unlockedQuote:
Originally Posted by herbgeek
Printable View
unlockedQuote:
Originally Posted by herbgeek
Rosy as in MAGA red? Turning a blind eye to encroaching authoritarianism is, at best, irresponsible.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
What was he planning to do with boxes of government information?
We were in Palm beach and everyone here must realize it is not a secure facility at all. A main street goes right next to the fence. There is a large service/ delivery gate on that side that was wide open when we drove by. One side of the property is open to the bay.
When I went to a civilian area of the pentagon pre 9/11 they wanted my name, SS #, ID and our escort had to be with us at all times. Who knows who wandered in and out of Mar a Largo as guests, workers etc. Risky business.
A SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility) can be as simple as a secure room with appropriate access controls. I'm guessing news reports of investigators earlier this year insisting upon a higher security lock on the storage room where documents were stored may have satisfied the basic requirements for storing confidential information.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Why did he have them in his home?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
The GSA actually has strict requirements for a SCIF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
https://www.gsa.gov
Lots of high ranking government officials have SCIF's in their residence. I'm guessing some portion of Mar a Lago was designated as a SCIF while he was in office.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
I know. I set up the required security measures for one after hurricane Katrina destroyed a previous one. They mostly deal with approved physical access control methods, secure communications and regulations having to do with visitors and reproduction devices.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Edited to add: Just out of curiosity I spent a few seconds googling and discovered that there is/was one at Mar-a-Lago. What Is a SCIF and Who Uses It? (nbcnews.com)
Interesting thought that I've not heard before. I'm thinking he could legitimately plead ignorance and say he didn't know what was in the boxes? It does beg to ask why he didn't just turn them over with the initial request months ago. My guess is that he was just being a contrary jerk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
But why would an ex government official have these records in their home? It’s not like anyone from the biden administration would be discussing foreign policy with this buffoon. Not to mention that he stole the stuff and then refused to give it back. Rational people understand that he likely thought he could monetize it. If you can come up with a more logical reason for why he stole it and refused to give it back when asked nicely I’d love to hear it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Yeah sure. Perhaps the main dining room where he discussed with Shinzo Abe possible responses to a potential act of war by North Korea? While onlookers were snapping photos with their phones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
What makes you think he took them while leaving the White House? I'll bet even President Biden takes documents, or perhaps copies of original documents to his personal home on the weekends and maybe leaves some there. I'd be surprised if he doesn't have a SCIF in Delaware too.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Everyone seems to be approaching this from their preferred narrative without thinking through, or even considering other possibilities. That results in sloppy reasoning.
Shit happens, I'm sure you remember Obama telling Medvedev on a hot mic to make sure Putin knows he'll have more flexibility after the election.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Because it was on the mainstream news as it happened?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
The mainstream news showed him taking boxes of documents out of the White House as he was moving out? I must have missed that.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Did the boxes have "Confidential" or "Top Secret" stamped in large red letters on the side so that the cameras could pick them out?
Trump visited Mar a lagoon 134 times during his presidency. 26 boxes of documents were removed. A bankers box could hold three to five thousand pieces of paper with staples, file folders etc. 26x3000 is 78,000 pieces of paper. I have never seen any mention of Trump being A big reader. In fact, any manager depends on Trusted staff to summarize huge amounts of info. So your argument does not make sense to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Edited to add one argument by trump was Obama took millions of papers with him. National archives said all documents are in their possession as per the law. Presidential libraries are run and monitored by the archives for record compliance after they are built with private funds.
I'm not making an argument, just thinking out loud. Everyone else seems to 'know' details that I can't possibly 'know', so I'm trying to provide food for thought while we await more information.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Olivia Troye, Republican homeland security and counterterrorism advisor to Vice President Pence, relates how appalled she was at the handling of government documents during her tenure. She described finding a sheaf of them in the women's bathroom. Then she outlined the proper procedure of securing them in marked, secure pouches when transporting them. She said nothing about flushing them down the toilet or eating them. Pretty sure that isn't protocol. Trump knew nothing about the proper administration of government, and nothing indicates he gave a damn.
Obama's live mic gaffe wasn't a state secret, or particularly harmful. I want to hear Trump's explanation for declaring that President Obama left office with thousands of classified documents--the National Archives disputes that, and it doesn't pass the laugh test. They're masters of projection, those MAGA bros.
Marcy Wheeler is a lawyer that has been blogging about trump and his alleged crimes, and other related stuff, for quite a while now. This is an interesting discussion of the likely crimes the DOJ is looking at in relation to the past week’s events, along with details about other individuals who have been convicted of those same crimes in the recent past, what it took to convict them, etc.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/08/1...-donald-trump/
From this Marci Wheeler Post I take away that we may not need to know Donald Trump’s intent and taking these documents no worries in a charge necessarily tied to his intent. Just having them and treating them in a sloppily controlled way is a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Wheeler is just another person spinning theories although she’s an educated person spinning theories, and perhaps educated theories..
It doesn’t matter when trump took the records. Why did he have them, period?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan;412691[B
Republicans are so completely hooked on defending the indefensible that that idiot Rand Paul thinks we need to repeal the espionage act if trump is guilty of it. Because you know, everyone has a first amendment right to steal and keep nuclear secrets. Or something.
Let me get this straight (as the husband would say no pun intended). About taking the 5th - is this not meant to avoid self incrimination? Meaning if there is nothing to hide, there is no reason to take the 5th? My legal understanding - as you'all know by now - is all about everyday survival in an increasingly extremely unequal country.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Point? The implications of Trump's taking the 5th, especially so often (in one sitting?) are beyond my legal grasp. Those of you who DO understand, ummmmm......perhaps some gratitude for understanding non survival based law? I mean no snark here - such comprehension is beyond millions of Americans. It is certainly very new and perplexing/bewildering to me.
That all said, has Trump hurt himself here legally? I really have no idea. Others here are much better versed in non-survival law. *though could it not be argued that this entire situation involves political survival - survival of a different kind?
Rob
So sick already of hearing about and discussions about the Hitler wannabe. Just wish he would disappear! Life was so much better with him out of the picture!
Also Thank God former Plillipine president Rodrigo Duterte, Victor Orban of Hungary, and what's his first name Erdogan of Turkey. There's more than just a few out there. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
I could not agree more, frugal-one. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I am truly hoping that the GOP has enough common sense not to nominate Trump. Ditto for the Dems not to nominate Biden. Faced with a choice of these two again, I'd be forced to write in Pedro Almodovar, a Spanish film director who made my favorite movie of all time. This would of course throw away my vote - but technically I DID vote so I have the right to complain. Let's hope for different candidates on BOTH sides!!!
Rob
on this we can agree. So why don’t you use some of your activism time to campaign for a half way reasonable Democratic candidate. Would probably be at this point just about anyone who’s not a Biden. I don’t know if I would vote for the vice president against Trump. I do not know. I really really would have a hard time doing it. But I might. But please don’t put me in that position, get someone else on the ticket besides her.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife
What exactly is wrong with President Biden? Is it that the right has permanently besmirched him with their baseless claims of election fraud?
He gets too much socialist legislation passed. I mean geez, what kind of ugly socialist would want to help veterans who were victims of burn pits, or deprive insulin manufacturers of obscene profits on the backs of diabetics. Or worst of all, increase the IRS’s ability to go after wealthy tax cheats. Oh the horror!Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
Biden will be in his 80s soon. It is time for younger blood. I will vote for anyone BUT trump. He was impeached twice and now has MANY criminal investigations going on against him. he is the definition of thug. Can’t understand why or how he should be nominated???
One thing I do find amazing about Trump, much as I can't stand him.....he truly has more lives than a cat's supposed nine lives. I honestly don't know at this point if it's even possible to hold him accountable for anything. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I am so all over the map concerning Kamala Harris. I'm glad to see a woman FINALLY rising closer to real power in the US. She can be likeable at times- so I see it. She has also committed more than a couple verbal embarrassments/word salads, all easily viewable on YouTube, which in my mind is why she has been sidelined and we don't hear much of her these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
I rather doubt the Dems would nominate her as there is too much juicy word salad video of her out there. It's a shame for women too as I worry Ms. Harris's performance to date may have postponed a woman finally serving as US President. I'm hoping for less verbal snafus from her and solid results of some kind from.her before her four years as VP end. I would have chosen Elizabeth Warren, personally. Or even Buttigieg - not because he's openly gay but because he's young, fresh blood.
Rob
This isn't an easy question as Liberal but I'll tell it as I see it. To me personally he seems out if touch with the numerous crisises Americans are facing - though I do believe he's trying and I am glad he's not an embarrassment with foreign heads of state. I certainly see him as the much better choice over Trump ' but somehow after the Trump years I was hoping for more. He's no Obama and lacks the charisma of Bill Clinton and I personally believe at times he's in over his head -but also doing the best he can.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
I'll close with this. I wish we could have Obama again. Rob
I agree with Jane that I think he's doing better than most people think he is. What has hindered him are the ridiculous jokes about his age, mental status, and life-long stuttering. This is where social media is a firebrand for coming to all the wrong conclusions. The caricature presented by detractors is not the man. But since the Era of Trump, anyone can be a victim of being turned into a digital version of a Garbage Pail Kid. (anyone else remember those?)
In terms of his actual policy, it took him time to get traction, to be sure, given the heavy hand he was dealt--COVID, the war in Ukraine, and all the precarious economic factors tied in with both of those things. Then there has been the daunting task of turning around the devastating actions against the environment by the previous administration (92 environmental policies revoked).
He has had finally been able to show some wins--a relatively stable economy at this point, despite COVID, a steady hand in the face of ominous geopolitical events, and of course, his passing of the Inflation Reduction Act.
He's not perfect, but he does not deserve the crap he's gotten. That being said, I also hope that we can get a younger person in. Never mind term limits--I can't imagine that any octogenarian is going to be able to fulfill the duties of the office of President. Maybe Merlin, since he lived backwards.
As presidents go I'm OK with Biden. He doesn't have the oratory or communication skills of Clinton or Obama, but he's done a reasonable job of furthering progressives issue, like placing minorities in high level positions. The new climate change legislation seemed like a little too much carrot and not enough stick to me, but considering the environment has mostly gotten lip service up until now, he gets bonus points for that. He at least gives the image of bicycling, rather than riding in a golf cart. My bar for presidents may not be that high.
I had an image of Pence/Cheney on a future ballot. I'm usually wrong on political predictions.
Didn't she lose by a massive margin? Who takes someone who loses by that much, and thinks they should run for President? Maybe she could run with the Forward party.Quote:
I had an image of Pence/Cheney on a future ballot. I'm usually wrong on political predictions.
Someone who wants to act as a spoiler, much like H. Ross Perot's 1992 campaign which ultimately kept George H.W. Bush from winning a second term.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
Because she lost a Congressional seat in Trump Country. I'm sure she has more popular appeal outside of Wyoming. I think many feel she's handled herself with integrity, and if she can get enough Replubicans and Independents who want to see someone who can get the GOP on a more reasonable track, she might have a chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
If there were more Republican voters that wanted that, she wouldn't have been the only one to take a stand (well and Romney maybe).Quote:
I think many feel she's handled herself with integrity, and if she can get enough Replubicans and Independents who want to see someone who can get the GOP on a more reasonable track, she might have a chance.