"It's not theirs, Its mine"



Max Burns

Trump's reasoning on the documents: "I was negotiating, and we were talking to NARA to get whatever they want. When we left Washington, we had the boxes all lined up. Everybody knew we were taking those boxes."


Max Burns

Why did Trump ignore his subpoena? "Because we were negotiating with them as per the Presidential Records Act...[NARA] has to love our Constitution a little bit more."

Max Burns


Does Trump still have any classified documents? "I don't have anything. I have no classified documents. And by the way they became declassified immediately when I took them. Why is it that Biden had nine boxes in Chinatown?"


Max Burns

"I said you owe me votes because the election was rigged," Trump says of his call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, in what sounds a lot like a confession.
 
Part 1

If Donald Trump was anyone other than Donald Trump, he would have pled guilty by now to the charges that are inevitably coming from the Mar-a-Lago search. Of course, if he was smart, he would have comprehensively searched and returned everything in his possession the minute the National Archives came knocking. So, this isn’t about whether he’s smart. It’s about whether he has a survival instinct and some common sense at this point.

He does not. If he did, the only smart move, after his failed efforts at deceiving federal prosecutors and his attempt to obstruct the investigation came to light, would’ve been a guilty plea. That’s the only thing that could limit his exposure on charges, some of which carry a statutory maximum penalty of twenty years in prison.

Justice Department decisions about charging cases are grounded in internal precedent from similar cases. That makes sense—as a prosecutor, you want to do your best to treat like cases alike. So prosecutors, after determining that they have sufficient evidence to obtain and sustain a conviction—that’s the “could you” question—are charged with considering whether they shouldindict. And one of the “should” considerations involves how DOJ has handled similar cases in the past.

That’s why it was predictable that prosecutors would give Mike Pence a pass for his possession of classified documents. His team voluntarily searched and returned everything without a request from NARA. His possession appeared to be inadvertent, and he took no steps to conceal it or retain documents; rather, he advised NARA he had them and invited them to come take possession. DOJ doesn’t charge cases like that—indicting defendants isn’t meant to be a gotcha game; it’s a serious matter of doing justice on behalf of the American people.

As opposed to Pence’s conduct, disseminating classified documents or national defense information would present the most serious type of situation here. Based on what is publicly known, there isn’t sufficient evidence to charge Trump with dissemination, at least not yet. The special counsel’s office doubtless has more definitive information in this regard than the public does.

But Trump’s case is not the same as Pence’s. Even if all the government can establish is retention, there are aggravating factors here that make Trump’s situation akin to others where DOJ has charged retention cases. And because DOJ operates on the principle of treating like cases the same, that strongly suggests we will see an indictment here, perhaps involving more people than just Trump himself.




 
Nothing but unsubstantiated rumors. This is not "news." It is gossip.

Trump is on the record. You obviously find fault with his claims about classified documents and national security or you wouldn't deny what Trump has been saying all along.

He was also claimed $750,000 in artwork at the US embassy in Paris was his.
 
Part 2

Some of the important factors that highlight the seriousness of Trump’s conduct include the following:

  1. Trump kept lots of government records, including classified material, and some of it was designated top secret, which means that its disclosure could “reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.” He also retained compartmented top secret materials, which have even more heavily restricted access and must be viewed and stored only in authorized and highly secured designated areas.
  2. Trump kept the documents for a long period of time, at least 18 months, although there is some suggestion that federal prosecutors are not confident everything has been returned even now. Trump kept the documents despite polite requests for their return, a visit from DOJ officials, and a subpoena (at least one), forcing DOJ to obtain a search warrant in order to seize the documents. Trump has repeatedly referred to the government’s property as his, said he was entitled to have it, and reportedly floated with his aides the idea of trading it to the Archives for material he wanted about his great white whale—the deep state conspiracy he insists led to the Russia investigation, despite a contrary finding by the DOJ inspector general and no evidence to support it from the Durham investigation, which concluded its work with little fanfare and a pair of acquittals in the only two cases it took to trial.
There are, quite obviously, no other cases involving former presidents. Trump is the first. The high office he held and his abuse of the public’s trust to use that office to access and retain the documents are important. All the other prosecuted cases involve people with lesser governmental authority, many of them quite low level. To prosecute them but allow Trump to walk away would be an injustice.

One case that is helpful in understanding why Trump’s conduct merits prosecution given DOJ’s prior practice is United States v. Kenneth Wayne Ford. In 2008, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Ford’s convictions for retaining national defense information in violation of the espionage act and making false statements to the government. Ford was an NSA computer specialist for two years, with a top security clearance. The FBI obtained a search warrant for his home and found sensitive and classified information in places including his kitchen and his bedroom. He acknowledged taking the documents home on his last day of employment, claiming he thought the materials would help him in his new job with a defense contractor. Then-Maryland U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein (who would later become Trump’s deputy attorney general) said, “Government employees who betray the public trust and endanger national security must be held accountable,” at the time of Ford’s sentencing to 72 months in custody.

The case is instructive because it involves retention of government materials but no charge of dissemination. DOJ charged Ford despite obtaining the return of its materials by executing a search warrant. Moreover, Ford also made a false statement, lying about the nature of his arrest in the course of applying for a position with a government defense contractor, and failing to disclose he had issues that needed to be assessed if he was going to be assigned to handle classified material. Ford’s conduct, while extremely serious, does not rise to the level of Trump’s for multiple reasons—his position, the lack of protracted concealment or overt obstruction. Rod Rosenstein’s comment about holding public employees accountable applies with full force to Trump. Ford is but one among many cases that make clear that DOJ precedent requires that Trump be prosecuted.





 

Forum List

Back
Top