Re: U.S. attorney reviewing documents marked classified from Joe Biden's vice presidency found at Biden think tank

[governo...@gmail.com]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 08:23:03 -0800 (PST), -hh
<recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 10:07:58 AM UTC-5, NoBody wrote:
>> -hh wrote:
>> >On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 11:29:47 AM UTC-5, Siri Cruise wrote:
>> >> In article <20230110-1...@Ubiquitous.news.giganews.com>,
>> >> Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > The material was identified by personal attorneys for Mr. Biden on Nov. 2,
>> >> > just before the midterm elections, Richard Sauber, special counsel to the
>> >> > president confirmed. The documents were discovered when Mr. Biden's personal..
>> >>
>> >> For how long did Biden ignore the subpoena for the documents?
>> >
>> >Or purger themselves by claiming to be in compliance with same? /s
>> >
>> >FYI, its not a crime to discover sensitive docs and self-report to get them turned in.
>> >What's a violation of the Espionage Act (18 USC § 793(d)) is to "willfully retain"
>> >sensitive national defense information “and fail to deliver it on demand to the officer
>> >or employee of the United States entitled to receive it."
>> >
>> >That an investigation is occurring over the finding is not a surprise: it is standard practice
>> >for whenever a potential spillage or breach has occurred, as an assessment is done to
>> >determine (a) *if* a spillage/breach had occurred, (b) the potential harm if so determined,
>> >(c) if the practices used for information security were/are deficient, and if so determined,
>> >develop appropriate recommended changes, (e) etc.
>>
>> Ah if it weren't for liberal double standards there would no standards at all.
>
>Cute cliche attempt ... too bad it doesn't apply:
>
>Biden's team found stuff & self-reported.
>No subpoena to retrieve required because it was voluntary.
>Similarly, no lawsuit filings from Biden to try to contest ownership.
>
>Trump had stuff, lied that he didn't have it.
>Got caught lying, so Feds went in and found it.
>Feds also found that its storage wasn't up to legal requirements.
>Trump sued, claiming he had a right to keep that which he'd already denied having.
>Falsely claimed that the FBI "planted" it.
>Falsely claimed that he had declassified it, even though that doesn't eliminate Espionage Act violations.

How does one declassify documents one never had, but sued to keep
after the FBI planted them?

Swill
--
"Reality is an acquired taste." - Matthew Perry