Does Trump ever do any jail time? (1 Viewer)

[Optimus Prime]

Everything I've seen and heard says that the split second Donald Trump is no longer president there will be flood of charges waiting for him

And if he resigns and Pence pardons him there are a ton of state charges as an understudy waiting in the wings if the fed charges can't perform

What do you think the likelihood of there being a jail sentence?

In every movie and TV show I've ever seen, in every political thriller I've ever read about a criminal and corrupt president there is ALWAYS some version of;

"We can't do that to the country",

"A trial would tear the country apart",

"For the nation to heal we need to move on" etc.

Would life imitate art?

Even with the charges, even with the proof the charges are true will the powers that be decide, "we can't do that to the country"?

 

[FullMonte]

We don't even know if any of the documents Trump had would expose sources.

They probably did, but for all we know it was just transcripts of tapped phone calls from world leaders having phone sex.

I think operatives who are exposing themselves on twitter are just doing it for the clicks.

I’m pretty sure some of the documents were marked HCS, which means they come from human sources. While they might not contain names, they undoubtedly contain information thst could be used to identify them.

Here’s the thing I’ve been thinking about. Should Trump be elected in 2024, what happens to our intelligence community? How much risk will our confidential sources take, knowing how Trump handled their security? How will our allies handle humint information they would have shared with us?

 

[FullMonte]

With all of the stuff we've been hearing, there's something that caught my eye/mind today that I haven't seen mentioned.

The portion of the Espionage Act that is referenced in the search warrant is 18USC793(c). This states:

Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter;

The part that has me thinking is "for the purpose aforesaid." This refers back to section (a), which states "Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation..." My question is, can we infer that the DOJ has reason to believe that someone was going to use these classified documents in some manner that was going to injury the US or be an advantage to a foreign nation? I mean, careless leaving documents out wouldn't rise to the level of "intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States" would it?

 

[UriUT]

Sounds reasonable. Plus the ability to intimidate the witness(es). They're proposing that their lawyer with secret clearance should be able to view what the doj has.

 

[superchuck500]

Sounds reasonable. Plus the ability to intimidate the witness(es). They're proposing that their lawyer with secret clearance should be able to view what the doj has.

I just don't see that option (Jim Trusty reviewing the material) is going to happen - plus his claim of "I retained top secret clearance" appears to be erroneous, you can't just retain clearance.

I think some kind of review of privileged (attorney-client) material or personal effects could hold up, but anything beyond that is going to be seriously problematic as a matter of law.

 

[UriUT]

I just don't see that option (Jim Trusty reviewing the material) is going to happen - plus his claim of "I retained top secret clearance" appears to be erroneous, you can't just retain clearance.

I think some kind of review of privileged (attorney-client) material or personal effects could hold up, but anything beyond that is going to be seriously problematic as a matter of law.

I hope this is how the judge views it as well. Though what Rubin writes makes sense if the judge allows access to what the trump team wants. She sees the intent, though now that i thinkof it, every defense team wants access to what the prosecution has. But here in particular they want not just the client-attorney/personal stuff. They again want access to the witnesses. True to mob form, she believes the intent is witness intimidation. As I also do suspect.

 

[MT15]

They can wait for discovery like any other subject of an investigation. I don’t like the preferential treatment Trump is getting.

 

[MT15]

This is a pertinent question:

 

[MT15]

Here’s the entire list. Just a crazy amount of government documents that he isn’t entitled to have:

 

[MT15]

 

[Optimus Prime]

In a column for MSNBC, the former assistant director for counterintelligence at the Federal Bureau of Investigation suggested that is inevitable that obstruction indictments will be handed down over the top secret documents that were hidden away at Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, and that the only question left is who will be headed to court and how many there will be.

According to Frank Figliuzzi, the Department of Justice's case against the former president has grown stronger by the day with no end in sight, and attempts by Trump and his lawyers to dismiss the relentless investigation are misfiring, meaning the DOJ has him dead to rights.

"We could be inching close to someone, maybe Trump himself, being charged with obstruction of justice," the ex-FBI official wrote. "A successful obstruction prosecution would require two things.

First, proof that the accused knowingly concealed or destroyed records and, second, proof they did so to impede the work of an official agency. DOJ’s response filing provides us some insights into why the department thinks such thing has already happened."

Based upon government filings, Figliuzzi wrote that "the DOJ’s assertions seem to make a case for both the 'knowing concealment' and the 'intent to impede' requirements for obstruction," and added that Trump ally Kash Patel could be in trouble, with the former FBI official suggesting, "It’s Patel who has claimed he can personally attest to Trump’s 'standing order' defense.

Time will tell who’s telling the truth, but if the FBI were to develop evidence that Patel and Trump conspired to concoct a phony standing order defense, then they could be charged.".........

Trump and his inner circle should be asking 'how many of us are going to be charged?': Former FBI official

 

[superchuck500]

 

[coldseat]

He is working overtime to distance himself from Trump and their administration. I'm not forgetting how much I hated that guy, lol.

But I hate that I'm sitting here nodding my head up and down while he's just sating the simple truth. I guess he at least stood up and did the right thing during the election.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I turned on CNN at 3pm and they've played this clip and another from Barr at least three times already. They're having a ball with it.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Just a hunch, but something tells me he’s changed his opinion that
=====================

CNN) - Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly called for the lengthy jailing of opponents of his who he claimed mishandled classified materials.

CNN's KFile reviewed comments from the former President, dating back to his first presidential campaign in 2016, from speeches, interviews and comments made on social media……..

"On political corruption, we are going to restore honor to our government, '' Trump said in August 2016. "In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law."

"One of the first things we must do is to enforce all classification rules and to enforce all laws relating to the handling of classified information," he said in September 2016.

Speaking in July of that year, Trump said Clinton's mishandling "disqualifies" her from public service.

"Any government employee who engaged in this kind of behavior would be barred from handling classified information," Trump said. "Again, that alone disqualifies her."…….

Donald Trump has repeatedly called for lengthy jail sentences for those who he claimed mishandled classified information

Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly called for the lengthy jailing of opponents of his who he claimed mishandled classified materials.

www.cnn.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

Donald Trump called his former Attorney General Bill Barr as having “no guts” and a “pathetic RINO” after Mr Barr went on Fox Newsto tear apart Mr Trump’s defence of having secret papers at Mar-a-Lago.

On Friday evening, Mr Barr took to the favourite network of the one-term president to defend the FBI raid on Mr Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. He emphasised that his former boss’s attempt to explain away classified materials at his private residence was “unprecedented” and he couldn’t “think of a legitimate reason” why those documents would be there in the first place.

“I think the driver on this from the beginning was loads of classified information sitting in Mar-A-Lago,” Mr Barr said on the right-wing news network. “People say this was unprecedented, well, it’s also unprecedented for a president to take all this classified information and put them in a country club, okay?”

Shortly after the interview aired, Mr Trump took to his own social media platform – Truth Social – to begin eviscerating Mr Barr’s character.

“Former A.G. Bill Barr was fired long before I left the White House on January 20th. He acted very slowly on the ‘No Collusion’ Mueller Report in that the FBI and ‘Justice’ had the ‘Laptop from Hell’ in their possession, which totally exonerated me long before Mueller’s decision came out,” the ex-president began in his first post on Friday night, before pivoting to a point he would pick in later posts that Mr Barr was allegedly “petrified of the lunatic Dems & of being Impeached!” he wrote…….

Trump rages at Bill Barr for comments made about Mar-a-Lago raid: ‘Weak and pathetic’

The ex-president took to Truth Social to call him former AG a “pathetic RINO” and having “no glory”

www.independent.co.uk

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

“Former A.G. Bill Barr was fired long before I left the White House on January 20th. He acted very slowly on the ‘No Collusion’ Mueller Report in that the FBI and ‘Justice’ had the ‘Laptop from Hell’ in their possession, which totally exonerated me long before Mueller’s decision came out,” the ex-president began in his first post on Friday night, before pivoting to a point he would pick in later posts that Mr Barr was allegedly “petrified of the lunatic Dems & of being Impeached!” he wrote…….

This guy truly lives in a fantasy land. In the world of trump, there's not a single person that has ever quit working for him, they have all been fired.

 

[Optimus Prime]

And all horrible incompetent morons when they’re fired but the best of the best when they were hired

 

[UriUT]

Not just Brits Joyce!!!! Jonathan Swan does a good job and he's an Aussie.