Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (3 Viewers)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

Former President D. Trump has been indicted by a New York Grand Jury. There will be much to talk about on this topic because this is just the first step in a lengthy process.
Possibly it is worthy of its own thread here rather than posting about Trump's indictment in already existing threads?
*
This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
*

Manhattan’s DA wanted a Friday Trump arrest. Trump’s team said no.

Secret Service needed more time to prepare, according to the ex-president’s legal team.

www.yahoo.com

 

[FullMonte]

He'll testify though, if it ever gets to trial. Because of course the jury will make an inference about the defendant not testifying. It's a fantasy that jurors only pay attention to what the judge instructs them to pay attention to. "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" only prompts people to go yank it open.

I didn't say, in any way, that jurors wouldn't do that. I said that they are not to do that, which is what the instruction they receive says. Of course they will make those inferences.

Now, in all seriousness...Do you honestly think that if Trump testifies, he will actually help his case? Or do you think that his inability to control his mouth will have him walking into trap after trap as the prosecutions best attorneys cross examine him? I think it is very unlikely that he will testify. If his lawyers are even a little competent, they will make it clear that if he insists on testifying, they will not represent him.

Ha!

That would be awesome if the prosecution did that. It would open up the entire speech for the defense to put in - during the prosecution's case!

No, it wouldn't. It would open up the portions of the speech that are relevant to the case for the defense to put in. Trump admitting that he had every right to keep documents and that he had them stored neatly is related to the case. The stuff about Hillary, Joe Biden, etc...is not.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Yes, while I was typing the reply that now seems to so offend you.

Not the least bit offended. Just pointing out my clarification and highlighting more of your misunderstandings.

 

[Snarky Sack]

How the government "found out" that documents were missing that Trump had is another story that I'll tell later on.

Here is the fairy tale official version:

The NARA Archivist, David Ferriero, became concerned that some copies of twitter tweets that he was expecting from the White House did not come in with the large number of boxes that the Trump White House turned in. As far back as 2018 the Archivist had asked the White House staff about reports that Trump would tear up documents, and that staff would tape them together.

National Archives acknowledges classified documents were found in boxes at Mar-a-Lago after Trump left office | CNN Politics

The National Archives acknowledged Friday it has discussed with the Department of Justice that classified records were found in boxes at Mar-a-Lago after former President Donald Trump left office, according to a letter from Archivist David Ferriero to the House Oversight Committee.

www.cnn.com

Yes, that is the level that Operation Get Trump had been reduced to at that point. Co-opting a librarian to complain about overdue library materials and torn pages.

It didn't go very far from there. The Archivist supposedly contacted the Justice Department when he saw that there were documents with classification markings in the boxes that Team Trump had returned. Which could not have surprised the DOJ, because those were the documents the FBI found during the several times when Trump let the FBI into Mar-a-Lago into inspect his document storage.

As far as what we have seen, there really is no system in place that tracks every copy of every classified document. Maybe in the military, but not in civilian government.

 

[FullMonte]

It didn't go very far from there. The Archivist supposedly contacted the Justice Department when he saw that there were documents with classification markings in the boxes that Team Trump had returned. Which could not have surprised the DOJ, because those were the documents the FBI found during the several times when Trump let the FBI into Mar-a-Lago into inspect his document storage.

So, now you are saying that the FBI went down to Mar-A-Lago and went through the boxes of documents BEFORE the Archivist contacted them?

 

[superchuck500]

He'll testify though, if it ever gets to trial. Because of course the jury will make an inference about the defendant not testifying. It's a fantasy that jurors only pay attention to what the judge instructs them to pay attention to. "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" only prompts people to go yank it open.

Ha!

That would be awesome if the prosecution did that. It would open up the entire speech for the defense to put in - during the prosecution's case!

Have you seen it? I linked it somewhere. People who may even be on the jury spontaneously burst into the "Happy Birthday" song. It's today so not too late to wish him well on Truthsocial.

It’s always risky for the defendant to testify in a criminal defense. A pathological liar defendant who has been lying so long he doesn’t even know the difference anymore is the worst scenario for a criminal defense team.

Juries are absolutely not allowed to infer guilt from a defendant’s silence and the judge and counsel are going to tell them that about 20 times. And defendants rarely do it. It’s not the same as asking them to not hear something they heard - it’s telling them a foundational rule of the American justice system.

But I think that Trump is certainly smart enough and with good preparation he could help his defense by taking the stand. You might be right that he’ll do it. But it would take the performance of his life not to fall for the traps that the prosecution will lay for him. Since announcing his run for president in 2015, Trump has testified under oath once - in the Carroll case and it wasn’t anything to be proud of. He misidentified the plaintiff as his own wife and made numerous statements that were featured in the plaintiff’s case at trial (which of course she won handily - the jury barely even deliberated).

I think most criminal defense experts would say it’s a massive risk for Trump to testify - because he’s either likely to make material admissions or perjure himself. But who knows, he certainly believes that he can manipulate perception. It’s just such an all or nothing proposition; that’s why the lawyers hate it. Like we say in racing “checkers or wreckers!”

 

[Snarky Sack]

I didn't say, in any way, that jurors wouldn't do that. I said that they are not to do that, which is what the instruction they receive says. Of course they will make those inferences.

Agree to agree.

Now, in all seriousness...Do you honestly think that if Trump testifies, he will actually help his case?

Did I say that? No, I said that he would testify, not that it would help his case.

In all seriousness, instead of trying to get me to agree that I've said something that you want to respond to, why not make a sock, have it say what you want to respond to and viola! The ideal foil.

Normally, a defendant is in a lose-lose situation about testifying. So the question is not whether testifying will help his case, but whether testifying will hurt his case worse than not testifying.

Unfortunately, the answer lies, not in truth and justice, but in the skills of the two lawyers and the competence and firmness of the judge. What I mean by that, is that a skilled Defense attorney can keep his examination of the defendant so narrow that the prosecutor would have little to be able to ask the defendant on cross without going outside of the scope of direct. Meanwhile a skilled prosecutor will find ways to go outside the scope without getting brought back.

Of course if the judge us incompetent or weak, the skills won't matter and the supposed cross will turn into a direct for the prosecution.

How Trump and his mouth falls into that depends on the Jury. If they are Trump supporters, say half, they will want to hear from Trump.

As far as Trump handing being cross-examined, will his examiner be more or less skilled than Caitlin Collins?

Or do you think that his inability to control his mouth will have him walking into trap after trap as the prosecutions best attorneys cross examine him? I think it is very unlikely that he will testify. If his lawyers are even a little competent, they will make it clear that if he insists on testifying, they will not represent him.

Always a possibility that, this late in life, Trump will go from telling lawyers what to do to letting lawyers tell him what to do.

No, it wouldn't. It would open up the portions of the speech that are relevant to the case for the defense to put in. Trump admitting that he had every right to keep documents and that he had them stored neatly is related to the case. The stuff about Hillary, Joe Biden, etc...is not.

Trump's lawyers will argue that the jury needs the whole speech for context. Anyway, don't you think that stuff about Hillary, Joe Biden, etc. would just make Trump look worse?

 

[MT15]

Are you sure about that? This doesn't look very secure for classified documents:

No. Nor do I think that he did that.

Emperor Hillary bleachbitted her illegal server, an smashed her devices with hammers.

I always stop when a poster tells me that they stopped. Have a nice day.

No, quit saying things that are not true.

 

[Snarky Sack]

So, now you are saying that the FBI went down to Mar-A-Lago and went through the boxes of documents BEFORE the Archivist contacted them?

Actually, no. Those were the documents that Trump found, not the FBI.

 

[MT15]

When talking about documents that are classified as S/TS SCI they are not, per se, they are reproduced and each reproduction comes with a control number. Those reproductions become the responsibility of a "records custodian" and that person would require a signature from the recipient of the "copy". In essence, they are serially controlled. Once a document is classified, it becomes the property of The United States, not an individual person to do with that they will.

The Executive Branch is not under compliance when it comes to securing classified records and I can understand it can be burdensome, however, if they don't clean-up their security manager's custodial issues, we will continue to have lost docs. I say lost because they had no idea that both Pence and Biden has classified docs in their possession.

I've asked the following before:

Why Did The United States Suspect Trump Had Missing Classified Documents In The First Place?

my understanding is that when the National Archives received the presidential documents after Trump left, they realized they were missing mass quantities of documents that should have been turned over to them. We can see that there were possibly a hundred or more document boxes from the photographs. Most of these document weren’t classified, but were not Trump’s to keep either, and the Archives were expecting them.

I’m not sure whether they just figured out that at least some of these documents had to be classified or whether someone who saw what happened tipped them off. But something triggered a review of classified documents and they then discovered there were plenty of those missing also. At least this is what I remember. They tried for almost two years to get Trump to return them.

 

[MT15]

“Qualified” is a tricky term but I would say a judge needs to have substantial command of criminal procedure and the management of the criminal trial courtroom. I think that requires quite a bit of experience - a couple dozen is probably when a judge feels pretty comfortable with it. I don’t really know, I’m not a criminal lawyer and all judges are different people with different personalities and capabilities. For example, a fairly new judge who was prosecutor for 20 years will have a very quick learning curve based on that experience. A judge with no criminal trial history will have a much steeper curve.

Cannon was an AUSA for about six years but I don’t think she tried a case.

Someone also said that trials dealing with retention of classified materials are a pretty specialized type of trial. One that she has most likely never seen or been involved with.

 

[MT15]

Barring some rare example, a document that is classified started out as classified, and was always the property of the United States, ownership deriving from the government having bought the paper, computer and printer, or the servers for electronic documents.

Actually, I guess if a foreign document were to be acquired through espionage, it would need to be classified.


Yes, because, those procedures are for the mid level folk, and the military folk of all levels whose lives are about following regulations.

Presidents, VP's, SecStates, they are mostly people who have been in and out of the government all their lives, but never in a disciplined government organization like the military. I think it is notable that Neither of the Clintons, Biden, Trump, and Pence all have in common that they never served in the military.

They have all also taken a cavalier attitude toward classified information.

If you mean Biden and Pence, the story is that their lawyers found them - and then the FBI found more after the lawyers completed the search.

Remind you of anybody?.

The timeline of events surrounding the discovery of documents at Biden's former office and residence

Here is a look at some of the key events surrounding the discovery of government documents in Mr. Biden's possession.

www.cbsnews.com

Washington — Revelations that documents bearing classification markings were found at President Biden's former office and his Wilmington, Delaware, house has prompted scrutiny of the president and the appointment of a special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The White House confirmed in early January that roughly 10 documents dating back to the Obama administration were discovered by Mr. Biden's personal lawyers at the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement on Nov. 2, and then disclosed that a "small number" were found in the garage at the president's home in Wilmington after his lawyers searched the locations where files from his vice-presidential office may have been shipped following his tenure in the Obama White House.

A subsequent search of Mr. Biden's Wilmington home by FBI investigators, conducted with his consent on Jan. 20, turned up six additional items with classified markings, his lawyers and Justice Department officials said.

New classified document found in FBI search of Pence home

The FBI has discovered an additional document with classified markings at former Vice President Mike Pence’s Indiana home.

apnews.com

WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI discovered an additional document with classified markings at former Vice President Mike Pence ’s Indiana home during a search Friday, following the discovery by his lawyers last month of sensitive government documents there.

Pence adviser Devin O’Malley said the Department of Justice completed “a thorough and unrestricted search of five hours” and removed “one document with classified markings and six additional pages without such markings that were not discovered in the initial review by the vice president’s counsel.”

The search, described as consensual after negotiations between Pence’s representatives and the Justice Department, comes after he was subpoenaed in a separate investigation into efforts by former President Donald Trump to overturn the 2020 election and as Pence contemplates a Republican bid for the White House in 2024.
So, yes. The government did not know they were missing. I don't know how Biden transported the documents from the Senate SCIF to his home. I'm guessing by the simple method of putting them into his briefcase and emptying them out into his desk and eventually into a box that found its way into his garage. Perhaps he meant to shred or burn them and never got around to it.

This is how Pence ended up with documents in his home:

The FBI had already taken possession of what Pence’s lawyer previously described as a “small number of documents” that had been “inadvertently boxed and transported” to Pence’s Indiana home at the end of the Trump administration.

Woe-Kaaaay . . .

How the government "found out" that documents were missing that Trump had is another story that I'll tell later on.

None of the Biden documents were from his Senate days. They all derived from his two terms as Vice President.

 

[Snarky Sack]

None of the Biden documents were from his Senate days. They all derived from his two terms as Vice President.

Source of that claim?

 

[superchuck500]

Someone also said that trials dealing with retention of classified materials are a pretty specialized type of trial. One that she has most likely never seen or been involved with.

I think we can safely assume she has zero experience with it at all.

 

[MT15]

Source of that claim?

The article you posted. And every other article I have read.

But here:

The White House confirmed in early January that roughly 10 documents dating back to the Obama administration were discovered by Mr. Biden's personal lawyers at the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement on Nov. 2, and then disclosed that a "small number" were found in the garage at the president's home in Wilmington after his lawyers searched the locations where files from his vice-presidential office may have been shipped following his tenure in the Obama White House.

I thought we had also discussed that the Executive Branch handles classified material very differently from the Legislative Branch. Trump’s claims that there are documents from his time in the Senate are lies.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Someone also said that trials dealing with retention of classified materials are a pretty specialized type of trial. One that she has most likely never seen or been involved with.

They'll have to find someone experienced in trials of ex-presidents who are now front runners to run against the leader of the party currently in power that brought him to trial.

Prolly they will need to outsource it to some third world dictatorship for that.

 

[MT15]

That included "six items consisting of documents with classification markings and surrounding materials," some of which dated back to Biden's time in the Senate, Bauer said. The DOJ also took some "personally handwritten notes" from Biden's time as vice president.

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/21/1150617734/the-doj-searched-bidens-home-and-found-more-classified-documents

This article contradicts what I have read in multiple places. And your article that I quoted contradicts it also. How do we know that the surrounding materials were from his Senate days with the way that sentence is worded?

 

[Snarky Sack]

The article you posted. And every other article I have read.

But here:

My article did not say that they came "only" from his time as Vice President.

I thought we had also discussed that the Executive Branch handles classified material very differently from the Legislative Branch. Trump’s claims that there are documents from his time in the Senate are lies.

Wow!

Trump has NPR, AND Biden's personal attorney, lying for him now:

Some of the items date back to Biden's time as a a senator, while others were from his time as vice president, said Biden's personal attorney, Bob Bauer, announced the extraordinary development in a Saturday night statement. The Justice Department also took some handwritten notes for further review, he said.

That included "six items consisting of documents with classification markings and surrounding materials," some of which dated back to Biden's time in the Senate, Bauer said. The DOJ also took some "personally handwritten notes" from Biden's time as vice president.

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/21/1150617734/the-doj-searched-bidens-home-and-found-more-classified-documents

 

[MT15]

They'll have to find someone experienced in trials of ex-presidents who are now front runners to run against the leader of the party currently in power that brought him to trial.

Prolly they will need to outsource it to some third world dictatorship for that.

You shouldn’t change your name. You are pretty much 90% snark.