Florida venture capitalist Michael Shvartsman and his brother Gerald Shvartsman pleaded guilty on Wednesday to participating in an insider trading scheme linked to the blockbuster deal that brought former President Donald Trump’s social media business public.
This has been going on a long time and they only started prosecuting Trump because he wasn’t willing to do the whole “handshake and give the classified documents back” deal. They literally started the classified documents case because he was being so belligerently criminal. Former Presidents “played the game” so to speak and gave back documents with a “slap on the wrist” outcome, because “but they gave them back!” They tried to give Trump the opportunity to do the same but he just can’t help being a criminal scumfuck.
This one is more egregious even than that, I think. I’m not aware of any prior case where a president was trying to hold onto classified documents and got caught. Compare it to, say, the current Biden thing: Biden found classified info in his home library that got moved there from his files in the WH after he left the VP slot. He notified the government, handed the stuff over, and supported a review of the rest of his home files where they found some more (if I understand correctly, not marked classified, which isn’t super unusual).
Contrast with Trump where the government became aware that a number of classified documents were missing, they asked and were told no, he doesn’t have them, got lawyers to testify that he didn’t have any, he moved them around when there started to be scrutiny, and the FBI eventually raided the place and found them. So for some reason, he clearly really wanted to hold onto those documents when it was made clear he shouldn’t have them, which should make everyone wonder what his motivation was - what he expected to gain.
It’s not just that Trump made a criminal mistake, he was actively committing crimes knowingly.
Oh, I understand how much more egregious Trump’s crimes were, but the reality is we’ve had a history of elected officials playing fast and loose with classified information, but it’s usually handwaved away for people in positions of power. Sure, it can be argued in the past these people made mistakes and gave the documents back because there wasn’t ill intent.
The problem is that’s still a different level of scrutiny than the average person is put under for similar mistakes.
A low-level Army security jockey’s life could be ruined by making mistakes with these documents, but when it comes to elected officials, they can make as many mistakes as they need, and its always forgiven. This differing attitude toward the elite is part of why they refuse to go after Trump seriously, despite how egregious his crimes have been.
A low-level Army security jockey’s life could be ruined by making mistakes with these documents, but when it comes to elected officials, they can make as many mistakes as they need, and its always forgiven. This differing attitude toward the elite is part of why they refuse to go after Trump seriously, despite how egregious his crimes have been.
That’s of course a possibility, but really not how it works. When there’s a data breach at any level, they really do look at intent. If a low level person makes an honest mistake, as long as they weren’t being negligently careless, they’re most likely going to get a warning. If it happens again, yeah, they’re not likely going to be able to keep their access.
Data leaks do happen, and they happen without ending peoples’ careers. That’s much different from actual espionage.
This one is more egregious even than that, I think. I’m not aware of any prior case where a president was trying to hold onto classified documents and got caught. Compare it to, say, the current Biden thing: Biden found classified info in his home library that got moved there from his files in the WH after he left the VP slot. He notified the government, handed the stuff over, and supported a review of the rest of his home files where they found some more (if I understand correctly, not marked classified, which isn’t super unusual).
Contrast with Trump where the government became aware that a number of classified documents were missing, they asked and were told no, he doesn’t have them, got lawyers to testify that he didn’t have any, he moved them around when there started to be scrutiny, and the FBI eventually raided the place and found them. So for some reason, he clearly really wanted to hold onto those documents when it was made clear he shouldn’t have them, which should make everyone wonder what his motivation was - what he expected to gain.
It’s not just that Trump made a criminal mistake, he was actively committing crimes knowingly.
Oh, I understand how much more egregious Trump’s crimes were, but the reality is we’ve had a history of elected officials playing fast and loose with classified information, but it’s usually handwaved away for people in positions of power. Sure, it can be argued in the past these people made mistakes and gave the documents back because there wasn’t ill intent.
The problem is that’s still a different level of scrutiny than the average person is put under for similar mistakes.
A low-level Army security jockey’s life could be ruined by making mistakes with these documents, but when it comes to elected officials, they can make as many mistakes as they need, and its always forgiven. This differing attitude toward the elite is part of why they refuse to go after Trump seriously, despite how egregious his crimes have been.
That’s of course a possibility, but really not how it works. When there’s a data breach at any level, they really do look at intent. If a low level person makes an honest mistake, as long as they weren’t being negligently careless, they’re most likely going to get a warning. If it happens again, yeah, they’re not likely going to be able to keep their access.
Data leaks do happen, and they happen without ending peoples’ careers. That’s much different from actual espionage.