The New York Times is nothing if not consistent. The “newspaper of record” now argues that taking classified materials from their proper storage is unimportant — unless they are taken by former President Donald Trump.
Never mind that the president has the freedom to possess documents under the Presidential Records Act. And the Times wants readers to overlook the commander-in-chief’s ability to classify or declassify any materials while in office.
'There are two standards of justice in our country: One for people like you and me, and one for the corrupt political class of which there are many,' President Trump said. https://t.co/kFzzYSDWso
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) January 19, 2023
That ability, for the record, does not extend to the vice president and particularly Joe Biden’s tenure when he made off with classified materials.
Instead, they want the focus to be on the former president himself. The Times noted that these materials keep appearing in the homes of former presidents and vice presidents.
Besides their discoveries at the Trump and Biden residences, former vice president Mike Pence also possessed some classified documents. Then the paper predictably turned its sights on Trump, claiming that he did not work with the FBI in turning over the papers.
What is fact is that Trump did work with federal authorities. He kept the materials safely under lock and key with the Secret Service and other security around at all times. Trump allowed officials onto his property and opened his doors for them to search as they felt necessary.
It was not necessary, however, and many feel the unprecedented raid was illegal.
Compare this to the circumstances of the Biden classified materials, circumstances that the leftist media would rather ignore. The Democrat haphazardly kept the files in his garage where any number of people could access them.
Those people, of course, include his infamous son Hunter Biden who faces numerous probes and investigations for his questionable dealings with foreign entities.
The Times went further into its reasoning by claiming that far too many documents are now classified. Part of the motivation, Yale Law School professor Oona Hathaway believed, is that there is no downside for over-classifying and possibly dire consequences for under-classifying.
The academic, who is also a former special counsel at the Pentagon, estimated that only 5-10% of the materials classified yearly genuinely warrant that action.
What the Times’ reporting boils down to is that there is a glaring double standard when it comes to the mainstream media and classified documents being mishandled. Only Trump gets demonized and only Trump deserves to be raided, and their hypocrisy is in full view for everyone to witness.
