Prosecutors have evidence Trump showed classified papers to people – report

submitted by ActuallyNot from theguardian.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]SoCo 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

So basically, they've found nothing and are grasping at straws to drag out this weaponized DOJ effort a few more news cycles....

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Jack Smith has subpoenaed people and Trump Org for information on his foreign business deals. If he's doing that, he knows or suspects that Trump leveraged the classified documents for those deals.

Prosecutors issue subpoena to Trump Org. for information regarding business deals in foreign countries

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Don't fall for gaslighting by subpoenas....

Accusations are not proof. The common attack trick of a Gish Gallop of accusations and Yellow Journalism is so very overplayed, one has to be pretty low on the mental totem poll to still fall for it.

Prosecutors issued subpoenas for everything Trump, and then some, from day one. This was when they clearly had no evidence of anything and that same insane activist judge who approved it, despite that making no sense in the history of us court. It even subpoenaed stuff from technically different companies that Trump et al had no authority to provide for the court and had nothing to do with the case. They were then reprimanded by the same insane judge for not stealing info from other companies to provide as demanded. Then, after the reprimand, it was proven that the demanded info wouldn't possibly be provided but they insane nonsense judge who was not practicing actual US law, did not refund the reprimand.

You seem to be suggesting that insane subpoenas imply there is something specific evidence they have and are looking for, despite history that proves abuse of subpoenas is just standard political weaponizing of the DOJ.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Accusations are not proof.

That's right. The article is interesting because of what Jack is investigating. The rest is joining the dots at this stage.

Still. Stock up on popcorn. Jack's known for bringing charges even ones that are difficult to prove in court.

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

It is no large challenge to treasonously push political charges through with no evidence. You just need and activist Judge. Jack is no hero for that, quite the opposite.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

And unrelated, Jack is gathering evidence that appears to be related to how the stolen documents were used.

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Jack is building a gaslighted narrative of negative motivations, to support the debatable assertions that possessing these documents, like previous Presidents and Biden had done in the past, were and act of criminal impropriety when Trump possibly did the same. It was a sly setup-conspiracy by the national archive / records department. Trump's legal team should have anticipated this non-standard weaponization of the DOJ and national archive.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Jack is building a gaslighted narrative of negative motivations

Gaslighted?

He's a veteran prosecutor, and well regarded. He's building a solid case, based on the facts.

to support the debatable assertions that possessing these documents, like previous Presidents and Biden had done in the past, were and act of criminal impropriety when Trump possibly did the same.

The indictment has been unsealed since you posted this. There is an embarrassment of evidence that he intentionally kept, and concealed from authorities documents that he knew to be classified, and that he showed documents with defence information to people without sufficient security clearance, and stored some of them in on the stage in the ballroom, and others in the bathroom and shower of Mar-a-lago's lake room.

So there are significant differences in the document related crimes of Trump and Biden.

It was a sly setup-conspiracy by the national archive / records department.

They negotiated for a year to get the documents back, before the search warrant was obtained. That's a lot of deference for being an ex-president given there's supposed to be one law for all.

Trump's legal team should have anticipated this non-standard weaponization of the DOJ and national archive.

Trump, in some cases appears to have lied to his legal team as well in his attempts to obstruct NARA.

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Gaslighted?

Taking a normal thing and projecting nefarious motives to make the action seem suspect in retrospect, a common application of gaslighting. Probably the most common anymore; almost routine.

He's a veteran prosecutor, and well regarded. He's building a solid case, based on the facts.

Yes, he has a history of pushing cases with out (admissible) evidence and being forced to assert accusations in court without evidence. (You remember the Dem cuffing campaign donations to support his pregnant mistress, right? He's only got a relatively okay track record, so not a whole lot to lose.)

The indictment has been unsealed since you posted this.

I'm pretty sure I read it before posting this. The indictment was quite entertaining. I had though they had something against him. This is super weak and likely to have people in hot water when this is all said and done. It is definitely an indictment written for the public to read, as most others will find it quite dubious.

The public doesn't understand that not only does a President have authority over classification when in office, but he expressly has very wide authority and privileges to manage his personal archives upon leaving. It is expressly forbidden for the national archives to even question the documents he holds on to deeming to be part of his personal archives, which frequently include sensitive stuff from when in office. There are no specific limitations about classification status.

This is done by every US President. The general public are too uninformed and have too bad of a memory pickup on this. They have been convinced from day one that Trump should never be trusted with classified documents.

The indictment's only evidence is that Trump has a phone call with his staff guy for 15 seconds. The staff guy moved a box.

Since Trump has express, specific, and unquestionable authority to posses many documents from his public service in the Whitehouse, his method of storage and uses of these documents should not be anyone's business either. This makes moving having boxes and even moving boxes to be not suspect, suspicious, abnormal, nor unexpected. The opposite is true, it is very expected.

The indictment postulates, without evidence, that this box moving is surely the purposeful moving of documents the FBI/national archives wanted, in order to hide them from the FBI and Trump's own lawyer. From this, all the other assertions are made.

This relies on the public being fooled into several gaslit assumptions that aren't true:

  • After office, Trump isn't permitted documents marked confidential.
  • Trump wasn't supposed to have any of those documents and having them was already suspect. Why would anyone have boxes. He isn't permitted to keep anything. Trump must ask permission for things, not the other way around.
  • When the FBI come harassing you for the umpteenth time, you must be still, so that any action doesn't appear to be hiding evidence.
  • Storing boxes in a spare out of service (large) lockable restroom with a shower is strange, as is storing them in a locked closet, or lockable service hallway. A stage doesn't have lockable storage and if you see a picture of boxes on a stage, they were probably left there, not put up there shortly, before hauling them tot the storage area.
  • Asking your lawyer for legal advice on how to avoid or legally refuse legally dubious demands from the FBI, giving examples for your lawyer to evaluate, constitutes nefarious planning to deceive. Like refusing to blow when pulled over is proof of drinking and driving.
  • Your consultation with your lawyer isn't protected communications that would be the largest and most eye popping shame ever of a corrupt DOJ to use against you.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Taking a normal thing and projecting nefarious motives to make the action seem suspect in retrospect, a common application of gaslighting.

Dude. If a quarter of what is in the indictment is true, Trump is in deep shit.

The indictment was quite entertaining. I had though they had something against him. This is super weak and likely to have people in hot water when this is all said and done.

He's completely fucked. They've got him saying that he knew the documents weren't classified, they've got him conspiring to keep the from NARA, they've got him moving them prior to the search, and selecting the ones he wanted to be found, they've got him showing them to people, and they've got him storing them on a stage in a ballroom.

The public doesn't understand that not only does a President have authority over classification when in office, but he expressly has very wide authority and privileges to manage his personal archives upon leaving.

1) Nope. Those remain the property of NARA. Presidential Records Act (1978). Under the PRA, the official records of the President and his staff are owned by the United States, not by the President.

2) His problem isn't personal records. His problem is firstly, the classified documents, and secondly the documents containing information regarding the defence of the USA. In the case of the second instance they've got him showing them to third parties.

The indictment's only evidence is that Trump has a phone call with his staff guy for 15 seconds.

What indictment did you read?

Was it this one?

Because there's a fuckton more evidence in that one.

The classified documents TRUMP stored in his boxes included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack. The unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military, and human sources and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods.

Note that 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, under paragraph (e), says that Trump is fucked on that count alone for up to ten years imprisonment.

The evidence that he had those isn't disputed, and it's rock solid. They're the documents that they recovered from him.

At 12:00 p.m. on January 20, 2021, TRUMP ceased to be president. As he departed the White House, TRUMP caused scores of boxes, many of which contained classified documents, to be transported to The Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, where he maintained his residence. TRUMP was not authorized to possess or retain those classified documents.

Same law, 10 years. Also very easy to prove. He had the documents. There's testimony regarding from when.

The Mar-a-Lago Club was an active social club, which, between January 2021 and August 2022, hosted events for tens of thousands of members and guests. After TRUMP’s presidency, The Mar-a-Lago Club was not an authorized location for the storage, possession, review, display, or discussion of classified documents. Nevertheless, TRUMP stored his boxes containing classified documents in various locations at The Mar-a-Lago Club—including in a ballroom, a bathroom and shower, an office space, his bedroom, and a storage room.

Same law paragraph (f), 10 years.

There's photographic evidence in the indictment.

On two occasions in 2021, TRUMP showed classified documents to others, as follows:

In July 2021, at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey (“The Bedminster Club”), during an audio-recorded meeting with a writer, a publisher, and two members of his staff, none of whom possessed a security clearance, TRUMP showed and described a “plan of attack” that TRUMP said was prepared for him by the Department of Defense and a senior military official. TRUMP told the individuals that the plan was “highly confidential” and “secret.” TRUMP also said, “as president I could have declassified it,” and, “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”

The evidence of that is the audio recording. And it's another violation of 18 U.S. Code § 793. 10 years.

In August or September 2021, at The Bedminster Club, TRUMP showed a representative of his political action committee who did not possess a security clearance a classified map related to a military operation and told the representative that he should not be showing it to the representative and that the representative should not get too close.

Sounds like the evidence for that is the testimony of the person he showed it to.

On March 30, 2022, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) opened a criminal investigation into the unlawful retention of classified documents at The Mar-a-Lago Club. A federal grand jury investigation began the next month. The grand jury issued a subpoena requiring TRUMP to turn over all documents with classification markings. TRUMP endeavored to obstruct the FBI and grand jury investigations and conceal his continued retention of classified documents by, among other things:

a. suggesting that his attorney falsely represent to the FBI and grand jury that TRUMP did not have documents called for by the grand jury subpoena;

There's a recording of that. And via 18 U.S. Code § 2, it's another violation of 18 U.S. Code § 793, by Trump. 10 years.

b. directing defendant WALTINE NAUTA to move boxes of documents to conceal them from TRUMP’s attorney, the FBI, and the grand jury;

As above. 10 years.

c. suggesting that his attorney hide or destroy documents called for by the grand jury subpoena;

Again. 10 years.

d. providing to the FBI and grand jury just some of the documents called for by the grand jury subpoena, while claiming that he was cooperating fully; and

same, 10 years. There's good evidence of this, because the search warrant turned up some of the missing documents.

e. causing a certification to be submitted to the FBI and grand jury falsely representing that all documents called for by the grand jury subpoena had been produced—while knowing that, in fact, not all such documents had been produced.

This is from evidence provided by his attorney.

The recording of Trump admitting that he was showing classified information to an employee, on page 15 is fucking telling, and interesting that they're not charging him under 18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information, but again under 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information. But the evidence is fucking irrefutable. It's a recording of the conversation that was made with Trump's consent.

The text messages between Nauta and Trump employee 2 show that Nauta broke 18 U.S. Code § 1001 - Statements or entries generally, which is 8 years. And by 18 U.S. Code § 2 - Principals, Trump also becomes guilty of that.

That's from the first quarter or so of the indictment, but I think it suffices to show that there's metric fuckton more evidence than "Trump has a phone call with his staff guy for 15 seconds."