Trump's Crimes & Investigations

[LFC]

37 counts.

The feds charged Trump with 31 separate counts of holding onto national defense information, one each, the indictment says, for sensitive document retained. Prosecutors offered a brief description of each document’s contents; one concerned, for example, the “nuclear weaponry of the United States,” another dealt with “military attacks by a foreign country.”

Trump also faces one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice, one count of withholding a record, one count of corruptly concealing a record, one count of concealing a document in a federal investigation, one count of scheme to conceal, and one count of false statements.

I wonder if some of those last counts are just placeholders, with many more similar counts to come.

[LFC]

Where are the other 34 boxes?

[LFC]

Obstructing justice.

[LFC]

This is about as sensitive as it gets.

[LFC]

[LFC]

[goldenvalley]

It’s very smart to release the indictment today. It will occupy the talking heads and writers all weekend with plenty of meat to discuss. The DOJ learned from the Mueller Report that they can’t let the cult and Trump toadies distort and lie about what is in it. Seized the narrative away from them unless you only watch Fox and related wing it outlets.

[indy]

I read through the indictment. Even I didn't believe he was THAT stupid.

[jackd]

The assignment of the case to Judge Cannon may prove fatal to the prosecution. If she retains the matter for pretrial and trial, she will be in a position to allow Trump to stall the matter past the election and, in the event of an actual trial, to severely restrict the government on evidence rulings such as the admissibility of his attorneys' testimony and restriction of content of classified documents in evidence. She's the worst possible judge in the district for the prosecution. One has to be skeptical that the assignment was really random as claimed by the court administrator. She will also be able, if she wishes, to favor the defendant on jury issues which were already going to be tough for the government given the MAGA influence in the Southern District of Florida.  All they need is one.

[goldenvalley]

I think the DOJ will be asking for recusal either voluntary or ask the chief judge to recuse. Her 2 decisions in the subpeonef material were so completely wrong that she looks at best incompetent and at worst biased. Fingers crossed even tho that hasn’t proved to be helpful in the past.

[goldenvalley]

On a more humorous note read the LGM post about the photo of the bathroom where boxes were found. www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2023/06/interior-design-document-storage-some-thoughts

“….Who puts a chandelier in a bathroom? Common, tacky people, who think Chandelier = Classy, therefore More Chandeliers = Classier, that’s who. And how does anyone over 5′ tall avoid getting bonked on the head? How does anyone over 4′ avoid cringing from the glass horror looming overhead?

Finally, there’s the thing really draws my eye. Amid all the faux glitz and fake glam, a plain old plastic tension rod holds up the shower curtain….”

[jackd]

Jun 10, 2023 18:04:54 GMT goldenvalley said:

I think the DOJ will be asking for recusal either voluntary or ask the chief judge to recuse. Her 2 decisions in the subpeonef material were so completely wrong that she looks at best incompetent and at worst biased. Fingers crossed even tho that hasn’t proved to be helpful in the past.

And should that fail, there is no reason to think that Jude Cannon wouldn't be impartial and totally fair in the continued handling of the case (sn).  May your fingers be helpful this time.  I'm reminded of the LA district attorney, Garcetti's, decision to try the OJ case in LA because his case was so strong even an LA jury would convict. I hope I'm over thinking this. 

[indy]

Lost in all this is the potential impact on our international security relationships. I mean, how can you trust a country whose president stores their most important intel secrets on the stage of his social club?

[indy]

I don't know if Cannon is the type to respect the judicial tongue lashing she got or not. I think the assumption is that she is overly deferential to Trump but that may not be the case. She could have simply erred on the side of too much caution afraid that she would be overturned on appeal the last time and now she may know better. I wouldn't bet on it but possibly. She also may now be out to prove she isn't the lapdog that everyone is claiming she is in which case her bullheadedness may prevent her from recusing herself. I guess we will see.

[goldenvalley]

Well I hear Trump was arraigned yesterday and no one "protested" in the streets with bear spray and flag poles bearing Trump flags.  That's something I guess, but not a reason to celebrate.  It'll be a while before there is anything to talk about in terms of this case.  

[LFC]

If you want a good laugh, check out this piece by Jonathan Turley, professional concern troll and speaker of truth to (Democratic) power. You gotta’ love this bit of false equivalence.

There are also pictures of documents stacked around a toilet—succeeding in matching the image of President Joe Biden storing documents next to his Corvette in his garage.

Then this one. Uuuhhh, who is included in “no one” because there seem to be plenty of people who have no problem believing Trump fully planned to use these documents as leverage for personal profit. With his track record, I can’t imagine him not doing that.

The law references an intent either to harm the national security of the U.S. or benefit a foreign power. No one is suggesting that harm actually occurred or that Trump intended to cause such harm. However, the government is proceeding under specific provisions making mishandling (and the refusal to turn over documents) a crime. That is the harm that the government will argue.

Just a little background on Turley here and here. The second link is a real hoot. It rates some of his worst recent prognostications in "Turls."

[goldenvalley]

Jun 14, 2023 21:45:39 GMT LFC said:

If you want a good laugh, check out this piece by Jonathan Turley, professional concern troll and speaker of truth to (Democratic) power. You gotta’ love this bit of false equivalence.

There are also pictures of documents stacked around a toilet—succeeding in matching the image of President Joe Biden storing documents next to his Corvette in his garage.

Then this one. Uuuhhh, who is included in “no one” because there seem to be plenty of people who have no problem believing Trump fully planned to use these documents as leverage for personal profit. With his track record, I can’t imagine him not doing that.

The law references an intent either to harm the national security of the U.S. or benefit a foreign power. No one is suggesting that harm actually occurred or that Trump intended to cause such harm. However, the government is proceeding under specific provisions making mishandling (and the refusal to turn over documents) a crime. That is the harm that the government will argue.

Just a little background on Turley here and here. The second link is a real hoot. It rates some of his worst recent prognostications in "Turls."

The documents were out in the wild...if Trump didn't monetize them, people around Trump could have.  I personally think he had many motives for keeping them, the primary being they were evidence of his greatness and importance. Apparently he let the National Enquirer guy keep and hold information for him so he sees the value in holding on to information. The rest would occur to him as the occasion arose.  

[LFC]

The real Hunter Biden investigation ends with a plea deal. He apparently plead guilty to 2 misdemeanor tax charges. Is suspect he'll have to pay a fine and, of course, admit guilt. Trump is, of course, melting down because it' soooooo unfair.

[LFC]

So far Judge Aileen "Loose" Cannon hasn't done anything blatantly stupid or corrupt. It may be that's she ended up being such a complete and total judicial joke that she's a bit worried over her reputation and ability to eventually move to a better position, or she just may be waiting to ratf*** the entire case. We'll see. In the meantime, the evidence Jack Smith is putting forth shows that Trump and his attorneys lied to her face in her own court during the last proceedings, so she may also be feeling like a stooge.

The judge overseeing the Mar-a-Lago documents prosecution of former President Donald Trump heard a dramatically different version of events last year — from Trump himself.

In a related case filed in August 2022, Trump made a series of representations to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon for the Southern District of Florida about the events leading up to the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago. But Special Counsel Jack Smith in his June 2023 indictment of Trump directly contradicted substantial aspects of what Trump said in last year’s lawsuit.

In Trump’s 2022 case — a Hail Mary of a civil lawsuit which sought to halt the Justice Department’s investigation following the Mar-a-Lago search — Trump portrayed himself as a victim of law enforcement run amok and overzealous prosecutors trying to knock him out of the 2024 presidential race with a preemptive strike. In Cannon, Trump found a remarkably sympathetic ear.

Cannon did exactly what Trump asked in the lawsuit: freeze the federal criminal investigation and appoint a special master to review the records seized by the FBI. The ruling was literally unprecedented, and earned Cannon both a name for herself and widespread opprobrium.

TPM reviewed the filings and transcripts from the earlier civil suit and compared the representations Trump made to Cannon then with the evidence prosecutors laid out this month in the indictment charging Trump with willful retention of national defense information and obstruction of justice.

What emerges are three categories of claims Trump originally made to Cannon which begin to fall apart in light of the evidence Smith has included in the indictment:

• Trump’s purported cooperation with the federal investigation
  
• The supposed location of records within Mar-a-Lago
  
• What the records themselves allegedly consisted of
  

The representations Trump made to the court stand apart from his many shifting, contradictory, and often damaging public statements about the Mar-a-Lago case. The in-court statements and filings, when contrasted with the evidence prosecutors have made public, are in a different category. In making claims to the judge who will now preside over his criminal trial that prosecutors can show were not just false but over-the-top, hyperbolic, and the exact opposite of what was happening, Trump has risked souring the one thing he has going for him: a judge who seemed favorably disposed to his disdain for the prosecution.

Todd Blanche, an attorney for Trump, didn’t return TPM’s request for comment.

It’s not clear what impact the divergences may have on Cannon; if questions about the accuracy of last year’s lawsuit are not formally introduced into the criminal case, she and jurors won’t be able to consider the issue.

But it may present her with discrepancies that are hard to ignore.

[pnwguy]

Jun 27, 2023 21:34:31 GMT LFC said:

So far Judge Aileen "Loose" Cannon hasn't done anything blatantly stupid or corrupt. It may be that's she ended up being such a complete and total judicial joke that she's a bit worried over her reputation and ability to eventually move to a better position, or she just may be waiting to ratf*** the entire case. We'll see. In the meantime, the evidence Jack Smith is putting forth shows that Trump and his attorneys lied to her face in her own court during the last proceedings, so she may also be feeling like a stooge.

My fear is that she could just take the money and run.  The Saudi's could funnel enough millions to some crony law firm that would "hire" her if she ratf*cked the case and then stepped down from the bench, to a no-work partnership.  She may be far beyond caring about reputation, if she nets a life of luxury, and there are plenty of GOP billions to buy her off.  And if someone tries to prosecute her on corruption charges, she knows some future GOP stooge will pardon her before there would be any consequences.

[indy]

Don't know what to make of this, or even if to take it seriously. More recordings?

The Department of Justice is prepared to seek indictments against multiple figures in former president Donald Trump’s orbit and may yet bring additional charges against the ex-president in the coming weeks, The Independent has learned.

According to sources familiar with the matter, the department has made preparations to bring what is known as a “superseding indictment” — a second set of charges against an already-indicted defendant that could include more serious crimes — against the ex-president in the Southern District of Florida.

But prosecutors may also choose to bring additional charges against Mr Trump in a different venue, depending on how they feel the case they have brought against him in is proceeding.The Independent understands that prosecutors’ decision on whether to seek additional charges from a grand jury — and where to seek them — will depend in part on whether they feel the Trump-appointed district judge overseeing the case against him in the Southern District of Florida, Aileen Cannon, is giving undue deference to the twice-impeached, now twice-indicted former president.

The team of federal prosecutors working under Special Counsel Jack Smith is currently prepared to add an “additional 30 to 45 charges” in addition to the 37-count indictment brought against Mr Trump on 8 June, either in a superseding indictment in the same Florida court or in a different federal judicial district. In either case, they would do so using evidence against the ex-president that has not yet been publicly acknowledged by the department, including other recordings prosecutors have obtained which reveal Mr Trump making incriminating statements.

Additionally, it is understood that Mr Smith’s team is ready to bring charges against several of the attorneys who have worked for Mr Trump, including those who aided the ex-president in his push to ignore the will of voters and remain in the White House despite having lost the 2020 election.

One of those figures is Mr Trump’s erstwhile personal attorney, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-giuliani-more-charges-b2366597.html

[goldenvalley]

Jun 29, 2023 20:25:41 GMT indy said:

Don't know what to make of this, or even if to take it seriously. More recordings?

The Department of Justice is prepared to seek indictments against multiple figures in former president Donald Trump’s orbit and may yet bring additional charges against the ex-president in the coming weeks, The Independent has learned.

According to sources familiar with the matter, the department has made preparations to bring what is known as a “superseding indictment” — a second set of charges against an already-indicted defendant that could include more serious crimes — against the ex-president in the Southern District of Florida.

But prosecutors may also choose to bring additional charges against Mr Trump in a different venue, depending on how they feel the case they have brought against him in is proceeding.The Independent understands that prosecutors’ decision on whether to seek additional charges from a grand jury — and where to seek them — will depend in part on whether they feel the Trump-appointed district judge overseeing the case against him in the Southern District of Florida, Aileen Cannon, is giving undue deference to the twice-impeached, now twice-indicted former president.

The team of federal prosecutors working under Special Counsel Jack Smith is currently prepared to add an “additional 30 to 45 charges” in addition to the 37-count indictment brought against Mr Trump on 8 June, either in a superseding indictment in the same Florida court or in a different federal judicial district. In either case, they would do so using evidence against the ex-president that has not yet been publicly acknowledged by the department, including other recordings prosecutors have obtained which reveal Mr Trump making incriminating statements.

Additionally, it is understood that Mr Smith’s team is ready to bring charges against several of the attorneys who have worked for Mr Trump, including those who aided the ex-president in his push to ignore the will of voters and remain in the White House despite having lost the 2020 election.

One of those figures is Mr Trump’s erstwhile personal attorney, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-giuliani-more-charges-b2366597.html

I'm speculating that New Jersey is another potential venue regardless of whether Judge Cannon in Florida proves to be Trump oriented.  

And Rudy, Rudy, Rudy, if he is sane enough to make a decent proffer he'd be a good witness for a set of 1/6 charges.  He was in from the beginning of the plot to subvert the election. I doubt he had anything to do with the documents.  Trump was sick of him losing and sweating off his makeup or dye or whatever it was.

[indy]

I'm certainly not familiar with tactics used in high profile cases but it seems to me this indictment was more a less a shot over the bow of all the people involved in not only this, but the Jan 6 scheme as well. I mean, they must be thinking that if Smith is willing to indict Trump himself, then he is certainly not going to think twice about indicting me. There may well be a strategy here to peel the onion, so to speak and Giuliani may have gotten the message.

[LFC]

It seems like it would make sense to bring charges in two different venues simply to get two different juries. You never know when you get that one juror who lies to get on and then acts in bad faith. And then there's jury nullification.

[indy]

A Washington, D.C.-based bar discipline committee concluded Friday that Rudy Giuliani should be disbarred for “frivolous” and “destructive” efforts to derail the 2020 presidential election in support of former President Donald Trump.

“He claimed massive election fraud but had no evidence of it,” the three-member panel declared in a 40-page decision. “By prosecuting that destructive case Mr. Giuliani, a sworn officer of the Court, forfeited his right to practice law.”

www.politico.com/news/2023/07/07/disciplinary-panel-calls-for-rudy-giulianis-disbarment-00105220