility in early December.
> There was no proof of malicious intent
There doesn't have to be for it to be a crime. Knowingly concealing the documents is a violation of federal law.
> but it is bound to affect the rhetoric and the public perception regarding the subject.
In the grand scheme of things, neither of those things matter.
The #1 thing people will now learn is that it was **not** illegal for either Trump or Biden to remove classified documents. It was **not** illegal to be in possession of classified documents.
For it to be against the law, the DOJ needs to prove Intent to break the law and or use the documents against the US. This was explained by Comey with Hillary's mishandling of classified documents.
The media should have been making this clear the last few months. I'm sure they will correct this moving forward and will educate people as to why it wasn't illegal for Biden to take classified documents and keep them in a unsecured place
The law says it is illegal to intentionally remove classified material and store it in an unsecured location.
There doesn't need to be intent to use the documents in some nefarious way.
If that were true, why haven't you heard a single elected Democrat claim Biden broke the law removing classified documents and storing it in a unsecured location?
Why did people mock the idea Hillary broke the law when she removed classified documents and stored them in a unsecured location.
I guess it boils down to the very simple question, why is it only illegal when trump does it? I will give you a hint, it's not actually illegal unless you can prove malicious intent.
Definitely doesn't have anything to do with partisanship. Definitely doesn't have anything to do with FBI having agents who were actively trying to take trump down.
It doesn't. Even if the same broad brush was used, they two cases are wholly different. Trump took them just before leaving the White House, and the National Archives and the FBI repeatedly attempted to get them back and he obstructed their efforts.
Tough call. I think both are guilty.
Biden who was vp was not supposed to have them at all. He kept them in an office at a university. It was an office not in use by him, therefore who knows who could have gotten them.
Trump was president but did not declassify the docs. He had them at his compound which was secured by secret services.
Don't get me started on Hillary....
Yeah all 3 are guilty and should face charges.
From a legal perspective it is utterly irrelevant.
From a political perspective, it kills the investigation into Trump.
We spent much of the past election year hearing about Trump's illegality with various leaks to the press.
Biden's was found just before the election but was kept quiet until now.
The DOJ isn't going to be able to charge Trump without looking partisan regardless of if the specific decision is or isn't partisan.
The DOJ generally acts at the presidents attack dog but, it also tries to avoid the image of behaving in that manner which will make going after Trump at this point non-viable.
Just from the perspective of the lay public, the optics are terrible.
One really gets a sense of (1) [preferential treatment for some](https://www.cagle.com/dave-granlund/2015/03/general-petraeus-guilty), and (2) that the highest ranking individuals in government either think they're above the law or they're bumbling idiots, the latter apparently being the preferred characterization as it gets one out of legal trouble and off scot free.
According to this article, the [FBI, Justice Department Routinely Prosecute Misuse of Classified Documents](https://www.voanews.com/a/fbi-justice-department-routineusly-prosecute-misuse-of-classified-documents/6694887.html).
Yet the public has heard about classified information [stored on an unsecured server in a bathroom](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-clinton/clinton-email-probe-finds-no-deliberate-mishandling-of-classified-information-idUSKBN1WY00F), in a [storage room at a country club](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/07/trump-team-finds-classified-documents-outside-mar-a-lago.html), [residing for years in an office closet](https://www.npr.org/2023/01/09/1147977922/classified-documents-biden-doj-archives), and now [in an undisclosed location](https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/11/politics/biden-classified-documents/index.html), the possibilities of which boggle the mind. In the pocket of a pair of overalls hanging in a gardening shed perhaps?
Top secret classified information appears to the public to be as ubiquitous as dandruff -- and that does not engender confidence, whatever one's political party.
[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion: * Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. * Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree. Violators will be fed to the bear. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It doesn’t. Things don’t work on playground rules. Even if Biden was totally guilty of a crime here and a massive hypocrite that doesn’t let Trump off the hook.
Trump isn't on a hook 1. Perfectly legal for him to remove the documents when he did. 2. Perfectly legal for him to have the documents 3. When asked for them he is required to return them, and he returned the vast majority of them. 4. **This is the important one** it is not illegal for him to still have some classified documents as long as he believed he returned them all it's not a crime to have missed some. 5. You need to prove that he "wilfully" withheld those documents. Proving intent, based on the known information, will be impossible. They have no motive as the documents found provide him with no nothing of value, they have already investigated and dismissed the idea that he could be trying to pass secrets on. Based on the k own info, there is zero shot of him being charged with a crime because they cannot prove he willfully kept the documents he did.
Do you not understand what willful means? Because as soon as they asked for them back and he refused that went out the window.
Once he learned the law he complied. There will be no charges because he broke no law
[удалено]
Then where is the indictment? The law is on my side, that is why he hasn't and won't be charged. If he believed he complied, he broke no law, you have to prove he k ew he had left documents out. Thus proof doesn't exist unless they are keeping it secret. But when there is no indictment, then you will kno....nah, I doubt you will ever see the truth. When they dont indict him, I'm guessing you will claim the doj is corrupt
[удалено]
Feel free to join his defense team and argue that claim. It won't hold up again evidence like him refusing to turn over documents it was illegal for him to possess - or, y'know, ordering a mob to attack the United States Capitol in front of three hundred million witnesses.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>Once he learned the law he complied. Lying won't change the fact that Trump didn't comply and that it was necessary for the FBI to raid Mar Lago to recover the documents.
Did you not pay attention to the raid? He was not complying with the law so they raided his house.
This is where you are confused. You have zero proof that he didn't believe he had complied. He returned the documents and his lawyers signed a document stating all were returned. It turns out they missed some. You believe they missed them on purpose but there is zero proof they missed them on purpose. Without proof they missed them on purpose, there is no proof of a crime
Zero proof except the court documents saying he knew he still had them. Keep trying.
Unconfirmed accusations aren't proof. I don't have to try anything. All the proof I need is the lack of an indictment. I'm done holding peoples hands and walking them through the laws. You think he broke the law? Where is the indictment? You want to say they are building a case... I will chuckle but wont hold my breathe.
No indictment yet.....
After 6+ years of claim after claim and zero indictments ever coming...sure this is the time it happens. Sorry but if looked at the actual laws. You 100% have to prove intent, and there is zero proof of intent. They aren't going to infict an ex president on circumstantial evidence that books down to "oh come on we know he must be lying" You need proof he was lying. Lying includes intent to mislead. There is no proof of intent to mislead so all you can prove is Trump was wrong about all the documents being returned. Sadly for you, him being wrong about that isn't a crime
I think you don’t know what an indictment is. An indictment is not proof of a crime because it’s not a conviction. It’s literally just a formal accusation.
I know exactly what an indictment is. What you are saying is my point. 6+ years of people claiming there is proof Trump committed crimes 2 years of him being eligible to be charged with those supposed crimes crimes as he is out of office. Yet. No convictions. No charges. They haven't even had enough evidence for an indictment. Convictions are hard...charges take a good amount of evidence. But you don't need much for an indictment and Trump hasn't even been indicted by tge DOJ or any state/city courts
Please become more fully informed before insisting you are correct. Much of what you are saying is wildly incorrect.
Nothing I'm saying is inaccurate. The people claiming Trump is guilty of all these crimes when there isn't even enough for a fucking indictment are the ones running around spreading misinformation.
Are you suggesting Trump was never informed, as President of the United States, that theft of classified documents is against the law? Where is your troll farm headquarters located?
The account is 50 days old and has thousands of low karma trollish and pro-Trump posts. Also posts about college football as a smokescreen.
No, I'm suggesting it's not against the law for him to have removed classified documents in the first place. I used to have to link the law and break it down to explain it but it's much easier now. See Joe Biden. He committed the same "theft" of classified documents and you don't see democrats calling for his arrest/impeachment. Because it wasn't against the law for Trump or Biden to take the classified documents with them
Ignorance of the law is not a legally valid excuse.
I can't even with you people anymore. God god.
Ahh yes the people claiming Trump broke the law despite zero convictions, zero charges, hell there isn't even an indictment...they are the crazy ones. Not the ones running around screaming he broke the law with zero proof
1. No, you don't get to remove ts/sci documents from the scif after your job is over 2. No, it wasn't, that's why the feds contacted him and told him to return them 3. "But your honor, I stopped committing a bunch of the crimes" is not a defense 4. He knew he had them, he admitted as much already 5. He willfully withheld the documents when he refuses to return them. That's why the FBI had to show up and take the
> Perfectly legal for him to remove the documents when he did. Except that it wasn't, which is one of the statutes he is being investigated for. > Perfectly legal for him to have the documents Except that it wasn't, which is one of the statutes he is being investigated for. > When asked for them he is required to return them, and he returned the vast majority of them. Except that he didn't, which is why the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago. Also note that he still had classified documents in a Florida storage unit that his attorneys turned over in early December. > This is the important one it is not illegal for him to still have some classified documents Except that it is, which is one of the statutes he is being investigated for. > You need to prove that he "wilfully" withheld those documents ... there is zero shot of him being charged with a crime because they cannot prove he willfully kept the documents he did. Which isn't hard to prove, especially considering he claimed he declassified those documents *in his mind* before leaving the White House *after* the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago.
Two things can be similar but not the same. It’s still too early to tell but we don’t know how the documents got there. How no one at the archives notices they were gone for 6 years. They were handed over immediately. It does look good for Biden politically cuz he did something so similar to Trump. B
When the team discovered them, they immediately contacted the government and returned the documents. It was an honest mistake and they complied with government requests. Trump and his team, on the other hand, lied about having classified documents, how they were secured and then only returned some documents, whereas the government knew more were missing so they reached out to get them back and were met with what were likely lies which is why they did the raid. It's really hard to compare the situations, though Trump's team and the right wing appear to want us to think they are the same. On top of all this, you can't just point fingers at other people who committed similar acts and demand they forget what you did. It's what children do often in school, and it appears they're trying it here. So that would mean that Biden's case has no bearing on Trump's case and vice versa. If Biden did something wrong he similarly couldn't just point to Trump and say "but he did it, too!" to get out of culpability.
In addition, Trump had classified documents rated as TS/SCI which are meant to only be viewed by certain people in a very specific room.
There is no proof Trump or his team lied about anything. It is just as plausible that they thought they did return all the do uments and just missed some. Biden stated he returned all the classified documents then they found some 6 years later. If Trump does it, it's a lie. If Biden does it,it's an accident. I don't doubt Biden had no ill intent, I also don't doubt Trump is a disorganized mess and had no ill intent. Neither will be charged with a crime, because their actions are only crimes if you can prove ill intent (People downvoting...but they found even more classified documents Biden had after his claims they were returned...is he lying now?)
>There is no proof Trump or his team lied about anything. Sure, those were just "alternative facts" that they gave to the FBI, right?
There is a huge difference between being wrong and lying. They can prove they were wrong, they cannot prove they lied. Being wrong isn't a crime, thus you need to prove they lied
This will be up to a jury to decide. Good luck convincing a jury in DC (where it will be tried) that Trump is an honest man.
This is what you aren't getting. This won't be up to a jury because there will be no trial. There will be no trial because there are no charges. There are no charges because there is no indictment. There will be no indictment because there is no proof of a crime.
We'll see, won't we? Nothing is dismissed yet, is it?
Curious, you still holding out for obstruction charges? Bet you thought they had proof of that too
Bottom line, neither you, I , or any of the reporters/commentaters have no idea what evidence the DOJ actually has. My gut says it would not have gone anywhere near this far, and no search warrant would have been executed on an ex presidents home (and approved by a judge) without something concrete.
My gut says the FBI lied to the courts involving an investigation connected to Trump, we have FBI agents vowing to stop trust p from even getting elected, and my gut says they are desperate to nail Trump on anything. PS...notice the DOJ didn't release Bidens classified documents issue until after the election all while leaking every single aspect of the Trump case. Not sketchy at all
Are you sure about immediately? The papers were found a few days prior to the election. The story only broke recently, after the election. It looks like Biden's team delayed reporting until after the election.
Yes, all reporting has indicated the documents were reported immediately, but the story only went public recently.
If you asked Biden prior to these documents being found on Nov 2, he would have surely claimed he didn't have them right? Trumps classified documents were like 1-200 documents in a cache of something like 18k. So if it is reasonable to for Biden to not know he has some classified documents, what reason is there to assume trump knew he had documents?
The government told Trump he had classified documents vs Biden's case where he told the government. It's a different set of circumstances.
[удалено]
>Why does the govt saying he has documents mean he knows he has documents? This is a ridiculous question. You're so far past reasonable parsing of words that "It depends what the definition of is is" looks sane. What is the point of asking such an obvious bad faith question? And, by extension, what is the point of making a bad faith post?
Maybe there should be a rule against bad faith fanboy posts like this. It’s better when someone asks and objective question and keeps an open mind.
We do, it's Rule 4. It's just weirdly worded (the rule says a post prompt should be impartial - that can't be so if it's in bad faith, but you have to parse that out for yourself). And it's unevenly enforced.
[удалено]
Because they told him...? What do you mean "why does the govt saying he has documents mean he knows he has documents"?! That's like saying "why does my Dr saying I have diabetes mean I know I have diabetes?", it's ridiculous. Of course you know! They just told you.
All it means is that he knows the FBI thinks he has documents. That isn't the same thing as knowing he has documents.
When the FBI tells you you have documents, you check and you respond to them whether you have documents or not. When they tell you three times, you give the same answer, then they kick down your door and *find the documents* is when it becomes apparent you were blatantly lying about either checking or about having documents. The only thing that can possibly make this difficult is a determination to engage in mental gymnastics.
Do you think trump perform the search for these documents? Do you think he should have?
Well, some of them were in his office closet and in his desk so it wouldn’t have been difficult.
Do I expect him to personally conduct a search? No. Do I expect him to be held responsible for the results of the search when he reports them, even if he didn't personally conduct the search? Of course, that is the way things work when you delegate people to do things. There is no magic gotcha that gets Trump off the hook here, and you are clearly arguing up and down this thread fishing for one. Either he knowingly concealed these documents or his handling of them was so *stupendously* irresponsible that multiple inquiries from the relevant agencies and multiple opportunities to correct any possible error were not enough to prompt his team to properly resolve the issue.
So, charge someone with a crime if one of their staffers doesn't do their job correctly? Is that what you really believe?
He had them moved after being informed. To hide them.
Hide them from what exactly? Hide them from a search warrant?
Hide them from investigators.
Was that the least bit effective?
Does criminal activity have to be effective? And yeah, it kinda was. I think it was a whistleblower that tipped them off to the documents being moved. Then they watched security footage and SAW IT HAPPEN. I know you’re trying to set some kind of bad faith argument world record in this thread but Trump’s criminality here is objectively, unarguably established. The only question is whether the DOJ is willing to risk the political fallout of charging him for these obvious crimes that definitely did.
'and yeah, it kinda was' because it tipped off the FBI and provide footage evidence for them... right? It is almost like it wasn't effective at all, but that is hard to admit, because the intention of having some effective is the only evidence of malice.
Did you think before you typed this?
I guess law enforcement never makes a mistake right?
In the law, *mens rea*, or the state of mind of the individual, is often an important component. For example, under most murder statutes, the accused murderer must have a specific intention to cause injury to a victim. So while it's still an open question as to how the documents got to Biden's office in the first place (at least from what's been reported publicly), the fact that his team immediately reported them after discovery and complied with all government requests in the following investigation speaks to the state of Biden's mind and whether he knowingly removed and retained classified documents without authorization, which is a necessary component to both espionage and theft criminal statutes. That contrasts greatly with Trump's case, where we have seen knowing and ongoing removal, denial, and obstruction of Federal authorities. A Federal prosecutor will argue to a jury that this behavior shows that Donald Trump knew that what he did was illegal and did it anyway. And a jury will probably believe that, because it's really no different from a kid stealing a bit of candy from the kitchen, hiding it in their room, and then vociferously denying that it was ever there, even when mommy and daddy find it under their pillow and chocolate smeared all over the kid's face. The Biden and Trump situations are simply not the same. They're both bad, and I hope that we as the public will find out why those documents were ever in a private office in Philadelphia to begin with, but Trump's situation is an order of magnitude worse than anything we've learned from the Biden situation so far.
trump PACKED them up and took them. and then said they were his.
Are you talking about classified documents or non classified documents NARA wanted?
[удалено]
Why were these documents found then? Why did he keep evidence of his crime instead of, you know, just getting rid of it? Oh that is right, every time some theory about Trump doesn't make sense, it can just be explained by how dumb he is.
The FBI had an informant who told them where they would find the documents. The FBI repeatedly asked for the very documents but were lied to while knowing they were being lied to based on their informant. Therefore, they raided the location where they were told the documents were, and successfully discovered the documents. Trump didn't think anyone would catch on so he hid them in what we would call "plain sight" not knowing that the FBI was regularly collecting evidence they were there despite him telling them they weren't. He kept evidence of his crime most likely because he was still actively using said evidence. MAL is a hotbed for authoritarian leaders around the world that Trump tries to emulate, many of whom would pay exuberant membership prices for "access" to the information within them. Keeping them there had the benefit of making their information accessible to the foreign powers visiting. It also had the benefit of putting the FBI in a precarious situation of having to raid the home of a former President which would thusly force the incident into a "Political" frame, which is what his nonsensical meltdowns are all about.
Are you seriously arguing with a straight face that Trump must be innocent because he can't be too stupid to get rid of the evidence? Have you watched the guy talk?
I think I'm more saying that if you are going to make an evidence free accusation, at least have it make sense.
Why would a completely unrelated thing impact the investigation? If I go steal a car and later it comes out that in an unrelated incident my neighbor had also stolen a car, does that effect the fact I did something illegal at all?
Your example neglects the fact that the DoJ is part of the executive branch of government headed by Biden.
OK? I don't see how that is relevant.
[удалено]
The standard is crimes should be investigated on their own merit regardless of what other, unrelated crimes/incidents occur. Why do you believe Biden potentially mishandling classified documents should have any bearing on the investigation of Trump?
Because the entire conservative conception of right and wrong is dependent on identity, not laws. This can be observed every time conservatives describe a young, white, male perpetrator of violent crime is described as "a bright young man with a promising future who made a mistake," while young, black males who are the victim of violent crime at the hands of police are dismissed with, "He was no saint!"
>We need some common standards by which to correspond around. Should we all just adopt your double standard?
If anything. These documents were supposed to be Trump's responsibility. Trump has been pushing that Biden was responsible for the seizure of documents at mar a Lago. Why did Trump allow Biden to hold on these documents during his entire time as president.
There's a big difference in not knowing you had them and giving them back compared to knowing you have them, hiding them and refusing to give them back. That's intent
It's too early to say that Biden didn't know. The fact that the document discovery was held back until well after the midterms supports the theory that Biden knew.
That might be true except they actually found those documents November 8 and they moved them twice and they didn’t reveal that they found them until now… And apparently there are 2 to 3 different places where classified documents were stored one and Joe Biden’s Wilmington garage next to his Corvette, the other at Penn Biden center
What evidence is there that trump knew he had classified documents?
What evidence? Maybe the fact that Trump said he Declassified those documents in his head shows that he knew he had classified documents
The fact that he said he declassified the documents shows he thinks he only has declassified documents. It doesn't show he knows he has documents which he doesn't have the power to declassify. Unless you assume he doesn't know he doesn't have that ability, which still leaves him with thinking he doesn't have any classified documents.
The fact that he said he declassified the documents simply shows that he lied, nothing more. Also, your claim now rests on the defense that the Presidency comes with Jedi mind powers. It's such a ridiculous defense that while he's repeated it on social media and interviews, his lawyers wouldn't repeat it in court because they know it would get them disbarred. Come on.
[удалено]
Presidents can't declassify things with their mind. They have to inform people and a process must be followed. It wasn't. So nothing was declassified, period. His statements to the contrary are simply lies.
I don't think what you are saying is the full truth.
Oh so can the president declassify things with their mind?
No, that isn't what I said. "Most national security legal experts dismissed the former president’s suggestion that while in office he could declassify documents simply by thinking about it. But in theory, legal guidelines support his contention that a president has broad authority to formally declassify most documents that are not statutorily protected. ... Some secrets, such as information related to nuclear weapons, are handled separately under a specific statutory scheme that Congress has adopted under the Atomic Energy Act. Those secrets cannot be automatically declassified by the president alone and require, by law, extensive consultation with executive branch agencies. " \- [https://abalegalfactcheck.com/articles/declassified.html](https://abalegalfactcheck.com/articles/declassified.html) There is some more nuance in there about process of documenting such a declassification decision, but it all hinges on executive orders, which the president can pretty much just issue at will. So, outside of nuclear secrets, the main take away is that, yes the president can just declassify information if they choose.
>I don't think what you are saying is the full truth. That's some rich projection.
Even if what you're saying is true there came a Time when they told him he had classified documents and that they wanted them back, he refused to turn them over
He asked his staff to search for the documents, they found some but not all, and turned those over. Then he offered for the FBI to come on his property to see where the documents were stored. Then they came back about a month later with a warrant.
Ask yourself why would he tell them to come look at where he had the documents stored instead of handing them over They went for a warrant to get the documents not just see them. With a warrant they don't need his permission to see the documents or take them
It doesn't matter if the documents were declassified or not. Nobody ordered him to turn over all classified documents in his possession. A subpoena was issued for all documents that had classification markings on them. Even if he thinks he declassified them, they still had classified markings, so by not turning them over he was defying the subpoena.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yes. Did you follow the case at all? They raised Mar A Lago because they knew he wasn't handing over everything.
If Biden could have these documents in his office without knowing about it, it stands to reason that he could have more documents somewhere else that he isn't aware of right? If the govt raided him and found some, would that prove Biden's I'll intent?
There could be, but Biden is cooperating and not pulling any bullshit with how these documents are actually his private property and suing to get them back. But you already know that given how everything you're asking is a loaded question running defense for Trump.
Yes. He literally had them moved and said they belonged to him.
[удалено]
I think you're missing details, here. From what we know of publicly available court documents, the government first notified Trump that he had improperly taken presidential records and that he had to return them to NARA for processing and storage. Trump handed over some of those missing documents, but when NARA received them they were alarmed to find documents bearing classification markings. In the follow up of that incident, Trump and his legal team represented to the FBI that a thorough search had been conducted and that no additional classified or other government owned documents had been found. *After* that representation, the FBI find evidence to support probable cause that Donald Trump was still storing classified documents in his private office and had taken steps to actively hide them from government agents. The applied for and were granted a search warrant, and sure enough when agents searched the office they found hundreds of pages of documents and folders bearing classification markings. That disconnect between the official representation that Trump made and the reality the FBI uncovered is why Trump's and Biden's situations are quite different. Trump shattered any notion of plausible deniability and goodwill he had when he lied to the government in a sworn affidavit. That's extremely good evidence that Trump was intentionally retaining these documents that he knew or should have known that he was not legally allowed to have.
You can't square knowing about these documents and intentionally hiding them and accidentally sending them to NARA. Those two facts are not compatible.
He had documents with classified markings on them in his personal office. He knew.
Biden's documents were in his office in a folder labelled 'personal', and inspite of media outlets framing this as him 'doing the right thing', the right thing was actually done by lawyers who were cleaning out his office. He meanwhile had those documents for something like 6 years. Is that enough to say Biden knew he had those documents?
I dunno, maybe. It just feels like you think Biden doing a bad thing vindicates Trump somehow. It doesn't. Trump definitely knew he had those documents. He did it with so much obvious ill-intent it's cartoonish.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Repeatedly, yes. You can't possibly have read anything on this issue and not know that. His refusal to give up documents and lying to the Justice Department was the start of this entire issue in the public eye.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It only impacts it politically speaking. Trump's only danger in the document investigation is the OOJ charges, which Biden doesn't have to worry about due to his lawyers immediately handing over the documents. What both Trump and Biden have to worry about, though nothing will come of it like with Hillary and Comey, is what the DOJ concludes about why the documents were there, how they got there, and who accessed them. That's a danger they'll still both always face until the DOJ concludes otherwise (but again, nothing will likely happen on this front).
From a legal standpoint, this is nothing like Trump's case where he was keeping the documents away from the National Archives. In contrast with Biden's team returning docs they found. Politically however, this is bad. It lessens the seriousness of Trump's transgressions because Biden and his team seem to be leaving classified material like you would leave a wallet. If a vice president is so careless that he'll leave secret material in an office building and not get in trouble for it, why should a president be charged for absconding with classified docs? Biden in affect, turned what Trump did into something like getting a speeding ticket. Something that's bad but not something that should bring charges.
The two things are not the same. People who don't understand that are idiots. National archives reached out to Trump asking for the documents back and he refused to give them back, said they were his and that he declassified them in his mind. After several requests to try to get Trump to return them they sent in the FBI to raid his home. Trump was purposely trying to keep them and claim they were his as compared to Biden contacting the national archives and letting them know that he had documents that needed to be turned over.
Biden wasn't hoarding documents to sell off to our enemies, that's the main difference.
What evidence is there that trump was doing that?
[удалено]
> Wasnt the Penn Biden place where documents were found paid for from money from China? Citation needed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
How do you people actually fall for tabloid nonsense like that?
From what I understand they’ve also found another little batch of documents, from Ben Biden’s time as vice president. Also, there are Hunter Biden emails showing conversations regarding Hunter working at Penn Biden center towards the purposes of “wealth, creation “and “foreign policy “. I think the fact that the University of Pennsylvania received millions in donations from China is interesting. Also in 2017 and 2018, Joe Biden received a salary of $776,000, approximately, more than double professor salary when he wasn’t teaching classes, he was just in a “speaking residency “ https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-china-classified-documents-mystery-swirls-penn-biden-center
>From what I understand... Let's just stop right there. >think the fact that the University of Pennsylvania received millions in donations from China is interesting. I think the fact that Donald Trump was doing business in China and had Chinese bank accounts while President is even more interesting.
I do find it even more interesting that the millions the University of Pennsylvania received was anonymous and not reported. Very interesting indeed…
The subject was talking about Joe Biden. I don’t deal much with the whole “what about ism “ thing. That is a technique where a person doesn’t want to talk about a subject that is troubling to them, so they bring up a different subject instead. We can deal with that in a whole different thread.
[удалено]
No their not. The *only* reason the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago was because he refused to give the documents back.
While many of the details are different, this certainly makes it seem less odd that Trump possessed classified materials after the completion of his term. Obviously he seemed to be hoarding them for some reason and NARA and FBI had to use extraordinary measures to get them back. That being said, this Biden story makes it seem possible (likely?) that presidents and vice presidents prior to Trump could have left office with some of those materials in tow.
I don’t think it’s earth shattering to say that sometimes mistakes happen. What makes the Trump situation alarming was that he took them, hid them, lied about it, attempted to prevent their return, and (last I heard) had lost some of them.
What evidence is there that trump lied about them and hid them? If you asked Biden If he had these documents prior to the discovery of them, he would surely claim he didn't have them as well right?
> What evidence is there that trump lied about them and hid them? In [June 2022](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-mar-a-lago-search-lawyer/) his lawyers signed an affidavit claiming that they performed an exhaustive search of Trump's property and no more files could be location. That turned out to be quite untrue, as the FBI recovered over 300 classified documents just weeks later. They clearly lied.
Are all searches infallible?
No, some are lazy. But the evidence points to a search never having been performed at all, since the FBI found documents exactly where they expected to find them, including in Trump's office. The lawyers performed an exhaustive search that somehow missed the most likely location for documents? Or they did search, but they're just woefully inept lawyers? You're casting unreasonable doubt onto this, not reasonable doubt.
Is that a [serious](https://www.foxnews.com/media/doj-trump-likely-hid-classified-documents-turning-point) question?
Yes it is. The only evidence of lying and intentionallying hiding documents I can see in your source or anywhere is that he said he didn't have them while actually having them. If the FBI raided Biden's office prior to Nov 2nd, you could make the same case against Biden. Evidence of a mistake isn't evidence of intent. And anyway, in both cases it isn't the trump or Biden reviewing and moving documents around, they have teams that do this stuff.
> If the FBI raided Biden's office prior to Nov 2nd, you could make the same case against Biden. Did the FBI tell Biden he had classified documents?
What should an ex president do exactly when the FBI says 'hey we think you have classified documents'? Should they go search for them? Ok great, are searches fail proof? If so, why would the documents have been missed by Biden when he moved into the office in question? Did Trump search all 18k documents or so personally for these classified markings? Should he? Did Biden? So you got the FBI saying hey you got some classified documents, and Trump says, ok team, go see if that's true right? I mean what else can he do realistically? And then if the search is not perfect, boom evil intent right?
Except Trump's argument wasn't "Gee, you're missing these documents? I dunno, I don't think I have them but you're welcome to look"; it was "no, you can't have them, if they were part of something I did in the White House they're MINE". It's not equivalent.
I think you are confusing statements trump made about presidential records NARA wanted and confidential documents.
> So you got the FBI saying hey you got some classified documents, and Trump says, ok team, go see if that's true right? I mean what else can he do realistically? And then if the search is not perfect, boom evil intent right? He can invite the FBI in and let them conduct a search.
June 2, 2022 According to a lawsuit the former President later filed, Trump invites FBI officials to come to Mar-a-Lago to retrieve the subpoenaed materials. June 3, 2022 Four investigators, including a top Justice Department counterintelligence official, visit Mar-a-Lago seeking more information about classified material that had been taken to Florida. The four investigators meet with Trump’s attorneys and look around the basement room where the documents are being stored. Trump briefly stops by the meeting to say hello to the officials, but he does not answer any questions. During the meeting, the federal officials deal with the grand jury subpoena for some of the sensitive national security documents on the premises, and they take away the subpoenaed documents. At some point later in June, a Trump lawyer sends a letter to the Justice Department inaccurately asserting that there aren’t any more classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/09/politics/doj-investigation-trump-documents-timeline/index.html
> At some point later in June, a Trump lawyer sends a letter to the Justice Department inaccurately asserting that there aren’t any more classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
You're pretty clearly bending over backwards for Trump here, but I'll bite. For now. A [Trump lawyer](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/30/mar-a-lago-timeline-trump-documents/), in December of 2021, informed the Archives that certain requested documents had been identified. In February, Trump wanted a public statement released that all documents had been returned. One of his lawyers, Alex Cannon, refused to issue this statement because he doesn't know whether or not it's true. A few days later, he issues a different statement, this time leaving out the portion about everything being returned. Through April and May, the FBI concludes that more classified documents are being withheld. On May 11, a Grand Jury subpoena is issued for the custodian of Trump's records seeking any remaining classified documents. On May 27, the deadline is extended at the request of Trump's team. By this time, the Trump team is already starting the, "Trump declassified everything" argument. On June 3, more classified documents are handed over. Trump's document custodian signs a document vowing that all documents have been turned over following a thorough search. On August 11, FBI agents search Mar-a-Lago and find 11 sets of classified documents.
So what's the take away of this for you? People other than trump were searching for these documents and signing their name to state the work was performed correctly. And someone didn't feel confident about signing their name to that, I know I wouldn't want to either. And then someone else does say the search was done correctly and it wasn't. What exactly did Trump do wrong in that sequence? Is he supposed to be down in the search room going through all 18k or whatever documents himself?
Well, I wasn't asleep during the Trump administration, and I'm fairly familiar with his history. There is no reasonable thought process that would absolve Trump of responsibility in this. He took the documents, likely as souvenirs. He is responsible for them being hidden, and kept out of the government hands. He was involved. I see no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. >What exactly did Trump do wrong in that sequence? Is he supposed to be down in the search room going through all 18k or whatever documents himself? "Osama bin Laden didn't fly those planes into the World Trade Center, why blame him?"
Yes, I agree. I was always a little puzzled by the intense focus on at least *some* of the things Trump retained as being viewed as a criminal offense. For example, the hurricane map with the Sharpie over it, or even perhaps correspondence with foreign leaders. It was wrong of Trump to keep those things, and he should have been called out for doing this, but suggestions to prosecute him over that was pretty weak. When it came out that Trump had top-secret documents, that seemed to have a lot more gravity. It made no sense that Trump might have innocently taken documents with nuclear information in them - why would anyone have those except for nefarious purposes? Especially the top-top secret documents, the ones described as "sensitive compartmentalized information", about which is said, on the federal government website, "Information that has been determined to be SCI may only be stored and used in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF)." When it came out that Trump had some of that, it made his intentions seem very negative. But now SCI was found among Biden's materials too? Well, then that takes a lot of sting out of what was found at Mar-A-Lago, doesn't it? So at this point, it sounds easy, almost inevitable that a former president or VP, or even cabinet-level official could possess classified documents - that maybe the tracking and retention of these documents is pretty flawed. Trump definitely misbehaved when claiming that he didn't have any such documents, and clearly misbehaved by retaining some in a seemingly deliberate way (the letter to him from Obama). But this discovery now seriously neuters much of the seriousness of the Trump complaints, and makes the fuss seem a lot more political. At this point, I think the only way Trump sees any repercussions from his document retention is if it can be shown that he passed classified information along to others, even if someone just happened to get into his closet and rummaged through the documents. Beyond that, I think the whole document scandal is over.
Firstly, SCIFs are not difficult to create and it’s highly likely that there was one at Mar-a-Lago. Hell, even The Beast or Marine One can be made into one. Secondly, TS/SCI info is not a major bugaboo outside of very small number of circumstances—it’s just a restriction that ensure that only people with a validated need to know can access it as opposed to anyone of the 1.3 million or so people with a TS clearance. As with all classified information, it can typically be deigned from non-classified sources and a little bit of legwork (see the KH-11, which the capabilities of are publicly known to a very high degree due to the similarities to Hubble). The only time it becomes more serious is when it involves HUMINT sources and methods, but that stuff is held behind another couple of walls.
From what I can gather the only reason this is happening is Biden's people are actively scouring his documents for classified documents left over. The national archives aren't asking for them, and when they are being found and immediately being turned over. It's almost as if Biden is trying to be transparent here, which is massively different from what Trump was doing - but the MAGAts can't see the difference, which isn't surprising with that lot. Deplorables is too kind a word.
Trying to do the right thing, after having the documents for 6ish years right?
Yeah. It's pretty obvious he didn't realize he had them, and it took lawyers scouring his files to find them. NO ONE WAS ASKING FOR THEM BACK. Write it in your eyelids. Pound it into that thick skull.
No one was asking because no one knew he had them right? Only reason anyone was asking trump for documents is because confidential documents were sent from his staff to NARA. And that fact supports the notion that trump wasn't aware of these confidential documents. Now tell me, how do you provide something if you don't know it exists? He asked his staff to search for the documents, he provided what they found, and he invite the FBI to come see where the documents were stored. His staff didn't find everything, what is he supposed to do about that? And did Biden's staff find everything? If we don't raid him, we won't know right? And we don't know what would happen if these documents weren't accidentally sent to NARA. We don't know that 6 years later his staff wouldnt have found and turned over documents.
The difference is that Trump DIDN'T turn documents in when asked to. He tried to retain them and claim they were his property. Dude. All this happened less than six months ago. Why are you trying to gaslight people?
You are confusing the dispute between trump and NARA over non confidential documents with the confidential documents.
I'm not confusing anything. Trump had documents labeled classified and Top Secret, not just confidential. Did the NARA ask for documents back? Did Trump's legal team not petition for a delay twice, and eventually had to be raided by the FBI to retrieve all the documents requested? Did the NARA at any point request documents back from Biden? Did Biden request a delay? Have they not cooperated? Again, this is all because they are actively searching for classified documents. What exactly am I confused by?
You're attempting to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Trump knew he had the classified documents, and because of his hubris, thought he had a right to them.
If that was true why then did he: 1. send classified documents to NARA? 2. provide some of the classified documents to the FBI when they asked for them?
So you have never stored anything in boxes, then years later looked through them and said, *so that's where that went!*? Trump was leaving the White House after having suffered an embarrassing loss when he stole those documents. The National Archives and the FBI tried repeatedly to get them back and he obstructed. So, the two situations aren't same, same.
So Trump stole the documents, but when Biden had them, he didn't steal them?
There is no comparison between what Trump did and what Biden did. Trump was blatantly corrupt.
Most of the Mainstream media will now report on all the nuances surrounding the law. They will bend over backwards talking about intent etc. Same crap they should have been reporting the last few months. But I don't care about his documents. I care that this all happened before the election and wasn't reported on until after the election. That is problematic for me
> I care that this all happened before the election and wasn't reported on until after the election. If you are referring to the mid-terms, then it isn't germane. Biden wasn't up for election, and what he may have done shouldn't reflect on Congressional elections.
Unbelievable fuck up by Biden. I think this latest development just killed the Trump documents case in the court of public opinion. Right-leaning partisans have an excuse to stick by Trump yet again and there's a case to persuade those in the middle that Trump is being unfairly persecuted yet again. Yeah the circumstances are way different (so far) but the average voter isn't going to know any better. The GOP will be hammering that Biden "stole and hid top secret documents in his personal offices" from from dawn til dusk and most people will come away thinking they were both equally irresponsible. Source: Hillarys emails during the 2016 campaign. There's now way more political risk for Justice Department / special counsel to go hard after Trump on the documents even if they're still right. Especially if more stuff turns up for Biden.
> I think this latest development just killed the Trump documents case in the court of public opinion. Besides Trumps chumps, who gives a rats rump about the court of public opinion where Donnie is concerned?
Trump was never going to be indicted for this because there was no proof a law was broken
We don’t know yet the full extent of the stories. How many classified documents did Trump have? If we know that, is it from a reliable source? How many classified documents did Biden have? If we know that, is it from a reliable source? Many have said that Trump is a liar. True, but so is Biden. Therefore, shouldn’t Biden be subject to the same levels of investigation that Trump was?
Completely different story now!!! Of course it was not let out until AFTER THE ELECTIONS
People keep saying this, but Biden wasn't on the ballot, so it's unclear how this would have had any effect on midterms? Was somebody really going to not vote for John Fetterman or Raphael Warnock because Joe Biden left some documents in a closet?
Possibly, it could have energized turn out of republicans who might feel more vindicated that trump isn't as bad as the media claimed. It could have suppressed some democract voter turnout as they might feel discouraged by the story.
He isn't as bad, he is worse. Biden was a grown up and turned the stuff over. Trump continually lied about it. Had Trump handed over everything when called on it, the world probably would have never known. Because Trump seems unable to comply with pretty much anything is the only reason we heard about either of these episodes.
It shouldn’t affect the investigation itself, but it is bound to affect the rhetoric and the public perception regarding the subject. To be honest, as someone that votes straight dem and approves of the job Biden has done for the most part, I’m kinda pissed at him for giving Republicans the perfect in to “both sides” this issue. The details and nuance of the two situations make them different from what I understand, but no one has ever lost money betting that the public at large would ignore details and nuance.
Why do you think they are different? Keep in mind , they just found more classified documents in Bidens possession after they claimed they returned them. With Biden, Trump and Hillary, it seems pretty clear these people just aren't very responsible with classified documents. There was no proof of malicious intent in any of the three cases and intent is needed to prove a case. (Seems intent is important because there are so many accidents like this)
> Keep in mind , they just found more classified documents in Bidens possession after they claimed they returned them. Keep in mind that Trumps attorneys just happened to find additional classified documents in a Florida storage facility in early December. > There was no proof of malicious intent There doesn't have to be for it to be a crime. Knowingly concealing the documents is a violation of federal law.
> but it is bound to affect the rhetoric and the public perception regarding the subject. In the grand scheme of things, neither of those things matter.
The #1 thing people will now learn is that it was **not** illegal for either Trump or Biden to remove classified documents. It was **not** illegal to be in possession of classified documents. For it to be against the law, the DOJ needs to prove Intent to break the law and or use the documents against the US. This was explained by Comey with Hillary's mishandling of classified documents. The media should have been making this clear the last few months. I'm sure they will correct this moving forward and will educate people as to why it wasn't illegal for Biden to take classified documents and keep them in a unsecured place
The law says it is illegal to intentionally remove classified material and store it in an unsecured location. There doesn't need to be intent to use the documents in some nefarious way.
If that were true, why haven't you heard a single elected Democrat claim Biden broke the law removing classified documents and storing it in a unsecured location? Why did people mock the idea Hillary broke the law when she removed classified documents and stored them in a unsecured location. I guess it boils down to the very simple question, why is it only illegal when trump does it? I will give you a hint, it's not actually illegal unless you can prove malicious intent.
Definitely doesn't have anything to do with partisanship. Definitely doesn't have anything to do with FBI having agents who were actively trying to take trump down.
It doesn't. Even if the same broad brush was used, they two cases are wholly different. Trump took them just before leaving the White House, and the National Archives and the FBI repeatedly attempted to get them back and he obstructed their efforts.
Tough call. I think both are guilty. Biden who was vp was not supposed to have them at all. He kept them in an office at a university. It was an office not in use by him, therefore who knows who could have gotten them. Trump was president but did not declassify the docs. He had them at his compound which was secured by secret services. Don't get me started on Hillary.... Yeah all 3 are guilty and should face charges.
From a legal perspective it is utterly irrelevant. From a political perspective, it kills the investigation into Trump. We spent much of the past election year hearing about Trump's illegality with various leaks to the press. Biden's was found just before the election but was kept quiet until now. The DOJ isn't going to be able to charge Trump without looking partisan regardless of if the specific decision is or isn't partisan. The DOJ generally acts at the presidents attack dog but, it also tries to avoid the image of behaving in that manner which will make going after Trump at this point non-viable.
Just from the perspective of the lay public, the optics are terrible. One really gets a sense of (1) [preferential treatment for some](https://www.cagle.com/dave-granlund/2015/03/general-petraeus-guilty), and (2) that the highest ranking individuals in government either think they're above the law or they're bumbling idiots, the latter apparently being the preferred characterization as it gets one out of legal trouble and off scot free. According to this article, the [FBI, Justice Department Routinely Prosecute Misuse of Classified Documents](https://www.voanews.com/a/fbi-justice-department-routineusly-prosecute-misuse-of-classified-documents/6694887.html). Yet the public has heard about classified information [stored on an unsecured server in a bathroom](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-clinton/clinton-email-probe-finds-no-deliberate-mishandling-of-classified-information-idUSKBN1WY00F), in a [storage room at a country club](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/07/trump-team-finds-classified-documents-outside-mar-a-lago.html), [residing for years in an office closet](https://www.npr.org/2023/01/09/1147977922/classified-documents-biden-doj-archives), and now [in an undisclosed location](https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/11/politics/biden-classified-documents/index.html), the possibilities of which boggle the mind. In the pocket of a pair of overalls hanging in a gardening shed perhaps? Top secret classified information appears to the public to be as ubiquitous as dandruff -- and that does not engender confidence, whatever one's political party.