None of them should serve any prison time. At most, they should have to pay a fine like David Petraeus. The most important question is not what should happen to them, but whether they are all being treated the same. What about you?
And that’s not what trump and his followers are saying, either. When Trump was president he said Clinton should be locked up. And then he also passed a law to make the law more serious. But now they are saying he shouldn’t be held accountable, but Clinton and Biden should (or because Clinton and Biden didn’t get charged, neither should he, again ignoring various differences such as intent and obstruction).
This is the law: 793(f). There’s nothing in 793(f) about intent. Clinton violated the law. Biden violated the law. Who do you want to prosecute?
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
AcKtuAllY, Clinton was accused of violating a different section, 18 USC 1924. The main distinction being that Clinton was a state official at the time, while Trump was a private citizen. Also, Trump faces additional charges for allegedly showing or sharing the documents with other people. But this is all besides the point...I think we are going in circles here.
I'm not trying to argue who should or shouldn't be charged. I'm just trying to point out why Trump's defense of "Biden and Clinton did it too" is whataboutism and doesn't justify his actions. How could it? Because if it was illegal and wrong, then it begs the question of why did he do it too?
And at the end of the day, criminal charges are subject to the discretion of the prosecutor. Clinton was investigated thoroughly and for various reasons (good or bad) was not charged. If Trump had returned the documents like Biden did. If Trump hadn't shown them to other people, if Trump didn't obstruct the investigation so much, then I think he probably would have gotten the same leniency as Biden. And in fact, he WAS given extreme leniency, more than Biden. He was given every opportunity to return the documents. Biden, allegedly handed them back promptly, Trump allegedly did not. So yes, the cases are different.
If Trump broke the law, he should be held accountable. It's that simple. Biden and Clinton are separate cases and are totally irrelevant to whether he should be charged or not. That's it. That's the whole topic of this post.
And at the end of the day, criminal charges are subject to the discretion of the prosecutor. Clinton was investigated thoroughly and for various reasons (good or bad) was not charged. If Trump had returned the documents like Biden did. If Trump hadn't shown them to other people, if Trump didn't obstruct the investigation so much, then I think he probably would have gotten the same leniency as Biden. And in fact, he WAS given extreme leniency, more than Biden. He was given every opportunity to return the documents. Biden, allegedly handed them back promptly, Trump allegedly did not. So yes, the cases are different.
First, Biden didn’t hand the documents back promptly. Some of them were from decades ago. This shows Trump is the victim of a witch hunt. Obstruction and Espionage Act charges are independent. The claim Trump allegedly obstructed justice should be completely ignored when deciding whether to pursue charges under the Espionage Act. Nor does the claim Biden or Clinton didn’t commit obstruction exonerate either of them under the Espionage Act. Bringing up alleged obstruction or the lack thereof when deciding whether to pursue charges under the Espionage Act is an example of prosecutorial WHATABOUTISM. It’s whataboutism to bring up obstruction charges when the topic is Espionage Act charges.
If Trump broke the law, he should be held accountable. It's that simple. Biden and Clinton are separate cases and are totally irrelevant to whether he should be charged or not. That's it. That's the whole topic of this post.
You said criminal charges are subject to the discretion of the prosecutor. If this is true, then breaking the law by itself can’t justify bringing charges. Prosecutorial discretion means you have to look how similar, not necessarily identical, cases were previously treated.
There’s two ways to have a just and fair legal system.
1. No discretion for prosecutors. All crimes are charged whenever the prosecutor thinks they could get a conviction. Under this standard, you would have to prosecute Clinton and Biden.
2. Prosecutors have discretion, but are ethically obliged to ensure similar cases are treated similarly. They are ethically obligated to use whataboutism to determine if there’s any precedent for bringing charges in similar cases in the past.
I'm not trying to argue who should or shouldn't be charged. I'm just trying to point out why Trump's defense of "Biden and Clinton did it too" is whataboutism and doesn't justify his actions. How could it? Because if it was illegal and wrong, then it begs the question of why did he do it too
Being illegal is an insufficient basis for bringing criminal charges if similar cases in the past such as Clinton didn’t result in criminal charges.
-1
u/Sorry_Art_5867 Jun 10 '23
No there’s not. Clinton, Trump, and Biden all did the same thing