Yea, well. We will so how well your Jerbs protect you when the Woke ninjas arrive at your doorstep looking to transgender your kids, and attack Christmas.
I guess I could assume the same thing. But I don't know how classification is handled. I can also assume that the information available to the president is more serious than what's available to any other government employee and that the president, once out of office, doesn't need to hold onto that information.
Can't the vice president declassify anything he wants? Who, besides council, had access to these docs?
This subjectivity, discretion, and skewed incentive structure combine to produce massive “overclassification,” a phenomenon noted by experts and blue-ribbon commissions for decades. Current and former government officials have estimated that 50 to 90 percent of classified documents could safely be released. The Obama administration pledged greater transparency and managed to reduce the yearly number of classification decisions by 18.5 percent in the last two years for which data are available, but there were still 77.5 million decisions to classify information in fiscal year 2014. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/government-classifying-too-many-documents Interesting read.
Not to some gop members saying why was it covered up during the midterms elections like it would have made a difference.
I'm sure that violating the law is fairly easy to do for a top official who had access to tons of classified documents. But once it's done, that is where the difference arises. If a person refuses to return the classified documents, lies about returning them, has their attorney's lie about it, and is uncooperative, then they have gotten themselves. If the person who initially violated the law, cooperates, returns all of the material, and accounts for it's locations and movements then there is no gotcha.
it's right there in their header: "The Congressional Integrity Project is committed to exposing the reality behind Republicans' politically motivated oversight and investigations targeting President Biden and Democrats."
1. If it's done, it's still a crime, just because Biden/Hillary took a more cooperative approach then Trump doesn't make what they did not a crime. 2. The problem is we are classifying far too many documents and making it far too easy for people to violate the law. That creates a situation where if you want to find a pretext to charge someone with something or publicly investigate someone, you can. The DOJ and the FBI aren't above partisan indictments or investigations. J. Edgar Hoover ran the FBI for 40 years if we recall. 3. This isn't a totally innocuous thing. It gets out into the media and is weaponized by partisans. It's a big nothing burger with regards to substance, because, the reality is the vast majority, if not all, the "classified" documents from Biden/Hillary/ Trump are probably innocuous. However, it drives headlines, drags peoples names through the mud and is divisive. 4. I'm interested in keeping the country, it's citizens and those who aid us safe, I'm interested in genuine treason, I'm not interested in manufactured outrage or scandals about "classified" documents that should be not classified at all. 5. People who should know something about this agree with me. We're classifying far too many documents and creating this manufactured outrage mess. The picture becomes much less clear when some key facts about the nation’s classification system are considered. Classification is not a science. The 2,000-plus officials who are authorized to make initial classification decisions exercise their individual judgments as to whether disclosure would harm national security. They have extremely broad discretion, and they are not required to explain their thinking. Given the subjectivity of the analysis, agencies frequently come to different conclusions about the sensitivity of the same piece of information. Needless to say, this would not happen if the appropriate classification status were self-evident. Moreover, officials encounter multiple incentives to err liberally on the side of classification. It is easier and safer for busy, risk-averse national-security officials to make classification the default. It also greases the skids when pursuing policy initiatives that otherwise might require broad buy-in. It can hide embarrassing facts or evidence of misconduct. And it serves as a way for officials to enhance their status or protect their agencies’ turf. There are no disincentives on the other side of the scale, as classification decisions normally go unreviewed and agencies do not punish officials for classifying too much. This subjectivity, discretion, and skewed incentive structure combine to produce massive “overclassification,” a phenomenon noted by experts and blue-ribbon commissions for decades. Current and former government officials have estimated that 50 to 90 percent of classified documents could safely be released. The Obama administration pledged greater transparency and managed to reduce the yearly number of classification decisions by 18.5 percent in the last two years for which data are available, but there were still 77.5 million decisions to classify information in fiscal year 2014. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/government-classifying-too-many-documents
I didn't care about either incident. I'm not worried about a President, former President, or former Vice President having classified documents that they had lawful access to at some point. In fact, most classified documents probably don't need to be classified and I am much more concerned about the classification system being used to keep information from the people than either of these incidents. I agree that Trump's classified documents incident was "worse" than Biden's.
