Trump Had More Than 300 Classified Documents at Mar-a-Lago - The New York Times
Category: News & Politics
Via: jbb • 2 years ago • 137 commentsBy: Maggie Haberman, Jodi Kantor, Adam Goldman and Ben Protess (nytimes)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The National Archives found more than 150 sensitive documents when it got a first batch of material from the former president in January, helping to explain the Justice Department's urgent response.
National Archives officials spent much of 2021 trying to recover material from former President Donald J. Trump that he should have turned over when he left office.Credit...Saul Martinez for The New York Times
By Maggie Haberman, Jodi Kantor, Adam Goldman and Ben Protess
Aug. 22, 2022Updated 8:47 p.m. ET
The initial batch of documents retrieved by the National Archives from former President Donald J. Trump in January included more than 150 marked as classified, a number that ignited intense concern at the Justice Department and helped trigger the criminal investigation that led F.B.I. agents to swoop into Mar-a-Lago this month seeking to recover more, multiple people briefed on the matter said.
In total, the government has recovered more than 300 documents with classified markings from Mr. Trump since he left office, the people said: that first batch of documents returned in January, another set provided by Mr. Trump's aides to the Justice Department in June and the material seized by the F.B.I. in the search this month.
The previously unreported volume of the sensitive material found in the former president's possession in January helps explain why the Justice Department moved so urgently to hunt down any further classified materials he might have.
And the extent to which such a large number of highly sensitive documents remained at Mar-a-Lago for months, even as the department sought the return of all material that should have been left in government custody when Mr. Trump left office, suggested to officials that the former president or his aides had been cavalier in handling it, not fully forthcoming with investigators, or both.
The specific nature of the sensitive material that Mr. Trump took from the White House remains unclear. But the 15 boxes Mr. Trump turned over to the archives in January, nearly a year after he left office, included documents from the C.I.A., the National Security Agency and the F.B.I. spanning a variety of topics of national security interest, a person briefed on the matter said.
Mr. Trump went through the boxes himself in late 2021, according to multiple people briefed on his efforts, before turning them over.
The highly sensitive nature of some of the material in the boxes prompted archives officials to refer the matter to the Justice Department, which within months had convened a grand jury investigation.
Aides to Mr. Trump turned over a few dozen additional sensitive documents during a visit to Mar-a-Lago by Justice Department officials in early June. At the conclusion of the search this month, officials left with 26 boxes, including 11 sets of material marked as classified, comprising scores of additional documents. One set had the highest level of classification, top secret/sensitive compartmented information.
The Justice Department investigation is continuing, suggesting that officials are not certain whether they have recovered all the presidential records that Mr. Trump took with him from the White House.
Even after the extraordinary decision by the F.B.I. to execute a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8, investigators have sought additional surveillance footage from the club, people familiar with the matter said.
More Coverage of the F.B.I. Search of Trump's Home
- A Chaotic Exit: Former President Donald J. Trump's unwillingness to let go of power helped lead to the failure to turn over government documents in his final days in office.
- Trump-F.B.I. Conflict: The Mar-a-Lago search was a dramatic moment after years of tumult between Mr. Trump and the nation's intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
- Shifting Explanations : Mr. Trump and his allies have given often conflicting defenses of his retention of classified documents without addressing why he had kept them.
- Trump's Reaction: In the wake of the search, Mr. Trump has accused the nation's justice system of being exactly what he tried to turn it into: a political weapon for a president.
It was the second such demand for the club's security tapes, said the people familiar with the matter, and underscored that authorities are still scrutinizing how the classified documents were handled by Mr. Trump and his staff before the search.
A spokesman for Mr. Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokeswoman for the F.B.I. declined to comment.
Mr. Trump's allies insist that the president had a "standing order" to declassify material that left the Oval Office for the White House residence, and have claimed that the General Services Administration, not Mr. Trump's staff, packed the boxes with the documents.
No documentation has come to light confirming that Mr. Trump declassified the material, and the potential crimes cited by the Justice Department in seeking the search warrant for Mar-a-Lago would not hinge on the classification status of the documents.
National Archives officials spent much of 2021 trying to get back material from Mr. Trump, after learning that roughly two dozen boxes of presidential records material had been lingering in the White House residence for several months. Under the Presidential Records Act, all official material remains government property and has to be provided to the archives at the end of a president's term.
Among the items they knew were missing were Mr. Trump's original letters from the North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, and the note that President Barack Obama had left Mr. Trump before he left office.
Two former White House officials, who had been designated as among Mr. Trump's representatives with the archives, received calls and tried to facilitate the documents' return.
Mr. Trump resisted those calls, describing the boxes of documents as "mine," according to three advisers familiar with his comments.
ImageEven after the F.B.I. executed a search warrant on Mr. Trump's club, skeptical investigators have sought additional surveillance footage from Mar-a-Lago. Credit...Emil Lippe for The New York Times
Soon after beginning their investigation early this year, Justice Department officials came to believe there were additional classified documents that they needed to collect. In May, after conducting a series of witness interviews, the department issued a subpoena for the return of remaining classified material, according to people familiar with the episode.
On June 3, Jay Bratt, the chief of the counterespionage section of the national security division of the Justice Department, went to Mar-a-Lago to meet with two of Mr. Trump's lawyers, Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb, and retrieve any remaining classified material to satisfy the subpoena. Mr. Corcoran went through the boxes himself to identify classified material beforehand, according to two people familiar with his efforts.
Mr. Corcoran showed Mr. Bratt the basement storage room where, he said, the remaining material had been kept.
Mr. Trump briefly came to see the investigators during the visit.
Mr. Bratt and the agents who joined him were given a sheaf of classified material, according to two people familiar with the meeting. Mr. Corcoran then drafted a statement, which Ms. Bobb, who is said to be the custodian of the documents, signed. It asserted that, to the best of her knowledge, all classified material that was there had been returned, according to two people familiar with the statement.
Mr. Corcoran did not respond to repeated requests for comment. Ms. Bobb did not respond to an email seeking comment.
Soon after that visit, investigators, who were interviewing several people in Mr. Trump's circle about the documents, came to believe that there were other presidential records that had not been turned over, according to the people familiar with the matter.
On June 22, the Justice Department subpoenaed the Trump Organization for Mar-a-Lago's security footage, which included a well-trafficked hallway outside the storage area, the people said.
The club had surveillance footage going back 60 days for some areas of the property, stretching back to late April of this year.
While much of the footage showed hours of club employees walking through the busy corridor, some of it raised concerns for investigators, according to people familiar with the matter. It revealed people moving boxes in and out, and in some cases, appearing to change the containers some documents were held in. The footage also showed other parts of the property.
In seeking a second round of security footage, the Justice Department wants to review tapes for the weeks leading up to the Aug. 8 search.
Federal officials have indicated that their initial goal has been to secure any classified documents Mr. Trump was holding at Mar-a-Lago, a pay-for-membership club where there is little control over who comes in as guests. It remains to be seen whether anyone will face criminal charges stemming from the investigation.
The combination of witness interviews and the initial security footage led Justice Department officials to begin drafting a request for a search warrant, the people familiar with the matter said.
ImageIt remains to be seen whether anyone will face criminal charges stemming from the documents investigation.Credit...Kenny Holston for The New York Times
The F.B.I. agents who conducted the search found the additional documents in the storage area in the basement of Mar-a-Lago, as well as in a container in a closet in Mr. Trump's office, the people said.
Mr. Trump's allies have attacked the law enforcement agencies, accusing the investigators of being partisan.
The intense public interest has now spurred a legal fight to see the search warrant's underlying affidavit. On Monday, a federal magistrate issued a formal order directing the Justice Department to send him under seal proposed redactions to the affidavit underlying the warrant used to search Mar-a-Lago by Thursday, accompanied by a memo explaining its justifications.
In the order, the judge, Bruce E. Reinhart, said he was inclined to release portions of the sealed affidavit but wanted to wait until he saw the government's redactions before making a decision.
Glenn Thrush and Alan Feuer contributed reporting.
Tags
Who is online
418 visitors
What? 300? Damn!
But, but, but Hillary's emails. . .
Over 700 pages.
I wonder if any of those documents contain information that would be personally damaging to Trump and his political future. That is almost the only thing that could explain all this.
"personally damaging to Trump............" Perhaps. Or more likely a lever and a hinge for profit with anything or anyone willing to pay.
I want to hear Trump's explanation (lie) of why he wanted those documents.
he was going to trade them for 4 acres in downtown moscow and a building permit.
Pretty sure he had $ signs on his fevered brain when he confiscated all those files.
there are no boundaries he wouldn't cross in the pursuit of self enrichment, greed, and leverage.
Trump would sell out the country in a heart beat if he thought he could gain some personal advantage or make a buck.
every cloud has a silver lining. trump has pretty much destroyed the GOP. bummer.
Trump doesn't like clouds because they don't cause golden showers.
I wouldn't expect that he would be able to walk off with all existing copies of anything. Aren't all these documents digitized?
"digitized?" That is not the point. The point is who had access to them.
I read this comment:
As implying Trump took possession of some documents to suppress their contents.
But I don't want to get into an adversarial back and forth as to why he took them with people I agree with on most things about Trump.
(I don't like Trump or his supporters.)
Will 'the saga of the Trump' ever end.
Trump believes himself to be invincible. If that proves to be true and he regains the presidency, his retribution and revenge will destroy the Western democracies.
He has already tried to pull the old Executive Privilege on the documents taken by the FBI.
The bigger they are the harder they fall..... Jimmy Cliff.
I thought that was Henry the Chicken Hawk.....
He's asking for them to return the documents he stole
Speaking of
Smoked with jimmy and Bob way back in the day.
Ever since Silence of the Lambs I have been wondering exactly how psychopaths' brains work.
I've read several popular books on psychopathy: The Mask of Sanity, Without Conscience, The Psychopathy Checklist, The Psychopath Next-door, and some others I would have to go rummage through shelves to remember.
After reading all of that Trump is still a mystery to me. His narcissism is obvious. But does he feel fear? Does he feel under siege? Are there some emotions he is incapable of? Does he substitute some emotions for others?
He's one for the textbooks.
I think he feels a lot of fear and that's what motivates him to do the things that he does.
I'm not a psychologist I just play one on the internetz
Another leak from the DOJ. It’s like they have an agenda or something
A statement from the National Archives is a "leak" ?
To the pro Putin MAGA everything is a 'leak' that exposes the true nature of 'the Trump'.
Can you leak to the statement?
This is the very definition of a leak:
did you know Trump told Putin he was sending the Boogaloo boys to kills Russians at the Helsinki meeting?
Or was it the other way around? Was it a false flag operation planned at Helsinki? Please let me know. It's hard to keep up with crazy ass conspiracies emanating from the left wing fever swamp.
Huh ?
You claimed there was a statement from National Archives claiming Trump possessed 300 classified docs. Where is it?
Oh. So you don't understand the article then.
Try reading it again and pay attention to who the sources of information are.
How can something be leaked when it is already known ?
Some people are more concerned with the process than the result. To hell with trump's misdeeds ! Who leaked it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Crazy.
No It's not. Which is why it was front page story. If you actually read the story, you'll see the new information is sourced anonymously, mostly to DOJ officials. The literal first sentence of the story is attributed to
"multiple people briefed" in other words anonymous DOJ sources.
Congrats on at least recognizing the information in the article was leaked as we whipsaw from "there was no leak!" to "who cares about the leaks?" with the same people supporting both arguments. Good stuff.
I didnt agree it was leaked, although it came from somewhere. I was simply referring to you, quite consistently, complaining a lot more about leaks than you do about Trumps abysmal and possibly illegal behavior.
Of course it was leaked. Anonymous sources are literally cited as the basis for the information in the article. It's simple reading comprehension.
And yet, because it involves Trump, left wingers go into reality denial mode and literally ignore their own source.
It's truly amazing to see. If Trump said there were seven days in a week, people here would deny it if they thought that fact helped Trump in some small way.
You jumped the shark a long time ago. Trump could shoot someone in the middle of 5th avenue and you would wonder who leaked the news more than you would care that he shot someone.
Lol. At least I'd be able to read the story correctly and agree that Trump shot someone.
The national archives has confirmed that Trump had the highest level of top secret classified documents at Maralago.
I guess somebody leaked that too. So what?
It's only a matter of time, probably days, until Trump says, yes, he had the highest level of top secret documents at his house, but it was a good thing.
No where in the NYT article does it attribute the information to "anonymous" sources.
Maybe to you.
e does it attribute the information to "anonymous" sources.
Okay. Then tell me identity of " the people briefed " who the NYT credits as sources.
You tell me. You spent 18 months or so parroting whatever defense Hillary Clinton offered to possessing thousands of classified documents, including Special access program materials on her unsecured home brew server and you called it a nothingburger. .
That's how the Clinton email story played out, and as each lie was exposed, you adopted the new talking point and what was claimed the week before was flushed down the memory hole.
if you think hillary clinton is a liar on a level with donald trump you are delusional
I'm no huge fan of the Clintons. You can definitely pillory Hillary with that line about having "public and private positions on issues" she made during a private campaign speech in 2013. But most politicians can probably be caught with some degree of that sort of bending the truth to tell voters what they want to hear.
Trump, OTOH, is an example of a pathologically lying con artist like Anna Sorokin.
Sean, yesterday, John Solomon published the letter May 2022 letter the NARA sent to Trump.
That letter includes all of the information in the paragraph you block quoted. In short, TRUMP released the information.
If you insist on calling it a leak, so be it.
hn Solomon published the letter May 2022 letter the NARA sent to Trump
A letter written in May detailed what the government found in the August raid?
NARA must have some preternatural powers.
Your comment is obtuse.
Try reading your own post before you make another kneejerk comment.
Why are you blathering about the August raid when your block quote begins with:
THAT information, and the rest of the information in your block quote, was confirmed by the letter which was published by John Solomon.
Oh and BTFW, Trump's minions have been on RW media for MONTHS talking about all of the classified documents in Trump's possession. Kash Patel [who is an utter moron] in particular.
Handholding over.
“In short, TRUMP released the information.”
Desperate or imbecilic? Both always seem to apply.
Lol. How dishonest can your post be? Unfortunately, I still write to an audience assuming they have basic reading comprehension skills and a modicum of good faith. Sadly, that excludes some here.
So, once again. I now have to engage in an argument that is too stupid to have because reading and critical thinking is too hard for some.
The article cites many antonymous leaks from the government. None of your doltish deflections address the authors' actual sources.
was confirmed by the letter which was published by John Solomon.
By all means, find the information in the article where the New York Times credits Solomon. Oh. It doesn't does it? So you have no point.
For starters, I notice you didn't link to the Solomon article. Why is that? Because it was published after this NYT, so of course the Times didn't rely on it when they published this article. Use common sense. Learn how time works.
Let me spoon-feed it to you so you understand what's happening. You just cited another reporter to verify the accuracy of one part of the article. That, of course, has nothing to do with the sourcing for the Times article. The article speaks for itself. Solomon is a red herring . Patel is a red herring. Read the article and address what's actually in it.
SO if you are going to reply focus on how to make an actual argument by addressing an actual relevant point. Don't just throw shit against the wall and hope for the best. Think first. Prove the report isn't based on antonymous leaks despite what the reporters wrote.
Nowhere near as dishonest as yours.
YOU stated:
We are not discussing the whole fucking article, we are discussing the contents of what YOU claim is the 'definition of a leak' by the DOJ.
I proved that NONE of the information contained in your block quote was leaked by the DOJ.
Solomon doesn't warrant any credit since he isn't the author of the NARA letter.
Your claim is ridiculous.
You know that how? They were published on the same day.
Oh and BTFW Trump's JANUARY return of 15 boxes of documents went to directly to NARA. As the letter that Solomon published states, the DOJ has subpoenaed those documents.
So, if there is a leak as you allege, it's from NARA, which is NOT under the DOJ.
That comment is a red herring.
The 'relevant point is that the discussion is about your characterization of the block quote as the 'very definition of a leak'. You seem desperate to deflect from that.
Strawman.
You are the one with the burden of proof.
Prove the report IS based on DOJ leaks.
Or was that allegation just some shit that you threw against the wall?
Of course we were. I highlighted the first attributed leak, and surprise surprise, nothing you've written has contradicted my claim.
ved that NONE of the information contained in your block quote was leaked by the DOJ.
That's literally insane. You are just making shit up again. Stop ignoring what's in front of you and making unfounded assertions. You can't hide from the author's actual words, no matter how dishonestly you spin.
Solomon doesn't warrant any credit since he isn't the author of the NARA letter.
Did you not cringe in shame when you typed that out? you should just remain silent rather than producing such obvious dreck. He's the reporter who first produced the letter. How you don't understand that is beyond me.
But again, cite the place in the NYT article cited this letter as evidence to support the block quote you are hyper focused on.
t your characterization of the block quote as the 'very definition of a leak
Again, did you not read the article? This is simple reading comprehension. I Can't dumb this down any more for you. THe author cited a number that ignited intense concern at the Justice Department and helped trigger the criminal investigation that led F.B.I. agents to swoop into Mar-a-Lago this month seeking to recover more, multiple people briefed on the matter said
Read it very slowly and then identify the source of the information that ignited intense concern at the Justice Department? Here a hint, the answer can be found at the end of the excerpt!
. You seem desperate to deflect from tha
Not at all. I'm going to keep asking you for proof that the Times reporters are lying about their attributions.
You are the one with the burden of proof.
Yes, which I satisfied by QUOTING THE FUCKING AUTHORS OF THE ARTICLE.
You've done nothing but deflect and lie.
But c'mon. Show me where the NYT authors cite the Solomon produced letter as the basis for their claims. It'd be some sort of magic since it was made public until after the NYT article was published, but that's for you to prove.
I'll keep checking in with you in case you forget.
You WANT that to be true because I refuted your claim that your block quote is the 'very definition of a leak' from the DOJ.
Now, as is your MO, you're devolving to name calling and personal bullshit, fuck off.
You are misusing the word refute. Simply making an unsupported declaration is not a refutation. Its a very Trump like approach to arguing you are taking. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat a made up claim, it is still a fictitious claim.
So where is your proof of the NYT citing the Solomon produced letter as the basis for the information contained in the block quote? Were they lying when they attributed the claim that "ignited intense concern at the Justice Department and helped trigger the criminal investigation that led F.B.I. agents to swoop into Mar-a-Lago this month seeking to recover more", to multiple people briefed on the matter? Where is the citation to the letter? Are you accusing the NYT reporters of lying about their sources? Which of the words "multiple people briefed said" do you interpret to mean 'a letter another reporter will produce after this article is published'?
stop being an obvious troll.
More examples of the trumpturd criminal enterprise raping, looting, pillaging, sacking, stealing, every goddamned thing he could rape, loot, pillage, sack, steal, etc. to infinity.
You say we have tds, y'all have CDS and HBDS. It's pathetic and deplorable.
Both of those sentences are unsubstantiated allegations.
Please prove your allegations.
I will note that it can be presumed that a plethora of people on multiple levels have been briefed on the content of the documents recovered from Trump in January.
Both of those sentences are unsubstantiated allegations.
Lol. keep making asinine declarations.
I'm still waiting for you to refute that the article in question, including the one section you want to focus on is based on leaks.
ple on multiple levels have been briefed on the content of the documents recovered from Trump in January.
Reading is fundamental. Quite throwing shit at the wall and focus. The claim in the block quote is about the concerns of the the DOJ and what motivated them to act. Only people inside the DOJ can know that.
Keep making personal comments. It proves a lack of an ability to conduct a civil discussion.
Um, YOU are the one that claim that it's based on DOJ leaks, the burden of proof is on YOU.
So is comprehension. Try it.
Prove your allegation Sean.
What motivated them to act is the NARA criminal referral which happened in FEBRUARY. Trump tried for months to keep the NARA from releasing the documents to the DOJ. DOJ's head of Counterintelligence and Export personally traveled to FL to try to get all of the documents returned. Trump's lawyers gave him a small file and then signed an affidavit stating that NO MORE classified documents remained at Mar-a-Lago.
They LIED.
The NARA KNEW they lied.
By that point, the Congress had been briefed and Trump's minions were on RW media blathering about it. Perhaps you should review what Patel told Breitbart and others in June.
So, the entire team at the NARA, the DOJ, the FBI, Trump and all of his minions KNEW why the DOJ was 'concerned' and why they were 'motivated' Sean.
How's THAT for focusing?
The next shoe to drop is - WHO LOOKED AT THOSE DOCUMENTS
This just keeps getting better and better!!!!!!!!!!
From this seed:
"Mr. Trump went through the boxes himself in late 2021, according to multiple people briefed on his efforts, before turning them over."
This means Trump can't blame other people for the failure to return the requested documents. Trump is personally guilty.
Also from this seed:
"Mr. Corcoran then drafted a statement, which Ms. Bobb, who is said to be the custodian of the documents, signed. It asserted that, to the best of her knowledge, all classified material that was there had been returned, according to two people familiar with the statement."
These lawyers should be asked (under oath) if their client (The Donald) asked them to make these obviously false statements.
These lawyers are f#cked.
Yes, the lawyers, especially the Bobb lady, are going to need lawyers. MAGA. My Attorney Gets an Attorney.
The bottom of the barrel when it comes to attorneys are the only ones who will represent the turd.
And to think he thought while 'president' that the DOJ were at his beck and call and that Barr was his consigliere (well they kinda were and he kinda was) especially considering how he fudged the Mueller summary.
It must be true then. The NYT has a long history of being accurate when posting anonymously sourced leaks that point to Trump doing something wrong.
You are absolutely right!
Just like they were accurate with Russian collusion and Hunter's laptop./S
TDS is a disease with no cure. Not that they are looking for one.
Is that like Jim Jordan and all of his antonymous sources at the FBI....
What is comical is you think the idiot Hunter and his stupid laptop are any smoking gun to get Joe...
If the laptop is such a scandal, why are the republicans doing nothing but sitting on their hands and complaining about it.
Y'all are the ones with CDS and HBDS.
Has there been a single day without the use of that acronym...
It is almost comical that they way some defend donald is to accuse others of wrong doing.
Such an easy response and such a simple out...
donald did this...you're just bias...donald also did this...you're just bias...doanld lied about this...you're just bias....
Maybe the ones that are 'bias' are the ones with no other way to defend the asshole.
Some even say you can't fix a problem you refuse to recognize.
Look at most articles here-especially the ones having nothing to do with Trump, then note how many times some folks drag Trump into it because they are incapable of logically defending their positions and deflect to Trump, as if that is responsive.
TDS is a disease with no cure.
Yes, Trump Dick Suckers can't help it.
I recommend duct taping their mouths.
If I had a dollar for every time some TDS-riddled person dragged Trump into a conversation having nothing to do with him, I could have retired a few years ago.
See 5.2.9
This article is about classified documents being found at Mar-a-lardo.
Butt, YOU think it has nothing to do with Trump.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Good point.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
No shit? Really?
Looks like my words have confused you greatly. perhaps reading them again might give you an understanding of what I ACTUALLY wrote instead of what you think you read.
TDS is a description of an affliction which applies to all that support, believe, honor and worship the orange lifeform taking up residence in Mar-a-Lago.
Trump has never done anything that wasn't wrong.
Trump has always been an evil person.
Here is the full text of YOUR ridiculous comment:
If I had a dollar for every time some TDS-riddled person dragged Trump into a conversation having nothing to do with him, I could have retired a few years ago.
This article IS about Trump.
Reading is fundamental.
too funny. here's another article/seed where he introduces trump into the conversation.
I heard that he was sent to military school for raping a young girl.
that's gonna leave a mark
Notice how that excuse has fallen by the wayside?
Aren't 300 secret documents at Mar-a-Lago a smoking gun? So, what's the hold up? Where's the indictment?
It sure gets the local leftist loons all excited.
.
And so does seeing the name "Trump'!
Here's another view...
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2022/08/23/how-bill-clintons-sock-drawer-could-play-a-role-in-the-fbis-trump-raid-fiasco-n2612109?utm_campaign=rightrailsticky1
It's too late to worry about tittles.
With as many failed "smoking gun" claims I think they are trying to move away from it and come up with another catch phrase to get the lemmings moving.
Read the opinion article from Andrew McCarthy. He lays out rather well (and he would have the knowledge) of how difficult it is to indict on classified documents. He lays out where the DOJ has a stronger case on obstruction which is a much easier case to prosecute.
Yet in Trump's reply to the DOJ's filing about the Special Master request, there is a GLARING absence of any claim by Trump that he declassified the documents retrieved through the search warrant. I guess overtly lying for Trump in a court filing was a bridge too far for Trump's current lawyers.
Garland doesn't have a choice now. Garland must indict Trump.
Garland has turned Jan. 6th into page 4 news. Garland has displaced Democrats' 'threat to democracy' narrative with a narrative of 'threat to national security'. Democrats won't let Garland back down. At this point, indicting Trump really doesn't have anything to do with Trump.
Garland has stepped on Democrats' politics. Garland better deliver or he will pay a heavy price. Democrats are unforgiving.
Trump's lawyer released the complete scenario of the National Archives and Trump. Amazingly stupid thing to do but when you deal with bottom drawer attorneys you get what you pay for.
Perhaps the Trump legal team could hire some NT legal experts to help them out.
Like Alex Jones' attorney?
I just want to know what these people think they are accomplishing.
Exercising two things at once, and if they are chewing gum, three.
Tanning?
You might want to look at this poll
It is pretty much divided down party lines with independents split 50/50.
We're talking about an FBI raid and an investigation into possible crimes. Either laws were broken or they weren't. Either he will be prosecuted or he won't.
How could a poll possibly matter? That's the whole point. We are now...finally... in the realm of the factual instead of feelings with regard to the former president.
How....exactly....does marching around a potential crime scene with signs accomplish anything?
Well, they are exercising their constitutional right of assembly and of speech. At least they don't have firearms...
A poll doesn't matter to the law, but what Perrie was trying to express was the reason for the folk protesting in your photo. Are they accomplishing anything? Well, they have you reposting their photo in a discussion about Trumps likely crimes which the protesters were apparently trying to draw attention to. I guess you could say, mission accomplished.
They are making idiots of themselves, alienating sane people who might otherwise agree with them.
You could say the same thing about the people down at the corner bar.
Yes, you could. Furthermore, you would be correct except for a corner bar is a private business and, as such, can ask them to leave. These people appear to be, however right or wrong the factual basis of what they are trying to say, in public, and the public, us, we are talking about it, as noted in post 8.3.3 by Dismayed Patriot
I hope they find the ones he buried under the palm trees.
DJT wouldn't likely pick up a shovel.