Davin News Server

On 2024-10-17 10:19, Skeeter wrote:
> In article <verg54$2qcov$9@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
>>
>> On 2024-10-16 19:40, Skeeter wrote:
>>> In article <veppde$2fj82$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
>>>>
>>>> On 2024-10-16 17:46, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>> In article <vepka0$2eimk$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2024-10-16 16:53, pothead wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-10-16, AlleyCat <katt@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 09:18:08 -0700,  Alan says...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Skeeter's correct.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I read that some of the documents Biden stole, he was not supposed to have had, in ANY of his official positions at the
>>>>>>>>>> time he took them and before stealing the election from Trump.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think it was on a CNN site... you can look it up.
>>>>>>>>> I've given you a link to the report, so why don't you just point out
>>>>>>>>> where it says that:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does it address the times he was neither VP or President, or the documents he wasn't supposed to have at all... ever?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then, I don't need to read it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you're pushing those Afghanistan documents, ONLY, then fuck off. There were FAR many more than just those, and some
>>>>>>>> he wasn't EVER supposed to have.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I asked Rudy this and maybe someone else did too, but if Biden was "allowed" to have ALL of the documents, WHY did they
>>>>>>>> take them away, investigate and consider bringing charges, only to "change their minds" because they were protecting
>>>>>>>> him, using the stupid excuse, that he was too far gone MENTALLY to remember WHY he had the documents in the first
>>>>>>>> place.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They don't list OPINIONS in those reports, dumb ass, and MUCH of what they were contemplating DID rely on opinion as to
>>>>>>>> how competent Biden was to be indicted and asked question.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you seen him lately?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He's MORE than cogent enough to take questions after being indicted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Biden is being protected and Trump is not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Case closed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Biden removed documents from the SCIF which is a huge violation.
>>>>>>> Biden was not POTUS when the massive number of documents were taken so
>>>>>>> he had no authority to posses them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's that simple.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whether Trump's authority permitted him to retain the documents he was
>>>>>>> in posession of is a matter of litigation but as POTUS at least he had
>>>>>>> the authority that Joe Biden did not have.
>>>>>> Hur dealt with that.
>>>>>
>>>>> By ignoring it.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. He went into great detail.
>>>>
>>>> You should read the report.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Biden had permission to bring documents to his home.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why did he need "permission" if he didn't know he had them?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He had permission WHEN they were taken home.
>>>>
>>>> Then they got overlooked.
>>>
>>> But he said he didn't know he had them. Therefore he wouldn't need
>>> permission.
>>
>> He didn't know he STILL had them at the time they were turned up.
> 
> Where did he think they went?

He forgot about them.

>>
>> They got to his home and office in only two ways:
>>
>> 1. He took them home at the time he DID have permission.
> 
> But he said he didn't know he had them. No permission needed.

But they came home when he DID need and have permission to have taken 
them home.

>>
>> 2. They were accidentally packed up and brought home when he left office.
> 
> Not to responsible is it? Just allowing documents to be handled by just
> anyone.

Why do you imagine it was just "anyone"?

> 
> Funny on the timing. Right after the Trump thing all of a sudden Joe has
> documents he needs to return. Documents he said he didn't realize he
> had.
Because someone in his camp thought it would be a good idea to make 
CERTAIN there wasn't anything that could be called out against him later.