A thorough comparison of the Trump classified documents case & the Biden classified documents case.

[homersapien 11,373]

12 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

The picture was in several media sites several weeks ago. I don't have it handy. But as I recall a search showed there were classified documents in the garage.

What media sites?

Edited August 15, 2023 by homersapien

[DKW 86 7,424]

The problem is and always will be that that the standard is simple possession. It don’t matter how you got them. It just doesn’t. It doesnt matter that you cooperate. It just doesnt. I worked document retention in the Nuclear Navy. If you have a classified document in your possession outside of a SCIF, then you win a free trip to Leavenworth. Please quit trying to pretend there is a logical or civilian standard here. There isn’t. It is straight up possession. They should both be going to prison. Period. PJB had 50 years in DC and still can’t figure it out. He’s a dumbass. trump was born a dumbass. 

Edited August 16, 2023 by DKW 86

[Didba 5,256]

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

The problem is and always will be that that the standard is simple possession. It don’t matter how you got them. It just doesn’t. It doesnt matter that you cooperate. It just doesnt. I worked document retention in the Nuclear Navy. If you have a classified document in your possession outside of a SCIF, then you win a free trip to Leavenworth. Please quit trying to pretend there is a logical or civilian standard here. There isn’t. It is straight up possession. They should both be going to prison. Period. PJB had 50 years in DC and still can’t figure it out. He’s a dumbass. trump was born a dumbass. 

I find it hard to believe that it is a strict liability crime and there are not any affirmative defenses or exceptions to that law. 

[TexasTiger 12,876]

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

The problem is and always will be that that the standard is simple possession. It don’t matter how you got them. It just doesn’t. It doesnt matter that you cooperate. It just doesnt. I worked document retention in the Nuclear Navy. If you have a classified document in your possession outside of a SCIF, then you win a free trip to Leavenworth. Please quit trying to pretend there is a logical or civilian standard here. There isn’t. It is straight up possession. They should both be going to prison. Period. PJB had 50 years in DC and still can’t figure it out. He’s a dumbass. trump was born a dumbass. 

Cite the law that aligns with your claims.

[Didba 5,256]

17 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Cite the law that aligns with your claims.

Right, lol, there’s no way that it’s strict liability. 

[DKW 86 7,424]

On 8/16/2023 at 2:46 PM, Didba said:

I find it hard to believe that it is a strict liability crime and there are not any affirmative defenses or exceptions to that law. 

The problem is: There is now. The laws we used to prosecute with are still on the books. They have just stopped doing what the law says because, as you know, Everything in DC has a double standard. There are military people serving time now for FAR FAR FAR LESS than trump or Biden did.

[DKW 86 7,424]

On 8/16/2023 at 2:46 PM, Didba said:

I find it hard to believe that it is a strict liability crime and there are not any affirmative defenses or exceptions to that law. 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1924

[Didba 5,256]

20 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1924

I appreciate the cite however the language of the statute is clear that it isn’t a strict liability crime, which you seemed to imply earlier but that might have been unintentional.

let me explain; the statute you cited states:

“Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.”

the bolded phrases speak to the mens rea (or mental state) that prosecutors must establish to convict, here the mental state is “knowingly with intent to…” which immediately pulls the crime out of strict liability territory. Unlike say for instance statutory rape or speeding, which doesn’t require any mental state to be proven at all.

You can fully believe the girl was 19 because she had an ID that said so or fully believe you were driving under the speed limit but it doesn’t matter because they are strict liability crimes.

I’m not debating the actual breaches by Trump or Biden, though Trump’s meets this standard easily just from his court filings admitting to knowledge. Biden’s situation is a little more tenuous to prove knowledge + intent.

If you’d like a clarification on any of that please feel free to ask  

 

[DKW 86 7,424]

22 hours ago, Didba said:

I appreciate the cite however the language of the statute is clear that it isn’t a strict liability crime, which you seemed to imply earlier but that might have been unintentional.

let me explain; the statute you cited states:

“Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.”

the bolded phrases speak to the mens rea (or mental state) that prosecutors must establish to convict, here the mental state is “knowingly with intent to…” which immediately pulls the crime out of strict liability territory. Unlike say for instance statutory rape or speeding, which doesn’t require any mental state to be proven at all.

You can fully believe the girl was 19 because she had an ID that said so or fully believe you were driving under the speed limit but it doesn’t matter because they are strict liability crimes.

I’m not debating the actual breaches by Trump or Biden, though Trump’s meets this standard easily just from his court filings admitting to knowledge. Biden’s situation is a little more tenuous to prove knowledge + intent.

If you’d like a clarification on any of that please feel free to ask  

And I guess that you are going to say that possession of the documents, removed from a SCIF Area, doesn't mean blah blah blah. 

Funny, we always read the other way. That possession meant that you were up to no good. Why else would you have them? Why would trump or Biden need classified docs? They are both too stoopid to understand, little own manage the damn things...😘

50 Years in DC and Old Joe still hasn't figured out what every first-year enlisted person in the military knows: How to handle classified docs...

Edited August 19, 2023 by DKW 86

[Didba 5,256]

32 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

And I guess that you are going to say that possession of the documents, removed from a SCIF Area, doesn't mean blah blah blah. 

Funny, we always read the other way. That possession meant that you were up to no good. Why else would you have them? Why would trump or Biden needs classified docs? They are both to stoopid to understand, little on manage the damn things...😘

50 Years in DC and Old Joe still hasn't figured out what every first year enlisted person in the military knows: How to handle classified docs...

There really isn’t any other way to read the statute. It’s not a strict liability statute like you first implied. I’m not saying they both didn’t break it. I’m just saying it’s not strict liability and the prosecution still has to prove mental state and intent which they wouldn’t if it was a strict liability law. 

if you think I’m defending Biden or something you are reaaal off base. I’m not gonna say anything like “that possession of the documents, removed from a SCIF Area, doesn't mean blah blah blah.”

if you read that statute as strict liability statute then I’m sorry but you are just wrong. 

Edited August 18, 2023 by Didba

[AU9377 4,931]

On 8/16/2023 at 1:08 PM, DKW 86 said:

The problem is and always will be that that the standard is simple possession. It don’t matter how you got them. It just doesn’t. It doesnt matter that you cooperate. It just doesnt. I worked document retention in the Nuclear Navy. If you have a classified document in your possession outside of a SCIF, then you win a free trip to Leavenworth. Please quit trying to pretend there is a logical or civilian standard here. There isn’t. It is straight up possession. They should both be going to prison. Period. PJB had 50 years in DC and still can’t figure it out. He’s a dumbass. trump was born a dumbass. 

Simple possession is not what the law requires. 

18 U.S. Code § 1924.   Whoever, being an officer ... of the United States, and, by virtue of his office ... becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

The FBI has been clear in the past when they stated DOJ policy has always been that  "cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice.

[AU9377 4,931]

5 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

And I guess that you are going to say that possession of the documents, removed from a SCIF Area, doesn't mean blah blah blah. 

Funny, we always read the other way. That possession meant that you were up to no good. Why else would you have them? Why would trump or Biden needs classified docs? They are both to stoopid to understand, little on manage the damn things...😘

50 Years in DC and Old Joe still hasn't figured out what every first year enlisted person in the military knows: How to handle classified docs...

It is as simple as possessing something that you don't know you have.  When you discover the document(s), they should be returned immediately.  Had Donald just returned the documents, there would have been no indictment and no indictment would have been sought.

[DKW 86 7,424]

14 hours ago, Didba said:

There really isn’t any other way to read the statute. It’s not a strict liability statute like you first implied. I’m not saying they both didn’t break it. I’m just saying it’s not strict liability and the prosecution still has to prove mental state and intent which they wouldn’t if it was a strict liability law. 

if you think We all know I’m you're defending Biden or something you are reaaal off base. I’m not gonna say anything like “that possession of the documents, removed from a SCIF Area, doesn't mean blah blah blah.” You just did.  Biden has been in DC 50 F'in years. He doesnt come close to doing right after 50 F'in years. But yet there will always be people like you ready to defend stoopid if it your team doing the stoopid.

if you read that statute as strict liability statute then I’m sorry but you are just wrong. 

I have years of first hand knowledge of prosecutions we made on people with simple possession and absolutely no intention to distribute etc. They went to Leavenworth. Most of our prosecutions may have been UCMJ however, so will defer at this time. But man, my God cannot you not see that allowing everything with two legs in DC to just flat ignore all classified document laws is just asking for our agents and military in the field to get killed for nothing but incompetence?

Unfortunately there is a 2 or even a 3 tier justice system in this country. The dolts in DC do not have their feet held to the fire ever. Classified documents? We don't prosecute anyone for that anymore. Must make the Russian and Chinese and maybe even the Al Qaeda's jobs real easy. No one is even watching nor maintaining a check-in and check-out list of documents. 

Clinesmith doctored evidence in the biggest case in FBI History, according to Strzok, everyone on the team was aware of it. But yet they all sat by and allowed it to happen. What happened to there? NOTHING> Clinesmith resigned and got his law license suspended for only one year. No jail time. Not even a fine.

And I am sure are 100% fine with all of that.

[DKW 86 7,424]

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

It is as simple as possessing something that you don't know you have.  When you discover the document(s), they should be returned immediately.  Had Donald just returned the documents, there would have been no indictment and no indictment would have been sought.

Are you truly this dense? They found documents and what did they do? They assigned uncleared lawyers to go look for them? WTF?????? Uncleared Attorneys got assigned to go look for them? How f'in stoopid is that? Seems to me they had absolutely no intention of keeping these documents classified at all. 

Second, ONLY FLAGRANT mishandling of these documents can lead to you having anything but nefarious possession of them. They are in clearly marked, cannot be missed, binders. How do you think that they are transported?

That brings up another issue: Why are we still using non-electronic documents anymore??? How f'in stupid are these people?

Edited August 19, 2023 by DKW 86

[AU9377 4,931]

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Are you truly this dense? They found documents and what did they do? They assigned uncleared lawyers to go look for them? WTF?????? Uncleared Attorneys got assigned to go look for them? How f'in stoopid is that? Seems to me they had absolutely no intention of keeping these documents classified at all. 

Second, ONLY FLAGRANT mishandling of these documents can lead to you having anything but nefarious possession of them. They are in clearly marked, cannot be missed, binders. How do you think that they are transported?

That brings up another issue: Why are we still using non-electronic documents anymore??? How f'in stupid are these people?

One problem is that we over classify documents.  We use it as a catch all.  If any importance is placed on it, it often gets classified.  All classified documents are not in large binders, which is why it is possible for them to get stuffed into files and those files get packed and moved by others months and years later.  They don't have tracking numbers and most don't have to be viewed in restricted locations only.

This is why willful retention,  intent, timely return of documents, and the cooperation of the official involved are considered when enforcing the relevant statutes. 

[Didba 5,256]

6 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

I have years of first hand knowledge of prosecutions we made on people with simple possession and absolutely no intention to distribute etc. They went to Leavenworth. Most of our prosecutions may have been UCMJ however, so will defer at this time. But man, my God cannot you not see that allowing everything with two legs in DC to just flat ignore all classified document laws is just asking for our agents and military in the field to get killed for nothing but incompetence?

Unfortunately there is a 2 or even a 3 tier justice system in this country. The dolts in DC do not have their feet held to the fire ever. Classified documents? We don't prosecute anyone for that anymore. Must make the Russian and Chinese and maybe even the Al Qaeda's jobs real easy. No one is even watching nor maintaining a check-in and check-out list of documents. 

Clinesmith doctored evidence in the biggest case in FBI History, according to Strzok, everyone on the team was aware of it. But yet they all sat by and allowed it to happen. What happened to there? NOTHING> Clinesmith resigned and got his law license suspended for only one year. No jail time. Not even a fine.

And I am sure are 100% fine with all of that.

Look man, I’m just saying it’s not a strict liability crime per the statutes language.

I’m not sure why you keep ranting at me about stuff beyond that.

 

[Didba 5,256]

16 hours ago, AU9377 said:

It is as simple as possessing something that you don't know you have.  When you discover the document(s), they should be returned immediately.  Had Donald just returned the documents, there would have been no indictment and no indictment would have been sought.

Could you explain? The statute has the mental state knowingly which from everything I remember means prosecution must prove the person knew they were removing unauthorized documents? Does possession = constructive knowledge?

Edited August 19, 2023 by Didba

[AU9377 4,931]

3 minutes ago, Didba said:

Could you explain? The statute has the mental state knowingly which from everything I remember means prosecution must prove the person knew they were removing unauthorized documents? Does possession = constructive knowledge?

That wasn't what I was referring to.  The comment I was replying to was this....

Second, ONLY FLAGRANT mishandling of these documents can lead to you having anything but nefarious possession of them. They are in clearly marked, cannot be missed, binders. How do you think that they are transported?

That comment presumes that someone could not have the document without knowledge or negligence.  I don't think that is correct.  In fact, the DOJ has repeatedly stated which types of violations are prosecuted and which are not.  I don't believe that constructive knowledge is part of this at all.

Comey's statement regarding charging Hillary Clinton pointed out what the considerations are...

All the (prior prosecutions of public officials) cases prosecuted involved some combination of: *clearly intentional and *willful mishandling of classified information; or *vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or *indications of disloyalty to the United States; or *efforts to obstruct justice.

That is the analysis involved.  It hasn't changed, even though some Republicans spend a lot of wasted air alleging that the DOJ's enforcement is somehow different depending on the party of the official.  The reality is that the facts aren't the same.

[Didba 5,256]

15 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

That wasn't what I was referring to.  The comment I was replying to was this....

Second, ONLY FLAGRANT mishandling of these documents can lead to you having anything but nefarious possession of them. They are in clearly marked, cannot be missed, binders. How do you think that they are transported?

That comment presumes that someone could not have the document without knowledge or negligence.  I don't think that is correct.  In fact, the DOJ has repeatedly stated which types of violations are prosecuted and which are not.  I don't believe that constructive knowledge is part of this at all.

Comey's statement regarding charging Hillary Clinton pointed out what the considerations are...

All the (prior prosecutions of public officials) cases prosecuted involved some combination of: *clearly intentional and *willful mishandling of classified information; or *vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or *indications of disloyalty to the United States; or *efforts to obstruct justice.

That is the analysis involved.  It hasn't changed, even though some Republicans spend a lot of wasted air alleging that the DOJ's enforcement is somehow different depending on the party of the official.  The reality is that the facts aren't the same.

Ah, then I think that backs up my reading of the statute requiring knowledge + intent. Thanks for the explanation. 

[DKW 86 7,424]

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

One problem is that we over classify documents.  We use it as a catch all.  If any importance is placed on it, it often gets classified.  All classified documents are not in large binders, which is why it is possible for them to get stuffed into files and those files get packed and moved by others months and years later.  They don't have tracking numbers and most don't have to be viewed in restricted locations only.

This is why willful retention,  intent, timely return of documents, and the cooperation of the official involved are considered when enforcing the relevant statutes. 

Every document I dealt with was in an oversized binder. It was updated daily and was kept 100% of the time in a SCIF. If you had one outside of the SCIF, you punched your ticket for Leavenworth.

 

[DKW 86 7,424]

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

One problem is that we over classify documents.  We use it as a catch all.  If any importance is placed on it, it often gets classified.  All classified documents are not in large binders, which is why it is possible for them to get stuffed into files and those files get packed and moved by others months and years later.  They don't have tracking numbers and most don't have to be viewed in restricted locations only.

This is why willful retention,  intent, timely return of documents, and the cooperation of the official involved are considered when enforcing the relevant statutes. 

Timely return and jail time was part of every case I saw. I don't think you understand what we are talking about here. If you had classified docs outside of a SCIF, you are up to no good. End of discussion.

 

Edited August 20, 2023 by DKW 86

[creed 1,637]

10 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Timely return and jail time was part of every case I saw. I don't think you understand what we are talking about here. If you had classified docs outside of a SCIF, you are up to no good. End of discussion.

 

IMO there is absolutely no reason...let me repeat, no reason any document to leave an SCIF location. Let me expand, the documents in question whether they be classified or just hand written notes are the property of the government. They are on the job work products, and we, the tax payer, paid for those documents. So they should NEVER leave the SCIF and NEVER be found outside the SCIF and/or in possesion by a current or past employee.

 

 

Edited August 20, 2023 by creed

[Son of A Tiger 561]

6 hours ago, AU9377 said:

 

That is the analysis involved.  It hasn't changed, even though some Republicans spend a lot of wasted air alleging that the DOJ's enforcement is somehow different depending on the party of the official.  The reality is that the facts aren't the same.

Do you honestly believe that the DOJ justice is fair in all the situations going on today?

[DKW 86 7,424]

9 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

Do you honestly believe that the DOJ justice is fair in all the situations going on today?

https://fortune.com/2023/08/16/americans-divided-by-party-over-trump-election-cases-poll/

Only 2 in 10 Americans have a ‘great deal’ of confidence in the U.S. Justice Department after Donald Trump’s indictment

https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/americans-sour-fbi-doj-trump-investigations-rcna91814

Overall, Americans were split. Thirty-five percent say they view the DOJ in a positive light and 36% say they view the agency negatively.

[DKW 86 7,424]

10 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Timely return and jail time was part of every case I saw. I don't think you understand what we are talking about here. If you had classified docs outside of a SCIF, you are up to no good. End of discussion.

Trying to be very clear here. We did not prosecute just one case while I dealt with classified material. It involved a huge breach and basically a dozen men screwing up at their job. All of them were disciplined, but not jailed. Some permanently lost security clearances. Maybe only 1-2 were fined. But no jail time.

We were sending a small cube truck of material to the incinerator. Instead, the SFs sent it to the dump. We recovered ZERO of the material after 3-4 weeks of looking for it.

Every other case I saw was prosecuted and had:

1) Possession of Classified Material outside of a SCIF

2) Had full compliance with the investigation by perp and his legal team.

3) Had immediate return of all material.

4) Ended in a trip to jail.

Every single case had all these points involved. All ended in jail time.

Edited August 20, 2023 by DKW 86