Comments by "TeeKay" (@teekay_1) on "Biden vs. Trump Classified Document Cases: What’s the Difference? | WSJ" video.

@robertkaminski9315 He was authorized to have any classified document as president.
9
@NemeanLion- Cooperation was meaningless since Biden never legally had the authority to take the documents, since he actually took them home as senator and VP. In addition, some were moved to the U of P in Philly were they were out of his control.
7
@timogul " just that they didn't have a case to win, " Not quite; the special council said that he could be prosecuted, but the spectacle of an old man with failing memory would be sympathetic to the jury. I know you'll argue with me, but read the document yourself. They acknowledged he broke the law.
2
@timogul No Tim. he said he had a case, but Joe was too senile to prosecute Go read the document. You're arguing something that simply isn't factually correct and easily verified.
2
Well, the good news is the WSJ laid off a bunch of "reporters" today from the DC bureau, so perhaps this was created by some schlub who is now wandering over to the CNN building on 1st street in DC hoping they can use someone with their talents.
2
@USMC1984 According to the ABA, presidents have broad authority to formally declassify most documents that are not statutorily protected, while they are in office So unless the documents are protected by statute, the president can declassify them. In this case, the panic this week is that Trump has the documents from the FBI about Crossfire Hurricane and it names names, which is why they're going hard after him. Apparently it was not in what the FBI took from Mar-a-Lago, so they're playing hardball to make sure those names are never released.
1
@timogul Timmy, you're changing the subject, so let's bring it back to classified documents: Here's the conclusion from the special prosecutor's report The Justice Department special counsel investigating President Joe Biden’s handling of classified materials said the president “willfully” retained classified materials while a private citizen, but chose not to bring criminal charges against the president due to concerns about the ability to convince a jury of wrongdoing, saying Biden could portray himself as an “elderly man with a poor memory"
1
@timogul You're changing the subject Timmy. Here's the reality that's smacking you in the face like a dead mackerel: "The Justice Department special counsel investigating President Joe Biden’s handling of classified materials said the president willfully retained classified materials while a private citizen, but chose not to bring criminal charges against the president due to concerns about the ability to convince a jury of wrongdoing, saying Biden could portray himself as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”" You want to say Joe didn't do anything wrong but it's not backed up except by what you heard on MSNBC. Go look at the document and come back when you're informed and willing to be honest.
1
@timogul So you believe that special counsels are chosen for their political biases? You realize you've just admitted the Biden administration is corrupt? And Biden doesn't realize it perhaps because he's senile?
1
The main difference between the two cases is Biden had no authority to have access to any of those documents , whereas Trump as president had complete authority to access those documents. In October 2020, Trump declassified those documents in his possession as was his right. The other difference is Trump stored the documents in a residence that was guarded around the clock by secret service agents. Biden stored them in a box in his garage before he was eligible for secret service protection. In addition Biden's documents were moved to Penn Biden Center where they were access by Chinese nationals. That's pretty much it.
1
@dwarvenjesus4266 which is appropriate because Joe is in his 80's.
1
@thomasdecarlo8543 " Senators can have access to some classified information depending on their security clearance. " Ah, a tricky sentence. Yes, they can, but they cannot remove said documents. They are generally provided to congressmen in a SCIF.
1
@dwarvenjesus4266 Yes, he does. Joe never had legal possession of those documents, and just giving them back once you get caught doesn't absolve him. But if Joe is senile, he should be removed from office. If he isn't senile, then he should be tried and if found guilty, removed from office.
1
@leewright1209 Well, Biden clearly has dementia, so there is that.
1
@timogul Yes, but they didn't charge Biden with that because he was senile.
1
This is why I dropped my subscription to the WSJ. It has all the credibility of MSNBC. Only the oped page is worth reading. The rest is fish wrapper.
1
@jakes658 Most of the WSJ's news is doctrinaire Democrat that you could get from Don Lemon. It's on that level. Rebecca Balhaus was particularly egregious, and although she's gone, the rest of the undereducated journalists who work at that paper have taken on the same role.
1
@jeffshriber6120 It actually does make a difference if you're the president.
1
@jeffshriber6120 Joe is senile and can't be prosecuted as per the special council. But Joe's case is far more egregious primarily because he never had authority to have those documents. Further Biden moved some of those classified documents to the Biden Penn Center at U of P where Chinese nationals had access to them. Trump has the authority to declassify those documents and he claims he did declassify them. Now we have no idea of some of those documents were protected by statute, but that should be in the indictment. Unfortunately, Jack Smith doesn't want to release an unredacted copy of the indictment, even to Trump's attorneys, so his motives seem to be highly political. In fact both instances are highly political
1