Biden's presidency

[Motown Bombers]

I wonder if we are going to get some Dark Brandon trading cards?

[Crazy Cat Gentleman]

he'd probably make them free, the big socialist.

[pfife]

I'd love to get a dark brandon nft on my obama phone

[CMRivdogs]

Slight difference for Trumpsters, Biden's attorney's found the documents and immediately acted responsibly. Trump tried to cover everything up.

 

BUT HIS SON'S LAPTOP!!!!!! 

[CMRivdogs]

 

[oblong]

That won’t matter. It’s all they need to “both sides” it.  Details are irrelevant.  People are too ignorant to understand.  

[ewsieg]

9 hours ago, oblong said:

That won’t matter. It’s all they need to “both sides” it.  Details are irrelevant.  People are too ignorant to understand.  

The details make this a much different story than what Trump did, but Dems invited some of this to themselves with their overhyped response to Trump.  Before details came out which outlined why Trump's issue was egregious every Democrat stressed how there is no excuse for confidential documents being taken from the White House.  Even Biden chimed with "How that could possibly happen, how anyone could be that irresponsible."

If it truly is that irresponsible, doesn't Biden deserve some flack for this as well?

[pfife]

The details make this a much different story than what Trump did, but Repubs invited some of this to themselves with their non-response to Trump.  Before details came out which outlined why Trump's issue wasn't egregious every Republican stressed how there are dozens of excuses for confidential documents being taken from the White House.  Even Trump chimed with "I declassified them by thinking about it"

If it truly isn't that irresponsible, doesn't Biden deserve some slack for this as well?

[Tiger337]

With Trump, it's a 100% guarantee that he was selling or planning to sell the documents, because that's what his life has been about for over 40 years.  He also disgraced himself and the country by trying to overturn an election and inspiring a riot.  That disqualifies him from ever getting the benefit of the doubt again.  You can both sides some things, but Trump is way beyond that now.       

[ewsieg]

5 hours ago, pfife said:

...but Repubs invited some of this to themselves with their non-response to Trump.  Before details came out which outlined why Trump's issue wasn't egregious every Republican stressed how there are dozens of excuses for confidential documents being taken from the White House.  Even Trump chimed with "I declassified them by thinking about it"

Absolutely correct. Almost like if you look at them as separate issues, you can say what Trump did was egregious and Biden's team was at least irresponsible (per his own words).

3 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

With Trump, it's a 100% guarantee that he was selling or planning to sell the documents, because that's what his life has been about for over 40 years.  He also disgraced himself and the country by trying to overturn an election and inspiring a riot.  That disqualifies him from ever getting the benefit of the doubt again.  You can both sides some things, but Trump is way beyond that now.       

I'm not trying to both sides stuff.  But again, Biden himself said that having confidential documents in your own possession is at minimum, irresponsible, is it somehow not irresponsible now because Trump was worse?

And it's not 100% that he was selling or planning on selling.  In fact from what I've read, Trump is a packrat and wanted anything that he felt put him or one of his decisions in a good light in his possession because he felt he 'owned' them.  It's why what he did is exponentially worse.  

[Tiger337]

16 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

And it's not 100% that he was selling or planning on selling.  In fact from what I've read, Trump is a packrat and wanted anything that he felt put him or one of his decisions in a good light in his possession because he felt he 'owned' them.  It's why what he did is exponentially worse.  

OK, 99%!  

[oblong]

44 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Absolutely correct. Almost like if you look at them as separate issues, you can say what Trump did was egregious and Biden's team was at least irresponsible (per his own words).

I'm not trying to both sides stuff.  But again, Biden himself said that having confidential documents in your own possession is at minimum, irresponsible, is it somehow not irresponsible now because Trump was worse?

And it's not 100% that he was selling or planning on selling.  In fact from what I've read, Trump is a packrat and wanted anything that he felt put him or one of his decisions in a good light in his possession because he felt he 'owned' them.  It's why what he did is exponentially worse.  

of course having something where it shouldn't be is "irresponsible". 

Going 75 in a 65 zone and 95 in a 25 zone are both "speeding".

That doesn't mean a person that drives 75 in a 65 zone can't be pissed off at a person who goes 95 in a 25 zone because they also once drove over the speed limit.

It's almost like you are trying to both sides stuff.

 

 

[ewsieg]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

That doesn't mean a person that drives 75 in a 65 zone can't be pissed off at a person who goes 95 in a 25 zone because they also once drove over the speed limit.

I guess I am both side'sing this in the fact that i'm pointing out both sides, just like in your scenario, should expect repercussions.  But to your point, absolutely both sides should understand that the punishment should fit the 'crime' and would vary wildly.

Note that I quoted 'crime' as well.  I did that because as of right now, there is only evidence of a crime in regards to Trump (knowingly taking documents and lying about not having any more), whereas with Biden, there is no evidence of a crime just some irresponsibility.  

My only point is, if you're going to get on your high horse and proclaim how horrible it is what Trump did when at the time we didn't even know all the facts, you might not want to be careless yourself.

[pfife]

why would you spend your time both sidesing something you also say is not the same?

[1984Echoes]

36 minutes ago, pfife said:

why would you spend your time both sidesing something you also say is not the same?

Let me state that more bluntly:

I don't give a fuck about Biden having a moment of irresponsibility. That falls under "it happens".

I do give a damn about the incessant criminal behavior of TFG.

But here's the question, to ewsieg: Why are you constantly demanding that we give a fuck about minor inconsequential issues that we don't give a fuck about; in order to make you feel better about this "both sides scenario" that you've created?

Because that's what it boils down to. And not to be vulgar... but seriously... If someone said Biden once drove 40 in a 35 MPH zone!!! I just don't really give an F. But you keep demanding that we do.

[oblong]

1 hour ago, ewsieg said:

 

My only point is, if you're going to get on your high horse and proclaim how horrible it is what Trump did when at the time we didn't even know all the facts, you might not want to be careless yourself.

At what point during the Trump document situation did we not know that the archives knew he had classified documents and he wasn’t returning them?  That’s what prompted the “raid” and when Trump let the public know what was happening.  There was not a single point in time that the publicly available information matched what happened with the President.  The situations were never similar or in line.  

[chasfh]

Here's a thought: what if there is a little political jujitsu going on here, in which (1) the Biden camp is trying to bait the Republicans into hammering him on this, which would shine a bright light on their hypocrisy after defending Trump on his own massive breach all this time; and/or (2) Biden is intending to embarrass the Trump camp by demonstrating to the country exactly how someone should cooperate with authorities when they get caught on this kind of thing, in exactly the way Trump did not?

IOW, what if the Biden camp ... I won't say manufactured this, but rather, allowed this to become public for either or both of these purposes? After all, the scope of their breach is much smaller, and also, the Biden lawyers proactively alerted authorities, whereas the Archives had to contact Trump, who refused to cooperate, and then had to chase the documents down.

If the Republicans are smart, they won't touch this with a 10 foot pole.

Here's hoping they run right toward it ... 🤞🏼

[ewsieg]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

At what point during the Trump document situation did we not know that the archives knew he had classified documents and he wasn’t returning them?  That’s what prompted the “raid” and when Trump let the public know what was happening.  There was not a single point in time that the publicly available information matched what happened with the President.  The situations were never similar or in line.  

Not really sure what you're getting at here.  There were a few days of rumors before the Justice Department spoke about the raid on Trump.  If you wanted to believe Trump on what he told the public and take that as 100% fact, I guess have at it.

But again, i'm not saying there are not vast differences in 1) intention and 2) cover up after the fact.  My only point is if you were one of the people that said there was no excuse for any confidential materials to be in someone's custody that is no longer a government employee with the need to know and stored in a non-government facility, you could at least admit some wrong even if you point towards the vast differences on why this isn't the same level as Trump.

I remember hearing folks questioning how many spies may have died because of this.  Certainly how many spies were outed and how many intelligence programs were destroyed over Trump having confidential materials.  Countless other reasons why Trump having these documents in a non secure room was so detrimental to our national security.

But because Biden's team did the right thing by informing the appropriate contacts as soon as they found them bad guys that may have gotten access to them unbeknownst to anyone, they are just going to return them and not use the information because the right process was followed?  

 

[oblong]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

Here's a thought: what if there is a little political jujitsu going on here, in which (1) the Biden camp is trying to bait the Republicans into hammering him on this, which would shine a bright light on their hypocrisy after defending Trump on his own massive breach all this time; and/or (2) Biden is intending to embarrass the Trump camp by demonstrating to the country exactly how someone should cooperate with authorities when they get caught on this kind of thing, in exactly the way Trump did not?

IOW, what if the Biden camp ... I won't say manufactured this, but rather, allowed this to become public for either or both of these purposes? After all, the scope of their breach is much smaller, and also, the Biden lawyers proactively alerted authorities, whereas the Archives had to contact Trump, who refused to cooperate, and then had to chase the documents down.

If the Republicans are smart, they won't touch this with a 10 foot pole.

Here's hoping they run right toward it ... 🤞🏼

The flip side is… what does it matter? Republicans are going to think what they want regardless of the facts.  

[pfife]

Didn't Trump release the info about being raided - day of?

[oblong]

10 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Not really sure what you're getting at here.  There were a few days of rumors before the Justice Department spoke about the raid on Trump.  If you wanted to believe Trump on what he told the public and take that as 100% fact, I guess have at it.

But again, i'm not saying there are not vast differences in 1) intention and 2) cover up after the fact.  My only point is if you were one of the people that said there was no excuse for any confidential materials to be in someone's custody that is no longer a government employee with the need to know and stored in a non-government facility, you could at least admit some wrong even if you point towards the vast differences on why this isn't the same level as Trump.

I remember hearing folks questioning how many spies may have died because of this.  Certainly how many spies were outed and how many intelligence programs were destroyed over Trump having confidential materials.  Countless other reasons why Trump having these documents in a non secure room was so detrimental to our national security.

But because Biden's team did the right thing by informing the appropriate contacts as soon as they found them bad guys that may have gotten access to them unbeknownst to anyone, they are just going to return them and not use the information because the right process was followed?  

 

You are asking us why we didn’t react the same way to a situation where one guy rants about being “raided “ and another where one guy’s team notifies the archives that they have something that the archives apparently didn’t know even existed.  
 

Person A takes petty cash money that no longer applies to him as he doesn’t work there anymore, is asked numerous times to give it back, doesnt, then they show up to get it.

Person B leaves a job and 5 years later discovers a box with petty cash in it, let’s them know he has it, sends it back

and you want to say “well hold on now…. Why didn’t you give person A the same benefit of the doubt?”  
 

 

 

 

[chasfh]

51 minutes ago, oblong said:

The flip side is… what does it matter? Republicans are going to think what they want regardless of the facts.  

Yes, but it’s not hardened Republicans they would want to convince.

[ewsieg]

49 minutes ago, oblong said:

You are asking us why we didn’t react the same way to a situation where one guy rants about being “raided “ and another where one guy’s team notifies the archives that they have something that the archives apparently didn’t know even existed.  

Person A takes petty cash money that no longer applies to him as he doesn’t work there anymore, is asked numerous times to give it back, doesnt, then they show up to get it.

Person B leaves a job and 5 years later discovers a box with petty cash in it, let’s them know he has it, sends it back

and you want to say “well hold on now…. Why didn’t you give person A the same benefit of the doubt?”  

I'm not saying you should react the same way.  I don't like the petty cash anecdote because person B left cash that anyone could have taken for 5 years in a place where the owner obviously didn't realize they had anything valuable and was lucky it wasn't stolen.  Cash vs confidential materials are a huge difference.

Back to your speeding anecdote though.  Imagine Mr 10 over tells everyone that listens just how stupid Mr. 70 over is, how there is no excuse to speed, ever.  Don't you know just how dangerous speeding is, let alone at that reckless speed of that idiot he saw earlier in the day.  Then he gets caught doing 10 over.   

In your scenario, is Person A justified in fighting the ticket and pointing out Person B was so much worse that it's not comparable?  If anything, he should be celebrated for only doing 10 over, amirite?!?!

[mtutiger]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

You are asking us why we didn’t react the same way to a situation where one guy rants about being “raided “ and another where one guy’s team notifies the archives that they have something that the archives apparently didn’t know even existed.  

Also, Trump's legal liability isn't even the fact that he left with classified docs in his possession... it's that, after being contacted multiple times by NARA, he continued to withhold at least some of those documents and he and his representatives appear to have lied at various points about it as well. 

Put another way, it's all the other ways that this Trump's classified documents issues differ from this one that exposes him to criminal liability. If he had done what Biden appears to have done and notified/cooperated with NARA, he likely would not be in trouble. No warrant would have been issued, no criminal investigation would exist because there would be no reason for it.

Edited January 11, 2023 by mtutiger

[oblong]

And we would never have known about it. In fact we didn’t know about any of it until Trump decided to grift off it by playing victim. 

intent matters legally.  Some people just insist on playing both sides and what about and “yeah but games and pretend they aren’t and I’m not going to participate anymore.