Posted on 06/10/2023 4:08:38 AM PDT by FarCenter
The sensational federal indictment Donald Trump faces has stunned one of the former president's most famous supporters, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz.
Trump faces 31 counts over claims he illegally-stored highly classified government documents at his Mar-a-Lago country club. Jaw-dropping details of the charges against Trump were outlined Friday - and he faces a lengthy prison sentence if convicted. Trump will appear before a Miami court on Tuesday.
Dershowitz describes himself as a liberal Democrat, although he has previously spoken out against what he sees as the unfair persecution of Trump.
And in an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, he said the new charges Trump faces are exceptionally serious. The author also warned that the former president's usual strategy of going on the attack could land him in even deeper trouble.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
The indictment is under the retention of military documents by subordinates section of the act. The act lays out the requirements to seek consent from one’s superior. The Commander in Chief has no superior officer. How can this apply to him?
This brings it back to the national records act which is a civil violation.
For me the real puzzling part is the investigation was done entirely in DC with an Obama judge. Many bench rulings only went in one direction. Then a summary was read to a Miami grand jury for the indictment.
Seems like a lot of purposely scattered puzzle pieces.
EC
Re: 35 - Sadly, President Trump is impulsive and acts out.
That can cause problems for him as a result.
“This case will be dismissed due to what is termed fruit of the poisonous tree, starting with the raid.”
Considering how corrupt we already know the courts and judges are ...how can you be so shock-sure that the case will be “dismissed”? Whistling past the graveyard isn’t going to cut it in this new reality the left has created (an almost daily fresh Hell) for us.
He has never been a political supporter of Trump, but he has vociferously countered many of the lawfare arguments against him.
“The Commander in Chief has no superior officer. How can this apply to him?”
Well obviously, since he was no longer CIC, it would apply to him. At least, that’s what they’re trying to hang him with.
I'm more of a DeSantis guy, but Trump isn't going to step aside. And this political persecution is only turning Trump into a martyr. If Trump wins the primaries and this kangaroo court somehow prevents him from running in the general, the R's will lose the house, senate, and especially the Oval Office. Bigly. Without Trump's supporters showing up (and they won't if Trump is sentenced), I predict that we will lose a few governorships as well.
This is the hand that has been dealt. I don't like them, but there it is.
He supports sales of his book. He teaches constitutional law and says he supports tte constitution. People like to extrapolate that that means he supports the constitution.
It’s increasingly clear that the Powers That Be intend to make sure we never again have a candidate to vote for who isn’t part of the Machine.
I’m assuming he’s referring to this quote they supposedly have on tape.
TRUMP: It’s Secret. Look. Look at this!
Or, it could be something else. But that one will be tough to explain, and has nothing to do with the “box hoax” where he does have some good arguments in his favor.
Per my Post #40,
The audio transcript does not amount to an actual admission that he was showing a classified document to the writer.
For the reader to have that impression they have to believe that when Trump said, “as president I could have declassified it” also means that he had never done so. That would be a supposition, which may not be factually accurate.
Why? So you can be a worthless statistic? A possibly embarrassing one, at that.
Nine ways to Sunday. The deep state will have their way.
https://twitter.com/mikekarnat/status/1667496429554749441?s=61&t=BspBEkX2hzhEXXxbQreKxg
The custodian of Joe Biden’s vice presidential records, a key witness in his classified documents probe, was caught up in another documents scandal while working at the Commerce Department during the Clinton administration, court records reveal.
Longtime Biden aide and gatekeeper Kathy S. Chung, who has been interviewed by federal prosecutors and congressional investigators in the Biden case, was part of a team sanctioned for withholding and even destroying key documents in the federal case that sought sensitive records from a central figure in the so-called Chinagate fundraising investigation of the late 1990s, RealClearInvestigations has learned exclusively.
A special prosecutor is now investigating whether Biden unlawfully handled top secret materials in early 2017, when he tasked Chung with removing boxes containing classified documents from the White House and storing them at various private offices in D.C., including the Chinatown neighborhood. Some of the highly sensitive papers also ended up at his home in Wilmington, Del.
Noting that Chung came into Biden’s orbit through working with the president’s son, Hunter, during the 1990s, congressional investigators want to know if the Biden family dealings in China have anything to do with the stockpiling of classified documents. They note that the mishandling of White House papers took place during the 14-month period in 2017-2018 when the Chinese were wiring almost $6 million in payments to Hunter and his uncle Jimmy Biden without providing any known legitimate services. They have expressed concern that the payments, which were flagged by the U.S. Treasury Department, were part of a Chinese intelligence-gathering operation.
While Donald Trump and Mike Pence are also under investigation for removing classified documents from the White House and storing them at their private residences, GOP congressional investigators say comparisons to Trump and Pence miss the point. In interviews with RCI, they insisted that Biden’s document scandal is potentially more serious than just mishandling state secrets. They suspect it could mushroom into a counterespionage case involving China and national security, though the White House dismisses such speculation as “baseless.”
Chung, who now works as a top aide to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, was not directly accused of wrongdoing. But lawyers for Judicial Watch complained her department was covering up for Huang, whom they suspected was trading government secrets and access to China.
Not according to the court in the Bill Clinton case. His classified records were presumed (declared) by the court to be declassified.
The PRA is a civil statute, not a general criminal statute. Jack Smith knows this as well as anybody, so he hasn’t charged Trump with absconding with classified documents.
These cases are as bogus as the Braggs’ cases in New York in their attempts to twist and contort the law to get Trump. It will fail to work, especially in Miami with a Trump-appointed judge under the 11th District, which is under the jurisdiction of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
No court can stop an eligible candidate from running for POTUS.
The requirements are spelled out in COTUS.
Only a constitutional amendment would be effective to change or add to or subtract from those requirements.
Nice excerpt.
/s
I suspect you are right .
Trump is not a Gop party person and he will never step
aside to help the Gop cause to retake the WH and senate which would keep him out of prison.
Trump was a Democrat for decades and donated big time to them .
He knew Hillary personally and knew she was intensely hated and toxic
and easy to beat if you smoked her out . He just used the Gop as a
apparatus .
We are probably screwed in every direction now.
I agree with most of your post, but FYI he Scif at Tru p’s home was dismantled as soon as he left office. I think he has some good arguments to make regarding the documents at his home; but the tape recording of having files he claimed were still classified, outside of a secure approved location, and discussing if not showing those to others, is his biggest problem.
Except Trump never actually claimed the documents were classified still.
Yes, if it was a journalist recording it for an interview. Yes, if it is a one party consent state for recording.
Jonathan Turley and the DiGenovas said the same about the case, if true. Said Trump got bad legal advice. Also said DOJ lawyers were bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.