Trump Indicted; Biden Not Indicted … Yet

 

The federal government has indicted Donald Trump on the classified documents found at his home in Mar-a-Lago. Trump is facing at least seven federal counts related to document handling and obstruction of justice. He has been ordered to appear in federal court in Miami on Tuesday.

The former president announced the news on Truth Social:

The corrupt Biden Administration has informed my attorneys that I have been Indicted, seemingly over the Boxes Hoax, even though Joe Biden has 1850 Boxes at the University of Delaware, additional Boxes in Chinatown, D.C., with even more Boxes at the University of Pennsylvania, and documents strewn all over his garage floor where he parks his Corvette, and which is “secured” by only a garage door that is paper thin, and open much of the time.

I never thought it possible that such a thing could happen to a former President of the United States, who received far more votes than any sitting President in the History of our Country, and is currently leading, by far, all Candidates, both Democrat and Republican, in Polls of the 2024 Presidential Election. I AM AN INNOCENT MAN!

This is indeed a DARK DAY for the United States of America. We are a Country in serious and rapid Decline, but together we will Make America Great Again!

Attorney General Merrick Garland launched an investigation in November 2022 to investigate Trump’s alleged improper retention of classified records.

Earlier Thursday, the FBI finally allowed members of the House Oversight Committee to view the FD-1023 document, which involves alleged legal violations by President Joe Biden.

According to Fox News Digital, an informant told the FBI in June 2020 that Biden was paid $5 million by an executive of the Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings, where his son Hunter Biden sat on the board.

Add to that Biden’s numerous classified documents scattered across the country, who knows how long the DoJ can remain silent.

Published in Elections, Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 142 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Just think, 12 men and women will decide if Trump is guilty or innocent of charges that he mishandled classified information.  

    Can Trump and Trump’s lawyers convince 1 of the 12 that there is “reasonable doubt?”

    • #61
  2. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Just think, 12 men and women will decide if Trump is guilty or innocent of charges that he mishandled classified information.

    Can Trump and Trump’s lawyers convince 1 of the 12 that there is “reasonable doubt?”

    Just think for a moment and ask how many people on that jury will have ever worked in a classified environment, will have any real understanding of what it means to mishandle classified documents, have any idea what it means to say that a document is “portion-marked“, have any idea that the chief executive can declassified documents, have any idea of just what a political witchhunt this is?

    • #62
  3. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Selective (Biased) enforcement. With a Presidential election coming up, this reminds me of Hillary Clinton and James Comey, and his biased change of an investigation into merely a ‘matter’.

    And this was handled in collaboration with his boss, the corrupt Loretta Lynch:

     

     

     

    • #63
  4. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Columbo (View Comment):

    Selective (Biased) enforcement. With a Presidential election coming up, this reminds me of Hillary Clinton and James Comey, and his biased change of an investigation into merely a ‘matter’.

    And this was handled in collaboration with his boss, the corrupt Loretta Lynch:

     

     

     

    The RNC/GOPe is no doubt watching closely . . . as Hillary laughs at all of us: 

    • #64
  5. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Django (View Comment):

    Columbo (View Comment):

    Selective (Biased) enforcement. With a Presidential election coming up, this reminds me of Hillary Clinton and James Comey, and his biased change of an investigation into merely a ‘matter’.

    And this was handled in collaboration with his boss, the corrupt Loretta Lynch:

    The RNC/GOPe is no doubt watching closely . . . as Hillary laughs at all of us:

    Huck Fillary.

    • #65
  6. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    MarciN (View Comment):
    I’m more concerned with the Three Felonies a Day problem than with the politics. Every single American, including the president of the United States, is threatened in this legal environment.

    Not if you hold the “correct” political opinions/agenda. The “rule” of law is radically unequally applied, whatever some lawyers think. Take the J6 accused of “parading” rotting in prison for years while the “summer of love” murderers and arsonists walk away unscathed.

    Saying the system is broken doesn’t quite cover it. It’s deeply corrupted.

    It invites corruption. 

    • #66
  7. Terence Smith Coolidge
    Terence Smith
    @TerrySmith

    Seems like good evidence of criminality exists, but I suspect the statute of limitations have run on out on whatever crimes Joe Biden, brother and  his son may have committed while he was VP. Prosecution for Joe’s mishandling of classified documents may still be a possibility in 2025 but I do believe he will issue blanket  pardons for  himself and his family before leaving office. He will justify doing so on the grounds those evil Republicans are not above misusing the justice system for political ends. He will get a pass from the press.  

    • #67
  8. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Terence Smith (View Comment):

    Seems like good evidence of criminality exists, but I suspect the statute of limitations have run on out on whatever crimes Joe Biden, brother and his son may have committed while he was VP. Prosecution for Joe’s mishandling of classified documents may still be a possibility in 2025 but I do believe he will issue blanket pardons for himself and his family before leaving office. He will justify doing so on the grounds those evil Republicans are not above misusing the justice system for political ends. He will get a pass from the press.

    He was VP on January 19, 2017. That is just 61/2 years ago. 

    • #68
  9. Terence Smith Coolidge
    Terence Smith
    @TerrySmith

    cdor (View Comment):

    Terence Smith (View Comment):

    Seems like good evidence of criminality exists, but I suspect the statute of limitations have run on out on whatever crimes Joe Biden, brother and his son may have committed while he was VP. Prosecution for Joe’s mishandling of classified documents may still be a possibility in 2025 but I do believe he will issue blanket pardons for himself and his family before leaving office. He will justify doing so on the grounds those evil Republicans are not above misusing the justice system for political ends. He will get a pass from the press.

    He was VP on January 19, 2017. That is just 61/2 years ago.

    I dont know the law  but from a casual search 5 years from date of the commission  of a crime seems to be a typical limit.

    https://www.federalcharges.com/bribery-laws-charges/

    I would appreciate a correction if someone knows the right answer.

     

    • #69
  10. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Just think, 12 men and women will decide if Trump is guilty or innocent of charges that he mishandled classified information.

    Can Trump and Trump’s lawyers convince 1 of the 12 that there is “reasonable doubt?”

    Just think for a moment and ask how many people on that jury will have ever worked in a classified environment, will have any real understanding of what it means to mishandle classified documents, have any idea what it means to say that a document is “portion-marked“, have any idea that the chief executive can declassified documents, have any idea of just what a political witchhunt this is?

    How about this for an opening statement made by Trump’s defense attorney:

    “My client, Donald Trump, isn’t guilty of breaking a federal law.  What my client, Donald Trump is guilty of doing is not agreeing with the political agenda of the Biden administration.”

    • #70
  11. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Terence Smith (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    Terence Smith (View Comment):

    Seems like good evidence of criminality exists, but I suspect the statute of limitations have run on out on whatever crimes Joe Biden, brother and his son may have committed while he was VP. Prosecution for Joe’s mishandling of classified documents may still be a possibility in 2025 but I do believe he will issue blanket pardons for himself and his family before leaving office. He will justify doing so on the grounds those evil Republicans are not above misusing the justice system for political ends. He will get a pass from the press.

    He was VP on January 19, 2017. That is just 61/2 years ago.

    I dont know the law but from a casual search 5 years from date of the commission of a crime seems to be a typical limit.

    https://www.federalcharges.com/bribery-laws-charges/

    I would appreciate a correction if someone knows the right answer.

     

    I don'[t either, but I thought it was seven.

    • #71
  12. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Another things Trump’s defense attorneys can tell the jurors is that there isn’t anything illegal in sharing classified information with other people who have the appropriate security clearances.  

    • #72
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Just think, 12 men and women will decide if Trump is guilty or innocent of charges that he mishandled classified information.

    Can Trump and Trump’s lawyers convince 1 of the 12 that there is “reasonable doubt?”

    Just think for a moment and ask how many people on that jury will have ever worked in a classified environment, will have any real understanding of what it means to mishandle classified documents, have any idea what it means to say that a document is “portion-marked“, have any idea that the chief executive can declassified documents, have any idea of just what a political witchhunt this is?

    How about this for an opening statement made by Trump’s defense attorney:

    “My client, Donald Trump, isn’t guilty of breaking a federal law. What my client, Donald Trump is guilty of doing is not agreeing with the political agenda of the Biden administration.”

    In DC and some other places, that might be considered a crime in itself.

    • #73
  14. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Just think, 12 men and women will decide if Trump is guilty or innocent of charges that he mishandled classified information.

    Can Trump and Trump’s lawyers convince 1 of the 12 that there is “reasonable doubt?”

    Just think for a moment and ask how many people on that jury will have ever worked in a classified environment, will have any real understanding of what it means to mishandle classified documents, have any idea what it means to say that a document is “portion-marked“, have any idea that the chief executive can declassified documents, have any idea of just what a political witchhunt this is?

    How about this for an opening statement made by Trump’s defense attorney:

    “My client, Donald Trump, isn’t guilty of breaking a federal law. What my client, Donald Trump is guilty of doing is not agreeing with the political agenda of the Biden administration.”

    In DC and some other places, that might be considered a crime in itself.

    It’s in Florida.  So, if Trump’s attorneys can present the issues to those Florida jurors in the right way, there is no reason Trump can’t find 1 of the 12 jurors to vote not-guilty on these charges.  

    • #74
  15. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Another things Trump’s defense attorneys can tell the jurors is that there isn’t anything illegal in sharing classified information with other people who have the appropriate security clearances.

    There is always the other requirement: Need-To-Know. I suppose that’s a debatable point with anyone who is given access. 

    • #75
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Just think, 12 men and women will decide if Trump is guilty or innocent of charges that he mishandled classified information.

    Can Trump and Trump’s lawyers convince 1 of the 12 that there is “reasonable doubt?”

    Just think for a moment and ask how many people on that jury will have ever worked in a classified environment, will have any real understanding of what it means to mishandle classified documents, have any idea what it means to say that a document is “portion-marked“, have any idea that the chief executive can declassified documents, have any idea of just what a political witchhunt this is?

    How about this for an opening statement made by Trump’s defense attorney:

    “My client, Donald Trump, isn’t guilty of breaking a federal law. What my client, Donald Trump is guilty of doing is not agreeing with the political agenda of the Biden administration.”

    In DC and some other places, that might be considered a crime in itself.

    It’s in Florida. So, if Trump’s attorneys can present the issues to those Florida jurors in the right way, there is no reason Trump can’t find 1 of the 12 jurors to vote not-guilty on these charges.

    I’m thinking they won’t keep it in Florida if they figure there’s a better chance of conviction in DC.

    • #76
  17. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Another things Trump’s defense attorneys can tell the jurors is that there isn’t anything illegal in sharing classified information with other people who have the appropriate security clearances.

    There is always the other requirement: Need-To-Know. I suppose that’s a debatable point with anyone who is given access.

    If I read something online about this correctly, Trump showed some of this stuff to one of his political donors.  Perhaps this political donor had a security clearance to see this sensitive information.  Not sure.  The jury is still out on this.  

    • #77
  18. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Another things Trump’s defense attorneys can tell the jurors is that there isn’t anything illegal in sharing classified information with other people who have the appropriate security clearances.

    There is always the other requirement: Need-To-Know. I suppose that’s a debatable point with anyone who is given access.

    If I read something online about this correctly, Trump showed some of this stuff to one of his political donors. Perhaps this political donor had a security clearance to see this sensitive information. Not sure. The jury is still out on this.

    Being serious for a moment, it has been standard procedure to allow the departing officials to keep their own security clearances in some cases so they could consult with the new administration. Biden was asked if the President would keep his clearances and Biden laughed while saying he saw no need for that. It’s an interesting question to me whether the President goes through a background check and has to fill out the standard forms, SF-86, I think it’s called. If not, does the president actually have a clearance as ordinary mortals do? Or is it simply that as Commander-In-Chief he gets blanket access? 

    • #78
  19. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Another things Trump’s defense attorneys can tell the jurors is that there isn’t anything illegal in sharing classified information with other people who have the appropriate security clearances.

    There is always the other requirement: Need-To-Know. I suppose that’s a debatable point with anyone who is given access.

    If I read something online about this correctly, Trump showed some of this stuff to one of his political donors. Perhaps this political donor had a security clearance to see this sensitive information. Not sure. The jury is still out on this.

    Being serious for a moment, it has been standard procedure to allow the departing officials to keep their own security clearances in some cases so they could consult with the new administration. Biden was asked if the President would keep his clearances and Biden laughed while saying he saw no need for that. It’s an interesting question to me whether the President goes through a background check and has to fill out the standard forms, SF-86, I think it’s called. If not, does the president actually have a clearance as ordinary mortals do? Or is it simply that as Commander-In-Chief he gets blanket access?

    Then the question is whether once a President leaves office, does he retain that security clearance or does it go away.  But the other questions is what happens if an ex-President shows classified docs to someone who doesn’t have a security clearance.  Is that against the law?  Does a violation of this law require that the person showing classified docs to someone without a security clearance know that this person doesn’t have a security clearance?  

    • #79
  20. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Another things Trump’s defense attorneys can tell the jurors is that there isn’t anything illegal in sharing classified information with other people who have the appropriate security clearances.

    There is always the other requirement: Need-To-Know. I suppose that’s a debatable point with anyone who is given access.

    If I read something online about this correctly, Trump showed some of this stuff to one of his political donors. Perhaps this political donor had a security clearance to see this sensitive information. Not sure. The jury is still out on this.

    Being serious for a moment, it has been standard procedure to allow the departing officials to keep their own security clearances in some cases so they could consult with the new administration. Biden was asked if the President would keep his clearances and Biden laughed while saying he saw no need for that. It’s an interesting question to me whether the President goes through a background check and has to fill out the standard forms, SF-86, I think it’s called. If not, does the president actually have a clearance as ordinary mortals do? Or is it simply that as Commander-In-Chief he gets blanket access?

    Then the question is whether once a President leaves office, does he retain that security clearance or does it go away. But the other questions is what happens if an ex-President shows classified docs to someone who doesn’t have a security clearance. Is that against the law? Does a violation of this law require that the person showing classified docs to someone without a security clearance know that this person doesn’t have a security clearance?

    I spent almost 30 years in that world so I have some familiarity with the procedures. In every SCIF or secure facility that I visited or worked in only cleared people were allowed unless escorted and then announcements were made to secure classified material, red lights flashing, alarms briefly sounding, the escorts yelling “uncleared” and so on. Also, badges were worn in some cases. In other cases, only a known third-party confirmation that the person was briefed was acceptable. 

    How with those restrictions in place would one be unaware that a given person didn’t have a security clearance? Granted, I never worked directly for the President, so procedures might be different there, but I doubt it. 

     

    • #80
  21. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Another things Trump’s defense attorneys can tell the jurors is that there isn’t anything illegal in sharing classified information with other people who have the appropriate security clearances.

    There is always the other requirement: Need-To-Know. I suppose that’s a debatable point with anyone who is given access.

    If I read something online about this correctly, Trump showed some of this stuff to one of his political donors. Perhaps this political donor had a security clearance to see this sensitive information. Not sure. The jury is still out on this.

    Being serious for a moment, it has been standard procedure to allow the departing officials to keep their own security clearances in some cases so they could consult with the new administration. Biden was asked if the President would keep his clearances and Biden laughed while saying he saw no need for that. It’s an interesting question to me whether the President goes through a background check and has to fill out the standard forms, SF-86, I think it’s called. If not, does the president actually have a clearance as ordinary mortals do? Or is it simply that as Commander-In-Chief he gets blanket access?

    Then the question is whether once a President leaves office, does he retain that security clearance or does it go away. But the other questions is what happens if an ex-President shows classified docs to someone who doesn’t have a security clearance. Is that against the law? Does a violation of this law require that the person showing classified docs to someone without a security clearance know that this person doesn’t have a security clearance?

    I spent almost 30 years in that world so I have some familiarity with the procedures. In every SCIF or secure facility that I visited or worked in only cleared people were allowed unless escorted and then announcements were made to secure classified material, red lights flashing, alarms briefly sounding, the escorts yelling “uncleared” and so on. Also, badges were worn in some cases. In other cases, only a known third-party confirmation that the person was briefed was acceptable.

    How with those restrictions in place would one be unaware that a given person didn’t have a security clearance? Granted, I never worked directly for the President, so procedures might be different there, but I doubt it.

    This court case will be more interesting than the ones they have on the Judge Judy show for sure.  

    • #81
  22. Dr. Bastiat Member
    Dr. Bastiat
    @drbastiat

    • #82
  23. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    I saw on social media that Charlie Kirk asked all of the Republican presidential candidates, except Trump, to drop out of the presidential race in a show of solidarity with Trump.  

    Ann Coulter sarcastically responded, “That’s nothing.  I asking all Republicans to commit suicide in a show of solidarity with Trump.”  

    • #83
  24. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    Has anyone asked the obvious questions: Since the president is president right up until the inauguration of the next president, chances are very good that someone else had the job of packing up his office. Isn’t that the “guilty” person if there are classified documents that ended up with the president at his residence in Florida? He’s not the type of person who would pore over these documents late at night in an attempt to steal classified documents. If there any there, it’s likely they were included accidently. 

    The hatred of Donald Trump is so strong that no one seems willing to give this guy the benefit of the doubt: “Hey, Mr. President, can we have a look at these papers either here or when you unload them in Florida just in case there are some classified documents that were picked up by accident. We’ll ship them back for you.” 

    As I understand it, and I can’t find the link now, Obama walked out of the White House with millions of pages of documents. No one bothered him about it. 

     

     

     

     

    • #84
  25. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    MarciN (View Comment):

    Has anyone asked the obvious questions: Since the president is president right up until the inauguration of the next president, chances are very good that someone else had the job of packing up his office. Isn’t that the “guilty” person if there are classified documents that ended up with the president at his residence in Florida? He’s not the type of person who would pore over these documents late at night in an attempt to steal classified documents. If there any there, it’s likely they were included accidently.

    I have read on social media that ex-President Trump was contacted by government officials who said to Trump, “You have some classified documents that we need to have returned to us.”  

    Trump said, “Sure.  Come over and get them.” But then Trump instructed some people to move the documents to other places in his residence, making the government officials think, initially, that they had retrieved all of the documents.  Later when these government officials realized that Trump had not given them all of the documents Trump promised to give them, they asked the FBI to get involved.  

    Also, again, according to what I have read on social media, there are recordings of conversations where Trump says to someone, “This is classified.”  So, these recordings will supposedly make a big part of the prosecution’s case.  They will argue that these recordings show that Trump knew he had classified docs and knew that he was showing them to people who didn’t have a security clearance.  

    Now, this could all be wrong, what I have read on social media.  We will have to wait until the trial starts and both the defense and the prosecution make their case.  

    • #85
  26. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    MarciN (View Comment):
    As I understand it, and I can’t find the link now, Obama walked out of the White House with millions of pages of documents. No one bothered him about it. 

    Of course not, because that would be racist!

    • #86
  27. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    MarciN (View Comment):
    As I understand it, and I can’t find the link now, Obama walked out of the White House with millions of pages of documents. No one bothered him about it.

    Of course not, because that would be racist!

    Mike Pence had some classified docs in his home.  When the government asked Pence for the docs, Pence gave them to the government.  

    The problem that Trump supposedly has is that he played cat and mouse with the government when they asked him for the docs.  Maybe ex-President Trump just likes jerking the chain of government officials for fun.  But in this case, Trump’s bit of fun might backfire on him.  

    • #87
  28. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    The problem that Trump supposedly has is that he played cat and mouse with the government when they asked him for the docs.

    You still don’t get it. The problem Trump has is that he’s pro-America and not on board with the neo-Marxists in power. 

    And DeSantis will face the same in 3. . 2. . 1. . . 

    • #88
  29. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    The problem that Trump supposedly has is that he played cat and mouse with the government when they asked him for the docs.

    You still don’t get it. The problem Trump has is that he’s pro-America and not on board with the neo-Marxists in power.

    And DeSantis will face the same in 3. . 2. . 1. . .

    I am talking about the problems Trump’s defense attorneys might face as they attempt to develop a defense in court for Trump’s actions.

    Pence returned the documents he had when he was asked to return them.  But if Trump played games with government officials when he was asked to return these documents and if Trump did show these classified documents to people who didn’t have security clearances and if Trump is recorded as saying, “These are classified,” that makes the job of Trump’s defense attorneys very difficult.

    ADDED:

    This are all ifs.

    If some of all of what I have read about this case on social media isn’t actually true, then of course, Trump’s attorneys can present their case more easily.

    • #89
  30. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    I’m officially on Mark Levin’s team:

    Mark Levin EXPLODES on Trump indictment: ‘This is war’ – YouTube

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.