TRUMP CONVICTED

BudmanTX

Well-Known Member
I think most of the documents and obstruction charges will be made in DC and some could be brought in Florida, especially for the staff and aids there. Much has to do with the national archives and DOJ in DC and documents stolen from there but there are additional crimes committed just in Florida by Trump and others. We won't have too long to find out, in leaks are happening daily, Donald is panicking and so are others since Mark is squealing! :lol:
naw the obstruction and the rest of the documents were found in florida total of a 103 of them, that why there is a floridian grand jury
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
naw the obstruction and the rest of the documents were found in florida total of a 103 of them, that why there is a floridian grand jury
They have cause for DC for a lot of it, we will see soon enough, I figure since indictments should drop from both soon and perhaps be consolidated under one federal judge in DC. I don't believe we will have to wait very long and neither does Donald who is sweating bullets as the walls close in. Let's see if he gets bail, after when he goes down, that will be the next question after the judge owns his ass upon arrangement and will Jack oppose his release...
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member

BREAKING: DOJ Prepared to INDICT Trump as Meadows Makes STUNNING Move

Special Counsel Jack Smith is ready to indict Donald Trump as early as this week and that Mark Meadows has agreed to plead guilty to several federal charges as part of a deal he has already received for limited immunity in exchange for his testimony.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member

WORST DAY YET for Trump in Federal Inquiry

14,149 views Jun 7, 2023
The moment Harry has been waiting for… Mark Meadows has testified before Jack Smith’s grand jury in the January 6th federal inquiry. Harry explains what his testimony means and why this is such an important step in Jack Smith’s broader investigation.
 

CunningCanuk

Well-Known Member

BREAKING: DOJ Prepared to INDICT Trump as Meadows Makes STUNNING Move

Special Counsel Jack Smith is ready to indict Donald Trump as early as this week and that Mark Meadows has agreed to plead guilty to several federal charges as part of a deal he has already received for limited immunity in exchange for his testimony.
I’m getting a “Sammy the bull” vibe with this Meadows development. It looks like the latest teflon don is going down.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member

From burning evidence to smoking gun: See Trump nightmare witness: Melber Report

15,791 views Jun 7, 2023 #Trump #JackSmith #WhiteHouse
Top White House aide Mark Meadows testified in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s two Trump probes. It comes as The Guardian reports Trump’s lawyers have been informed he is the target of a criminal investigation in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case. In this special report, MSNBC Chief Legal Correspondent Ari Melber breaks down why Meadows is so key in the investigation and the damning evidence.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
He's a good lawyer. If anybody were just listening to him, they would be convinced that there isn't a clear case. Trump was just following normal procedures, just like Obama and W. He just needed time to sort through everything. NARA did not provide him with a facility near his home like they did for Obama and W so that the documents could be safely stored. The people they were working with were oppositional. That sort of thing. When cornered, he tosses out several hypothetical alternatives. Note his use of "could be". These "could beees" are red herrings and he's good at it. "It could be that the reason for the break is that the Grand Jury expired and they need to convene a new one". Umm no, it didn't. Also "it could be interpreted a few different ways". Actually, no. Trump's lawyer declared in an affidavit that no more documents being requested by NARA were remaining at MAL. This is not something that could be interpreted in any other way.

His defense of Trump regarding Jan 6 was classic. When asked how Trump could not know he lost the election after being told so in the courts, by Trump's own staff and by government officials, Palatore said:

"If that's the evidence at the time but that's not the evidence at the time. Some people were telling him there was fraud, some were telling him there was no fraud. For the judicial rulings, some of them reached a partial ruling based upon the merits, based upon not a complete thing, a lot of them said it was threshold issues of standing and so yes there were a lot of judicial rulings against him but none of them said OK, you parties have gone through a complete discovery, you've actually gone through everything and based on the merits this is what the decision is. In fact a lot of those lawsuits at the time, they were seeking these injunctions without discovery and I think that in retrospect had some of those people said "that we are not seeking an injunction now, we are seeking an expedited discovery""

Meet the Press/Chuck Todd asked: "You are saying he had a bad legal team? Is that what you think?"

Paltore's answer: "I think the way some of these things were conducted, certainly some by Sidney Powell (chuckles), were lawsuits that were conducted or criticized after the fact, I think if they had gone for expedited discovery and said, "look, we have an indication of smoke, we don't know if there is a fire, if there is a fire over there, look tell them to open the box and let's have a look. If there is a fire, I'm going to ask for an injunction, if there isn't a fire I'm going to come back and dismiss the case". If they had done that from the beginning there would be a different story. Instead "I have smoke, can you overturn the election? And the judge said "no". "

God damn him for his lie. That lie continues to damage US Democracy to this day. There was no smoke indicating election fraud except the smoke Trump was blowing. Christopher Krebs, the guy who oversaw cyber security for the election said it was the most secure in US history and was able to prove that it was. For doing a perfect job, saying so in an interview and being able to prove it, Trump fired him. Then hired people to tell him what he wanted them to say.

Palatore's argument that Trump is innocent because he had bad lawyers working for him is not new. Hasn't that kind of defense been tried and failed already? Also, look at the alternative scenario Palatore is advocating that he said should have happened "expedited discovery". Of what? It's all just more delay, delay, delay only what he's advocating is delaying the transfer of power from Trump to Biden. "Should seek expedited discovery". Then it all gets snarled up in court. There was no smoke. There never was any smoke. Every investigation into the election over the past three years did not show fraud and the only proof that was "discovered" proved the election was a clean one.

Throughout the interview, Palatore picked and chose the facts he was willing to discuss (he refused to answer several direct questions on the basis that they were "confidential"). On the topics he chose to discuss, in his soft voice, he would put questions and conflicting information around the hard facts to make it seem that things were not as they appeared. Red herrings. If I were looking at doing hard time for my crimes and had the money to pay him, he'd be on my team.

My guess is he thinks Trump is going down and is jumping ship before it does. His reason? "Irreconcilable conflicts with members of the legal team." He explains "I had difficulty doing the job I had to do." He didn't want to expand on it in the interview. I guess that Palatore thinks Trump is heading into a disaster and is jumping ship before the shit storm gets his poorly fitting suit dirty.
Then he should say so, and shut his fucking lying mouth otherwise.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
books are and will be written and movies made...
covfefefrontcover_1-2487377387.jpg

It's too bad all 6 three stooges have passed away, they would been naturals to star in a trump movie...
If they make a new one, Borat ans John Stewart definitely need to be in it, and roger stone can play the penguin...but i don't think roger stone is playing...
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
If Trump was the kingpin, Mark is the keystone of a larger republican conspiracy, he is a key witness and someone who will need to deal away decades of time and that means other people's asses, Trump, his cronies and republican congress people among others.
IF they need him to...They seem to have a shitload of evidence without even calling him as a witness.
He could be just as fucked as everyone else, if they don't feel they need his testimony.
You're probably right, though, it would make their job a lot easier if they flipped him like a flapjack, but i'd be fucked if i told him that. I'd make him sell his cheap ass to me, so it was clear to both of us that i OWNED him.

posted this before i got to the end of the thread...I still would have made the worm squirm...
 

printer

Well-Known Member
‘Venue matters’: Trump charges could come from Florida federal grand jury
The late-stage presentation of evidence to a Florida grand jury is the latest sign that former President Trump may face trial in Miami as prosecutors work to insulate the Mar-a-Lago case from legal challenges stemming from location.
Special counsel Jack Smith has for months been calling witnesses before a D.C. grand jury on the matter, but a recent flurry of activity in the case – just days after Trump’s attorneys met with Justice Department prosecutors in Washington, has instead been in Florida.

This week a handful of witnesses have been appearing in Florida, including Trump aide Taylor Budowich who tweeted Wednesday that he was compelled to answer questions in the probe.
The move is a sign Smith is weighing filing charges there in addition to or instead of D.C. as defendants have a right to face trial where the alleged crime took place.
Determining the venue isn’t a low stakes decision – a defendant can move to dismiss charges they believe haven’t been brought in the correct location.

ADVERTISING

“It signals that charges are likely to be in Florida, which also signals that I think the special counsel likely did not believe that he had venue for one or more of the charges in D.C.,” Brandon Van Grack, a former top national security lawyer with the Department of Justice who is now in private practice, told The Hill.

But bringing the charges in Florida raises other considerations.
“For viewers who might be thinking ‘Who cares as long as there are charges? Whether it’s D.C. or Florida, why does the venue matter?’ It really could make a huge difference. The jury pool is different. The judges are different,” Andrew Weissmann, who was one of the lead prosecutors on the Mueller investigation, said during an appearance on MSNBC.

“Also, D.C. is a location where the court is very used to dealing with classified information. There’s an expertise there. So in terms of speed, getting this case to trial, the venue matters.”

Trump’s legal team has been informed he is a target in the Mar-a-Lago probe, a move that usually precedes the filing of charges.
Trump could face a multitude of charges in connection with the mishandling of records at Mar-a-Lago, including Espionage Act charges for willful retention of documents, as well as obstruction of justice charges stemming from the effort to keep them.




But while the effort to recover the documents stemmed from Washington – first from the National Archives and then from the Department of Justice – the timeline of the movement of the documents is at play in the case.
Trump’s legal team argued in a Supreme Court brief that he was still president while the boxes containing the classified documents were moved to Florida.
If true, his team may be able to successfully argue to a judge that the conduct in question was initiated in the Sunshine State.

Though the Justice Department could try and make the case that Trump had involvement in the packing of the boxes during the D.C.-based transition, Van Grack notes that several circuits have determined that preparatory acts alone cannot be used to determine venue.
For obstruction of justice charges too, much of the activity appears to have occurred in Florida.
Prosecutors have zeroed in on a number of actions at Mar-a-Lago, from the failure to turn over all classified records following a subpoena last summer to video camera footage showing the movement of boxes in and out of a storage room.

A D.C. judge compelled testimony from Trump attorney Evan Corcoran after determining he may have been misled about how many documents remained at Mar-a-Lago. Corcoran returned 38 in response to the June 2022 subpoena, while the FBI found over 100 more when they searched the residence in August.

Judges can pierce attorney-client privilege if they believe legal advice was given in furtherance of a crime, and Corcoran has since recused himself from the case.

Most recently, CNN reported that prosecutors have also been asked questions about the flooding of the room that housed the servers that stored the security footage after a Mar-a-Lago employee drained a pool.

Obstruction charges in this case require proving a defendant knowingly concealed records and that they knowingly sought to impede an investigation.
While subpoenas for the documents and video footage may have been issued in Washington, the D.C. circuit has held that the venue must be tied to where the unlawful conduct was committed.
On that front, prosecutors could be eyeing charges for more than just Trump.

Justice Department officials have also been examining Walt Nauta, Trump’s valet who was spotted on security camera footage moving some of the boxes.

Tim Parlatore, who until last month served as one of Trump’s attorneys in the matter and who has maintained the former president should not face charges in the probe, said there would be no basis for charging Nauta in D.C., while the same holds true for Trump.
“Ultimately I haven’t seen anything in this case that would indicate that D.C. has jurisdiction. It’s something that when [top DOJ prosecutor] Jay Bratt opened the investigation, he started with a D.C. grand jury. I don’t think they had any basis to believe that there was jurisdiction in D.C. but that’s what he did. And that’s what Smith inherited,” Parlatore said.

“If they’re actually now getting down to where the rubber meets the road, they have to really consider can they make out venue.”
It’s not entirely an either/or decision for Smith.

Prosecutors could bring different charges in different jurisdictions, trying Trump in two different cases.
Some see a benefit to bringing certain charges in D.C., where judges more routinely deal with classified information and some consider the jury pool to be more favorable to the Justice Department.

On the warrant to search Mar-a-Lago, prosecutors also noted they were investigating charges for concealment or removal of government records, a crime that requires showing a willful effort to keep the government from accessing its documents.
The charge could be one of the safest bets for bringing in D.C.

“The existence of a separate grand jury in Florida considering evidence in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case strongly suggests that there may be *two* indictments due to venue issues, as there was in the [Paul] Manafort case,” Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, wrote on Twitter, referencing Trump’s former campaign manager.
“Certain potential crimes occurred *only* in Florida.”

But Van Grack said he doesn’t think that’s likely given DOJ’s own timeline considerations.
“It’s not that you can’t bring charges into different districts. But let’s also keep in mind, the special counsel, the Department of Justice has to try this case as quickly as possible to minimize the impact on the election. So the notion of bringing two different cases in two districts, I think would seem unlikely,” he said.
“You can do it. It delays things. It takes additional time. And I think it would be unlikely considering the time pressure that the Department of Justice is under to pursue that course.”

Weissmann on Thursday wrote that the safest bet is to bring the case in Florida.
“All else being equal, the prudent prosecutor will be reluctant to choose a venue where, if the government gets the venue decision wrong, it cannot proceed to try the defendant in another district for her crimes,” he wrote.

“Thus, although Florida may be a less advantageous district for the government — given its jury pool and its judges, who are less steeped in handling classified document cases…Florida is legally a less risky venue at this juncture.”
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
IF they need him to...They seem to have a shitload of evidence without even calling him as a witness.
He could be just as fucked as everyone else, if they don't feel they need his testimony.
You're probably right, though, it would make their job a lot easier if they flipped him like a flapjack, but i'd be fucked if i told him that. I'd make him sell his cheap ass to me, so it was clear to both of us that i OWNED him.

posted this before i got to the end of the thread...I still would have made the worm squirm...
To get a deal Mark will have to sell out everybody and the more congress people and senators he helps to convict the more time he shaves off. Lindsey is vulnerable in Georgia and his ass would be worth a bit and the maga crowd in congress looks really nervous to me and have been making threats and noises. Mark could get a walk for blowing congress wide open and busting Gym Jordan and a host of others, Mark knows everybody who requested a pardon and there were a lot of them. Mark has nobody to sell out other than republicans, Trump is going down over the documents first and fast leaving them all holding the bag over J6. Donald will be gone for life when convicted for the MAL crimes and they are getting him as a bonus, Mark will plead guilty to a conspiracy and finger the others involved in the conspiracy from the witness stand.
 
Top