Also, Trump desperately wants to spend a night or two in jail. It will do wonders for his fundraising and his 'poor oppressed me' narrative.
That's the part that should have gotten him locked up. Not just having the documents.His problem was the attempt to prevent the FBI from doing so, which is all-but unprecedented.
William henry harrison did nothing wrong.Hey I'm not against locking up all the other former presidents too if that's what it takes.
The question is less "don't charge Trump, or you have to try everyone else, too" (my former comment notwithstanding) and more "is the crime you're talking about really WORTH all that fuss?" Mere possession of documents has been (historically) deemed not to be "worth all that fuss," whereas Trump's efforts to HIDE documents, to LIE ABOUT having them, and to actively OBSTRUCT the retrieval of them, put him in a category we've hardly ever seen a president nor former president accused of.Yeah, whenever they try to argue that presidents need immunity or else Obama might be charged for drone strikes, etc. my answer is usually: "Don't threaten me with a good time."
I think you're emphasizing a distinction that no one has actually disputed. No one said said he should have been arrested for "mere possession".The question is less "don't charge Trump, or you have to try everyone else, too" (my former comment notwithstanding) and more "is the crime you're talking about really WORTH all that fuss?" Mere possession of documents has been (historically) deemed not to be "worth all that fuss," whereas Trump's efforts to HIDE documents, to LIE ABOUT having them, and to actively OBSTRUCT the retrieval of them, put him in a category we've hardly ever seen a president nor former president accused of.
It's less that he disputed the point, but I felt that Wonko's assertion in post #2,222 was too generic about the crime for which he was advocating Trump's imprisonment, and I think that being too generic on this point is actively dangerous. Let's not give our opponents fuel to accuse of advocating for punishment for one side only, and not for our own. There's far too much of that around as it is.I think you're emphasizing a distinction that no one has actually disputed. No one said said he should have been arrested for "mere possession".
"When they actually found and removed all those top secret documents" was after the attempts to obstruct.