Defendant-1’s 38 Count Indictment
Here’s a link. I’ll update in a bit.
There are 31 counts for withholding documents, each holding a 10 year sentencing, on top of the obstruction charges. I’ll summarize them:
- May 3, 2018 White House intelligence briefing (TS/NOFORN/SPECIALHANDLING)
- May 9, 2018 White House intelligence briefing (TS/SI/NOFORN/SPECIAL HANDLING)
- Undated military capabilities of foreign country with Sharpie annotation
- May 6, 2019 White House intelligence briefing (TS/SPECIALHANDLING)
- June 2020 concerning nuclear capabilities of foreign country (TS/XX/XX/ORCON/NOFORN)
- June 4, 2020 White House intelligence briefing (TS/SPECIAL HANDLING)
- October 21, 2018 communications with leader of foreign country (S/NOFORN)
- October 4, 2019 military capabilities of foreign country (S/REL TO USA FVY)
- Undated document concerning military attacks by foreign country (TS/XX/XX/ORCON/NOFORN/FISA)
- November 2017 document concerning military capabilities of foreign country (TS/TK/NOFORN)
- Undated document concerning military contingency planning of US (no marking)
- Undated document concerning projected regional military capabilities of foreign country S/REL to USA/FVEY)
- Undated document concerning military capabilities of foreign country and United States (TS/SI/TK/NOFORN)
- January 2020 concerning military options of a foreign country (S/ORCON/NOFORN)
- February 2020 concerning policies in a foreign country (S/ORCON/NOFORN)
- December 2019 concerning foreign country support of terrorist attacks against US interests (S/ORCON/NOFORN)
- January 2020 concerning military capabilities of foreign country (TS/XX/TK/ORCON/IMCON/NOFORN)
- March 2020 concerning military operations against US forces (S/NOFORN)
- Undated document concerning nuclear weaponry of US (S/FR)
- Undated document concerning timeline and details of attack in foreign country (TS/XX/ORCON/NOFORN)
- Undated doc concerning military capabilities of foreign countries (S/NOFORN)
- August 2019 concerning regional military activity of a foreign country (TS/XX/RSEN/ORCON/NOFORN)
- August 30, 2019 White House intelligence briefing with Sharpie (TS/SPECIAL HANDLING)
- Undated doc concerning military activity of a foreign country (TS/HCS-P/SI/ORCON-USGOV/NOFORN)
- October 24, 2019 military activity of foreign countries and US (TS/HCS-P/SI-ORCON-USGOV/NOFORN)
- November 7, 2019 military activity (TS/XX/ORCON/NOFORN/FISA)
- November 2019 military activity of foreign countries (TS/SI/TK/NOFORN)
- October 18, 2019 White House intelligence briefing (TS/SPECIAL HANDLING)
- October 18, 2019 military capabilities (TS/XX/SI/TK/ORCON/NOFORN)
- October 15, 2019 concerning military activity (TS/XX/ORCON/NOFORN/FISA)
- February 2017 concerning military activity of foreign country (TS/SI/TK/NOFORN)
Those below the line were returned in June 2021.
Update: Here’s the best explanation of the classification marks and possible content I’ve seen so far, from Matt Tait.
Time to go get the sparkly stuff, then.
I will admit that I wasn’t planning to, but just did exactly that.
The charges alone mean that I can safely stop compulsively responding to AG Garland bashers/MDM* posts at my TWTR methadone site, The WaPo.
I am relieved and grateful, again.
*mis-dis- and mal information
And once again, I express my gratitude to Marcy Wheeler’s cogent, diligent, and highly credible analysis and reporting.
OK.
Time for another contribution.
https://www.emptywheel.net/support/
PS
Contribution made, I over paid and over tipped for a delivery of said “sparkly stuff”, and both feel right.
Thanks again, Marcy.
Also, once cork is popped, cardinal rule of not commenting under influence kicks in.
Thank you, and thank you. Sláinte!
Fixed it for you:
“Also, once cork is popped, cardinal rule of not commenting *until* influence kicks in.”
Question: Could it be possible that the 2 provable incidents of sharing which happened in NJ are not included in this indictment just in case they ended up with a judge like Cannon? How likely would a DC and or NJ indictment be, assuming Cannon retains the case?
(bought a four-pack of Sutter Home pinot grigio. Cheap but tasty enough.)
I bothers me some (Amazon, *etc*.) but the Whole Foods red pinot and even their cab is OK with food, at like US$4 a bottle.
My own celebration was a home-made Boston bar pizza and a half bottle of the pinot.
Remember when “two-buck Chuck” was actually about 2 bucks?
Half embarrassed to say so, but while I am more a bourbon guy, Mrs. bmaz has discovered Kirkland Cabernet in a box from Costco and….it is not horrible at all. Actually fairly decent.
I will try it and try (no promises) to remember to report back.
Box wine is so much more convenient than bottles, less so than an IV.
About a quarter of the classified/national security documents seized from MAL were found in Trump’s office. Hard for Trump to persuade anyone that he didn’t know about them, failed to maintain them with sufficient care, and chose not to return them.
What possible defense does he have for all this? A rational person would just bargin for home confinement because of his status and the optics, but Trump isn’t rational. I cannot begin to imagine how his lawyers will deal with this.
[Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Because your username “Mike” is far too short and common it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. Thanks. /~Rayne]
That’s easy! They resigned!!!
[Welcome to emptywheel. Your second comment which was fairly duplicative was moved to trash. New users’ comments often take longer to clear auto-moderation. Thanks for your patience. /~Rayne
ADDER: “Shychka” is your second username; you’ve commented previously as “Hychka.” Neither name complies with the site’s new standard of 8-letters minimum. Please pick a new, unique and compliant name to use here forward.]
They resigned! See https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/09/trump-loses-two-lawyers-just-hours-after-being-indicted-00101263
They’ll deal with it by asking Judge Cannon to dismiss all charges with prejudice.
Perhaps, but not germane to either the outcome or the charges, imho.
The filing is in her and Reinhart’s district. Both their names are on the heading in the filing by Smith, in fact. Interesting times…
The ‘possible’ defenses we’ve been hearing from the RWNM for as long as this case has been in the news. Possible, not valid. At this point there are not any valid defenses Defendant-1 could claim that hasn’t already been debunked or blown by his failure to STFU.
One is tempted to think the lawyers leaving his service (rats from the sinking ship come to mind) did so to avoid blowback like AG Barr did.
Thanks, Marcy!
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23839636-230609-trump-indictment []
“Beautiful mind paper boxes“… LOL!
NAUTA: They have too much writing on them..I marked too much
Looks a lot like obstruction, doesn’t it?
Sure does, EOH…sure does.
OMG!
Trump will be asking for years, “Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?” More than a few people will consider becoming a knight errant to do his bidding.
That’s not normal – or acceptable. It is an attempt to incite others to use violence to avoid the natural and logical consequences of his own behavior. It is itself violent and abusive, both of one’s supporters and the target of one’s ire. It adds to the mountain of evidence that Donald Trump cares about nothing and no one besides Donald Trump.
‘beautiful mind paper boxes’ is my favourite line from the document. It has something poetic about it although I don’t claim to know what it means :-)
I think it refers to the 2001[?] movie “A Beautiful Mind” with Russell Crow.
John Nash is turning over in his grave, laughing.
Here’s a picture of what I was thinking:
https://twitter.com/CherylOverby/status/1667276623865946114
That crossed my mind but I haven’t seen the movie. It might be time to order the DVD :-)
I liked that line too, so funny. I worked on that movie and am ready to testify, haha!
At one point in the movie John Nash has papers spread out on the floor, seeing patterns where none exist. I believe he also makes a classic conspiracy movie “crazy string wall…”
I don’t see many movies and it’s odd that I saw that one, but I remember at the end the shocking and somehow surprising (to me) realization that the protagonist was insane. I felt somewhat the same way when I heard that phrase while listening to the news today. Not that the idea that Trump was losin’ it psychologically was new to me, but that it should be the subject of banter among his employees.
Trumps need to surround himself with sycophants speaks to these employees calling him POTUS. They probably revere trump as a sort of genius, like the Crowe character.
MELANIA
That is hard to construe as anything other than really, really bad for Nauta and Trump’s defense. And the ‘family member’ is aware of the ongoing crime.
Not necessarily. She refers only to “boxes,” not indicating knowledge of their contents. (I’m not defending the former first lady here. She may have known much or little, and I don’t see her as any sort of American patriot. But the text does not condemn her.)
Marcy’s list, above:
“He told me to put them in the room and that he was going to talk to you about them.”
Oh MY!
I am curious about what was happening around the dates of the documents (e.g. the intelligence briefings in May 2018) as well as the other documents concerning military activities. I understand that the hardcore MAGA types will not be moved by this. But I wonder how the GOP can continue to support this dumpster fire of a situation. I assume there is always the innocent until proven guilty defense, which is certainly valid. But it does not look good for DJT. His own words have helped bury him. Interesting times.
CNN reported on a second, non presidential defendant. It seems the other defendant can anticipate a hung jury due to jury nullification.
Trump aide Walt Nauta
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so that community members get to know you. “fuzzylightbulb” is your second user name; you’ve commented previously as “sui generis.” Pick a name and stick with it. Thanks. /~Rayne]
My AOL.com news feed is reporting that Walt Nauta is included in the indictment. Also too, Trump’s lawyers John Rowley and Jim Trusty have tendered their resignations from Defendant-1’s defense team. Ruh-roh.
Yup. See this clip in Teri Kanefield’s thread:
Thank you for the Teri Kanefield reminder! I need to catch up on my reading!
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]
Her thread on the indictment from which that image came is at this link:
https://mstdn.social/@[email protected]/110515582205729548
Thanks for the link, Rayne.
[Thanks for updating your username to meet the 8 letter minimum. /~Rayne]
Thank you!
Traitor much ?
No. Words matter. Colloquial misuse of the word as associated with Trump is itself an abuse.
Attention commenter “Za”: You have four comments in the auto-moderation bin right now which will not be cleared for publication because username “Za” is entirely too short and does not comply with the site’s 8-letter minimum for usernames.
It’s also your second username; you’ve previously commented 30 times as “Douglas Erhard.” I suggest returning to that username or create a new, unique 8-letter username and stick with it here forward.
Moderation here doesn’t have time to fix all the comments people leave with two- and three-letter names, typos, or sockpuppeting attempts.
On page 45 of the indictment, point 4 indicates that the case will take 21 days to try. Does that mean anything significant, or is it kinda “standard” to fill it in that way?
This District apparently is known to be on some sort of “fast track”, which means there’s a clock ticking down, to IIRC 70 days. I never knew that was a thing, but there you go!
Some of this is, will or should not be news to our principal allies, but the public disclosure of Trump’s alleged conduct regarding his abuse of USG secrets will not make it easier for them to cooperate with us, notwithstanding that Trump has been out of office for two and a half years.
… especially considering they’ll have to take into account the non-zero chance he’ll return to office in a year and a half.
I just read through the entire indictment. Everyone should do so. The recounting of his tough guy statements about classified information while he was POTUS is particularly infuriating. Petard, meet hoist?
The shitshow will no doubt continue ad nauseum.
I second that. With the caveat that the story being told here can be proven, this is (unsurprisingly) worse than imagined.
Yes. “The story being told here can be proven.“ The document reads to me with utter simple factual assertion clarity, but, I guess we will see. I would expect continued relentless “melt the clock“ tactics.
Indeed, it is worse than imagined.
Don’t forget these are Goldilocks documents, significant enough to bring charges but safe enough to make public. The worst breaches will never see the light of day, at least in our lifetimes.
The indictment certainly paints a vivid picture of deliberate malfeasance and conspiracy. Plenty of ego, malignant narcissism & hubris, too, as one might expect. And the indictment is just a sketch—the supporting evidence and testimony that will be revealed in court should prove very interesting (and hopefully damning).
Seems like there’s some misplaced loyalty and boneheadedness involved too.
So far SC Smith is doing a real good job of making the public aware of the charges which were written in clear simple language for people to read. He also in part stated them and clearly publicly stated the severe harm about what Trump has done does to our country. Real Patriots will care.
That he released the charges today is also good because it knee caps Trump’s ability to create a fake narrative over the weekend before Court on Tuesday.
Real Patriots will care.
Yes, and “by their fruits shall [we] know them”.
Wall Street Journal is reporting this case has been assigned to Aileen Cannon.
This speaking indictment if it accurately presents the facts would appear to limit the damage Cannon could do at trial (if she retains the case). Her greatest opportunity for damage would be in sentencing, e.g., a sentence of a few years supervised release and maybe a $250,000 fine.
Meanwhile, can we dope out who employee #2 is and who attorney #1 and #2 are? Are they Corcoran and Bratt? Attorney #3 is Bobb who foolishly signed the letter certifying that a diligent search had been made and no documents had been found.
I’m guessing there will be a lot of others peering over her shoulder as she does her work on this case.
Awesome work, EW. Relating to Atomic Energy Act stuff, “FR” should be written “FRD”; I first read “FR” as in “FGI-FR”
[Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]
So, I’m remembering that photograph the FBI published showing a bunch of documents strewn on the floor of Trump’s office including some very serious classification markings. I’m remembering how Trump insisted that the FBI did that. And now I see a very similar photograph of documents strewn all over the floor of the storage room. Questions abound.
Perhaps Trump was recalling the spill and trying to distance himself from it when responding to the FBI photograph. Even more interesting to me is the possibility that the FBI had already seen that photograph and were trolling Trump with the similar photograph. Does that seem plausible to y’all?
When did they obtain Nauta’s photograph? He took it in December 2021, per this Politico article (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/09/trump-indictment-read-00101292):
“ At one point in December 2021, Nauta found several boxes toppled in Trump’s Mar-a-Lago storage room, with papers strewn about the floor, including some labeled as “Five Eyes” intelligence — a reference to the group of nations that are most closely allied with the United States and engage in a higher level of intelligence sharing. Nauta took two photos of the spill and shared them with another Trump employee.”
But would Nauta’s photos have been among the things seized August 8 2022? Not an expert, but I don’t see how his photos would be mixed in with Trump’s stuff. I’d have thought these are a more recent find.
Maybe from Trump employee 2, since he sent her/him those photos. [pdf14/49].
The documents in the FBI photo look pretty carefully chosen and carefully (if a bit sloppily) arranged. Also the box next to them is not disorderly. The recent photo looks like a collapse caused by stacking more boxes than the lowest box could support (and yes, I’m enough of an idiot to be able to speak from experience about this).
Just read through it, what a doozy!
Interesting to note his obsession with Hillary’s emails, even in 2022.
His whole world view goes through the narrow lens of projecting all his own wrongdoing onto Democrats.
That level of fanatical corruption is pure unadulterated nazism, and Kremlin-ism.
In this case, with characteristic Trumpian irony, his obsession was with getting his lawyers to imitate what he saw as her successful strategy for getting away with his own crime. Now that it served him to do so, he minimized Hillary’s transgression (“beauty appointments”) to suggest his own deserved similar (perceived) treatment.
Even “Boom Boom” Cannon can’t fuck this up.
The definition of being out too far over one’s skis.
She will certainly try.
What a truly stupid move it was handing this to her.
My first thought is that getting AMC assigned, knowing it’s somewhat random, was a good move. She’s in the spotlight now, even more than before. And she has been bruited about being a SCOTUS nominee. She may have to choose between the devil she loves and her own future.
I’m not so sure depending upon what she’ll get to rule on, but it would be entertaining to see her try making a coherent legal argument to do so. This is more serious conceptually than the special master fiasco Cannon bungled so spectacularly last time. It’s not like the 11CA is populated by DFH tree-huggers.
Jack Smith’s “press conference” was over in about 55 seconds. He made terse look voluble. He will speak through his indictments and trial. The historical significance of this case is someone else’s problem. He’s there to enforce the law.
Working in the Hague will do that, I guess as well as keeping one’s focus. As a thought experiment, who is more laconic, Coolidge or SC Smith?
Coolidge had his role in the famous bet where a lady said she could get him to say three words. His response: “You lose”.
“On April 22, 1924, Coolidge himself said that the “You lose” quotation never occurred. The story about it was related by Frank B. Noyes, President of the Associated Press, to their membership at their annual luncheon at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel, when toasting and introducing Coolidge, who was the invited speaker. After the introduction and before his prepared remarks, Coolidge said to the membership, “Your President [referring to Noyes] has given you a perfect example of one of those rumors now current in Washington which is without any foundation.” — from the Wikipedia article on Silent Cal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_Coolidge#%22Silent_Cal%22
Still, there’s reports like “Coolidge and his wife, Grace, who was a great baseball fan, once attended a Washington Senators game and sat through all nine innings without saying a word, except once when he asked her the time.”
And then there’s the story of Mr. and Mrs. Coolidge’s visit to a chicken farm, origin of the psychological phenomenon known as the Coolidge Effect. Also perhaps apocryphal, of course.
Which earlier was a story about an inexhaustible bull they viewed at a Vermont fair. “‘Tweren’t the same cow.” And yes, apocryphal, regardless of the type of crittur involved.
From Wikipedia:
“ Smith is a competitive triathlete despite not becoming a swimmer until he was in his mid-thirties.”
Suggests a stoic persevering characteristic…
Spouse pointed out his resemblance to a painting by El Greco of a man who doesn’t appear to suffer fools.
https://img.theculturetrip.com/1440x/smart/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/el_caballero_de_la_mano_en_el_pecho.jpg
A sober administrator of justice.
About 3 minutes, on C-Span. Clear and to the point. (He has a good voice.)
I agree! Revealing my bias, but I was so worried about his voice having never heard it. I agree – nicely resonate voice, to my lay persons ear, anyway.
Who is the Trump family member who Nauta called “ma’am” and said she would be discussing the boxes with Donald?
Ivanka? Definitely not Melania!
Can only be Melania. She’s the only female Trump who would’ve been traveling to Bedminster in June 2022, and giving orders to valets regarding the fullness of the plane is just quintessential Melania. She needed that room for her Louboutins.
President travels on a 747, no? That’s a whole lot of luggage!
Trump flew in a small private jet from Mar-a-Lago to Bedminster on the occasion in question.
ADDER: photo posted at Reddit; page is now gone but this image is still indexed. No info about photographer for attribution.
He has a 757.
I think it’s Melania. Her text sounds like a native Slavic speaker. An incorrect verb choice for “take” the boxes to POTUS room. And a missing “the” before boxes. Put, take, carry, place…all those words are a little different in Slavic from English so easy to mix up. And Slavic lacks articles before nouns, so another thing I notice Slavic speakers often slip on, especially in writing.
I agree.
Yeah, now that I read it again, of course it’s Melania. So she was well-aware of the “papers” that Trump kept waving around and dragging with him everywhere he went?
This is just nutso behavior. God damn every GOPer who is covering for this guy. They have sold out this country for power. It’s nauseating.
Do you think she bothered to care? My feeling is not. She has her own bubble.
LOL How to get a divorce without violating an air-tight pre-nup?
Don’t help the spouse avoid prosecution and conviction for federal crimes and you’ll get what the French called a divorce-in-place.
Yes, but did he mean well? Was his intent anything we could call pluralistic or malicious? Oh woe is me, it’s so difficult to prove.
That has no bearing on the question of guilt or innocence with respect to 19 USC 793(e). It would come into play, I think, only after conviction, when determining appropriate sentencing. He was in possession of documents containing information that could affect national security, and he knew it. And there is no way to whitewash 19 USC 1512(k) here; the obstruction is well documented & cannot be construed as “playful.”
I do like the upgrade from Indivdual-1 to Defendant-1.
Criminal Defendant Trump…
wouldn’t the info in the indictment have provided probable cause to conduct a search at Bedminster for the boxes flown there?
Perhaps at this point that is no longer necessary. In part because he’s had plenty of time to cover his tracks there.
*fingers crossed* *lighting candles* *making small animal sacrifices on the barbeque grill*
Here ya go, Rayne! You, Marcy and Brandi come to mind with all those lady cards at the end! ; ^ )
https://youtu.be/aCws7foN6ww
Oh c’mon! That’s all superstitious nonsense. At least, that’s what my numerologist told me.
But useful nonetheless, since the small animals in question are presumably edible.
Grilled chicken breast was a delicious sacrifice. Yum. I wonder how many small animals I will have to sacrifice to achieve a search at Bedminster? Will I have to go full Atkins Diet/keto? LOL
I’m also gobsmacked by the scene of Trump staffers finding the boxes opened and documents splayed all over the floor and just kind of shrugging it off like, “Oh, that happened again. Must be mice”
That brings new insight into why Trump might have “lost” security footage if the people going into the storage room were seen to be strangers! What a security nightmare this was.
And how about the photo of the boxes in the bathroom next to the toilet. I keep a golf jokebook for such reading opportunities. Trump likes to allow his visitors the luxury of perusing classified national security secrets.
I mean, this is just wild.
https://youtu.be/P5_5sPfFEGM?t=20
Looking back through the site’s posts over the past couple of weeks, I’m struck by the post “All GOP Horserace Analysis Is Useless without Consideration of Possible Indictments.”
Today shows how it’s even more nuts that NY Times editors let the article in question get published with that framing. It would have been reasonable to treat an indictment at that point as something that was hard to pin down. But to not even talk about it as a wildcard?
In reading the indictment (which I admit I did fairly cursorily on my lunch break), it seems like there are suggestions that Trump may have wanted to take boxes with him to NJ when he left MAL on 6/3/22 (Trump’s family member saying “Not sure how many he wants to take on Friday on the plane.” p.23). Nauta replied something to the effect that he didn’t think Trump wanted to take any. Would what’s contained in the indictment (e.g., the family member’s text) constitute probable cause for a search of Bedminster? If yes, does the fact that we know of no search in NJ indicate that the investigators determined that Trump did not transport docs north? Nauta’s text that he didn’t think Trump would want to take boxes would, obviously (to investigators) not be dispositive that Trump didn’t do so. So given that Trump left for NJ just days after lying about returning all docs, why wasn’t Bedminster searched?
Looks like, while I was writing my comment, rosalind beat me to the punch above. Definitely still curious though!
I read it as Waltine saying Trump didn’t want to take the boxes, but wanted to take a selection of documents from the boxes instead. Whether he said that to appease Melania of massive luggage, or whether it was actually true, who knows.
A May 2023 Golf Digest article notes:
Three LIV Golf events will be held at Trump courses in 2023 (Doral-FL, Bedminster-NJ, National-DC).
July 2022 an LIV event was hosted at Trump’s course in Bedminster, NJ.
That he was going through a fairly large number of boxes to select a few specific documents to take to Bedminster makes wonder who else was going to be there during his visit.
Trump hates manual labor almost as much as he hates getting his hands dirty or his hair mussed. He must have known he had hidden some good shit in those boxes and wanted specific bits of it, possibly to use, certainly to be taken elsewhere.
Having just read the documents that EW put up to the cloud… yikes.
Trump stored his boxes so that they could be conveniently accessed from the pool patio. How convenient for visitors…
Well, and liquor closet, lock shop, linen room–all places staff go to routinely
His lawyers resigned! See https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/09/trump-loses-two-lawyers-just-hours-after-being-indicted-00101263
[Please stop publishing duplicate comments. You’ve already said this in this same thread. /~Rayne]
Page 9, section 22 was my favorite part, and including it was genius.
Can’t wait to cut/paste those quotes to all that are still defending him.
and
Paragraph 23 which was taken from Trump’s Statement revoking John Brennan’s security clearance… https://sgp.fas.org/trump/index.html
“As the head of the executive branch and Commander in Chief, I have a unique, Constitutional responsibility to protect the Nation’s classified information, including by controlling access to it.
More broadly, the issue of (a former executive branch official’s) security clearance raises larger questions about the practice of former officials maintaining access to our Nation’s most sensitive secrets long after their time in Government has ended. Such access is particularly inappropriate when former officials have transitioned into highly partisan positions and seek to use real or perceived access to sensitive information to validate their political attacks. Any access granted to our Nation’s secrets should be in furtherance of national, not personal, interests.
Sarah Kendzior also nailed it back in 2017, fleshing out some of the details of the Trump/Cohn origin story as an aside: https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/status/821530561357500416
Whenever I see a hoard of Trump’s boxes or folders, it always reminds me of this photo of Cohn:
https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/status/821530561357500416/photo/1
Not that is matters but no way did Trump write that. I wonder who did, Steven Miller? I’ve kept up hope that somehow Miller would be culpable in something. Seems like he’s been too crafty, even on J 6th stuff?
Meanwhile, over at Faux, we have Elmo spouting off and issuing threats:
“Musk sends warning to justice system after Trump indicted on multiple federal charges”
It can’t do Trump’s case much to have a box likely containing secret docs marked MAL Bedroom in a random bathroom.
Note the new username
[Thanks for updating your username to meet the 8 letter minimum. /~Rayne]
I love this website. Enjoying the comments. I hope my username is acceptable.
[Welcome to emptywheel. Your username is fine as it complies with the 8-letter minimum and is unique to the community. /~Rayne]
Link to the photos of the storage locations of the documents
https://www.instagram.com/p/CtR_UywO1xR/
This combined with the list of documents is truly gobsmacking.
Is there any chance there’s another non-Instagram source? Persons who avoid Facebook and Instagram may not be able to see that and visiting the link may park a beacon on a community member’s device. Thanks.
Thanks for that. Instagram cookie removed. (Privacy and Security>Manage Cookies)
Thanks for the tip, notjonathon!
Yes, thanks, that’s the word I was looking for: GOBSMACKING.
Better than falling into the gobshite category.
Oh, but that word fits Trump to a T !!
Link to Forbes photos of document storage
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/06/09/indictment-photos-trump-stored-documents-in-bathroom-ballroom-bedroom/?sh=651570256263
Youtube link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5_5sPfFEGM
Thanks very much, very helpful.
the only way i can do it … peg the numbers.
DOCKET for pdf is 67490070 *
.
DOCKET url = https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/united-states-v-trump/
.
DOCUMENT ID = https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.7.0.pdf
.
7 Jun 9, 2023 ORDER UNSEALING CASE, Granting 6 Motion to Unseal
as to Donald J. Trump (1), Waltine Nauta (2).
Signed by Ch. Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres on 6/9/2023.
See attached * document for full details. (sl) … [Doc is just 1 pg ??]
(Entered: 06/09/2023)
Main Document Order on Motion to Unseal Case pdf
** **
** Does anyone know what the “attached document” refers to because this order Doc 7 is just one page … **
likely refers to the penalty sheets p45-49 for Trump and Nauta.
Page 42 and 43 of the indictment is my favorite part. Felt like the FBI tried so hard to give Nauta every opportunity to answer honestly. Everything short of “Walt, you know we have all the texts and surveillance video – sure you don’t want to rethink this, buddy?” :)
Rayne: I don’t have my old username, does this work? Sorry for the hassle.
[Your previous username was “USMA1986.” Let me know which one you’re going to stick with going forward. Thanks. /~Rayne]
Ha! Thanks, Rayne. I’ll stick with USMA1986.
It’s a reminder that despite having Mike Pompeo as a classmate, not all of us from ‘86 are Trump bootlickers. :)
Appreciate all that you and Marcy and Bmaz do at Empty Wheel.
With apologies to Paul Simon:
Ah, punaise, you have laid a glove or two on the old orange punching bag! It is a gift.
super-Cali-pugilsitic, expedite the motions!
Nicely done. The backpack that comes with that magic umbrella must be bottomless. :-)
Just a spoonful of RICO* makes the medicine go down
In the most indictful way
*(special for bmaz)
Ima gonna take pictures of this. On Kodachrome of course.
“gives you those nice, bright colors!”
“When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school,
It’s a wonder I can think at all”
To be honest, I used to be somewhat of a photographer long ago and Kodachrome was a spectacular film medium, despite the reverse part of it. But after new products from Fuji and Agfa, it just lost presence.
It’s against the law
It was against the law
What Melania saw
It was against the law
Jack Smith looked down and spit on the ground
Every time Trump’s name gets mentioned
The jury said, “Oy, if I get that boy
I’m gonna stick him in the house of detention”
ya beat me to it!
Oh Judas Priest.
Molly, that was excellent.
Brava, Molly!
El Caudillo* Pasa
I’d rather be to yammer than to wail
Yes, I would
If I could
I surely would
I’d rather be one to tarrow than post bail
Yes, I would
If I could
I surely would
(h/t to Charles Pierce for coining El Caudillo del Mar a Lago)
Apologies? Paul Simon should thank you for the tribute!
All lies in jest till the man hears what he wants to hear…
So, any nations out there lacking an extradition treaty with the US? Russia, sure. Turkey, maybe? If I were Trump, I would be fleeing the nation about now. How can anyone possibly defend against this case? And this SOB still has Atlanta and DC indictments to look forward to. If I were Alvin Bragg, I would just table or re-seal the Manhattan indictment out of pity. Frame it, and tell the court, JK, never mind.
This is the first good day I have had since 2015. Since that SOB came down an escalator. We’re still doomed aa a nation (and B Maz will still run out of water in AZ, poor grumpy guy), but I will take today as a gulp of good vibes. Trump is beyond toast.
Well, there is Paraguay, but Dubai is more likely. Venezuela (cf. “Burn Before Reading”) a long shot.
“Abu Dhabi, it’s far away, Abu Dhabi, that’s where you’ll stay”–Garfield song (to Odie)
Will the legal experts please answer a question ? Reading this Indictment doc, why have they not searched Bedminster? At some point they had the information about the boxes being moved there on the private jet, was that not probable cause enough to also search there ?
Is there something I am missing ?
I would imagine they would need evidence or testimony that there was still documents there.
Maybe they figure they have enough without Bedminster. Besides, those documents are already safely tucked away in Riyadh.
Now we see for ourselves how compelling Jack Smith’s speaking indictment is. No more doubt about that. And since I’ve read it, I am reminded that Florida has one of the largest populations of retired military in the country. There are also many active duty personnel and their families. And there are numerous civilians working for DOD in supporting positions.
So, it wouldn’t be surprising if someone connected to the military (or retired) ended up on the jury. That, of course, doesn’t guarantee loyalty to the country or Constitution. But I’m guessing jurors might have some animated discussions about that.
And most of those are likely hard core GOP.
Don’t you think some of them will be shaken by this evidence? Or are they like Republican members of Congress, not interested in the truth?
OT, but maybe not.
Dunno why, but Beryl Howell just postponed our Special Education litigation hearing — she’ll be setting a new date, per our attorney. She must be busy.
Maybe, but also it is summer.
thanks for your perspective, bmaz. Now that our “little one” is 18, the case caption changed to “Son-of-posaune vs. DCPS.” Little bit of a shock seeing that!
It is already almost mid-June, but Federal courts are literally famous for taking August off, sometimes July. Would not worry about it.
OT but . . . sped litigation?
I tried that once. Started Pro se just after surgery on a shattered right wrist so I wrote it in pencil in the Fed Courthouse where I live. Tried to amend later (there was lots of history and a lot of SEA findings with worthless corrective actions) but got beat down and let that go. I did beat back a summary judgment motion. Then I spent $20k on a lawyer (no sped lawyers where I live) who got himself training, but I would have been looking at huge sums for expert witness (and SCOTUS had ruled you could not be compensated for that)–even a local (podunk state) expert would have charged $1000 an hour including mileage and waiting in the courthouse. I was tempted to throw away everything I owned even if it meant homeless on the street but lawyer talked me out of it. Where I live has *no* history of due process let alone civil litigation which is bad because there is no real developed caselaw. Anyway, wish you luck.
Sorry about your case. Actually, we prevailed on all the merits and were awarded all expenses plus attorney’s fees. And DCPS is refusing to pay now. So we had to file. Crazy, isn’t it?
I would have thought that MAL would be spacious enough to avoid keeping top secret documents in the bathroom (!) or in front of a ballroom stage.
Not surprised at how gaudy it is, though. Cringe.
I remember Barbara Bush saying that she would not waste her “beautiful mind” thinking about something. I believe it was the fate of people seeking shelter from a hurricane in Texas. Comparing that example of the social fecklessness of the Bush family to similarly offensive arrogance from the Trumps, Barbara’s dismissive attitude closely resembles that exhibited by the current Mrs.Trump.
I have added a digit to reach eight.
[Thanks for updating your username to meet the 8 letter minimum. /~Rayne]
It’s worse than that. She didn’t want to disturb herself with thoughts of body bags from Bush’s war.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/barbara-bush-beautiful-mind/
Thank your, Marcy, for breaking down the documents in counts 1-31!
As to the comments already posted: I accede to many of them, especially regarding the quotes from the 2016 campaign (p. 9), and the exchange between the “family member” (“Ma’am”) and the co-defendent Nauta (p. 23). Moreover I like the thorough tracking of the movement of the boxes (p. 10-13): from the ballroom to the business center to a bathroom and shower (!) before they are finally (if some of them only temporarily) brought to the storage room, where they fell and their contents were spilled.
PS: Only 37 counts go on Trump; no. 38 as on Nauta alone.
Grab ’em by the secrets. When you’re president, they let you do it.
I’m going to run quick, but—if Mar-a-Lago was used in the commission of crimes can it be seized in asset forfeiture?
I remember reading it was offered to the government at one point, years ago before the former guy bought it, but they didn’t think it was worth it.
Totally Off Topic.
Going up and down McElmo Canyon from my home in Utah to Cortez, CO today, I noticed something unusual. Only one American flag was flying, and the usual flags and Trump supporting political messages (such as Fuck Biden) at the various ranches/alfalfa farms all along the road were all gone.
I think they are going underground.
One omission confuses me, and I don’t recall it being addressed before. The General Allegations para 6 details his showing the classified documents to unauthorized people at Bedminster, and may be inserted just to document his understanding of classification significance. But it also seems to my untutored eye to be enough to spark two counts of sharing classified information (I know I’m being imprecise with my wording here, and forget which statute is involved). I don’t think any of today’s counts cover that activity. As we have learned, Jack Smith is bringing indictments in the place where the crime is alleged, so my question is: has there been a GJ quietly working in NJ, and would we know?
[Apologies, Rayne: I commented a long time ago and I think I used this email but damned if I can remember the tag. I’ve noted this one.]
Some things that stuck with me after sleeping on it:
It’s clear that DOJ had evidence of Melania knowing about the documents, from the whole loading the plane messages. They could have really ramped up the pressure by interviewing her about them and setting a perjury trap, but they didn’t. I think that’s a good thing, but I belive it’s something they would have done to a less prominent target.
Trump emplyee 2 is painted as a collaborator, but I think everything attributed to them could be learned from a cloud warrant.
It’s also clear that they have crime-fraud exempted attorney notes from sensitive meetings. Stringer Bell would not be amused.
I guess “Those below the line were returned in June 2021” must be: June 2022