Report indicates how government sets itself above the law

By Tony Farkas
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

You may or may not have known that President Joe Biden was the subject of a special counsel investigation regarding classified documents being found in Biden’s home garage and other places.

Documents that he wasn’t supposed to have.

If you remember at the time those were found, there was a SWAT raid on President Donald Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago regarding classified documents being found there.

Not to belabor the past, but there’s wasn’t a SWAT presence at Biden’s house, which is kind of significant given the nature of the charges.

In the report, it points out that the then-Vice President (Biden) through his staff had stored these records because they were important to Biden, and he apparently thought the notebooks were his personal property. Essentially, he took them willfully.

News reports have indicated that Biden also knew he should not have had the documents, but that the government was unaware of them, so no harm, no foul. That, and in some cases, it was the fault of his staff at the time.

This is remarkably different than what happened to Trump, who is facing prosecution from the Justice Department for not turning over his documents.

However, this is remarkably similar to the treatment received by Hillary Clinton, who was found to have been “extremely careless” as Secretary of State by housing an email server in her closet, a server that was believed to have contained classified material (which couldn’t be verified since it was wiped clean).

Related Articles

students participate in LOCAL government day

The difference in all these cases is the political bent of the perpetrators, meaning Biden and Clinton are liberals and Trump isn’t. Another chief difference that few people are talking about is the fact that Trump is a former president, and in that role can declassify items. Secretaries of State and Vice Presidents do not have that power.

One of the most significant findings, though, is one claimed in the summary, which said that Biden should not be prosecuted because Biden could paint himself as an “elderly man with poor memory,” which would be a hill prosecutors could not climb.

Prosecuting or not prosecuting crimes based on the suspect’s political beliefs is something straight out of the Karl Marx handbook (which also includes the limiting of information, but that’s another story), but equally as nuts is a counselor finding evidence of a crime and then finding reasons not to prosecute amounts to dereliction of duty.

Prosecutors prosecute. It’s up to grand juries to recommend indictments, and to petit juries to determine guilt. That should be the extent of it, regardless of whether it involves a sitting president (the current sitting president wasn’t a president at the time).

Moreover, if the prosecutor alleges a mental issue (vigorously denied by Biden and anyone close to him), shouldn’t that be the subject of an inquiry? Either he violated, knowingly or unknowingly, law regarding classified documents, or he was addled, leaving the question of his ability to run the country.

Yet, nothing will happen. Bet on it.

Because the government, especially the government with the right political letter after their name, has its own rules.

Tony Farkas is publisher of the San Jacinto News-Times and the Trinity County News-Standard. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. The views expressed here are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of this publication.