Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (2 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

 

[Snarky Sack]

Um, sorting through the seized material, preparing subpoenas, taking interviews, preparing grand jury information, convening a grand jury, preparing the indictment.

Correct. They were given no time limit in which to do all of that.

Your conviction that the government will “surely” be hiding exculpatory evidence is just silly. Everybody knows what happened here - what is exculpatory? It could be exculpatory if Trump had declassified the material when he was president but we know that didn’t happen.

We don't know that it didn't happen. Some of us have the mistaken belief that there is a formal process, binding to a sitting president for declassifying documents. It's a moot point for this case. "Classified documents" was a red herring. Trump is not charged with unlawful possession of classified documents.

This is such a simple case about unlawful retention of covered material, refusal to return that material, deliberate obstruction of the effort to recover the material, and misuse of the material.

Right, not having classified documents in the first place. After ten months of being assured that such was Trump's crime, it turns out that was just the excuse for the raid.

This idea that there’s some batch of exculpatory evidence the government is hiding is ridiculous.

You think that because you're only seeing and hearing one side, and you're seeing it constantly. You believe that the DOJ is taking a completely honest and unbiased approach in spite of their very recent history in their pursuit of Trump.

If the DOJ hides anything at all, the fair assumption would be that it is exculpatory. If they try to use documents in which the overwhelming majority is redacted, like the search warrant was, any reasonable person will say that of course they are hiding something and that it is likely exculpatory.

 

[superchuck500]

Correct. They were given no time limit in which to do all of that.

We don't know that it didn't happen. Some of us have the mistaken belief that there is a formal process, binding to a sitting president for declassifying documents. It's a moot point for this case. "Classified documents" was a red herring. Trump is not charged with unlawful possession of classified documents.

Right, not having classified documents in the first place. After ten months of being assured that such was Trump's crime, it turns out that was just the excuse for the raid.

You think that because you're only seeing and hearing one side, and you're seeing it constantly. You believe that the DOJ is taking a completely honest and unbiased approach in spite of their very recent history in their pursuit of Trump.

If the DOJ hides anything at all, the fair assumption would be that it is exculpatory. If they try to use documents in which the overwhelming majority is redacted, like the search warrant was, any reasonable person will say that of course they are hiding something and that it is likely exculpatory.

Lol, you're impossible.

Trump is charged with 37 federal counts. And 31 of them are under 18 USC Sec. 793(e), "Willful Retention of National Defense Information", which the complaint refers to generically as "Classified Information" - and then identifies each, based on classification (Secret, Top Secret, etc.). Yes, you're correct that it's the content of the material that brings the charge and not their classification, but it's also the content of the material that brings their classification and it's all the same thing in the end - at least on these facts.

What are you talking about that being the excuse for the raid? It's 31 of the 37 counts! The other six relate to his efforts to obstruct their recovery, obstruct the proceedings related to their recovery, and other false statements made related to those efforts.

You realize that the redactions are only for the public filings? Because they relate to protected information and processes that aren't appropriate for the public record? But they're not redacted in the papers to the court and to the defense.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Lol, you're impossible.

Trump is charged with 37 federal counts. And 31 of them are under 18 USC Sec. 793(e), "Willful Retention of National Defense Information", which the complaint refers to generically as "Classified Information" - and then identifies each, based on classification (Secret, Top Secret, etc.). Yes, you're correct that it's the content of the material that brings the charge and not their classification, but it's also the content of the material that brings their classification and it's all the same thing in the end - at least on these facts.

All that is true enough.

But you miss my point (I told you we'd talk past each other):

For ten months, we have been assured that they had an airtight case against Trump for unlawfully possessing classified information, and that any claim that Trump declassified them without following a (non-existent) formal procedure for declassification by a president, he could not have declassified them.

Now we are supposed to accept the quick shift to "uh, it's not that he had classified material, we aren't charging him for that. Garsh, where did you get that silly idea? No . . . we are charging him for the documents being national defense information!"

By tacitly admitting that he could and did declassify the documents, they make proving criminal intent impossible. No jury will believe that Trump intentionally gave national defense information to someone in order to weaken the U.S. militarily. At most, you would have four or five people on the jury willing to completely suspend disbelief in order to help the prosecutor get Trump. The thee or four Trump supporters likely to be on the jury will not believe it in the slightest.

As to the four to six undecideds likely to be on the jury will side with the prosecutors on many points, but that is not one of them.

What are you talking about that being the excuse for the raid? It's 31 of the 37 counts! The other six relate to his efforts to obstruct their recovery, obstruct the proceedings related to their recovery, and other false statements made related to those efforts.

You realize that the redactions are only for the public filings? Because they relate to protected information and processes? But they're not redacted in the papers to the court and to the defense.

"Classified material!" was the excuse we were given for the raid. Hence the staged picture of the classified cover sheets scattered on the floor with the edges of purported classified documents underneath them.

 

[superchuck500]

All that is true enough.

But you miss my point (I told you we'd talk past each other):

For ten months, we have been assured that they had an airtight case against Trump for unlawfully possessing classified information, and that any claim that Trump declassified them without following a (non-existent) formal procedure for declassification by a president, he could not have declassified them.

Now we are supposed to accept the quick shift to "uh, it's not that he had classified material, we aren't charging him for that. Garsh, where did you get that silly idea? No . . . we are charging him for the documents being national defense information!"

By tacitly admitting that he could and did declassify the documents, they make proving criminal intent impossible. No jury will believe that Trump intentionally gave national defense information to someone in order to weaken the U.S. militarily. At most, you would have four or five people on the jury willing to completely suspend disbelief in order to help the prosecutor get Trump. The thee or four Trump supporters likely to be on the jury will not believe it in the slightest.

As to the four to six undecideds likely to be on the jury will side with the prosecutors on many points, but that is not one of them.



"Classified material!" was the excuse we were given for the raid. Hence the staged picture of the classified cover sheets scattered on the floor with the edges of purported classified documents underneath them.

I don't know who "we" is and who these alleged tellers are - I think you're confused about public discussions and actual events and proceedings in the case, which are the only things that matter. What somebody says in the Washington Post or what some congressman says doesn't matter.

What did DOJ say? The search warrant identifies three categories of material with sworn affidavits stating the probable cause for the investigation to believe those materials are at the location and that they are relevant to elements of potential criminal charges.

Those categories are: (1) classified documents, (2) national security information, (3) presidential records.

And that material, specifically targeted in the warrant, makes up the gravamen of the case against Trump, along with his conduct to conceal, lie, and obstruct about that material. There's no disconnect, it's part of the same timeline that began when Trump removed the material and NARA asked for it back. At that time, NARA referred the matter to investigators because the agency believed that the documents included classified material with national security information. This is the case Trump is facing and it's hard to imagine what could possibly be exculpatory based on this obvious set of facts - much of which has been confirmed and none of which has been rebutted with any meaningful defense to date.

Seriously, we're "talking past" each other because I'm trying to talk about the case, the criminal proceeding, and you're talking about broader public commentary, perception and conspiracies.

Read the Search Warrant for Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Home (Published 2022)

A federal judge on Friday unsealed the search warrant for former President Donald J. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Fla., as well as a list of items removed from the property when federal agents executed the warrant this week.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Snarky Sack]

I don't know who "we" is and who these alleged tellers are - I think you're confused about public discussions and actual events and proceedings in the case, which are the only things that matter. What somebody says in the Washington Post or what some congressman says doesn't matter.

It matters here on a message board, I think.

What did DOJ say? The search warrant identifies three categories of material with sworn affidavits stating the probable cause for the investigation to believe those materials are at the location and that they are relevant to elements of potential criminal charges.

This search warrant?

How can any of us know what is in that search warrant?

And that material, specifically targeted in the warrant, makes up the gravamen of the case against Trump, along with his conduct to conceal, lie, and obstruct about that material. There's no disconnect, it's part of the same timeline that began when Trump removed the material and NARA asked for it back. At that time, NARA referred the matter to investigators because the agency believed that the documents included classified material with national security information. This is the case Trump is facing and it's hard to imagine what could possibly be exculpatory based on this obvious set of facts - much of which has been confirmed and none of which has been rebutted with any meaningful defense to date.

This is what posters on here don't seem to understand. I know you do, but I think you are glossing over it. Trump hasn't rebutted any evidence of any crimes, because he must wait until the prosecution presents its case to the jury and hands it over to the defense.

I get that you cannot imagine what could possibly be exculpatory, but Trump's lawyers are paid to come up with a theory of innocence based on the facts presented by the government.

I'm guessing that the government will try to time its case so that they rest on Monday, November 4, the day before the election, leaving no time for Trump's lawyers to even make an opening statement before the voting. With the government getting so much support from the media in their pursuit of Trump, they no longer have to worry about such tactics being too obvious.

Seriously, we're "talking past" each other because I'm trying to talk about the case, the criminal proceeding, and you're talking about broader public commentary, perception and conspiracies.

What else can we, on a message board, talk about?

At this point, the government has been the only one presenting evidence. We could say, "Eh, I bet these guys at the DOJ/FBI have really changed a lot since the days of Strzok, Page, Klinesmith, McCabe, Lynch and Comey. We should just trust them." Or, we could talk about how to interpret the DOJ's actions in light of how dishonestly they have behaved during Operation Get Trump.

NYT is paywalled for me.

If what they published in your link is an unredacted version of the search warrant, I may be tempted to pay to see it. Is it?

 

[superchuck500]

It matters here on a message board, I think.

This search warrant?

How can any of us know what is in that search warrant?

This is what posters on here don't seem to understand. I know you do, but I think you are glossing over it. Trump hasn't rebutted any evidence of any crimes, because he must wait until the prosecution presents its case to the jury and hands it over to the defense.

I get that you cannot imagine what could possibly be exculpatory, but Trump's lawyers are paid to come up with a theory of innocence based on the facts presented by the government.

I'm guessing that the government will try to time its case so that they rest on Monday, November 4, the day before the election, leaving no time for Trump's lawyers to even make an opening statement before the voting. With the government getting so much support from the media in their pursuit of Trump, they no longer have to worry about such tactics being too obvious.


What else can we, on a message board, talk about?

At this point, the government has been the only one presenting evidence. We could say, "Eh, I bet these guys at the DOJ/FBI have really changed a lot since the days of Strzok, Page, Klinesmith, McCabe, Lynch and Comey. We should just trust them." Or, we could talk about how to interpret the DOJ's actions in light of how dishonestly they have behaved during Operation Get Trump.

NYT is paywalled for me.

If what they published in your link is an unredacted version of the search warrant, I may be tempted to pay to see it. Is it?

I don't even know what your point is anymore about the nature of the case and the search warrant. I get all of the mistrust, some of which is reasonable, but this is a pretty straightforward case about material Trump illegally possessed, refused to return, and then took affirmative and criminal steps to conceal and obstruct.

Good luck with the defense. We'll just have to see how it goes.

 

[Saintamaniac]

Based on the one delusional trump supporter in this thread the defense will go something like this:

Defense: "Your honor, the government is lying. We rest our case"

 

[CoolBrees]

The grand jury saw the DOJ’s case.

And they unanimously agreed there was enough evidence to indict him.

Were there no Trump supporters there? Certainly there had to be at least three according to our new resident sycophant.

Why did Trump’s lawyers all quit? Seriously, you have mentioned his crack law team. Can you name them?

 

[MT15]

Seriously, we're "talking past" each other because I'm trying to talk about the case, the criminal proceeding, and you're talking about broader public commentary, perception and conspiracies.

IMO, he is largely talking about his feelings. He feels like Trump is a good guy who is truthful and aboveboard and he feels like the FBI and DOJ are full of leftists out to get him. All facts get filtered through these feelings and adjusted accordingly.

This is a gift link, hopefully it will work:

Read the Search Warrant for Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Home (Published 2022)

A federal judge on Friday unsealed the search warrant for former President Donald J. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Fla., as well as a list of items removed from the property when federal agents executed the warrant this week.

www.nytimes.com

 

[J-DONK]

IMO, he is largely talking about his feelings. He feels like Trump is a good guy who is truthful and aboveboard and he feels like the FBI and DOJ are full of leftists out to get him. All facts get filtered through these feelings and adjusted accordingly.

This is a gift link, hopefully it will work:

Read the Search Warrant for Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Home (Published 2022)

A federal judge on Friday unsealed the search warrant for former President Donald J. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Fla., as well as a list of items removed from the property when federal agents executed the warrant this week.

www.nytimes.com

I laugh every time a conservatives comes on this board, and tries to tell us the FBI is a Marxist cult full of Biden supporters. It never gets old either.

 

[MT15]

Might be a big deal for the Jan 6 indictments:

 

[DaveXA]

Might be a big deal for the Jan 6 indictments:

Interesting.

 

[LA - L.A.]

For ten months, we have been assured that they had an airtight case against Trump for unlawfully possessing classified information...

Actually, it was Trump that started all that "ten months" of false BS about Trump being investigated for having documents that were classified. It never came from the DOJ. The DOJ said he had documents that were classified, but from the very beginning they pointed out that the issue was the information in those documents, not whether or not they were classified. The DOJ has been consistent from the very beginning about that.

The confusion that @Snarky Sack is having is that news outlets made the mistake of repeating Trump's false, BS strawman argument that Trump was being investigated solely, and only, on the basis that some of the documents Trump had were classified. It was always about the content of the documents Trump had and never about the classification status of those documents.

Snarky Sack heard news outlets, Trump and Trump apologists continually use the phrase "classified documents" for ten months and jumped to the false conclusion that the DOJ must be focused on whether or not the documents Trump illegally kept were classified or not. Whether or not the documents were classified was never the legal issue for the DOJ. It was the fact that he illegally kept documents that contained information that is covered by the Espionage ACT, regardless of their classification.

Trump used the BS strawman argument that the legal issue was about the classification of the documents, so he could then falsely claim that he had declassified the documents he illegaly kept, because he had issued a standing order that any documents he kept with him were declassified. Then he gave the BS false defense of "how can I be guilty of keeping classified documents when I declassified them?"

The people Trump hand picked to be on his staff all, as in every single one of them, called BS on Trump for his BS and stated very clearly and very loudly that Trump never issued any such order.

So Trump doubled down on his false, BS strawman argument that he was being investigated for having documents that were classified, but pivoted to the new false, BS strawman defense of "I declassified the documents with my thoughts, so how can I be guilty of illegally possessing classified documents when I declassified them?"

Every single person who's ever had anything to do with the actual process of declassifying documents clearly and loudly stated that Trump was full of BS and that there is a formal process that has to be followed to truly declassify a document and that no president can just declassify them with his thoughts.

So Trump tripled down on his false, BS strawman argument that he was being investigated for having classified documents, but pivoted to the new false, BS strawman defense of "I didn't have any classified documents and the FBI planted the ones they said they found, so how can I be guilty of illegally possessing classified documents when I didn't have any classified documents?"

Once again, that was proved to be false by everyone who's not a Trump devotee. Even Trump himself reached a point where he gave up on his false, BS strawman argument about classified documents.

Trump in the Fox news interview with Bret Baier acknowledged that he was actually being investigated and indicted for breaking two categories of laws:

1. He willfully and knowingly kept documents illegally that are covered by the Espionage Act, regardless of their classification.
2. He willfully and knowingly obstructed the efforts of the government to get the documents Trump illegally possessed back from Trump.

Trump in his interview with Bret Baier admitted that he had the documents and that he hadn't give them back yet, because he "was really busy and didn't have time to go through them."

Trump is now begging Republicans in Congress to save him from the investigations and indictments. Even Trump has given up on trying to distort and twist what the actual facts of the case are.

The biggest truth is that the only reason Trump was indicted is because he intentionally and knowingly lied to the government in an effort to keep the documents he knew he couldn't legally have. Had Trump given back all the documents without lying and hiding the documents to try to keep them, the DOJ would have closed the case and Trump would have not been indicted for this.

Trump supporters admire Trump for never admitting when he's mistaken or wrong. Trump supporters admire Trump for constantly creating false, BS strawman arguments. Trump supporters admire Trump for constantly telling lies, so that he can feel like he always wins and is always right. Trump supporters admire Trump for saying any lie that let's him own the liberals. Trump supporters get off on all of it.

So, it should be no surprise to anyone that Trump supporters mimic Trumps behavior and do all of those same things Trump does. That mimicking behavior is common in humans and it's what gave birth to, "monkey see, monkey do." Don't try to reason or argue with a Trump supporter, it's a waste of time. Some Trump supporters actually get off on frustrating and taunting non-Trump supporters.

Instead of trying to change the mind or behavior of a Trump supporter, just focus your efforts on making sure everyone else sees through their false BS and that no one else falls for their false BS.

 

[LA - L.A.]

NYT is paywalled for me.

Then how did it come to be that you have previously provided links to NYT articles?

"stayed home and baked cookies."

Well, let's see if you can acknowledge this basic fact from the New York Times:

From the New York Times:

 

[MT15]

Well, the NYT doesn’t protect every story so he may have been accessing their free stories. I did a gift link to the search warrant though, so he can see it now.

Also: more people cooperating with Smith, it seems:

 

[MT15]

Also, Smith is proposing a very realistic trial date in early December.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

 

[superchuck500]

DOJ moves to continue trial until 12/11/2023: