this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2026
220 points (99.5% liked)

News

36666 readers
2987 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Well when I worked in government we had a ton of paperwork all over the place. Was early 2000s and we were scanning everything into archives. Maybe things have changed.

I would imagine the prison holding the most notorious and infamous people would have more records than even a normal federal prison.

But maybe not. If shit was destroyed the medical and incoming/outgoing records would be the only things that I would think relevant to destroy. And destroying it all is probably better than just destroying specific items. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Things have for sure changed, but almost exclusively in that the attitude has become that while there's still lots of paperwork, said paperwork is now the bulk of what's shredded. If it's not worth digitizing it's not worth archiving, and once it's digitized why do you need to keep the hard copies? It's far easier to store a few boxes of 40TB LTO than it is the millions of documents they contain. As a result practically nothing is worth archiving as hard copies.

I don't know why MCC would have been any different - it wasn't a supermax or something fancy, it was mostly just a holding facility for people pending trial / a glorified jail.

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Yeah. IDK. This facility holds high profile people who are indeed awaiting trial. If I was there I would probably want to keep good records. But like I said, it’s all conjecture.

I was thinking along the lines of documents within a few days of his death.

Obviously this is just my imagination at this point but if I was gonna kill someone and wanted to leave as little evidence as possible I would probably burn it all. Destroying everything I could find would be the next best thing. If I were there for nefarious reasons, I wouldn’t want even a scribble of a note in a some document margin saying I was there.

All that to say, it may be good to investigate what/if things were indeed destroyed.

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

While I agree, my issue here is that the investigation saved so many documents that were incriminating. There's not much to investigate in the destruction of documents since document destruction is absolutely routine - it just seems pointless to investigate it since those documents will have already been destroyed, and we have heaping mounds of documents from that same time frame that are already massively damning and which may indicate missing records id they're ever actually examined.

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 0 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Totally fair. But to destroy evidence they probably had to involve more people. Conspiracies collapse when there are a lot of people. If they can flip one of the lower players, they can work their way up the ladder. A random security guard probably can’t afford a lengthy legal battle. Isn’t that how investigations usually go?

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 0 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I'm sorry, I don't think I understand what you mean.

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 0 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

No worries. Wasn’t clear. I’m saying they should investigate to see if they catch one of the guys doing the shredding. If they find them, prosecutors can try to “flip” them. Get the person to give up (or turn) who told them to destroy things.

Imagine Bill Barr ordered the destruction. The guy he ordered could turn him in.

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

We know that, though - according to this it was ordered by the BoP team, and they aren't some unknown group. If you mean who were ordering them then yeah, there may be something there - but they haven't flipped yet, and if they were in on the conspiracy it's weird they left so many incriminating documents unshredded which were then later released.

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

There’s a reason that they say: “It's not the crime, it's the cover-up.”

Don’t underestimate what people will do when they think they are up against a wall.

In this case the cover-up has been pretty good.

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

But nobody's up against a wall here - they saved tons of relevant documents, plenty of it incriminating. Beyond this vague claim that there was more shredding than usual, there's no evidence that this was part of the coverup - that there is a coverup is obvious, but then they keep releasing documents that could have been destroyed by the BoP team and weren't, and which make them look just awful. I don't see what there is to gain from investigation into documents destroyed by Team Document Destruction! when we already know they both destroyed lots of documents and didnt destroy ones that punch big holes in the coverup.