Is here: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000188-a12f-db74-ab98-b3ff4de50000
It's 49 pages long and will take a while to get through but Smith certainly leads off with some heavyweight accusations: on page 3 he describes two instances after he was out of office where Trump showed and discussed with people who had no security clearances plans and maps of military operations he admitted were "highly confidential" and "secret".
In addition on the same page, it is alleged that Trump instructed his attorneys make false statements to the FBI, hide or destroy documents, make a certification that all documents had been produced when he knew this was false and have his aide, Waltine Nauta (also indicted), "move boxes of documents to conceal them from Trump's attorney, the FBI and the grand jury."
Whew! Will get back once I have read more.
09 Jun 23
@no1marauder saidWhat's to debate?
Is here: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000188-a12f-db74-ab98-b3ff4de50000
It's 49 pages long and will take a while to get through but Smith certainly leads off with some heavyweight accusations: on page 3 he describes two instances after he was out of office where Trump showed and discussed with people who had no security clearances plans and maps of military operat ...[text shortened]... em from Trump's attorney, the FBI and the grand jury."
Whew! Will get back once I have read more.
@no1marauder saidAm I reading this right?
If anyone can figure out a way to copy and paste from this document or find another source with the same document that allows it, I'd appreciate it; I can't get copy/paste to work from it.
37 counts, all felonies, total time if served consecutively, 400 years?
If served concurrently, 20 years.
The files I saw were all .pdf files, one per page, 49 of them. Perhaps this is why it won't paste.
Thank you for the link.
09 Jun 23
@wildgrass saidOne might think that a criminal indictment of an ex-president who also happens to be the leading Republican contender might raise issues worthy of discussion.
What's to debate?
If you have no interest in the subject, don't read the indictment or participate in the thread. Free country and all.
09 Jun 23
@suzianne saidIn theory, yes. But I know of no such draconian sentences imposed for violations of these statutes.
Am I reading this right?
37 counts, all felonies, total time if served consecutively, 400 years?
The files I saw were all .pdf files, one per page, 49 of them. Perhaps this is why it won't paste.
09 Jun 23
@no1marauder saidFine. I know the "other side" yells witch hunt and banana republic etc. but the fact that trump broke the law seems pretty irrefutable here. The facts also point to extremely stupid behavior. What's the plausible legal defense?
One might think that a criminal indictment of an ex-president who also happens to be the leading Republican contender might raise issues worthy of discussion.
If you have no interest in the subject, don't read the indictment or participate in the thread. Free country and all.
09 Jun 23
@earl-of-trumps saidExactly.
I don't at all feel sorry for Trump, we all saw this play out in front of us.
Eric Holder said - and I agree with him, if trump handed over the documents when asked, there would be no indictment.
09 Jun 23
@wildgrass said“but the fact that trump broke the law seems pretty irrefutable here. ”
Fine. I know the "other side" yells witch hunt and banana republic etc. but the fact that trump broke the law seems pretty irrefutable here. The facts also point to extremely stupid behavior. What's the plausible legal defense?
and your proof is?
09 Jun 23
@mott-the-hoople saidLook, I know that a 49 page indictment is longer than "One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish", but follow the link in the OP and read it for yourself, if you can.
“but the fact that trump broke the law seems pretty irrefutable here. ”
and your proof is?
It beats the manufactured "evidence" against the Bidens. How's that House Overreach Committee investigation going?
09 Jun 23
@mott-the-hoople saidRead the indictment.
“but the fact that trump broke the law seems pretty irrefutable here. ”
and your proof is?
@mott-the-hoople saidOK, found a PDF converter. Let's take a look at this evidence:
“but the fact that trump broke the law seems pretty irrefutable here. ”
and your proof is?
"⦁ On July 21, 2021, when he was no longer president, TRUMP gave an interview in his office at The Bedminster Club to a writer and a publisher in connection with a then-forthcoming book. Two members of TRUMP's staff also attended the interview, which was recorded with TRUMP's knowledge and consent. Before the interview, the media had published reports that, at the end of TRUMP's term as president, a senior military official (the "Senior Military Official" ) purportedly feared that TRUMP might order an attack on Country A and that the Senior Military Official advised TRUMP against doing so.
⦁ Upon greeting the writer, publisher, and his two staff members, TRUMP stated, "Look what I found, this was [the Senior Military Official's] plan of attack, read it and just show
... it's interesting." Later in the interview, TRUMP engaged in the following exchange:
TRUMP: Well, with [the Senior Military Official]-uh, let me see that, I'll show you an example. He said that I wanted to attack [Country A]. Isn't it amazing? I have a big pile of papers, this thing just came up. Look. This was him. They presented me this-this is off the record, but-they presented me this. This was him. This was the Defense Department and him.
WRITER: Wow.
TRUMP: We looked at some. This was him. This wasn't done by me, this was him. All sorts of stuff-pages long, look.
STAFFER: Mm.
TRUMP: Wait a minute, let's see here. STAFFER: [LaughterJ Yeah.
TRUMP: I just found, isn't that amazing? This totally wins my
case, you know.
STAFFER: Mm-hm.
TRUMP: Except it is like, highly confidential.
STAFFER: Yeah. [Laughter]
TRUMP: Secret. This is secret information. Look, look at this.
You attack, and-
***
TRUMP: By the way. Isn't that incredible?
STAFFER: Yeah.
TRUMP: I was just thinking, because we were talking about it. And you know, he said, "he wanted to attack [Country A], and what ... "
STAFFER: You did.
TRUMP: This was done by the military and given to me. Uh, I think we can probably, right?
STAFFER: I don't know, we'll, we'll have to see. Yeah, we'll have to try to-
TRUMP: Declassify it.
STAFFER: -figure out a-yeah.
TRUMP: See as president I could have declassified it.
STAFFER: Yeah. [Laughter]
TRUMP: Now I can't, you know, but this is still a secret.
STAFFER: Yeah. [Laughter] Now we have a problem.
TRUMP: Isn't that interesting?
At the time of this exchange, the writer, the publisher, and TRUMP's two staff members did not have security clearances or any need-to-know any classified information about a plan of attack on Country A."
Pages 15-16 of the indictment.
That was after he had been served with a Grand Jury subpoena that required him to turn over all documents with classification markings and after he had one of his attorneys provide a written certification "falsely representing that all documents called for by the grand jury subpoena had been produced."