Former President Donald Trump has been indicted for a second time

[Yttrium]

Even a parking ticket isn't based on intent (for those not above the law).

But if you want to go that route, it's rather ironic that biden's illegally held classified documents (since he never had the authority to declassify them) that he held onto in his garage since he was a VP (or even a Senator) are only discovered right after Trump's home was raided. Almost as if he knew he might get into some real trouble if he didn't do something to make it "different" for himself.

Good point. Once Biden is out of office, let's sic the DoJ on him.

Meanwhile, the case against Trump remains unaffected by that.

 

[Aldebaran]

You know that Biden is also being investigated for those documents right ?

I am perfectly fine with Biden being held accountable. Same with Pence.

So am I. But the prevailing argument here of those who try to excuse their behavior remains, "But it's different!"
I'm very interested in seeing how those investigations turn out, and how the results will be received.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Don't you think it's suspicious that lawyers happened to find documents in Bidens garage, and then once they return them, the argument suddenly becomes based on the "willful retention" of documents..?

Did the argument change? You're going to need to show evidence for that assertion.

Then we see the claims being heightened, in that Trump was actively conspiring to keep them hidden, and has obstructed efforts to find them.

That's because the evidence shows that this is what happened.

How can I be sure that these charges are not a fabricated illusion, created as a conspiracy to frame a former president by both Bidens lawyers, and the Bureau?

Where do you see any involvement from Biden's lawyers?

And what part of the indictment, specifically, points to *willful* retention? Is it only the boxes in the bathroom? If so, that doesn't prove, without a reasonable doubt, that he knew what was inside them.

No, it's not just the boxes in the bathroom. The photo of the boxes in the bathroom was only in the indictment because it was material evidence for a text exchange in which two Trump employees discussed moving documents to that bathroom for storage. It's just part of the documentation of the movement of the boxes - they were later moved to the storage room, which is where the FBI found them when they executed their search warrant.

The evidence for "willful retention" is as follows:

1. A photo, taken by Walt Nauta, of spilled documents in the storage room, at least one of which was classified. In cleaning that up, he would have seen this classified document and known that there was at least one such document on the premises. From the text exchange, it appears that Trump saw this photo as well.

2. A recorded interview (recorded with Trump's knowledge and consent) on July 21, 2021 between Trump and a writer and publisher working on a book, in which Trump showed them a document and said that it was classified, specifying that he could have declassified it when he was president, but didn't, to which a staffer said "Yeah, now we have a problem."

3. The testimony of a PAC (Political Action Committee) representative who stated that Trump showed him a classified map of military installations in a foreign country, telling him that he "shouldn't be showing this" and not to get to close. The PAC representative did not have a security clearance.

4. Security footage which shows boxes of documents being moved from the storage room to Trump's residence before Trump's attorneys conducted their search of the boxes in compliance with the May 11, 2022 subpoena. In total, 64 boxes were removed from the storage room and only 30 were returned. The attorneys were not told about this and only searched the boxes in the storage room.

5. The presence of 27 documents with classification markings in Trump's personal safe.

In total, he was only charged with 31 counts of willful retention of classified material despite the fact that the FBI found 102 classified documents at Mar-a-Lago when they executed their warrant. One of those counts was for the document photographed spilled on the floor, and I would guess that the other 30 refer to those found in Trump's personal safe and those shown to people without proper security clearances.

 

[adrianmonk]

So am I. But the prevailing argument here of those who try to excuse their behavior remains, "But it's different!"
I'm very interested in seeing how those investigations turn out, and how the results will be received.

Probably because it is different in one aspect. According to the indictment, Trump took action to prevent the documents from being returned, whereas Biden and Pence (at least from what we know today) did not. Mens Rea matters. If Trump had returned the documents when asked the first time, I am perfectly fine with him not being charged.

Either way, Trump, Biden and Pence should be held accountable, because if the holder of the highest office cannot be held accountable, what is the point ?

 

[Belk]

Are you saying that the former vice President of the United States had classified documents that he did not have the ability to declassify stored in his garage for close to a decade and did not realize it until 2023? His storing them in an unprotected garage and in a public office center in PA is not holding onto them?

I thought just being in possession of them is what was against the law, not the willingness of giving them back after 8 or nine years.

I don't care what you think. Only what the law says. Come back when someone brings a case. Until then this is just a bunch of whataboutism. Something you seem to object to when others do it

 

[Aldebaran]

I don't care what you think. Only what the law says. Come back when someone brings a case. Until then this is just a bunch of whataboutism. Something you seem to object to when others do it

The law says the president has the right to declassify any document that was once classified.

 

[Belk]

The law says the president has the right to declassify any document that was once classified.

That's nice. Let us know when that becomes relevant.

 

[Aldebaran]

That's nice. Let us know when that becomes relevant.

Apparently, it became relevant about 14 minutes ago:

I don't care what you think. Only what the law says.

 

[Belk]

Apparently, it became relevant about 14 minutes ago:

Nope. Sure didn't.

 

[Aldebaran]

Nope. Sure didn't.

Are you saying that what you claim to care about isn't relevant?

 

[Belk]

Are you saying that what you claim to care about isn't relevant?

Ah. My apologies. Let me clear this up for you. As I said earlier, I do not find conversing with you productive. Toodles.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Same with Pence.

And he wants to run as a "law and order" candidate.

 

[JosephZ]

The law says the president has the right to declassify any document that was once classified.

Classified documents from the Department of Energy covered under the Atomic Energy Act, which Trump had, can't be unilaterally declassified by the president. As for the others, there is a process; a process Trump didn't follow.

 

[hislegacy]

I don't care what you think. Only what the law says. Come back when someone brings a case. Until then this is just a bunch of whataboutism. Something you seem to object to when others do it

My apologies - I was asking about something you brought up.

 

[Belk]

My apologies - I was asking about something you brought up.

No, you were asking about something someone else brought up that I responded to.

 

[hislegacy]

I thought just being in possession of them is what was against the law, not the willingness of giving them back after 8 or nine years.

I don't care what you think. Only what the law says. Come back when someone brings a case. Until then this is just a bunch of whataboutism. Something you seem to object to when others do it

I'm back with a legal question:

Is possession of classified material no longer illegal if you return said material after years of having it?

 

[RocksInMyHead]

I'm back with a legal question:

Is possession of classified material no longer illegal if you return said material after years of having it?

I'm not certain that there are any criminal penalties for simply possessing classified materials. You're not allowed to have them, but if you don't know that you have them (or prosecutors can't prove that you knew) and no one asks you to return them, then they can't really charge you with anything. See 18 U.S. Code § 793. Trump is charged specifically under section (e).

 

[Tinker Grey]

I'm not certain that there are any criminal penalties for simply possessing classified materials. You're not allowed to have them, but if you don't know that you have them (or prosecutors can't prove that you knew) and no one asks you to return them, then they can't really charge you with anything. See 18 U.S. Code § 793. Trump is charged specifically under section (e).

I believe this is correct. @RDKirk seems to have more direct experience than I do.

I am a defense contractor with various clearances. We are required to do repeat training every year. I confess I don't pay too close attention because I avoid situations where I need to know "the stuff". I tell auditors that I don't know this-or-that, but I know who to ask.

In any case, IIRC, I can possess classified materials. If I am on the move with them, then I must have the material on my person at all times no matter how inconvenient (e.g., take them with you to the bathroom). Note however if I'm moving something I'd better have permission. And I won't be the only one in trouble if no one notices that should have noticed.

INTENT MATTERS: There have been a few times over the years where there has been spillage (leaking of classified information). This has been in the form of emails "in the clear". That is, on the company's network which has access to the outside world. What generally happens is some gov't employee aggregates enough information in a single email (or chain of emails) that it qualifies as classified and sends it to one of the company's employees who then reports a problem. What happens then is that the computers of the sender and all the recipients are confiscated and "scrubbed". Many an engineer has been upset by losing a lot of work. (Keep a backup, buddy). The paths on the network are evaluated and they try to determine if the info got any further.

You know how many went to prison? None. You know how many people got fired? None. Why? It was an accident. Stuff happens. IF SOMEONE TRIED TO COVER IT UP, then that person would be summarily fired and FBI would be notified of the details who would then decide what to do with the situation.

In a similar situation, LegalEagle (Youtube channel) did a review of some Trump tax-stuff around the time of his first impeachment (IIRC). The lawyer on the channel, thought some of the revealed stuff was dodgy, BUT he thought nothing would come of it because it is "really difficult to prove intent".

Yeah, intent matters. As far as we know, Biden and Pence had no intent to do anything with the material nor even knew they had the material. They should be in the clear. The Pence case is apparently closed. Biden's is not.

 

[Say it aint so]

He wasn't president when he took them.
He didn't know they were there, which indicates gross neglegence.
He was hypocritical of Trump by claiming Trump having documents, and then tried excusing himself.
He didn't even have the docs in a secured building.

So what's worse?

Not knowing they were there. Discovering they were there, and turning them straight over.

--or--

Knowing they were there. Hiding what was there. Asking your attorney to lie about them. Purposely showing others who don't have clearances top secrets. And still claiming, "there mine, mine, mine."

Again, like comparing apples versus lugnuts.

 

[Bradskii]

It seems like a lot of people are more in favor of punishment than they are with promoting the greatest common good.

...There is no lesson to be learned from this.

The lesson will be not to take classified documents out of the WH.

...There is no good that will come of this.

Someone who has possibly broken the law will be punished if found guilty.

...Trump will not be stopped politically from this.

Probably not. But that's not the point of the indictment.

...This is just a technicality.

It's illegal.