Why I believe that Trump will not be indicted over the Mar-a-Lago Documents

[Seymour Flops]

If it turns out I'm wrong, feel free to bump this thread endlessly. If it happens in the foreseeable future, I'll be off the board for a week since someone was finally brave enough to put up rather than shut up. That was poster forkup, who did not hesitate to take my wager challenge.



So, here are my reasons:

1) Probably the most important: If they really wanted to indict him, they would have indicted him already. The Mueller report assured us that the reason he was not being prosecuted was that he was a sitting president. On January 21, 2021, they still had all the evidence that Mueller uncovered. I'm not saying that it wasn't enough for an indictment. Prosecutors can (figuratively) get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. That's an ordinary grand jury with an ordinary defendent. How easy would it be to get a Grand jury in the bluest city in the nation, DC, to indict the Bad Orange Man.

For some reason they do not want to indict him. I think I know why, but I'm not a mind reader. If they indict him, the playing field is instantly leveled for Trump. DOJ/FBI hates that idea worse than the idea of being held accountable by the people's representatives in Congress. They can't force a conviction by threatening the family members of the jury, or raiding their homes and arresting them. They would have to present evidence that Trump's legal team would then be able to test, and witnesses that Trump's legal team would then be able to cross-examine.

They sure don't want that.

2) Indictment would force them to reveal information that they want to keep secret. Really secret. To convict Trump on a charge related to classified documents, they would have to show the documents to the jury. Then they will leak. If a judge agrees that Trump declassified the documents - and there is no legal reason not to agree to that - the public will have a right to know, even if the judge puts a gag order on during the trial.

It more and more appears that the purpose of the raid was to "get back," the Crossfire Hurricane binder documents. The ones that Trump declassified in writing and ordered released. The raid took place one week after Judicial Watch filed a suit to force the DOJ to honor the FOIA and hand them over. By getting Trump's copies, they prevent Trump from revealing the real documents if the DOJ releases fake ones or heavily redacted ones in response to JW's suit.

Even if Trump has digital or xerox copies, they hope he will fear to show them since he's already been raided for having copies. Their problem with that strategy is that Trump is too old and too rich to be afraid of prison. His lawyers can keep the DOJ busy for long past his life expectancy with motions and appeals. He can afford way smarter lawyers than the DOJ can.

In short, the only reason the DOJ hasn't indicted is because they haven't wanted to indict. I see no reason for that to change.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Mostly, if there were any evidence against Trump, Herr Leaksensmears would have it leaked to the NY Times by now.

The fact that nothing is leaked that shows incriminating evidence proves that the corrupt FBI and Department of Injustice have nothing.

 

[Rocko]

An indictment of Trump would be bad if you think about the repercussions

 

[Uncensored2008]

An indictment of Trump would be bad if you think about the repercussions

Using federal police and a corrupt DOI to raid your opponent for president in the 2024 election is bad, very bad.

Trying to imprison that opponent is a complete breakdown of civil society and the rule of law. The Nazis are testing the boundaries of how far they can push tyranny.

 

[Rocko]

Using federal police and a corrupt DOI to raid your opponent for president in the 2024 election is bad, very bad.

Trying to imprison that opponent is a complete breakdown of civil society and the rule of law. The Nazis are testing the boundaries of how far they can push tyranny.

I haven’t followed the story. All I know if Trump did fuck up and take classified documents to his Mar-a-Lago home, and I’m not saying he did or he didn’t, but if he did, they should give him a pass, because that’s what’s best for the country.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Trump should be indicted – evidence of his corruption and criminality is compelling and overwhelming.

Unfortunately, Trump won’t be indicted.

Trump won’t be indicted because DOJ doesn’t want to establish precedent whereby former presidents can be subject to criminal prosecution, hobbling a president from making difficult policy decisions, and perhaps jeopardizing national security.

 

[Rocko]

Trump should be indicted – evidence of his corruption and criminality is compelling and overwhelming.

Unfortunately, Trump won’t be indicted.

Trump won’t be indicted because DOJ doesn’t want to establish precedent whereby former presidents can be subject to criminal prosecution, hobbling a president from making difficult policy decisions, and perhaps jeopardizing national security.

So they should have never opened up an investigation

 

[Uncensored2008]

I haven’t followed the story. All I know if Trump did fuck up and take classified documents to his Mar-a-Lago home, and I’m not saying he did or he didn’t, but if he did, they should give him a pass, because that’s what’s best for the country.

How does the Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces, who has absolute authority over the classification of documents "take classified documents to his Mar-a-Lago home?"

It's simply not possible. In 2012, Barrack Obama gave a bunch of top secret intelligence to Vladimir Putin to aid Putin in the invasion and occupation of the Crimea. This was done as part of Obama's "flexibility."

The GOP sued, the courts ruled - correctly - that as CIC the simple fact of Obama giving top secret documents to a hostile foreign government declassified those documents.

The SCOTUS ruled on this 40 years ago under Egan v Dept. of Navy. The CIC may declassify anything they wish at any time they wish in any manner they wish.

Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

Department of the Navy v. Egan

supreme.justia.com

What Biden and his goons did on 8/8 was a purely political act to try and impact the mid-terms and possibly leverage this to disqualify his opponent from the 2024 election.

For this gross abuse of power, Biden MUST be impeached.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Trump should be indicted – evidence of his corruption and criminality is compelling and overwhelming.

Unfortunately, Trump won’t be indicted.

Trump won’t be indicted because DOJ doesn’t want to establish precedent whereby former presidents can be subject to criminal prosecution, hobbling a president from making difficult policy decisions, and perhaps jeopardizing national security.

Yes, and speaking of precedents, I forgot to mention the Clinton precedent.

I believe that their goal is to leak as much damaging information as possible. That damaging information need not be true, since they will never admit that it was they who leaked it. Then when even Dems start asking when they are going to shit an indictment, they will get off the pot by citing the non-prosecution for the Clinton server.

They will say something to the effect of "We won't make the mistake of listing all of the potential criminal activity and then saying we will not indict." That way, the only information we have is the unaccountable leaking.

 

[d0gbreath]

Who knows? With a healthy dose of who cares?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Trump should be indicted – evidence of his corruption and criminality is compelling and overwhelming.

Yet you can't seem to come up with anything other than slander.

Unfortunately, Trump won’t be indicted.

Simply because that was not the purpose of the Gestapo raid. This is a political action where Biden and his utterly corrupt AG are trying to impact the mid-terms.

Herr Leaksensmears conducts a raid that violates every aspect of the peaceful transition of power and then leaks tidbits to a complicit yellow press to slander and libel a political opponent.

Your wetdream of throwing opposing candidates in prison died when a special master was appointed.

Trump won’t be indicted because DOJ doesn’t want to establish precedent whereby former presidents can be subject to criminal prosecution, hobbling a president from making difficult policy decisions, and perhaps jeopardizing national security.

The Department of Injustice was testing the waters to see how far they could go in undermining the Constitutional Process. The fascist democrat party pushes ever further to end free and fair elections.

 

[forkup]

If it turns out I'm wrong, feel free to bump this thread endlessly. If it happens in the foreseeable future, I'll be off the board for a week since someone was finally brave enough to put up rather than shut up. That was poster forkup, who did not hesitate to take my wager challenge.



So, here are my reasons:

1) Probably the most important: If they really wanted to indict him, they would have indicted him already. The Mueller report assured us that the reason he was not being prosecuted was that he was a sitting president. On January 21, 2021, they still had all the evidence that Mueller uncovered. I'm not saying that it wasn't enough for an indictment. Prosecutors can (figuratively) get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. That's an ordinary grand jury with an ordinary defendent. How easy would it be to get a Grand jury in the bluest city in the nation, DC, to indict the Bad Orange Man.

For some reason they do not want to indict him. I think I know why, but I'm not a mind reader. If they indict him, the playing field is instantly leveled for Trump. DOJ/FBI hates that idea worse than the idea of being held accountable by the people's representatives in Congress. They can't force a conviction by threatening the family members of the jury, or raiding their homes and arresting them. They would have to present evidence that Trump's legal team would then be able to test, and witnesses that Trump's legal team would then be able to cross-examine.

They sure don't want that.

2) Indictment would force them to reveal information that they want to keep secret. Really secret. To convict Trump on a charge related to classified documents, they would have to show the documents to the jury. Then they will leak. If a judge agrees that Trump declassified the documents - and there is no legal reason not to agree to that - the public will have a right to know, even if the judge puts a gag order on during the trial.

It more and more appears that the purpose of the raid was to "get back," the Crossfire Hurricane binder documents. The ones that Trump declassified in writing and ordered released. The raid took place one week after Judicial Watch filed a suit to force the DOJ to honor the FOIA and hand them over. By getting Trump's copies, they prevent Trump from revealing the real documents if the DOJ releases fake ones or heavily redacted ones in response to JW's suit.

Even if Trump has digital or xerox copies, they hope he will fear to show them since he's already been raided for having copies. Their problem with that strategy is that Trump is too old and too rich to be afraid of prison. His lawyers can keep the DOJ busy for long past his life expectancy with motions and appeals. He can afford way smarter lawyers than the DOJ can.

In short, the only reason the DOJ hasn't indicted is because they haven't wanted to indict. I see no reason for that to change.

Thanks for the shout out. So I'll start by rebutting this OP.

1) Your first reason in my view is flawed in its misconception in how the DOJ works. It is true that a grand jury has a way lower standard for handing down an indictment that the beyond reasonable doubt standard for conviction in a criminal trial. ( the reason for the "ham sandwich" standard saying.) However Federal Prosecutors despite what you think are usually very risk averse, and don't like the idea of the reputational loss that comes with indicting someone and then failing to secure a conviction. Times 10 when the defendant is a former president.

The Mueller report is a good illustration of that. I actually read the entire Mueller report and tend to agree with it's major findings. The problem is that the obstruction charges while airtight in the context of the facts are less so when adding the fact that the person doing the obstruction is the President. This adds a range of potential constitutional protections not available to any other person that MIGHT be sufficient to cast reasonable doubt.

In short it's a long winded way of me saying that the reason Trump wasn't charged with obstruction of justice after he left office is that the prosecution of that charge wasn't a sure thing.

This again IMO, is simply not the case in this instance. He isn't shielded from prosecution by his office and if anything the facts of the case are both more straightforward and even easier to prove in a court of law.

2) No the wouldn't have to reveal the actual information in the documents to secure a conviction. The documents don't require a classification in order to allow for conviction, simply a reasonable assumption that the revealing of those documents would harm the interests of the United States. That assumption can be shown by showing that the documents held a classification level. Because that is by definition what those markings mean. And nothing would prevent the FBI from attaining permission to de-classify some documents that are obviously national security documents and for which mitigation measures for exposing them to the public have already occurred. In fact that argument has already been stated by the special master who was pushed by the defence to allow them access to the actual information in the documents.

Think of it this way. If it would be impossible to convict someone for mishandling highly classified information because it risks exposure, people like Aldrich Ames would still be free.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Thanks for the shout out. So I'll start by rebutting this OP.

1) Your first reason in my view is flawed in its misconception in how the DOJ works. It is true that a grand jury has a way lower standard for handing down an indictment that the beyond reasonable doubt standard for conviction in a criminal trial. ( the reason for the "ham sandwich" standard saying.) However Federal Prosecutors despite what you think are usually very risk averse, and don't like the idea of the reputational loss that comes with indicting someone and then failing to secure a conviction. Times 10 when the defendant is a former president.

The Mueller report is a good illustration of that. I actually read the entire Mueller report and tend to agree with it's major findings. The problem is that the obstruction charges while airtight in the context of the facts are less so when adding the fact that the person doing the obstruction is the President. This adds a range of potential constitutional protections not available to any other person that MIGHT be sufficient to cast reasonable doubt.

In short it's a long winded way of me saying that the reason Trump wasn't charged with obstruction of justice after he left office is that the prosecution of that charge wasn't a sure thing.

All that will still apply. Trump is two for zero in winning impeachment trials, and he would certainly win any criminal trial for doing the same thing every single president before him did: take documents out of the White House. The DOJ will not want to take that chance. Their goal is not for Trump to wind up in jail, and it would never happen if that was their goal. At best, they'd like him to plead to some charge that would disqualify him for presidency.

Absent that, they would be foolish to take it to trial.

Having said that, you do have a chance of winning our wager in this way: The DOJ might indict, and then either delay going to court or let Trump's lawyers do the delaying, long enough for Trump to kick the bucket or show signs of dementia, which would prevent him from being nominated by voters. Republican voters, anyway.

This again IMO, is simply not the case in this instance. He isn't shielded from prosecution by his office and if anything the facts of the case are both more straightforward and even easier to prove in a court of law.

I'd like to see how you connect the dots to that conclusion. There are really only two things that he could be charged with:

1) Unlawfully taking and keeping government property, i.e. documents

2) Unlawfully keeping classified documents in an unauthorized and unsecured location.

They cannot charge him with "stealing" from the white house for just documents. The Clintons stole hundreds of thousands of dollars in furniture, china, and art as they left, and all that happened to them was having to return some of it.

They won't charge him for mishandling of classified because of the Clinton precedent, and because he absolutely had the power to de-classify the documents. The DOJ knew that, which is why their subpoena called for "documents with classification markings," instead of "classified documents."

Concievably, Trump could be charged with contempt of a subpoena, but that is at the discretion of a judge, and I don't see a judge doing that.

2) No the wouldn't have to reveal the actual information in the documents to secure a conviction. The documents don't require a classification in order to allow for conviction, simply a reasonable assumption that the revealing of those documents would harm the interests of the United States. That assumption can be shown by showing that the documents held a classification level. Because that is by definition what those markings mean. And nothing would prevent the FBI from attaining permission to de-classify some documents that are obviously national security documents and for which mitigation measures for exposing them to the public have already occurred. In fact that argument has already been stated by the special master who was pushed by the defence to allow them access to the actual information in the documents.

Think of it this way. If it would be impossible to convict someone for mishandling highly classified information because it risks exposure, people like Aldrich Ames would still be free.

That's a good argument, but against the wrong point. I didn't say that they won't try him because it could release classified documents. The documents are in fact de-classified. I said that:

2) Indictment would force them to reveal information that they want to keep secret. Really secret. To convict Trump on a charge related to classified documents, they would have to show the documents to the jury. Then they will leak. If a judge agrees that Trump declassified the documents - and there is no legal reason not to agree to that - the public will have a right to know, even if the judge puts a gag order on during the trial.

The whole point of the raid, other than to embarass Trump, and make people think that indictment is imminent, was to recover Trump's copies of the Crossfire Hurricane documents that Judicial Watch sued them for a week before the raid.

Judicial Watch sues DOJ to release Trump-declassified ‘smoking gun’ documents from Russia probe - Judicial Watch

From Just the News: The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch has sued the Justice Department to compel the release of “smoking gun” documents former President Donald Trump declassified and ordered release that detail misconduct in the FBI’s discredited Russia collusion investigation. The Freedom...

www.judicialwatch.org

The DOJ has Trump's copies now, and were supposed to have shown them to the special master. If those copies get out, the whole Operation Get Trump will be blown.

 

[flan327]

Mostly, if there were any evidence against Trump, Herr Leaksensmears would have it leaked to the NY Times by now.

The fact that nothing is leaked that shows incriminating evidence proves that the corrupt FBI and Department of Injustice have nothing.

Why are you so scared?

I simply don’t understand that attitude

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why are you so scared?

What am I scared of?

I simply don’t understand that attitude

I oppose fascism - which means I oppose the Biden administration and the democrat party.

I oppose the perversion of the FBI as a political tool to harass and defame political opponents of the democrat party. I oppose an openly corrupt Department of Injustice defying law and precedent in order rig the 2024 presidential election.

What Xi's Biden Regime evokes in me is not fear, but revulsion.

 

[forkup]

All that will still apply. Trump is two for zero in winning impeachment trials, and he would certainly win any criminal trial for doing the same thing every single president before him did: take documents out of the White House. The DOJ will not want to take that chance. Their goal is not for Trump to wind up in jail, and it would never happen if that was their goal. At best, they'd like him to plead to some charge that would disqualify him for presidency.

Absent that, they would be foolish to take it to trial.

Having said that, you do have a chance of winning our wager in this way: The DOJ might indict, and then either delay going to court or let Trump's lawyers do the delaying, long enough for Trump to kick the bucket or show signs of dementia, which would prevent him from being nominated by voters. Republican voters, anyway.


I'd like to see how you connect the dots to that conclusion. There are really only two things that he could be charged with:

1) Unlawfully taking and keeping government property, i.e. documents

2) Unlawfully keeping classified documents in an unauthorized and unsecured location.

They cannot charge him with "stealing" from the white house for just documents. The Clintons stole hundreds of thousands of dollars in furniture, china, and art as they left, and all that happened to them was having to return some of it.

They won't charge him for mishandling of classified because of the Clinton precedent, and because he absolutely had the power to de-classify the documents. The DOJ knew that, which is why their subpoena called for "documents with classification markings," instead of "classified documents."

Concievably, Trump could be charged with contempt of a subpoena, but that is at the discretion of a judge, and I don't see a judge doing that.

That's a good argument, but against the wrong point. I didn't say that they won't try him because it could release classified documents. The documents are in fact de-classified. I said that:

2) Indictment would force them to reveal information that they want to keep secret. Really secret. To convict Trump on a charge related to classified documents, they would have to show the documents to the jury. Then they will leak. If a judge agrees that Trump declassified the documents - and there is no legal reason not to agree to that - the public will have a right to know, even if the judge puts a gag order on during the trial.

The whole point of the raid, other than to embarass Trump, and make people think that indictment is imminent, was to recover Trump's copies of the Crossfire Hurricane documents that Judicial Watch sued them for a week before the raid.

Judicial Watch sues DOJ to release Trump-declassified ‘smoking gun’ documents from Russia probe - Judicial Watch

From Just the News: The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch has sued the Justice Department to compel the release of “smoking gun” documents former President Donald Trump declassified and ordered release that detail misconduct in the FBI’s discredited Russia collusion investigation. The Freedom...

www.judicialwatch.org

The DOJ has Trump's copies now, and were supposed to have shown them to the special master. If those copies get out, the whole Operation Get Trump will be blown.

You have no idea how many several things in this post I want to reply to. It would probably derail the OP so I'll try to limit it.

I'd like to see how you connect the dots to that conclusion.

Sure. The affidavit list 3 not 2 possible crimes. 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information 18 U.S. Code § 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy 18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

Basically saying he gathered, removed, or concealed, and tried to obstruct the investigation in those previous acts of defense information, and government records in general. Just from public filings, we know he did indeed gather and concealed those documents, ignored a subpoena and when the FBI came to his house afterward gave a few documents and the lie that that was all of it. This IS obstruction by any stretch.

They cannot charge him with "stealing" from the white house for just documents.

Sure they can just like to could arrest any other person who "just" steals documents that have national security implications

2) Indictment would force them to reveal information that they want to keep secret. Really secret.

I already told you why that is simply not true.

hey would have to show the documents to the jury. Then they will leak.

No, they wouldn't have to and if you "leak" this information to the public you would quickly find yourself in the same predicament Trump is in.

The DOJ has Trump's copies now, and were supposed to have shown them to the special master. If those copies get out, the whole Operation Get Trump will be blown.

This is what we call a conspiracy theory. How do you "know" what information is in those documents while five seconds ago you were claiming the government would not indict Trump because they don't want the public to know the contents?



I will go into the last bit of this post because you keep on harping that this is somehow connected to this raid and that it would prove that the FBI did something nefarious to Trump during the 2016 election campaign. It is not salient to this OP so I'll gladly go into it more in another venue.

Trump declassified these documents 3 days before Biden took office. Meaning they were in the possession of the executive branch for all of Trump's presidency. During that time. The FBI had an internal investigation into the FBI's conduct of Russian interference and the Trump's campaign involvement. It found no wrongdoing. Then it had a congressional committee led by Ron Johnson stating the same. Then the DOJ appointed Durham who has found one mid-level attorney that lied to another agency ( I think the FBI but I'm hazy on that specific) when asked if Carter Page had previously been an informant. Again bringing you not an inch closer to the idea that the FBI acted improperly.

Yet now your link claims that the executive branch somehow had a "smoking gun" in their possession all along that the DOJ only became aware of after Trump left office.

 

[Dragonlady]

If it turns out I'm wrong, feel free to bump this thread endlessly. If it happens in the foreseeable future, I'll be off the board for a week since someone was finally brave enough to put up rather than shut up. That was poster forkup, who did not hesitate to take my wager challenge.



So, here are my reasons:

1) Probably the most important: If they really wanted to indict him, they would have indicted him already. The Mueller report assured us that the reason he was not being prosecuted was that he was a sitting president. On January 21, 2021, they still had all the evidence that Mueller uncovered. I'm not saying that it wasn't enough for an indictment. Prosecutors can (figuratively) get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. That's an ordinary grand jury with an ordinary defendent. How easy would it be to get a Grand jury in the bluest city in the nation, DC, to indict the Bad Orange Man.

For some reason they do not want to indict him. I think I know why, but I'm not a mind reader. If they indict him, the playing field is instantly leveled for Trump. DOJ/FBI hates that idea worse than the idea of being held accountable by the people's representatives in Congress. They can't force a conviction by threatening the family members of the jury, or raiding their homes and arresting them. They would have to present evidence that Trump's legal team would then be able to test, and witnesses that Trump's legal team would then be able to cross-examine.

They sure don't want that.

2) Indictment would force them to reveal information that they want to keep secret. Really secret. To convict Trump on a charge related to classified documents, they would have to show the documents to the jury. Then they will leak. If a judge agrees that Trump declassified the documents - and there is no legal reason not to agree to that - the public will have a right to know, even if the judge puts a gag order on during the trial.

It more and more appears that the purpose of the raid was to "get back," the Crossfire Hurricane binder documents. The ones that Trump declassified in writing and ordered released. The raid took place one week after Judicial Watch filed a suit to force the DOJ to honor the FOIA and hand them over. By getting Trump's copies, they prevent Trump from revealing the real documents if the DOJ releases fake ones or heavily redacted ones in response to JW's suit.

Even if Trump has digital or xerox copies, they hope he will fear to show them since he's already been raided for having copies. Their problem with that strategy is that Trump is too old and too rich to be afraid of prison. His lawyers can keep the DOJ busy for long past his life expectancy with motions and appeals. He can afford way smarter lawyers than the DOJ can.

In short, the only reason the DOJ hasn't indicted is because they haven't wanted to indict. I see no reason for that to change.

I disagree:

1. Federal prosecution moved slowly - very slowly. No President has ever been charged with a crime after leaving office, and this would set a terrible precedent. Plus Trump keeps threatening violence if he is indicted. So while it's disappointing that Trump hasn't faced charges before now, Trump's lawlessness has been so blatant and so threatening to the rule of law, the DOJ really has no choice but to charge him to prove that "no man is above the law".

I also think that Trump WANTS them to arrest him, so he can use that to fundraise and to foment violence. If he's not arrest for the stolen documents, he's going to up the ante until they do. And I think Trump is going to be terribly disappointed at how few people will respond to his calls this time.

2. This is his ONLY way to avoid prosecution. The stuff he stole is so sensitive that the DOJ can't even discuss it in open court. Otherwise he's toast, and the conviction is a slam dunk.

Trump is currently trying to employ his usual legal strategy - deny and delay. But Trump is used to dealing with people who can't afford good lawyers and who are desperate for the money hey owes them, and he just waits them out.

At this point, Trump can't even get the C List lawyers to sign on since every lawyer working for him is now in legal trouble for doing what he tells them to do. MAGA truly has become Making Attorneys Get Attorneys. But the most important reason that Trump can't get decent lawyers is that a good lawyer wouldn't want an idiot like Trump for a client.

He doesn't listen to advice. Trump is going to go "with his gut" every single time because he thinks he knows better than anyone else. In reality, it's a sign of his extreme lack of self confidence. And his "trusting his gut instincts" is what lead him to 7 bankruptcies, a crashed economy, and 1 million people dead from covid.

 

[pyetro]

.

They cannot charge him with "stealing" from the white house for just documents. The Clintons stole hundreds of thousands of dollars in furniture, china, and art as they left, and all that happened to them was having to return some of it.

Politifact: "stolen" is an inaccurate word to describe Clinton’s actions"

Viral image claims Clintons stole $200k in furniture, china and artwork from White House

An old complaint about Hillary Clinton, stemming from her days as first lady, is making a comeback during her run for th

www.politifact.com

 

[Seymour Flops]

Politifact: "stolen" is an inaccurate word to describe Clinton’s actions"

Viral image claims Clintons stole $200k in furniture, china and artwork from White House

An old complaint about Hillary Clinton, stemming from her days as first lady, is making a comeback during her run for th

www.politifact.com

Zzzzzzz . . .

 

[forkup]

If it turns out I'm wrong, feel free to bump this thread endlessly. If it happens in the foreseeable future, I'll be off the board for a week since someone was finally brave enough to put up rather than shut up. That was poster forkup, who did not hesitate to take my wager challenge.



So, here are my reasons:

1) Probably the most important: If they really wanted to indict him, they would have indicted him already. The Mueller report assured us that the reason he was not being prosecuted was that he was a sitting president. On January 21, 2021, they still had all the evidence that Mueller uncovered. I'm not saying that it wasn't enough for an indictment. Prosecutors can (figuratively) get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. That's an ordinary grand jury with an ordinary defendent. How easy would it be to get a Grand jury in the bluest city in the nation, DC, to indict the Bad Orange Man.

For some reason they do not want to indict him. I think I know why, but I'm not a mind reader. If they indict him, the playing field is instantly leveled for Trump. DOJ/FBI hates that idea worse than the idea of being held accountable by the people's representatives in Congress. They can't force a conviction by threatening the family members of the jury, or raiding their homes and arresting them. They would have to present evidence that Trump's legal team would then be able to test, and witnesses that Trump's legal team would then be able to cross-examine.

They sure don't want that.

2) Indictment would force them to reveal information that they want to keep secret. Really secret. To convict Trump on a charge related to classified documents, they would have to show the documents to the jury. Then they will leak. If a judge agrees that Trump declassified the documents - and there is no legal reason not to agree to that - the public will have a right to know, even if the judge puts a gag order on during the trial.

It more and more appears that the purpose of the raid was to "get back," the Crossfire Hurricane binder documents. The ones that Trump declassified in writing and ordered released. The raid took place one week after Judicial Watch filed a suit to force the DOJ to honor the FOIA and hand them over. By getting Trump's copies, they prevent Trump from revealing the real documents if the DOJ releases fake ones or heavily redacted ones in response to JW's suit.

Even if Trump has digital or xerox copies, they hope he will fear to show them since he's already been raided for having copies. Their problem with that strategy is that Trump is too old and too rich to be afraid of prison. His lawyers can keep the DOJ busy for long past his life expectancy with motions and appeals. He can afford way smarter lawyers than the DOJ can.

In short, the only reason the DOJ hasn't indicted is because they haven't wanted to indict. I see no reason for that to change.

To avoid misunderstandings: If Trump is indicted for having classified documents illegally before the end of August, I take a month off the board. September 1st comes with no indictment for classified documents, you take a month off the board.

Just adjusted the terms of the wager we made. I noticed though that I fucked up. The original wager was one week. So you can choose if you want the loser to serve 2 weeks or a month.