Trump’s New Indictments

Of all the commentary I’ve seen today about the new indictments, this is the best bit:

According to the document, on June 27, 2022, De Oliveira told someone who is identified as “Trump Employee 4” that “‘the boss’ wanted the server deleted.” When the employee balked, “De Oliveira then insisted to Trump Employee 4 that ‘the boss’ wanted the server deleted and asked, ‘what are we going to do?’’ (“The boss,” as it turns out, is not a particularly failsafe nickname for the guy in charge—in this case, Donald Trump.)

Nauta was allegedly covering his own tracks with a similar level of diligence. According to the charging document, after multiple subpoenas were sent for missing Mar-a-Lago security camera footage in June 2022, Nauta made a quick change of plans. Instead of traveling to Illinois with Trump the next day, “he changed his schedule and began to make arrangements to go to Palm Beach, Florida instead.”

Nauta then “texted one person that he would not be traveling with Trump the next day because he had a family emergency and used ‘shushing’ emojis; at 9:48pm that night he texted a Secret Service agent that he had to check on a family member in Florida.” This was allegedly all part of “the attempt to delete security camera footage” to prevent federal prosecutors from obtaining it.

Ah, the “shushing emojis!” Not the best ones to use whilst covering up a potential crime.

The consensus appears to be that Jack Smith is putting together a case that even a South Florida jury of MAGA-heads would find incriminating. See David Kurtz at TPM, The New Evidence Against Donald Trump In The MAL Case Is BRUTAL.

Aaron Blake writes at WaPo that the new indictments and the supporting documentation accomplish three things:

One, they strengthen the case for obstruction of justice. With shushing emojis.

Two, one of the new indictments is a “presentation concerning military activity in a foreign country.” This appears to refer to the Pentagon’s standing plans to invade Iran if that ever became necessary. This was the document Trump is heard on tape admitting is classified even as he waves it around and tells random people to look at it.

And three, the prosecution no doubt is attempting to flip Trump employee Carlos De Oliveira.

I’ll add to this post if I hear of more juicy bits today.

10 thoughts on “Trump’s New Indictments

  1. The consensus appears to be that Jack Smith is putting together a case that even a South Florida jury of MAGA-heads would find incriminating.

    Ah, Maha, dreaming the impossible dream. Orange Julius could get on the stand and testify that everything he did was illegal and he knew it was illegal while he was doing it… and any MAGAt on the jury would still vote to acquit.

    1
    • Re your concern about a hung jury: it could happen but…

      The authors of the Constitution anticipated that criminal charges could and probably would be brought against individuals for corrupt reasons. King George had used the tactic repeatedly. Corrupt judges had sole authority to carry out the king's wishes even when the case was totally without merit. 

      Keep in mind – the founders anticipated that the US could easily follow that path if there were corrupt leaders and they set up a system to take the power away from the "king." Any defendant in a criminal case may demand a trial by jury. The verdict is rendered by a panel with NO interest in the outcome. This doesn't guarantee a just verdict. just an impartial one. It's one of the finest features of the first modern democracy. 

      Not enough pundits are defending the trial-by-jury system. If Trump is being politically persecuted, he should be embracing a trial as the opportunity to vindicate himself. If the charges are false, it should be easy to pick apart the prosecution. 

      The unfortunate truth is that DOJ has occasionally used its power to put out a political hit. But not with indictments because that blows up in your face when the jury fails to convict. (See John Durham.) No, the DOJ publicly opens an investigation during the campaign and then closes the case after the election. (See the evidence in the prosecutors who were fired at the beginning of the Bush second term because they wouldn't abuse their power that way.) 

      Trump and his lawyers aren't trying to make the case that the evidence of guilt isn't there or is flawed or tainted. Not beyond saying everything Trump did was "perfect."  Trump is screwed when the evidence is presented to a jury, I think. He seems to know it, which is why Trump's made repeated public calls to Congress to intervene to stop the process BEFORE the evidence becomes public. (See Trump's repeated attempts to suppress the Special Grand Jury Report in Georgia.  For the innocent man, the truth will set you free. Trump seems to perceive – the truth will send him to jail.

      4
      • I am not scoffing at the jury system per se. I am scoffing at the notion that any amount of facts would convince MAGAts to abandon their God Emperor.

        1
        • Which tells me you've never served on a jury, or, if you did, it was a weird one. 

        • There are degrees of everything. There were Trump voters on the E. Jean Carroll jury who sided with E. Jean Carroll. The voir dire process should weed out the hardcore Trump fanatics. I’m not too concerned, really.

      • "It was a perfect Obstruction of Justice."

        Trump's co-defendants are his 'former Navy cook / bodyman' and his Mar-A-Lago maintenance man.  The "best and the brightest"?  Employee #4 is the Mar-A-Lago IT person who refused to participate in destroying evidence.

        If it came to a battle of wits, I would choose someone who attacked the Capitol Building in an ultra-light with the evil intention of delivering mail letters to Congress.

        1
        •  Thanks. I've not forgotten the message I delivered in those letters.

          For the moment, we have to defeat fascism. First cut off the head of the snake. That means putting TFG in prison for crimes he committed. The people who enabled Trump need to get their appropriate punishment. It may be jail,  disbarment,  civil trials, and monetary damages. The USSC has to be straightened out. A lot of state-level legalized election rigging has to be struck down. 

          Then we have to return to building the wall. (Not that wall.) A wall of separation between big money and OUR government. I want that phrase to catch on – it's the key to unlocking democracy that serves people (instead of serving big business and fat cats.)

          I still plan to live long enough to see it happen.

           

          4
  2. Hey Donnie,

    "The Sopranos" called.

    They want their mob plot script rejects back!

    1

Comments are closed.