DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump indicted in Florida on documents case, 7 counts

Even after all of the coverage, it was still mind-boggling to actually see that collection. smdh

and the hits just keep on coming

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/06/politics/oval-office-meeting-trump-special-counsel-probe/index.html

Exclusive: Special counsel prosecutors question witnesses about chaotic Oval Office meeting after Trump lost the 2020 election
Kaitlan Collins Zachary Cohen Paula Reid Sara Murray Katelyn Polantz
By Kaitlan Collins, Zachary Cohen, Paula Reid, Sara Murray and Katelyn Polantz, CNN
Published 8:04 PM EDT, Thu July 6, 2023



Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images/FILE
CNN
—
Special counsel Jack Smith’s team has signaled a continued interest in a chaotic Oval Office meeting that took place in the final days of the Trump administration, during which the former president considered some of the most desperate proposals to keep him in power over objections from his White House counsel.

Multiple sources told CNN that investigators have asked several witnesses before the grand jury and during interviews about the meeting, which happened about six weeks after Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. Some witnesses were asked about the meeting months ago, while several others have faced questions about it more recently, including Rudy Giuliani.

Last month, for two consecutive days, Giuliani sat down with investigators for a voluntary interview about a range of topics, including the tumultuous December 2020 meeting that he attended, sources said.



Prosecutors have specifically inquired about three outside Trump advisers who participated in the meeting: former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, one-time national security adviser Michael Flynn and former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne, sources said.

Giuliani’s lawyer, Robert Costello, declined to comment.

A lawyer for Powell declined to comment, as did a lawyer for Byrne. CNN has also reached out to an attorney for Flynn for comment.

jack smith special counsel remarks 060923 ISO
Arizona secretary of state's office subpoenaed in special counsel probe into 2020 election interference
Both Powell and Byrne previously spoke at length under oath about the meeting and other topics to the House committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. Flynn declined to answer questions in his committee interview, by asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

The special counsel’s sustained interest in the chaotic episode comes as Smith’s team appears to be nearing charging decisions in the investigation into efforts to overturn the election results. Investigators are still gathering evidence, reaching out to several new witnesses in recent weeks and working to schedule interviews.

During the heated Oval Office meeting on December 18, 2020, outside advisers faced off with top West Wing attorneys over a plan to have the military seize voting machines in crucial states that Trump had lost. They also discussed naming Powell as special counsel to investigate supposed voter fraud, and Trump invoking martial law as part of his efforts to overturn the election.

Shouting and insults ensued; the night ended with Trump tweeting that a coming gathering in Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021, to protest the election results “will be wild.”

Among the witnesses questioned by the special counsel’s team was former national security adviser Robert O’Brien, who told the January 6 House select committee that he was patched into the December 18 meeting by phone after it had already devolved into a screaming match between Flynn, Powell and White House lawyers, according to a transcript of O’Brien’s deposition that was released by the panel.

Details about subsequent secret grand jury testimony and closed-door interviews illustrate how the special counsel and his prosecutors are looking at the various ways Trump tried to overturn his electoral loss despite some of his top officials advising him against the ideas.

The consistent emphasis on the December 18 Oval Office meeting appears to overlap with the special counsel’s broader effort to hone in on the actions of several Trump lawyers and allies during the period from December 14, 2020, to January 6, 2021.

The December 14 date is of particular interest to prosecutors, sources told CNN. On that day, slates of alternate Republican electors in seven battleground states signed certificates falsely asserting Trump had won. Also that day, members of the Electoral College met in all 50 states to officially cast their ballots, declaring Joe Biden the winner with 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232.

Investigators have focused on efforts to recruit the illegitimate electors, have them sign certificates falsely asserting Trump had won, and then use them as a pretense to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to delay certification of Biden’s Electoral College win on January 6.

At least one witness has told prosecutors in recent weeks that Trump allies asked Pence to question the legitimacy of Biden’s electors in those seven states based on unfounded claims about widespread voter fraud and kick the decision of certification back to the states themselves, one source said.

Trump Lawyer Wood Retired as Georgia Bar Weighed Disbarment (1)
Tatyana Monnay
Tatyana Monnay
Reporter


Wood asks the Georgia bar to grant his resignation request
Wood faces bar investigations that could lead to disbarment
Lin Wood, an attorney who tried to overturn 2020 presidential results on behalf of former President Donald Trump, retired from practicing law effective Wednesday after the State Bar of Georgia weighed his possible disbarment.

The Georgia bar granted Wood’s retirement request, the organization said in a letter to him Wednesday.

“You may not practice law in this State or in any other state or jurisdiction and you may not hold yourself out as a lawyer,” the bar said in its letter, noting that it has dropped two investigations into Wood’s professional conduct.

The Georgia bar had been examining whether to disbar Wood, who was part of Trump’s legal team in the 2020 election. The bar asked Wood to undergo a mental health assessment as part of a probe opened in 2021. Former colleagues said Wood displayed “erratic, abusive, and unprofessional behavior,” according to the bar.

Wood said that the investigation and mental exam request were politically motivated and sued to stop it. In his Tuesday letter to the bar, he said of his retirement, “I understand that this request is unqualified, irrevocable and permanent.”

Wood and the Georgia bar did not immediately respond to requests for additional comment.

This isn’t the first time Wood is facing disciplinary proceedings for his help in trying to overthrow the 2020 election. In Michigan, a judge ruled in 2021 that Wood and Sidney Powell were among a group of attorneys that must pay the state and city of Detroit $175,250 for abusing the legal system with unfounded conspiracy theories.

Wood was included in a group of Trump loyalists who got suspended from Twitter for posting election conspiracies, which once violated the site’s policies.

(Updates with Georgia bar accepting Wood's resignation request.)
To contact the reporter on this story: Tatyana Monnay at tmonnay@bloombergindustry.com

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Chris Opfer at copfer@bloombergindustry.com; John Hughes at jhughes@bloombergindustry.com

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/busin...etiring-as-georgia-bar-weighs-disbarment

He only hires the best.

Wood was right there in the mix for the insurrection and he's gonna get off by simply retiring? I just don't think thats right at all.

It’s how many big corporations take care of their deplorable CEO’s, force them to retire and put a minority in charge to take the heat, instead of punishing their poor performance. Lawyers….When disbarment is imminent. Just retire. Lol.

Goper collar crime gets retirement instead of prosecution. Pffft.

I would call that a TBD. The point is that he has given up his law license by retiring and cannot offer legal services any more.

The Georgia bar is not a police or sheriff department. If they believed a criminal act was committed, it would have to be a referral.

\


Granted he wouldn't be able to practice law but I don't think he's stopped from going on Newsmax or FOX and give his opinion.. That might be worse.

I did hear that Jack Smith could still go after him regarding J6.. As you said, TBD

Rudy is coming into the find out stage...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...likely-committed-ethics-violat-rcna61845


D.C. Bar counsel urges Giuliani be disbarred after panel says he most likely committed ethics violation
The panel's tentative finding, which isn’t final, came after Giuliani defended his work on a lawsuit that sought to toss out the 2020 election results in Pennsylvania.
Image: Rudy Giuliani



The D.C. Bar's disciplinary counsel recommended Thursday that Rudy Giuliani be disbarred after a hearing panel tentatively determined that he most likely violated at least one professional conduct rule in his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Pennsylvania.

The panel said its determination was preliminary and nonbinding, and because of that it declined to specify what rule Giuliani, who contested the election results as former President Donald Trump’s lawyer, had most likely violated. It will release a final decision in several weeks, after hearing recommendations related to what discipline Giuliani should receive, assuming the preliminary finding stands.

Hamilton “Phil” Fox, of the Washington, D.C., Office of Disciplinary Counsel, called for the harshest penalty for Giuliani, disbarment, after the panel announced its tentative finding, saying Giuliani tried to undermine the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election.

“Any lawyer that engages in this kind of misconduct, harming the country as this has done, has at least got to realize that his or her law license is at risk,” Fox said.

At the conclusion of the proceedings, Giuliani expressed outrage toward the panel for allowing Fox to make what he characterized as a "personal attack." Airing a series of grievances, Giuliani defended his attempts to contest the 2020 election results, which he continues to claim he had reason to believe were rigged.

Giuliani’s lawyer, John Leventhal, argued for a minor disciplinary measure, like a letter of reprimand or a private admonition, arguing that the disciplinary counsel’s arguments rely heavily on politics.

“We feel that the least serious discipline should be imposed. Otherwise you’re going to chill effective advocacy in the future,” Leventhal said.



The panel is set to issue a final report with its recommendations to the D.C. Bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility, which will decide whether to accept the recommendation after both sides file additional briefs. The Washington, D.C., Court of Appeals will make the final determination on any disciplinary action.

The recommendation was made after Giuliani defended his work on a lawsuit that sought to toss the 2020 election results in the state at a hearing before a committee of the bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility last week. A judge rejected the lawsuit, and a federal appeals court refused to allow the campaign to file a revised complaint.

At the hearing before the Washington panel, Fox told it that Giuliani, a former New York City mayor and U.S. attorney in Manhattan, “weaponized his law license to bring a frivolous action in an attempt to undermine the Constitution.”

Leventhal argued that Giuliani shouldn’t face charges because the judge in the Pennsylvania case didn’t accept and never considered the sole version of the complaint Giuliani signed.

A New York appeals court suspended Giuliani’s law license last year, saying he made “demonstrably false and misleading” statements about the 2020 election while serving as Trump’s lawyer. Giuliani’s Washington law license was suspended after the New York decision.

From what i understand, that is a quirk in the Georgia system for lawyers. They can get out of disbarring by simply retiring. Other states like Pennsylvania, that is not possible.
The DOJ seems to be looking at Wood, Giuliani and especially Sidney Powell for criminal charges.

I hope the whole klan of them rot in jail. Traitors to the man.

The game plan all along; delay until after the election;

How Trump will fight the classified documents charges he’s facing, including asking for a long delay
By Tierney Sneed
Updated 11:26 AM EDT, Tue July 11, 2023





—
Former President Donald Trump and his co-defendant Walt Nauta on Monday night laid out some of the legal attacks they’ll potentially launch against charges related to the alleged mishandling of classified information brought against them by special counsel Jack Smith.

The defendants argue the charges will give rise to “unprecedented” pre-trial disputes that will require US District Judge Aileen Cannon to weigh in on legal questions that have likely never been put before a court before.

Former Vice President Mike Pence, left, and former President Donald Trump
From Mike Pence to 'fake' electors, here's who has testified to the January 6 grand jury or met with prosecutors
The defense also suggests it won’t be possible to seat a fair jury while the presidential campaign is underway – a hint that Trump may ultimately ask for a post-election trial date, though Monday’s filing did not propose any specific schedule.

“This extraordinary case presents a serious challenge to both the fact and perception of our American democracy,” Trump’s and Nauta’s legal teams wrote in the joint filing. “The Court now presides over a prosecution advanced by the administration of a sitting President against his chief political rival, himself a leading candidate for the Presidency of the United States.”

The special counsel wants the case to go to trial in mid-December. Trump and Nauta have pleaded not guilty to the charges, which include obstruction-related allegations in addition to the accusations that Trump illegally retained national defense information.

Here are some of the pre-trial issues Trump and Nauta may raise in the case:

Does the Presidential Records Act and “various criminal statutes” require the case’s dismissal?
Trump and his allies have claimed that the Presidential Records Act – passed after the Watergate scandal to dictate how a former president is obligated to turn over records from his or her administration upon their departure from the White House – actually shields his alleged behavior.

Not surprisingly, his lawyers say they’ll pursue that argument in a motion to dismiss the case, claiming those legal questions have “never been addressed by any court.”

Legal experts have thoroughly debunked the claims Trump has made about the PRA so far.

Did the special counsel have the authority to bring the charges?
The defendants’ filing says that they may bring “Constitutional and statutory challenges relative to the authority of the Special Counsel to maintain this action (additional issues of first impression for this Court).”

The filing did not elaborate on what the scope of those arguments could take, but when Trump faced an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller into his campaign’s links to Russia, he claimed that the “The appointment of the Special Counsel is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL!”

When such arguments were made in court against Mueller’s authority by another entity charged in the Russia probe, a Trump-appointed judge upheld Mueller’s appointment and prosecutorial powers.

Were the documents in question actually classified?
Trump and Nauta say “the classification status of the documents and their purported impact on national security interests” are a potential pretrial issue that will need to be dealt with.

Trump has claimed at times that he declassified the documents in question, though his lawyers have stopped short of making such assertions in legal filings. The charges Smith brought, however, do not necessarily turn on whether the materials were classified.

How will the classified material be handled in the case?
The defendants previewed opposition to prosecutors using “any ‘secret’ evidence in a case of this nature.”

This appears to be a reference to the procedures that will be hashed out, under a relevant law, for how the classified materials will be handled during the trial and whether they will be shielded from public view. Trump and Nauta say they won’t know how much of a dispute over these procedures there will be until they have a chance to review the classified discovery.

But they said that they “believe there should simply be no ‘secret’ evidence, nor any facts concealed from public view relative to the prosecution of a leading Presidential candidate by his political opponent.”

The first hearing on how to handle the classified documents is scheduled for next Tuesday.

Will there be other discovery matters that need to be addressed?
The Monday night filing gave new insight into what evidence the Smith team has handed over to the defendants so far, as they suggested that at some point they’ll have to make additional discovery requests.

In just the first discovery production, which did not include any of the classified materials in the case, prosecutors gave the defense roughly nine months of closed-circuit TV footage, according to the new filing, as well as 428,300 records that include 122,650 emails and 305,670 documents.

Can a fair jury even be seated during a presidential election?
Without saying explicitly that they’ll seek a post-election trial date, Trump and Nauta raised the notion that it may not even be possible to seat a jury while the presidential campaign is underway.

“Here, there is simply no question any trial of this action during the pendency of a Presidential election will impact both the outcome of that election and, importantly, the ability of the Defendants to obtain a fair trial,” the filing said.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/politics/trump-classified-documents-legal-attack/index.html

Special Council says not so fast-first hearing July 18th

First hearing on classified documents will be July 18 after special counsel accuses Trump co-defendant of seeking ‘unnecessary’ delay
Katelyn Polantz
By Tierney Sneed and Katelyn Polantz, CNN
Updated 9:47 AM EDT, Tue July 11, 2023




CNN
—
The first hearing before US District Judge Aileen Cannon in the federal criminal case against Donald Trump will be on July 18, according to a court order.

The hearing will be about handling classified information in the case – the first of likely many proceedings on this topic – and may not be fully conducted in public because of the sensitivity around the issues.

The date was set after a fight on Monday where special counsel Jack Smith suggested Trump and co-defendant Walt Nauta were trying to create an “unnecessary” delay by moving it from this coming Friday.


The spat highlights how even the most incremental, procedural developments in the historic federal criminal case against Trump and Nauta could become mired in disputes – especially when it comes to scheduling as prosecutors want to go to trial in less than six months and Trump lawyers have been adept at delaying other legal fights he’s facing.

Walt Nauta, aid to former President Donald Trump, follows Trump as they board his airplane, known as Trump Force One, in route to Iowa at Palm Beach International Airport on Monday, March 13, in West Palm Beach, FL.
Trump aide Walt Nauta pleads not guilty to charges of mishandling classified documents
In Nauta’s filing requesting the delay, the Trump aide cited a bench trial that his main lawyer, Stanley Woodward, has in Washington, DC, this week as the reason for proposing a delay.

Smith fired back in his filing that Nauta has provided no reason why his Florida-based lawyer, Sasha Dadan, couldn’t handle the hearing.

“An indefinite continuance is unnecessary, will inject additional delay in this case, and is contrary to the public interest,” the Smith team said in their filing.

In a new filing later Monday, Trump’s defense team and the special counsel’s office said July 18 would be an agreeable date for the first appearance.

In the fight over when the coming hearing on classified procedures should take place, Nauta claims he had “little notice” that prosecutors were going to bring the charges in the Southern District of Florida – where he would be required to have an attorney licensed in the Sunshine State – and said his DC attorney’s initial inability to get notices from the docket until then hampered his efforts to flag the scheduling conflict.

Nauta also raised his defense team’s lack of security clearances as an issue, while claiming that it was not reasonable to expect his new Florida-based attorney to take the lead on the matters slated for discussion at Friday’s hearing “barely a week after she has been retained by Mr. Nauta.”

Smith’s team shot back that Woodward, the DC-based lawyer, has yet to fill out the form required in the security clearance process.

“Almost a month has passed since the grand jury returned its indictment. There is a strong public interest in the conference occurring as originally scheduled and the case proceeding as expeditiously as possible,” the Smith team said.

While Trump entered his not guilty plea in the case on June 13, Nauta was only able to enter his not guilty plea last week due in part to delays in retaining a Florida counsel.

This story has been updated with additional developments.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/10/poli...classified-procedures-hearing/index.html

I think it only makes sense that he would try to delay the case moving forward. His main hope at this point is that he will be re-elected so he can pardon himself just like he did some of his buddies who got caught up in criminal behavior that surrounded the previous trump administration.

Judge sets a trial date for next May in Trump’s classified documents case in Florida

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Florida has scheduled a trial date for next May for former President Donald Trump in a case charging him with illegally retaining hundreds of classified documents.

The May 20, 2024, trial date, set Friday by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, is a compromise between a request from prosecutors to set the trial for this December and a bid by defense lawyers to put it off indefinitely until sometime after the 2024 presidential election.

If the date holds, it would follow close on the heels of a separate New York trial for Trump on dozens of state charges of falsifying business records in connection with an alleged hush money payment to a porn actor. It also means the trial will not start until deep into the presidential nominating calendar and probably well after the Republican nominee is clear — though before that person is officially nominated at the Republican National Convention.

In pushing back the trial from the Dec. 11 start date that the Justice Department had asked for, Cannon wrote that “the Government’s proposed schedule is atypically accelerated and inconsistent with ensuring a fair trial.” She agreed with defense lawyers that the amount of evidence that would need to be sifted through before the trial, including classified information, was “voluminous.”

“The Court finds that the interests of justice served by this continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and Defendants in a speedy trial,” Cannon wrote.

Trump could yet face additional trials in the coming year. He revealed this week that he had received a letter informing him that he was a target of a separate Justice Department investigation into efforts to undo the results of the 2020 presidential election, an indication that charges could be coming soon. And prosecutors in Georgia plan to announce charging decisions within weeks in an investigation into attempts by Trump and his allies to subvert the vote in that state.

The trial before Cannon would take place in a federal courthouse in Fort Pierce.

It arises from a 38-count indictment last month, filed by Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith, that accused Trump of willfully hoarding classified documents, including top secret records, at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach and conspiring with his valet, Walt Nauta, to hide them from investigators who demanded them back.

Trump and Nauta have both pleaded not guilty.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-cl...3obbpAbm-n1FBwVGWNZjOSGiI66EwQ6awM0Kdc1E

If the Goper’s nominate this criminal for POTUS again they’re all idiots. Lol

Unless he backs out, he'll get nominated.

And lose again. Don’t forget that bit. Only way he wins is cheating.

Smith has added additional charges and filed against another Mar a Lago employee

Updated July 27, 2023, 7:34 PM EDT
By NBC News
Here’s the latest on the investigation into Donald Trump:
A new indictment was filed today in connection with the ongoing prosecution by special counsel Jack Smith of Trump and a top aide, adding charges against the former president for his handling of classified documents after he left the White House. The new, or superseding, indictment also charges Carlos De Oliveira, a maintenance worker at Mar-a-Lago who helped move boxes in of classified documents.
Trump announced last week that he received a letter notifying him he is the target of a grand jury examining the Jan. 6 riot and efforts to overturn the 2020 election, the other probe being led by Smith.
Members of the grand jury in the Jan. 6 investigation were spotted at the courthouse today. A court official said later in the day that no indictments had been returned and that none were expected. Members of the grand jury were seen leaving the courthouse around 4:30 p.m.
NBC News reported that Trump's lawyers met with Smith's office and were advised to expect an indictment, but Trump and a spokesman rebutted that report as being incorrect.
3m ago / 7:34 PM EDT
Attempt to delete footage could damage Trump argument that he was entitled to the documents
Laura Jarrett

The latest charges accusing Trump and his staff of trying to delete surveillance camera footage provide prosecutors with a significant new tool to bolster their story to the jury.

According to the superseding indictment, after Trump is served with a grand jury subpoena to return the classified materials, Carlos DeOliveira allegedly told the Director of IT at the club that ‘’the boss’ wanted the server deleted.”

The former president’s defense has consistently taken some form of — I had the right to possess the documents (despite no longer being president).

But if prosecutors can prove he and others engaged in a conspiracy to delete footage in order to thwart federal efforts to locate the documents, that adds a new dimension to the story that was missing previously.

Prosecutors aren’t required to prove a defendant’s motive, but attempting to delete the video footage (assuming DOJ can show that), would strengthen the overall obstruction case, as well as providing evidence towards his consciousness of guilt on the alleged retention of the classified materials.



Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she "heard on the phone" about the superseding indictment involving Trump, his aide Walt Nauta and a new defendant, Carlos De Oliveira.

“I mean, everyday we keep hearing there’s going to be another indictment about January 6, and overturning the election," Pelosi said during remarks at the Voters of America Summit after describing how she heard the news about Trump on her way to the event.

She added that Trump's supporters "think he is above the law."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/live-blog/trump-grand-jury-indictment-rcna96233

Geez, another nail in his coffin..

This is shoveling dirt on it.

Sadly, that's true, but it is what needs done. If he hadn't done what he's accused of, he wouldn't have to deal with it.

US says Trump ordered video deleted, charges second employee in documents case

WASHINGTON, July 27 (Reuters) - Donald Trump ordered employees at his Florida resort to delete security videos as he was under investigation for retaining classified documents, U.S. prosecutors said on Thursday as they broadened the case against the former president and charged a second member of his staff with helping to hide documents.

U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith filed three new criminal counts against Trump, bringing the total to 40, and charged a maintenance worker at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, Carlos De Oliveira, with conspiracy to obstruct justice, accusing him of helping Trump to hide documents.

De Oliveira, 56, told another worker at the resort where Trump lives that "the boss" wanted security videos of the property in Florida deleted after the Justice Department subpoenaed them.

Prosecutors also charged De Oliveira with lying to the FBI during a voluntary interview, falsely claiming he had no involvement in moving boxes of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

"Never saw nothing," De Oliveira told the agents, according to the indictment.

De Oliveira's lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The charges were made public hours after Trump said his attorneys met with the Justice Department officials investigating his attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, in a sign that another set of criminal charges could come soon.

"This is nothing more than a continued desperate and flailing attempt by the Biden Crime Family and their Department of Justice to harass President Trump and those around him," Trump's campaign said in a statement.

Trump pleaded not guilty in Miami last month to federal charges of unlawfully retaining the classified government documents after leaving office in 2021 and obstructing justice. Prosecutors accused him of risking some of the most sensitive U.S. national security secrets.

Trump is the first former U.S. president to face criminal charges and has already been indicted twice this year, once in New York over hush-money payments to a porn star and once already over the classified documents.

REPUBLICAN FRONT-RUNNER IN 2024 ELECTION CAMPAIGN

The charges have not hurt Trump's standing as the front-runner in the race for the Republican nomination to challenge President Biden in the 2024 election.

On the contrary, Trump's lead over nearest rival Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has grown. A Reuters/Ipsos poll earlier this month showed Trump leading DeSantis 47%-19% among Republicans, a wider lead than his 44%-29% lead before the first indictment in New York in March.

Trump is scheduled to go to trial in March 2024 in New York and May 2024 in Florida, at which point the Republican nomination may already be decided. Special Counsel Smith's team said in a separate filing that they would work to ensure the new charges would not delay the trial.

Prosecutors filed additional charges against another Trump aide, Walt Nauta. Nauta pleaded not guilty earlier this month to charges he helped the former president hide documents.

According to the new indictment, Nauta and De Oliveira moved 64 boxes of records to Trump's residence after the Justice Department subpoenaed Trump for any classified records in May 2022. They later returned only 30 of them for inspection by Evan Corcoran, a Trump attorney who asked to review their contents to comply with the subpoena.

De Oliveira is due to appear in court in Miami on Monday.

Prosecutors also said they recovered the document involved in an incident in which Trump, bragged about a "plan of attack" against another country in an interview at his New Jersey golf resort.

According to the indictment, Trump explained the document was highly classified. Nobody else in the room had the authority to examine it, Smith wrote.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ne...1vKuh82H3jdUrhdGKa7GyQotGMYFxHgY6_qgcmtM

Trump says it’s ‘unpleasant’ to discuss indictments with Melania

Former President Trump says he’s not a fan of sharing news about his multiple criminal indictments with his wife, Melania Trump.

“It’s always unpleasant when you have to go in and tell your wife that, ‘By the way, tomorrow sometime I’m going to be indicted,’” the 45th president said during a Friday interview on “The John Fredericks Show.”

Trump continued the reenactment of a supposed conversation between him and the former first lady about the multiple probes.

“And she says, ‘For what?’ And I say, ‘I have no idea. I have absolutely no idea,’” he said.

On Thursday, the Justice Department accused Trump in a superseding indictment of attempting to delete surveillance footage at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida related to his classified records case, which is scheduled to go to trial in May.

Last week, Trump announced he had been informed he is a target in the Justice Department investigation into his efforts to remain in power after losing the 2020 election.

The ex-commander in chief in April pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts in New York, and he also faces another potential looming indictment in Georgia.

Asked by Fredericks on Friday how his family, including his wife and 17-year-old son, Barron, were “holding up” in light of the multiple criminal cases, Trump said he attempts to put barriers between them and the legal drama.

“Well, I try to keep them shielded and out of it,” he said.

“I just stay away from the standpoint of this.”

https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-kn...OlNx2pgtGWFUiLVo8fHDzfWsUwApKkIGCBrSxVHw

What has he done with them? Locked them in a dungeon with no TV? Lol… As if a 17 year old and his mother doesn’t have access to world news and other media outlets. This guy is just plain stupid. Like all his MAGA followers. Stupid is as stupid does.

He has no idea my butt. He knows what he did.

Regarding obstruction. You cannot be more guilty.

He obviously knew what he had. He obviously obstructed the process of the government to get their documents back.

Guilty.

The "Let's do this at my house" request?

Trump wants the Justice Department to set up a secure facility where he can discuss materials he allegedly mishandled

Trump's lawyers said it would be more cost effective to "re-establish" a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF, at his Florida resort than to travel to one.

Donald Trump's lawyers on Wednesday asked a federal judge in Florida to order the government to "re-establish" a secure facility at his Mar-a-Lago resort where they could safely discuss the national security documents prosecutors say he illegally kept there.

In a court filing to U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, Trump attorneys Todd Blanche and Chris Kise asked for the accommodation after arguing special counsel Jack Smith's proposed protective order on how they can discuss the sensitive materials recovered from the former president's home was too onerous.

"This request is based on the immense practical and logistical hurdles and costs that make it virtually impossible for President Trump to make regular trips to a public facility to discuss classified discovery material with counsel as necessary to conduct a defense consistent with the rights afforded by the Constitution," their filing said.

Smith's office said in a filing last month that Trump and his lawyers should stick to the established protocol for discussing the documents — going to a court-approved sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF. "The government is not aware of any case in which a defendant has been permitted to discuss classified information in a private residence, and such exceptional treatment would not be consistent with the law," the July filing said.

Blanche and Kise called that argument "misleading," citing the "uniqueness of President Trump’s residence, including that it is in a highly protected location guarded by federal agents that previously housed a secure facility approved for not only the discussion, but also the retention, of classified information."

They acknowledged that facility was "decertified" in early 2021. Trump was charged in June with mishandling more than 100 classified documents, including holding on to sensitive materials that he knew were classified after he left the White House. The indictment alleged that national security documents were stored at times in different parts of the resort, including a ballroom stage and a bathroom.

Trump has pleaded not guilty in the case.

In Wednesday's filing, Blanche and Kise contended that a Mar-a-Lago SCIF would save the government money given "the logistical hurdles and incredible resources that will be required every time President Trump travels to one of the government’s contemplated SCIFs."

"Efforts to safely transport and protect President Trump—all of which are required by the Secret Service—cost the United States government and state and local municipalities hundreds of thousands of dollars per visit, which is significantly more than the fixed amount necessary to re-establish the secure area at which President Trump (and his lawyers) were once permitted to discuss classified information," they said.

The filing stressed that a Mar-a-Lago SCIF would only be used to discuss classified material and that Trump is not asking permission to review or store any documents in that location.

The special counsel's office declined comment on the filing; Trump's attorneys did not respond to a request for comment.

Both sides are due in court Thursday before a magistrate judge for an arraignment on the superseding indictment alleging Trump was part of a scheme to delete subpoenaed security video in the case.

Trump, who is not required or expected to attend the hearing, has entered a not guilty plea via his lawyers. His two co-defendants — Trump aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago employee Carlos De Oliveira — are expected to attend in person.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...AGXEU_l9hEDfdWo_GjYwBuHfnKdjGrycjYTrtR3I

And Republicans claim it's the democrats who have a sense of entitlement.

Trump was warned the FBI could search Mar-a-Lago if he didn't comply with subpoena for classified docs

The FBI ultimately searched the Florida estate in August of last year and recovered more than 100 classified documents, which led to criminal charges against the former president.

Former President Donald Trump was warned by one of his lawyers in May of last year that the FBI could search his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida if he didn't comply with a grand jury subpoena that requested the return of classified documents, NBC News has confirmed.

Trump was informed of the possibility of an FBI search by attorney Evan Corcoran, who met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago shortly after the subpoena was issued, ABC News first reported on Wednesday.

Corcoran detailed their meeting in a series of voice memos on his phone the following day, according to ABC, which said it reviewed copies of transcripts of the recordings.

Corcoran also noted in the recordings that minutes after he had met with Trump, he met with another lawyer of the former president by a Mar-a-Lago pool who warned that Trump is "just going to go ballistic" if Corcoran pushed Trump to comply with the subpoena, ABC reported.

NBC News has not seen copies of the transcripts or heard the audio of Corcoran's recordings, but confirmed with a source familiar with the matter the existence of the transcript of the voice memo dealing with Corcoran's warning Trump of a potential FBI search of Mar-a-Lago. Trump's presidential campaign and Corcoran did not immediately respond to NBC News' requests for comment.

In a statement to ABC News, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung appeared to dismiss the report.

"The attorney-client privilege is one of the oldest and most fundamental principles in our legal system, and its primary purpose is to promote the rule of law," he said. "Whether attorneys’ notes are detailed or not makes no difference — these notes reflect the legal opinions and thoughts of the lawyer, not the client."

Trump “offered full cooperation with DOJ, and told the key DOJ official, in person, ‘Anything you need from us, just let us know,'" Cheung added.

The FBI, however, ultimately searched the Florida estate on Aug. 8, 2022 and recovered more than 100 classified documents. At the time, Trump described the search as an "unannounced raid on my home" that he said "was not necessary or appropriate."

"These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents,” Trump said in a statement at the time.

Corcoran's voice memos have become a key piece of evidence in special counsel Jack Smith's investigation into Trump's handling of classified documents, ABC News reported. The probe led to Trump initially being charged in June in a 37-count federal indictment, accusing him of willfully retaining national defense information, making false statements and representations, conspiring to obstruct justice, withholding a document or record, corruptly concealing a document, concealing a document in a federal investigation and a scheming to conceal.

The indictment appears to cite from Corcoran’s notes and testimony statements that Trump made about the boxes of classified documents, although Corcoran is not named in the document.

"I don’t want anybody looking, I don’t want anybody looking through my boxes, I really don’t, I don’t want you looking through my boxes," Trump allegedly said, according to the indictment, which noted that one of the attorneys had "memorialized" the former president's statements.

"Well what if we, what happens if we just don’t respond at all or don’t play ball with them?" Trump also said, according to the indictment.

"Wouldn’t it be better if we just told them we don’t have anything here?" he said, according to the document.

At the end of July, a superseding federal indictment was filed that also brought new charges against Trump in the case, alleging that he was part of a scheme to delete security video to try to cover up efforts to hide the classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

Asked about the voice memos, a spokesperson for the special counsel's office told NBC on Wednesday that they declined to comment beyond the what was in the indictment in the case.

The federal judge overseeing the case decided in July that the criminal trial will begin on May 20 of next year in Fort Pierce, Florida.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...v8MYGspZNRS9KdjCowouvaC7FVy30PbBHDtclILs

Trump: ‘I’m Allowed to Do Whatever I Want’ With Classified Info
Peter Wade
Wed, September 6, 2023 at 1:37 PM EDT·4 min read


Donald Trump said he “absolutely” plans to testify in the federal government’s case against him regarding classified documents he removed from the White House. “I’m allowed to do whatever I want … I’m allowed to do everything I did,” the former president told conservative podcast host Hugh Hewitt.

In an interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show” that dropped Wednesday, the host asked Trump, “Did you direct anyone to move the boxes, Mr. President? Did you tell anyone to move the boxes?” referring to the boxes of more than 300 classified documents the federal government seized last year from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

“I don’t talk about anything. You know why? Because I’m allowed to do whatever I want. I come under the Presidential Records Act,” Trump replied, while also taking a quick detour to bash Hewitt. “I’m not telling you. You know, every time I talk to you, ‘Oh, I have a breaking story.’ You don’t have any story. I come under the Presidential Records Act. I’m allowed to do everything I did.”

Trump has long been misrepresenting what is allowed under the Presidential Records Act.

The law states: “Upon the conclusion of a President’s term of office, or if a President serves consecutive terms upon the conclusion of the last term, the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President.” There is an allowance for presidents to keep records that are of “a purely private or nonpublic character” and unrelated to presidential duties, but many of the documents Trump was found to possess came from government agencies, such as the C.I.A. and Department of Defense. Trump even bragged on tape post-presidency about holding on to plans for war with Iran.

When Hewitt asked Trump if he would testify in his own defense at the trial in the documents case, the former president said, “That, I would do. That, I look forward to, because that’s just like Russia, Russia, Russia. That’s all the fake information from Russia, Russia, Russia. Remember when the dossier came out and everyone said, ‘Oh, that’s so terrible, that’s so terrible,’ and then it turned out to be it was a political report put out by Hillary Clinton and the DNC. They paid millions for it. They gave it to Christopher Steele. They paid millions and millions of dollars for it, and it was all fake. It was all fake.”

“So I look forward, I look forward to testifying. At trial, I’ll testify,” Trump added. Of course, Trump loves to talk a big game, and we likely won’t know if he will actually testify until next year. The classified documents trial is set to begin in May 2024.

Hewitt followed up by asking, “If you do [testify] and they ask you on the stand, did you order anyone to move boxes, how will you answer?”

“I’m not answering that question for you,” Trump said, “but I’m totally covered under the law.”

In addition to discussing his legal troubles, Hewitt asked Trump for his thoughts on an unrelated topic: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. “I know that they don’t like me,” Trump said. “I said that I don’t think they are very appropriate what they’re saying, what they’re doing, and I didn’t like the way she dealt with the queen.”

Trump added that he would “love to debate” Markle.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-m-allowed-whatever-want-173709203.html

"I can do whatever I want."

That is how trump looks at life on earth. "I can grab them by the *ussy." You can do that when you are a star.

I can remain in office when I was voted out. I can sexually harass women.

I can falsify records to gain more loans. I can hack voting machines and pressure voting officials to find votes I don't have.

I can cheat at golf because I own the course. I can make fun of physically disabled people because that's funny.

I don't pay people because I don't want to. I can use the office of the presidency for personal gain.

I can do whatever I want because my name is trump.

I should be president because I want to. I represent the republican party because gop voters believe me.

It's important to note, any lawyer who knows anything would NEVER allow trump to testify. That's suicide.

Lol….We all know what happens when trump proclaims he’s going to do a thing. He doesn’t do it.

Not to mention employee #4 is flipping right now and cooperating with the special counsel. Lol

That’s what happens when somebody gets to go through life with zero accountability.

I can’t even be mad a Trump. We literally reward people in this country for unchecked, unlimited ambition and entitlement.

No kidding. trump is just the by product of a broken society with a sole ambition for power, greed, and me,me,me.

I can't disagree with you at all.

I would like to add, though, that I do hold a lot of resentment against the Democrats for 2016. If they had not gamed their own system for the one person so unlikeable that Trump could actually beat her, we might not even be having these conversations. Now we have to live with the fallout of 2016's perfect storm.

So you are PO at the democrats for Hillary but not the GOP for trump. Got it.

And the troll beat keeps going on. If you've gotten that from that post, combined with all the myriad of other posts I've made about Trump, then you need to take remedial reading courses.