DOJ should 'stop playing games' and indict 'classified documents terrorist' Donald Trump: Glenn Kirshner
By: Alternet. org
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Reacting to a report in the New York Times that Donald Trump plotted with aides to use the sensitive documents he illegally took with him to Mar-a-Lago after losing his 2020 re-election bid as bargaining chips to gain access to documents related to an investigation into his ties to Russia, former prosecutor Glenn Kirschner said enough is enough and the DOJ needs to indict him.
Appearing on MSNBC's "The Katie Phang Show," Kirshner claimed the DOJ has been overly tolerant of the former president's delaying tactics as they investigate him and that they have enough on him already to prosecute.
"You know, Trump is all about the quid pro quo, isn't he? This for that," he told the host. "And it proves a couple of things if this reporting is accurate, and we have no reason to believe it's not, but, first of all, he knew he had the documents. He knew the documents were of some value, frankly, he knew that he had no right to possess the documents because he was negotiating for their return to the federal government."
"I don't know why the government negotiated with somebody that I have called a classified documents terrorist for so long rather than taking the kind of law enforcement activity that the Department of Justice would have taken if you or if I were in possession of stolen national security information," he added.
"Donald Trump is now exposing himself as somebody who is willing to take property that he stole and leverage it to his own benefit for other information that he wants, that he has no right to, from the federal government," he elaborated. "I analogize it to a situation where your neighbor stole your TV, and then said if you want to back give me $500. Well in concrete terms, that's what Donald Trump was doing with these stolen documents."
"I do wish that the Department of Justice would stop playing Donald Trump's reindeer games, stop playing on Donald Trump's playing field because civil litigation is Donald Trump's playing field and it's where he can best weaponize the delay that is inherent in the civil litigation process and you know how the DOJ can put an end to all of that? Indict him in federal district court in Washington D.C." he insisted.
Tags
Who is online
496 visitors
How many times is Trump going to be allowed to try and extort his "opponents' before he is arrested and charged? It is getting ridiculous.
On its face, the abuses perpetrated are obvious.
That being said, it is prudent for the prosecutors to proceed with caution. In this age of retribution, the last thing needed is to set a precedent of charging an ex-office holder without irrefutable evidence. The irony is clear, as trump is the king of retribution, enabling him to thus far avoid prosecution. But he is also the prince of pride and continues to provide more rope in which to hang himself.
Uncharted territory to be sure.
He is being allowed to make a mockery of American justice because the DOJ is afraid of what might "happen" if he is indicted. Even Al Capone wasnt granted such deference out of fear.
“Are you claiming that Trump hasn't been charged because the Biden Justice Department is afraid of retribution?”
No.
I’m claiming that we, meaning all of us, are aware of the ramifications and in doing so, understanding that one person’s megalomania cannot dictate policy, procedure, and precedent going forward.
If you really care about American justice, then you’ll let the process play out. Further, you’ll insist that the prosecutor make proof beyond a reasonable doubt, while respecting the Constitutional rights of the accused.
What might happen?
What ramifications?
No, not entirely true. The FBI is making a mockery of the American justice system.
Donald Trump is making a mockery of the American left.......
Or they are just doing it to themselves.
And you’re probably racist if you need to have it explained to you . . . yadda yadda yadda.
iS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU? The Jan 6 committee has proven that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election. Is that ok with you?
The Jan 6th committee has proven jack shit of nothing! They have only presented evidence that backs their warped version of reality; witnesses that have been well coached and say exactly what they want; and allow no cross examination because their are no Republicans on the committee!
They are not legitimate in any way shape, or form!
In a trial the defense will get to cross examine all witnesses, also provide their own witnesses to prove innocence, and provide evidence that counters the prosecution's.
If the DOJ really thought they had a good case they would already have brought charges. Instead they are hinting at another potential raid. Seems they/FBI are incompetent as well as partisan.
Is there something wrong with YOU? The work of the Jan 6 committee doesn’t have SHIT to do with the current investigation of documents found at Mar-A-Lago, or the government’s willingness to prosecute him over it. The only thing “wrong” with me is I know what the fucking topic is - and it’s not “did Trump try to steal the election?”
There is a broad array of allegations of illegality being presented against Trump, most of it supported by fact. In and of itself that fact should make anyone wary of defending him about anything.
I'll just leave it at that. We have gone through this "both sides" bullshit for 7 years now and it is destroying our country.
I’m sure they have him this time, not like the other 50 times, but this time for sure.
Ted Cruz said that all 100 US senators knew that Trump was guilty in his first impeachment. Around 50 Republicans voted against conviction. Do you support those spineless traitors ?
John, you have confirmation bias, you will believe anything negative said about trump. How many retractions have been published? From 17 intelligence agencies said to there is no taco bowls at Trump tower?
Even Ted Cruz understood that when you ask the president of another country to help you smear your US election opponent you are committing an impeachable offense. Cruz just didnt have the balls to vote for what he knew was true.
Maybe they viewed it as jury nullification.
According to a book you mean. No proof other than what the authors say is true. Until Trump is actually charged and convicted I refuse to jump up and down screaming for his head.
I'm sure most sane Americans also refuse to do so.
So much what?
What are the charges?
Where were the indictments?
Still waiting. So far, the only thing that's been accomplished has been a lot of veiled threats and political noise. And the mid terms look like they'll still be a referendum on Biden and Democrats.
"And it proves a couple of things if this reporting is accurate ..." That's been the rub all along, hasn't it? For the last six or seven years Democrats have focused their attention on swaying public opinion about Trump. The whole exercise has been about political gamesmanship by both Trump and Democrats. The end result has only been to turn Biden into Trump and raise public awareness that the country is moving in the wrong direction.
The only thing the country has gotten from Democrats' political efforts has been a politicized DOJ/FBI, an untrustworthy news media, and a failure to address the issues that matter most to the public. Democrats are victims of their own self-inflicted political wounds.
And the public is still waiting.
It has been shown, beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump is a piece of crap cancer on the American character. Yet a large number of "conservatives" continue to support him.
And by all appearances you couldnt care less. How do you explain yourself?
Trump demonstrated that during the 2016 Republican primaries. To become President, Trump had to beat the Republican Party before he even had a chance to beat the Democratic Party.
Shouting that Trump is 'a piece of crap cancer on the American character' is old, old news. That narrative has been playing the news cycle since 2015. Democrats have been singing the same tune for seven years.
And, after seven years of repetition, the public is still waiting for Democrats to actually do something. The longer this drags out, Democrats demonstrate that they're just not up to the task. If Democrats can't deal with Trump then there's little hope Democrats can address real problems. On the list of things for the public to worry about, Trump is low on the list.
And the public is growing tired of waiting. Democrats need to throw Trump in prison so that, maybe, they'll start doing the job they were elected to do. But it's beginning to look like Democrats can't handle the job at all.
As long as there are people like you that are willing to rationalize his crimes and blame "the other side" the harder it is to get past this.
The country will never get past it until he is brought to justice. If he is allowed to run for president again all hell may break loose.
What part of 'throw his ass in prison' do you not understand? Still waiting.
“I am not sure anyone wants Trump to go to jail.”
Perhaps we just want him to be held accountable.
Swalwells Chinese spy girlfriend stole Schiffs evidence.
One thing you dramatically fail to understand is, there are many that you claim rationalize his "crimes" that actually don't. We aren't rationalizing any crime(s) (none has yet to be proven actually). It's the methods that we are critical of. And anybody critical of the Democrats methods, you lump into one group.
So what you're saying we can expect the Democrats, you and those like you would continue to cry and whine about something you still have absolutely no proof of.
One thing you dramatically fail to understand is facts.
an untrustworthy news media.
Politico just published the sexual assault details of a republican candidate. I’m not sure the press can go any lower.
Why is Herschel Walker national news? The press is becoming more and more like Trump. And the press has gone even lower than Trump.
Which one ?
Hershel Walker is national news because he is running for the United States Senate in an election that could give the gop control...
She is an African American veteran, who is also conservative. Something the press hates.
That's much more damning for the military than a media organization reporting a matter that was public record.
Do you think it was better that it was swept under the rug ?
Her personal military file is NEVER public record.
(Green has not contested the authenticity of the documents, which were obtained by a public records request and provided to POLITICO by a person outside the Mrvan campaign.)
No she has not contested the authenticity of the documents, in fact her comments lead one to believe that the sexual assault did happen. She has spoken out in anger about it however, believing that this was part of her service record that should not have been released and has requested an investigation on the matter. The list of information that can be released from a service members personal file via a FOI request seems fairly cut and dry and doesn't include some of the information that is in that Politico story.
The assault and the poor evaluation report do not seem to be included in the information that can be released. So I agree that a formal investigation should be made, Probably won't make much difference in the election as there really isn't enough time to complete any investigation before November, but it should still be done and if there was anything illegal done the guilty should be held accountable.
I'll ask you the same question I asked George. Do you think the military was right to ask her to stay quiet about the assault ? And why did they ?
I have no idea what really happened. I know that typically, a Black female Service member would have the benefit of the doubt from the US media and that a poor military evaluation would be assumed by many as evidence of military sexism or racism or both.
Yeah? Well only voters in Georgia have any say over the election outcome. Seems like making Herschel Walker national news is an attempt to incite the public to intimidate Georgia voters and meddle in a Georgia election. And we're supposed to believe that elections aren't rigged?
The poor evaluation was expelled and she received her promotion. She is now a Lt. Colonel.
Nobody is falling for you obvious attempt at deflection. The issue is a democrat campaign and a reporter used a victim of sexual assault to further the campaign of an obvious scumbag.
No, I don't think it was the right thing to do. But as to why they did, it's spelled out in the Politico article.
Attempting to balance the force against foreign governments and foreign morals can be a difficult path. I can appreciate what the Air Force leadership was up against. Doesn't make what they did to her right but I can understand the difficulties.
Umm, the article doesn't show that. It shows that she appealed the evaluation and had letters written supporting her by her in-country supervisor. But it doesn't show that the poor evaluation was removed.
I also find an article from 2019 where she is a major in the Air National Guard so her promotion to Lt. Colonel had to happen after she left the Air Force and when she was in the Air Guard.
What deflection ? How could her being a victim of sexual assault further the campaign of her rival ? That makes no sense.
I would think along those lines also.
Prosecutors - good ones, at least - aren’t in the business of filing charges just to file charges. They want to win their case. So it’s not unusual for them to wait until they have overwhelming evidence. Federal prosecutors, in particular, have a very high conviction rate for this reason (95-99% depending on where you look).
They don’t proceed to trial unless they are very confident in the outcome. Before that happens, they are more likely to make some kind of deal with the defendant, but you need to have all the pieces in place for that, too.
This is a complex and unique case. It’s not like a beat cop witnessed some kid spray painting the school with graffiti. Even if everyone agrees on the facts, there will be a lot of debate over whether or not a crime was even committed. Partisans won’t like hearing that, but it’s the reality whether you like it or not.
Is he? Like, more than every other politician? These people are always making deals with each other. I.e. “I’ll vote for your bullshit bill if you vote for mine,” etc. This bit of analysis seems like a partisan slam.
Maybe because your opinion isn’t real important in determining whether or not to negotiate with someone. Seriously, who at the FBI or AG’s office gives a shit what this former prosecutor thinks or says on TV?
That’s incredibly stupid. “You or I” are not the former president. We would have never had legal access to - or control of - these documents in the first place. He did. I can see why this moron is a “former” prosecutor.
This is fucking nonsense. The quid pro quo allegations are not about legislation. In the latest instance Trump says he will give the Maralago documents back if the Archives give him some 2016 documents so he can go on a fishing expedition about the FBI. Who the fuck is he to try to make a "deal" about documents that he had no right to in the first place?
Your defense of this crap is beyond the pale.
Typical hyperbole in regards to a differing perspective.
Perspectives have to be legitimate. The perspective that nothing has been proven against Trump is not legitimate.
This constant bs that "no one has anything on Trump" is insane and people who say it should be ashamed of themselves.
What is your definition of proven?
Fuck off.
Where is this coming from ? I cannot find this with a Google search.
They don’t need to be. These people make deals for all sorts of things. Endorsements is another example.
Prosecutors also make deals - with people they are investigating or prosecuting. Every day they do it. If you don’t know that, you have a lot to learn.
You don’t know what he had a right to. Nobody does. That’s what all of this investigation and legal procedure will determine.
The way you whine and attack people for simply saying something something that challenges your point of view is childish. Grow up.
No reason to tell me. It’s unconnected to anything I said. Maybe you have me confused with someone else.
Defense of what?
No idea what you’re talking about.
See... this is why we can't have nice things.
Sure. Assuming they have the evidence, yeah.
Oh for fuck's sake. Nope. Ruined it with half a ton of steaming batshit.