advertisement


Post-Trump: III (decline, further tantrums, legal proceedings, book deals etc)

Think so or know so?

I mean of course it might be true, because anything might be true. But I do not believe that Obama, Bush or any other previous president was stealing state secrets.

These secrets are definitely are not in their presidential libraries because if they were a) we would know about it as the process of declassification would reveal it and b) you -- or more likely anyone of the number of journalists and historians -- could go along and read them.
 
I mean of course it might be true, because anything might be true. But I do not believe that Obama, Bush or any other previous president was stealing state secrets.

These secrets are definitely are not in their presidential libraries because if they were a) we would know about it as the process of declassification would reveal it and b) you -- or more likely anyone of the number of journalists and historians -- could go along and read them.

I can’t stand Trump but he’s only done what former presidents have done Clinton was stealing classified documents one of his advisors was jailed for stealing the documents and I’ve no doubt they were all at it in one form or another and that includes those two above.

Top generals were caught stealing classified documents too btw Patreaus for one.
 
I can’t stand Trump but he’s only done what former presidents have done Clinton was stealing classified documents one of his advisors was jailed for stealing the documents and I’ve no doubt they were all at it in one form or another and that includes those two above.

Top generals were caught stealing classified documents too btw Patreaus for one.

Sandy Berger and Petraeus were misusing classified documents *not* Presidents Clinton and Bush. And the point of those two cases is it demonstrates the strength of the relevant laws.
 
Brilliant tactical move by DOJ on selecting statutes for the search. None of the crimes cited require the documents to be classified. Any claim by Trump that he declassified the documents is irrelevant.” Barb MQuade (Twitter).
 
Why is this guy not already in jail? You and I would have been put away years ago.

Law seldom applies to the ultra-rich. Even less so if they front a far-right political cult in a rigged political system. Trump, Johnson and the rest of them would be in jail for life under any sane system on multiple counts of corruption and treason, but their parties always ring-fence them and continue the criminality.
 
Well he can/could up to a point depending on the classification but it looks as though he thought he could take anything and do what he wanted with the stuff.

One of Clinton’s advisors did a year in jail for stealing classified documents when Clinton left office the guy stuffed the documents into his socks and about his person then hid them from government officials and was eventually caught and jailed. Think that guy was actually a lawyer.
You are speaking of Sandy Berger. He lost his law license and did a year of probation, but no prison time.
 
Sandy Berger and Petraeus were misusing classified documents *not* Presidents Clinton and Bush. And the point of those two cases is it demonstrates the strength of the relevant laws.

Right, the big boy did it and ran away defence, I get it.
 
Last edited:
Right, the big boy did and ran away defence, I get it.

The Clintons have been endlessly accused of many, many things but in 30 years of reading about US Politics you are the first person I have ever heard suggest that Bill stole classified information.
 
The Clintons have been endlessly accused of many, many things but in 30 years of reading about US Politics you are the first person I have ever heard suggest that Bill stole classified information.

Its not me suggesting it, it's a matter of public record that his advisor left the Whitehouse with classified documents in his socks so who was the guy stealing the documents for?
 

Sandy Berger's Little Mistake


by Bob Wilson
Sandy Berger the former Clinton Administration National Security Advisor, said he made a "mistake" and was just "sloppy" when an FBI investigation revealed that he had stolen Top Secret memos and documents from the National Archives relating to the events surrounding al-Qaida attacks on America during the 1990s and in the year 2000. Archive security notified the FBI when they discovered documents missing, and saw Berger stuffing papers into his pants, socks, and a leather briefcase.

Upon investigation, Berger admitted that he had "made a mistake," and took them. Unfortunately, Berger says he "lost" some of the documents, but that he returned some of them after his the FBI searched his home. Amazingly, he even returned some documents that the Archive hadn't yet noted were missing! He apologized and said he had just been "sloppy." This, from the former "National Security" advisor to the previous President of the United States, and security advisor to the current Democratic candidate for president.

A "mistake" is not a crime in most instances. Theft of Top Secret documents is a Federal crime that is supposed to carry extremely serious consequences. Being "sloppy" isn't a crime. Clinton's affairs might be described as "sloppy." Lying under oath about them IS a crime worthy of impeachment, depending apparently upon one's definition of the word "is." Mr. Burger would have us believe that he was simply unaware of the procedures surrounding the security of Top Secret documents. He says he should have known that stuffing them in his pants and walking out might be a breach of security. For his "mistake" Mr. Berger has resigned as John Kerry's advisor on national security affairs.

The truly amazing fact is that, in the context of political scandals, Watergate pales by comparison! The Watergate scandal that resulted in Nixon resigning from office was essentially trivial in comparison. Nixon was (and still is) vilified for pondering a cover up of a break-in by low level political operatives into the files of a left-wing political supporter of the Democratic presidential nominee. They were looking for evidence of Communist ties to the McGovern campaign, and this transgression lives on as the Democrat's ultimate immortal example of Republican "dirty tricks."

Democrats are defending Mr. Berger by attacking the "timing" of the revelation that he was, ah, "sloppy." They stand behind his contention that he didn't really commit a crime, by stuffing Top Secret material in his pants and removing them from Federal custody. The Democrat spinmasters say that the revelation that Mr. Berger had "mistakenly" stuffed certain documents in his pants relating to how Clinton handled terrorism prior to 9/11 is just Republican trickery and an attempt by Bush to divert American's attention from his failures in the unjust war in Iraq.

So, ultimately it comes down to whether you accept the Democrat's spin that Mr. Berger was just "sloppy" and "mistakenly" stuffed Top Secret documents relating to terrorism threats into his pants prior to the 9/11 Commission investigation, or whether you have at least a minimal grasp of the obvious. With that, you would have to conclude that Sandy Berger attempted to keep information about terrorism, and the previous administration's approach to it, from the American people and the 9/11 Commission. Of course, you "middle-of-the-road" folks might just choose to believe that Sandy Berger was merely gathering material for a book.

https://www.spectacle.org/0804/wilson.html
 
Its not me suggesting it, it's a matter of public record that his advisor left the Whitehouse with classified documents in his socks so who was the guy stealing the documents for?
Himself. The incident happened in 2003, long after Clinton (and Berger) were out of office. "On July 19, 2004, it was revealed that the United States Department of Justice was investigating Berger for unauthorized removal of classified documents in October 2003 from a National Archives reading room prior to testifying before the 9/11 Commission."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Berger
 
Sandy Berger's Little Mistake

by Bob Wilson
Sandy Berger the former Clinton Administration National Security Advisor, said he made a "mistake" and was just "sloppy" when an FBI investigation revealed that he had stolen Top Secret memos and documents from the National Archives relating to the events surrounding al-Qaida attacks on America during the 1990s and in the year 2000. Archive security notified the FBI when they discovered documents missing, and saw Berger stuffing papers into his pants, socks, and a leather briefcase.

Upon investigation, Berger admitted that he had "made a mistake," and took them. Unfortunately, Berger says he "lost" some of the documents, but that he returned some of them after his the FBI searched his home. Amazingly, he even returned some documents that the Archive hadn't yet noted were missing! He apologized and said he had just been "sloppy." This, from the former "National Security" advisor to the previous President of the United States, and security advisor to the current Democratic candidate for president.

A "mistake" is not a crime in most instances. Theft of Top Secret documents is a Federal crime that is supposed to carry extremely serious consequences. Being "sloppy" isn't a crime. Clinton's affairs might be described as "sloppy." Lying under oath about them IS a crime worthy of impeachment, depending apparently upon one's definition of the word "is." Mr. Burger would have us believe that he was simply unaware of the procedures surrounding the security of Top Secret documents. He says he should have known that stuffing them in his pants and walking out might be a breach of security. For his "mistake" Mr. Berger has resigned as John Kerry's advisor on national security affairs.

The truly amazing fact is that, in the context of political scandals, Watergate pales by comparison! The Watergate scandal that resulted in Nixon resigning from office was essentially trivial in comparison. Nixon was (and still is) vilified for pondering a cover up of a break-in by low level political operatives into the files of a left-wing political supporter of the Democratic presidential nominee. They were looking for evidence of Communist ties to the McGovern campaign, and this transgression lives on as the Democrat's ultimate immortal example of Republican "dirty tricks."

Democrats are defending Mr. Berger by attacking the "timing" of the revelation that he was, ah, "sloppy." They stand behind his contention that he didn't really commit a crime, by stuffing Top Secret material in his pants and removing them from Federal custody. The Democrat spinmasters say that the revelation that Mr. Berger had "mistakenly" stuffed certain documents in his pants relating to how Clinton handled terrorism prior to 9/11 is just Republican trickery and an attempt by Bush to divert American's attention from his failures in the unjust war in Iraq.

So, ultimately it comes down to whether you accept the Democrat's spin that Mr. Berger was just "sloppy" and "mistakenly" stuffed Top Secret documents relating to terrorism threats into his pants prior to the 9/11 Commission investigation, or whether you have at least a minimal grasp of the obvious. With that, you would have to conclude that Sandy Berger attempted to keep information about terrorism, and the previous administration's approach to it, from the American people and the 9/11 Commission. Of course, you "middle-of-the-road" folks might just choose to believe that Sandy Berger was merely gathering material for a book.

https://www.spectacle.org/0804/wilson.html
I agree that he got off too lightly, but I won't speculate as to his motives.
 
The Clintons have been endlessly accused of many, many things but in 30 years of reading about US Politics you are the first person I have ever heard suggest that Bill stole classified information.

Hillary has been hiding Bill’s stolen documents in the basement of a Washington, DC, pizzeria. I have no doubt about this.
 
Hillary has been hiding Bill’s stolen documents in the basement of a Washington, DC, pizzeria. I have no doubt about this.
Must be a big basement if it has enough space for both stolen documents and the satan-worshipping pedophiles - or is that a different pizzeria? :D
 
Its not me suggesting it

You literally just said that stealing and selling of classified documents was done by all former presidents and that Trump only differs because he went to far. And that this was done, in part, using their presidential libraries:

It’s becoming quite clear too that a US president can basically steal state secrets and sell them and no one bats an eyelid as long as they don’t get caught, Trump was probably only doing what every other US president has done ie taking stuff for himself ie a perk of the job but he’s obviously overstepped the mark.

it's a matter of public record
that his advisor left the Whitehouse with classified documents in his socks so who was the guy stealing the documents for?

Ultimately we don't really know. Although a common interpretation is that he destroyed some particular copies of a document because they contained hand written notes by him and/or Clinton that would have come to light as part of the 9/11 investigation and prove politically disastrous. E.g. the administration deciding not to do something about al-Qaeda.

That is, he was not stealing the secrets but protecting the administration politically. This is very different from what Trump is accused of and what you suggested was done by previous presidents.

Similarly, Patreous seems to have been misusing documents to help with his biography and/or impress his biographer.
 


advertisement


Back
Top