Trump Regrets Leaving White House as He Peddles Lies About Voter Fraud

In a recent rally in Pennsylvania, former President Donald Trump expressed regret over leaving the White House, stating he “shouldn’t have left” as he continues to push his baseless claims of widespread voter fraud. This rhetoric not only signals his persistent delusions about the 2020 election outcome but also hints at his unwillingness to accept potential defeat in the upcoming 2024 elections. His remarks come just days before the election, showcasing a campaign centered around grievance rather than policy.

Trump’s comments during the rally reflected a tone of resentment and self-pity as he lamented his departure from office. Significantly, he implied that the Democratic Party is “demonic,” illustrating his descent into extreme rhetoric that has characterized his political narrative. This kind of language not only alienates moderate voters but also stokes unnecessary hostility among his supporters.

Moreover, Trump’s continued insinuations that he will not recognize the election results unless he deems them “fair” raises alarms about the potential for further political unrest. His previous behavior, culminating in the January 6 Capitol riots, serves as a stark reminder of the dangers inherent in his rhetoric. His insistence on the presence of “hundreds of lawyers” at polling booths further exemplifies his unfounded paranoia surrounding electoral integrity.

Additionally, Trump’s sluggish and hoarse delivery during the rally indicates a lack of vigor that many observers may interpret as a fading influence. His obsession with personal grievances, rather than engaging in a constructive dialogue about the future, suggests that he is increasingly out of touch with the needs and concerns of American voters.

As he marches toward the 2024 election, Trump’s fixation on his past grievances over substantive policies highlights a troubling trend in his leadership style. With the specter of his divisive presidency still looming, voters must consider whether embracing such a figure is beneficial for the nation moving forward.

(h/t: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/03/us/politics/trump-pa-rally-election.html)

Trump says he’s received a target letter from special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 investigators – POLITICO

Skip to Main Content POLITICO Politico Logo Congress Pro E&E News Search Search WASHINGTON & POLITICS Congress White House Elections Legal Magazine Foreign Affairs 2024 ELECTIONS News GOP Candidate Tracker STATE POLITICS & POLICY California Florida New Jersey New York GLOBAL POLITICS & POLICY Brussels Canada United Kingdom POLICY NEWS Agriculture Cannabis Cybersecurity Defense Education Energy & Environment Finance & Tax Health Care Immigration Labor Sustainability Technology Trade Transportation NEWSLETTERS Playbook Playbook PM West Wing Playbook POLITICO Nightly POLITICO Weekend The Recast Huddle All Newsletters COLUMNISTS Alex Burns John Harris Jonathan Martin Michael Schaffer Jack Shafer Rich Lowry SERIES & MORE Breaking News Alerts Podcasts Video The Fifty Women Rule Matt Wuerker Cartoons Cartoon Carousel POLITICO Live Upcoming Events Previous Events Follow us Twitter Instagram Facebook My Account Log In Log Out legal Trump says he’s received a target letter from special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 investigators It’s the clearest sign yet that Trump may soon face his third criminal indictment — this time for his effort to subvert the 2020 election results. While the specific crimes that former President Donald Trump may be charged with are not clear, Smith’s team has been eyeing potential obstruction charges related to Trump’s actions in the days leading up to Jan. 6 and on that day itself. | Giorgio Viera/AFP via Getty Images By Kyle Cheney 07/18/2023 09:32 AM EDT Updated: 07/18/2023 10:07 AM EDT Link Copied Donald Trump said Tuesday he expects to be indicted by special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 grand jury, citing a “target letter” he received from investigators on Sunday. Such a letter “almost always means an arrest and indictment,” Trump, who has already been criminally indicted twice in recent months, wrote on Truth Social. Trump said the letter, which is prosecutors’ typical precursor to a charging decision, offered him a chance to speak to the grand jury, which meets at the federal courthouse in Washington D.C., later this week. Targets of criminal investigations rarely speak to grand juries, and Trump has not exercised that right in the two other criminal cases in which he’s been charged. Legal Tracking the Trump criminal cases By POLITICO Staff The letter is the clearest sign yet that Smith is close to seeking an indictment for Trump’s role in the effort to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power on Jan. 6, 2021. While the specific crimes that Trump may be charged with are not clear, Smith’s team has been eyeing potential obstruction charges related to Trump’s actions in the days leading up to Jan. 6 and on that day itself — including pressuring his vice president, Mike Pence, to unilaterally block the certification of Joe Biden’s electoral victory. Investigators have also examined Trump’s consideration of a plan to seize voting machines from the states, his campaign of false claims that the election was stolen and his role in advancing a plan to assemble bogus slates of presidential electors to stoke a conflict ahead of Jan. 6. It’s unclear whether other figures associated with Trump’s effort are also in Smith’s sights. Investigators have interviewed dozens of prominent figures in Trump’s orbit, including Pence, in recent months. Attorneys John Eastman and Jeff Clark — two Trump associates considered key allies in his effort — had their phones seized last year. Trump revealed the target letter as he prepares to fight on another front to delay a criminal trial — also resulting from charges brought by Smith — related to his hoarding of national security secrets at his Mar-a-Lago estate. Trump’s attorneys will be in court in Fort Pierce, Fla. on Tuesday afternoon asking for the trial to be postponed until after the 2024 election, a prospect that Smith’s team has vehemently opposed. Trump is facing an extraordinary array of criminal charges and investigations. In addition to the two cases Smith has mounted, he’s facing charges in Manhattan for allegedly falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment scheme to a porn actress accusing him of an extramarital affair in 2016. And a district attorney based in Fulton County, Ga. has convened a grand jury that is expected to consider charging Trump and allies for efforts to subvert the 2020 election in Georgia. Many aspects of Smith’s Jan. 6 investigation were previously pursued by the House select committee on Jan. 6, which interviewed hundreds of figures associated with Trump’s scheme to seize a second term despite losing the election. The committee concluded that Trump was at the center of a complex, months-long effort to sow doubt about the election results and then orchestrate several attempts to reverse the outcome despite no evidence of significant fraud. The panel focused in particular on Trump’s effort to pressure state and local officials to appoint “alternative” slates of presidential electors in seven states won by Biden and then use those slates as a pretense to disrupt the Jan. 6 session of Congress — when the Constitution and federal laws require Congress to meet and certify the election. That session, also according to the Constitution and law, is managed by the vice president, who doubles as president of the Senate. When no state officials acquiesced, Trump turned to a cadre of lawyers, including Eastman, who promoted fringe alternatives to keep Trump’s prospects alive. Eastman famously pressured Pence and his top aides to violate provisions of the Electoral Count Act — the law that has governed the Jan. 6 session of Congress since 1887 — to advance the effort. Prosecutors and the select committee have also focused on Trump’s effort to assemble a massive crowd in Washington on Jan. 6, part of his plan to pressure Pence and GOP lawmakers to help reverse the results, and then to steer it toward the Capitol after Pence made clear he wouldn’t go along with the plan. Trump inflamed the crowd with his rhetoric and then stoked anger further when he attacked Pence — even as violence was underway at the Capitol — accusing him of lacking “courage.” Pence and lawmakers were forced to evacuate and delay the count of electoral votes for six hours while law enforcement and the National Guard worked to clear the mob. Filed under: Donald Trump, Donald Trump 2024, 2020 Presidential Candidates, 2020 Elections, Jack Smith, Trump Indictment POLITICO Link Copied About Us Advertising Breaking News Alerts Careers Credit Card Payments Digital Edition FAQ Feedback Headlines Photos POWERJobs Press Print Subscriptions Request A Correction Write For Us RSS Site Map Terms of Service Privacy Policy Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information and Opt Out of Targeted Advertising © 2023 POLITICO LLC

@[100044274887410:2048:Donald J. Trump] will be indicted again for his scheme to stop the peaceful transfer of power by planning on the DOJ to seize voting machines, assembling fake electors, his fake electors submitting fraudulent votes, pressuring state officials to ignore votes and hand him the election, and of course for sending an armed mob to the Capitol to stop his Vice President from participating in the certification of the election.

[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/18/trump-says-hes-received-a-target-letter-from-special-counsel-jack-smiths-jan-6-investigators-00106776]

Trump-appointed judge gives a ‘break’ to Jan. 6 rioter at sentencing

WASHINGTON — A federal judge nominated by former President Donald Trump gave a “break” Friday to a man who used bear spray during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, saying he did not deserve the prison sentence requested by prosecutors. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden sentenced Tyler Bensch, who pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts in connection with the riot, to two years of probation and 60 days home incarceration. Prosecutors had requested nine months in federal prison. “You participated in a national embarrassment,” McFadden said before imposing the sentence. “You came ready for trouble.” But, he added, Bensch’s involvement was “pretty minor” when compared to others, while noting that his age was a mitigating factor. Bensch was 19 years old on Jan. 6, 2021. “I am giving you this break because of your age” at the time and a lack of criminal history, McFadden said. “This doesn’t need to define you or your life.” Bensch was arrested in August alongside members of the “B Squad” who were associated with the far-right Three Percent movement and “Guardians of Freedom,” as well as Jeremy Liggett, a far-right extremist who ran unsuccessfully for a congressional House seat last year. Bensch pleaded guilty to disorderly and disruptive conduct on restricted grounds along with theft of government property, admitting that he helped carry a stolen police shield from the grounds of the Capitol. In an interview with the FBI after his arrest, Bensch said B-Squad members took part in firearms training and hand-to-hand combat training ahead of the attack. In their sentencing memo, federal prosecutors said Bensch “helped push others towards the violence” and carried a chemical irritant spray, which prosecutors said in court was bear spray. Bensch deployed the spray “against another rioter” that day. Recommended Hunter BidenWho is Mark Scarsi, the judge assigned to Hunter Biden’s new tax charges case? A tearful Bensch did not speak during Friday’s sentencing hearing, but his court-appointed attorney Peter Cooper said the Florida man deeply regretted his actions. Bensch, Cooper said, “didn’t have the maturity to understand what he was getting into” and “carries great remorse for what he did that day.” Cooper went on to say that Bensch hopes to start a career in law enforcement, adding that it’s “not beyond the realm of possibility” that he could do so even with his misdemeanors. Bensch is currently working for a pool cleaning company, and the conditions of his sentence will allow him to leave his home for employment during his 60 days of home detention. Bensch’s case was the impetus for the departure of a self-proclaimed FBI whistleblower to take his complaints to Republican members of Congress. Steve Friend, a former FBI special agent who was based in Florida at the time of Bensch’s arrest, had been scheduled to transport Bensch but refused to do so. Friend, according to a book he authored, told other FBI employees that he didn’t think that rioters who assaulted officers on Jan. 6 should be charged. He later testified before the GOP-led House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, a new panel that is focused on allegations that the government is unfairly targeting conservatives. Friend said he believed that federal authorities were bringing Jan. 6 defendants “to the gallows” because their cases were being tried in Washington, D.C. “They don’t stand a chance if they go to court,” Friend said. Rioters have been acquitted on many charges by both jurors and judges, with McFadden acquitting Jan. 6 defendant Matthew Martin a few months before Friend was supposed to help transport Bensch. McFadden on Friday also sentenced Bensch’s codefendant, Jonathan Rockholt, to five months in federal prison. Prosecutors had sought 13 months in prison. The Senate confirmed McFadden in 2017 in an 84-10 vote, with all opposition coming from Democrats. In a separate Jan. 6 case Friday, Barry Ramey was sentenced to five years in federal prison. Prosecutors had initially requested nine years in prison for the Proud Boy member who struck two officers with pepper spray, but U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich said that would create an unwarranted sentencing disparity. More than 1,000 people have been charged in connection with the Jan. 6 attack, and more than 300 have been sentenced to periods of incarceration. The longest sentence — 18 years — went to Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, who was convicted of seditious conspiracy. Ryan J. Reilly Ryan J. Reilly is a justice reporter for NBC News.

A federal judge nominated by former President Donald Trump gave a “break” Friday to a man who used bear spray during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, saying he did not deserve the prison sentence requested by prosecutors.

U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden sentenced Tyler Bensch, who pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts in connection with the riot, to two years of probation and 60 days home incarceration. Prosecutors had requested nine months in federal prison.

[https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna93170]

Trump Asked About I.R.S. Inquiry of F.B.I. Officials, Ex-Aide Says Under Oath – The New York Times

Skip to contentSkip to site index Politics Today’s Paper Trump Investigations Where the Inquiries Stand Tracking the Cases How the Cases Compare What if Trump Is Convicted? Possible Trial Dates AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENT Supported bySKIP ADVERTISEMENT Trump Asked About I.R.S. Inquiry of F.B.I. Officials, Ex-Aide Says Under Oath In a court filing, John Kelly, who was a chief of staff under Donald Trump, said the former president had asked about having the tax agency look into Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. Share full article John Kelly, a former White House chief of staff, in 2018.Credit…Doug Mills/The New York Times By Michael S. Schmidt July 7, 2023 John F. Kelly, who served as former President Donald J. Trump’s second White House chief of staff, said in a sworn statement that Mr. Trump had discussed having the Internal Revenue Service and other federal agencies investigate two F.B.I. officials involved in the investigation into his campaign’s ties to Russia. Mr. Kelly said that his recollection of Mr. Trump’s comments to him was based on notes that he had taken at the time in 2018. Mr. Kelly provided copies of his notes to lawyers for one of the F.B.I. officials, who made the sworn statement public in a court filing. “President Trump questioned whether investigations by the Internal Revenue Service or other federal agencies should be undertaken into Mr. Strzok and/or Ms. Page,” Mr. Kelly said in the statement. “I do not know of President Trump ordering such an investigation. It appeared, however, that he wanted to see Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page investigated.” Mr. Kelly’s assertions were disclosed on Thursday in a statement that was filed in connection with lawsuits brought by Peter Strzok, who was the lead agent in the F.B.I.’s Russia investigation, and Lisa Page, a former lawyer in the bureau, against the Justice Department for violating their privacy rights when the Trump administration made public text messages between them. The disclosures from Mr. Kelly, made under penalty of perjury, demonstrate the extent of Mr. Trump’s interest in harnessing the law enforcement and investigative powers of the federal government to target his perceived enemies. In the aftermath of Richard M. Nixon’s presidency, Congress made it illegal for a president to “directly or indirectly” order an I.R.S. investigation or audit. The New York Times reported last July that two of Mr. Trump’s greatest perceived enemies — James B. Comey, whom he fired as F.B.I. director, and Mr. Comey’s deputy, Andrew G. McCabe — were the subject of the same type of highly unusual and invasive I.R.S. audit. It is not known whether the I.R.S. investigated Mr. Strzok or Ms. Page. But Mr. Strzok became a subject in the investigation conducted by the special counsel John Durham into how the F.B.I. investigated Mr. Trump’s campaign. Neither Mr. Strzok nor Ms. Page was charged in connection with that investigation, which former law enforcement officials and Democrats have criticized as an effort to carry out Mr. Trump’s vendetta against the bureau. Mr. Strzok is also suing the department for wrongful termination. Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page exchanged text messages that were critical of Mr. Trump and were later made public by Rod J. Rosenstein, then the deputy attorney general under Mr. Trump, as he faced heavy criticism from Republicans on Capitol Hill who were trying to find ways to undermine him. The sworn statements from Mr. Kelly are similar to ones he made to The New York Times in November, in which he said that Mr. Trump had told him that he wanted a number of his perceived political enemies to be investigated by the I.R.S., including Mr. Comey, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page. Mr. Kelly told The Times last year that Mr. Trump’s demands were part of a broader pattern of attempts to use the Justice Department and his authority as president against people who had been critical of him, including seeking to revoke the security clearances of former top intelligence officials. In the sworn statement, Mr. Kelly said that Mr. Trump had discussed having the security clearances of Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page revoked, although Mr. Kelly did not take action on the idea. Mr. Kelly said that his notes showed that Mr. Trump discussed the investigations of the two on Feb. 21, 2018. “I did not make a note of every instance in which then President Trump made a comment about Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page,” Mr. Kelly said. “President Trump generally disapproved of note-taking in meetings. He expressed concern that the notes might later be used against him.” Mr. Kelly said that he never took any steps to follow through on Mr. Trump’s desires to have his enemies investigated. Mr. Trump has said he knew nothing about the audits of Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe and their spouses. The I.R.S.’s inspector general found last year that Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe had been randomly selected for the audits, though the inspector general’s report acknowledged some deviations from the I.R.S.’s rigorous rules for random selection when the agency made final selections of the returns that would be audited. Mr. Kelly told The Times last year that Mr. Trump had at times discussed using the I.R.S. and the Justice Department to address others in addition to Mr. Comey, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page. They included, Mr. Kelly said, the former C.I.A. director John O. Brennan; Hillary Clinton; and Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon and the owner of The Washington Post, whose coverage often angered Mr. Trump. Michael S. Schmidt is a Washington correspondent covering national security and federal investigations. He was part of two teams that won Pulitzer Prizes in 2018 — one for reporting on workplace sexual harassment and the other for coverage of President Trump and his campaign’s ties to Russia. More about Michael S. Schmidt A version of this article appears in print on , Section A, Page 14 of the New York edition with the headline: Trump Asked About an I.R.S. Inquiry of F.B.I. Officials. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe Share full article AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENT Site Index Site Information Navigation © 2023 The New York Times Company NYTCo Contact Us Accessibility Work with us Advertise T Brand Studio Your Ad Choices Privacy Policy Terms of Service Terms of Sale Site Map Canada International Help Subscriptions Manage Privacy Preferences

John F. Kelly, who served as former President Donald J. Trump’s second White House chief of staff, said in a sworn statement that Mr. Trump had discussed having the Internal Revenue Service and other federal agencies investigate two F.B.I. officials involved in the investigation into his campaign’s ties to Russia.

Mr. Kelly said that his recollection of Mr. Trump’s comments to him was based on notes that he had taken at the time in 2018. Mr. Kelly provided copies of his notes to lawyers for one of the F.B.I. officials, who made the sworn statement public in a court filing.

“President Trump questioned whether investigations by the Internal Revenue Service or other federal agencies should be undertaken into Mr. Strzok and/or Ms. Page,” Mr. Kelly said in the statement. “I do not know of President Trump ordering such an investigation. It appeared, however, that he wanted to see Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page investigated.”

-The New York Times

[https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/07/us/politics/trump-kelly-irs-fbi-strozk-page.html]

Trump rejected lawyers’ efforts to avoid classified documents indictment – The Washington Post

One of Donald Trump’s new attorneys proposed an idea in the fall of 2022: The former president’s team could try to arrange a settlement with the Justice Department.

The attorney, Christopher Kise, wanted to quietly approach Justice to see if he could negotiate a settlement that would preclude charges, hoping Attorney General Merrick Garland and the department would want an exit ramp to avoid prosecuting a former president. Kise would hopefully “take the temperature down,” he told others, by promising a professional approach and the return of all documents.

But Trump was not interested after listening to other lawyers who urged a more pugilistic approach, so Kise never approached prosecutors, three people briefed on the matter said. A special counsel was appointed months later.

Kise, a former solicitor general of Florida who was paid $3 million upfront to join Trump’s team last year, declined to comment.

That quiet entreaty last fall was one of many occasions when lawyers and advisers sought to get Trump to take a more cooperative stance in a bid to avoid what happened Friday. The Justice Department unsealed an indictment including more than three dozen criminal counts against Trump for allegedly keeping and hiding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Florida.

Trump, 77, now faces the most legally perilous moment of his life playing out in a federal court — charges that could bring decades in prison. He pleaded not guilty in Miami on Tuesday and vowed to fight the charges.

“President Trump has consistently been in full compliance with the Presidential Records Act, which is the only law that applies to Presidents and their records,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. “In the course of negotiations over the return of the documents, President Trump told the lead DOJ official, ‘anything you need from us, just let us know.’ Sadly, the weaponized DOJ rejected this offer of cooperation and conducted an unnecessary and unconstitutional raid on the President’s home in order to inflict maximum political damage on the leading presidential candidate.”

The PRA is not the only law applying to presidents and federal documents, as evidenced by the charges filed against Trump.

Since the National Archives first asked for the return of presidential documents in Trump’s possession in February 2021 and until a grand jury issued its indictment this month, Trump was repeatedly stubborn and eschewed opportunities to avoid criminal charges, according to people with knowledge of the case, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal internal details. They note that Trump was not charged for any documents he returned voluntarily.

Interviews with seven Trump advisers with knowledge of the probe indicate he misled his own advisers, telling them the boxes contained only newspaper clippings and clothes. He repeatedly refused to give the documents back, even when some of his longest-serving advisers warned of peril and some flew to Mar-a-Lago to beg him to return them.

When Trump returned 15 boxes early last year — leaving at least 64 more at Mar-a-Lago — he told his own advisers to put out statements to the National Archives and to the public that “everything” had been returned, The Washington Post has previously reported. But he quietly kept more than 100 classified documents.

Later, facing a grand jury subpoena, the indictment alleges the former president worked quietly with an aide to move boxes without telling his own lawyers, leading to a false attestation that every document had been returned.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”

Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

In an interview Wednesday, Fitton said he dined with Trump on Monday night at his club, eating filet mignon with the former president one day before his first court appearance on the document charges. “I saw him last night; he’s in a good mood. He’s serious and ready to fight under the law.”

Fitton, who appeared before the grand jury and was questioned about his role in both the Mar-a-Lago documents case and the investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, acknowledged he gave the advice to Trump but declined to discuss the details of their conversations. He added that he read the indictment and did not believe it laid out illegal or obstructive conduct. Multiple witnesses said they were asked about Fitton in front of a grand jury and the role he played in Trump’s decisions.

1/6

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”

Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.

Judicial Watch lost a lawsuit in 2012 that demanded the audio recordings be designated as presidential records and that the National Archives take custody of the recordings. A court opinion issued at the time stated that there was no legal mechanism for the Archives to force Clinton to turn over the recordings.

For his part, Fitton said Trump’s lawyers “should have been more aggressive in fighting the subpoenas and fighting for Trump.”

Trump’s unwillingness to give the documents back did not surprise those who knew him well. Former White House chief of staff John F. Kelly said that he was particularly unlikely to heed requests from people or agencies he disliked.

“He’s incapable of admitting wrongdoing. He wanted to keep it, and he says, ‘You’re not going to tell me what to do. I’m the smartest guy in the room,’” Kelly said Tuesday.

Other advisers said the FBI and National Archives wanting the documents so badly made Trump less likely to give them back.

Trump’s chances to avoid charges began in early 2021, according to current and former advisers. After Gary Stern, counsel at the National Archives, asked Trump’s team for the return of documents, some of his lawyers and advisers began advising him to return them. National Archives officials were privately baffled at what they viewed as inexplicably recalcitrant behavior and kept asking for answers to no avail.

In the fall of 2021, Alex Cannon, then a Trump attorney, urged the former president to return documents to the National Archives, repeatedly telling him that he was required to give them back, according to people familiar with the matter.

After months of talking to Trump and his staff, Cannon — referred to in the indictment as a “Trump Representative” — told Trump that the National Archives was threatening to go to Congress or to the Department of Justice if he did not return the documents, the people said.

“It’s mine,” Trump said, explaining why he did not want to give the materials back, according to people with knowledge of his comments.

That threat prompted Trump to eventually begin looking through some of his boxes — or “my papers” as he called them, according to text messages listed in the indictment sent by former assistant Molly Michael. He eventually returned 15 boxes of materials to the National Archives, in January 2022.

That was followed by Trump directing his lawyer and his spokesman to put out statements saying he had returned “everything” — which they declined to do. That episode became of interest to federal prosecutors, according to four people with knowledge of the matter.

After the National Archives in February found reams of classified material and disorganized boxes in February 2022, they referred the matter to the Justice Department for a potential investigation. Archives officials did not believe everything had been properly returned, The Post has reported.

They were right.

Trump had kept at least 64 boxes of documents, according to the indictment. Trump never believed that his home would be searched and thought that he would be able to keep the documents, two advisers said.

After being initially reluctant to be drawn into what they viewed as a dispute between the Archives and Trump, the Justice Department opened an investigation in April 2022 and sent a subpoena asking for all classified documents in May.

Meanwhile, Trump grew angry with his lawyers and chose new lawyers, bringing in Evan Corcoran to handle the matter at the recommendation of adviser Boris Epshteyn.

Shortly after the subpoena arrived, the indictment says, Corcoran and another lawyer met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago and told him he needed to comply. The indictment says Trump told the other lawyer not to return for the search of his property.

According to testimony Corcoran gave, he was encouraged by Trump to stonewall or not comply with the subpoena. Trump even suggested any “bad” documents could be plucked out of the file after Corcoran searched a storage room, according to the indictment.

“I really don’t want anybody looking through my boxes, I really don’t, I don’t want you looking through my boxes,” he said, according to Corcoran, as cited in the indictment. Trump also said, per the lawyer: “Well, what if we, what happens if we just don’t respond at all or don’t play ball with them?” and “Wouldn’t it be better if we just told them we don’t have anything there?”

But all the documents were not in the storage room, because the indictment alleges Trump and personal aide Walt Nauta moved some boxes without telling Corcoran. Nauta later helped pack some of the boxes to fly them from Mar-a-Lago to Bedminster, leading to a false attestation that everything had been returned, the indictment says.

A lawyer for Corcoran declined to comment on his testimony. A lawyer for Nauta, who is also charged in the indictment, declined to comment.

Kise, who originally urged a more cooperative approach, told others when he took the case that he believed that charges could be avoided. He began asking other advisers what happened during the subpoena process in an effort to understand why the Justice Department would take such an extraordinary step of searching the former president’s property.

Kise has largely been away from the documents case publicly in recent months as other lawyers pursued a more aggressive strategy, and Trump advisers say other lawyers badmouthed Kise to Trump.

In recent days, Kise was responsible for helping Trump find new lawyers in Florida — tapping his deep Rolodex in the state in a bid to find someone who’d be willing to work for Trump. In court on Tuesday in Miami, Kise was seated next to Trump as he was arraigned for 37 felony charges.

The latest: U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon overseeing Donald Trump’s classified documents case suggested that she might delay the planned scheduled, which includes a trial in May 2024.

The case: The criminal investigation looks into whether Trump took government secrets with him after he left the White House and obstructed a subsequent investigation. Trump has pleaded not guilty. Here’s what to know about the classified documents case.

The charges: Trump faces 40 separate charges in the documents case. Read the full text of the superseding indictment against Trump and our top takeaways from the indictment.

Can Trump still run for president? While it has never been attempted by a candidate from a major party before, Trump is allowed to run for president while under indictment in four separate cases — or even if he is convicted of a crime. Here’s how Trump’s indictment could impact the 2024 election.

@[100044274887410:2048:Donald J. Trump] rejected pleas from his D-level lawyers several times to quietly return the classified documents he stole, but instead opted to listen to the legal advice of not-a-lawyer @[2517459524978538:274:Tom Fitton] who runs the far-right group @[100064539227808:2048:Judicial Watch].

This is amazing because Judicial Watch was formed by Fitton to stop every probable policy of the @[100044322825129:2048:Barack Obama] administration, with occasional success, and transformed into a MAGA/QAnon/antivaxxer/anti-LGBTQ group. And now because of Tom Fitton, Donald Trump may spend the rest of his life in jail.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/]

Biden orders DNC and reelect to remain silent about Trump’s indictment – POLITICO

Skip to Main Content POLITICO Politico Logo Congress Pro E&E News Search Search WASHINGTON & POLITICS Congress White House Elections Legal Magazine Foreign Affairs 2024 ELECTIONS News GOP Candidate Tracker STATE POLITICS & POLICY California Florida New Jersey New York GLOBAL POLITICS & POLICY Brussels Canada United Kingdom POLICY NEWS Agriculture Cannabis Cybersecurity Defense Education Energy & Environment Finance & Tax Health Care Immigration Labor Sustainability Technology Trade Transportation NEWSLETTERS Playbook Playbook PM West Wing Playbook POLITICO Nightly POLITICO Weekend The Recast Huddle All Newsletters COLUMNISTS Alex Burns John Harris Jonathan Martin Michael Schaffer Jack Shafer Rich Lowry SERIES & MORE Breaking News Alerts Podcasts Video The Fifty Women Rule Matt Wuerker Cartoons Cartoon Carousel POLITICO Live Upcoming Events Previous Events Follow us Twitter Instagram Facebook My Account Log In Log Out Trump Indictment Biden orders DNC and reelect to remain silent about Trump’s indictment Some allies see a missed opportunity by going quiet. While President Joe Biden has framed his stance as in line with longstanding tradition, it is not uncommon for presidents to occasionally weigh in on ongoing criminal investigations. | Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP Photo By Jonathan Lemire 06/13/2023 05:35 PM EDT Link Copied President Joe Biden and his top aides have taken a vow of silence on the federal indictment of his predecessor, Donald Trump — and have explicitly ordered the national Democratic Party and his reelection campaign to do the same. That directive was issued in recent days after Trump was hit with federal charges for his handling of classified documents after he left the White House, according to three people familiar with the instructions. But that decision has some Democrats and allies worried that Biden could miss a chance to underscore the seriousness of the national moment as well as deliver a political blow to his top White House rival. Biden declared at the start of his presidency that he would not discuss Department of Justice investigations, particularly those about the former president, and he remained tightlipped when Trump was arraigned Tuesday in a Florida courthouse. Some in his inner circle hope the decision will be revisited if next year’s general election looks like it could be a rematch with Trump, even if the legal fight has not been resolved by then. As the president’s advisers chart a court for the campaign to come, they are aware that continued silence about the charges facing Trump would deprive Biden’s reelection effort of a potent political weapon. The number of criminal cases Trump faces are growing and could soon include charges of election interference and inciting the Jan. 6 riot. Those acts make up much of Biden’s long standing case that Trump poses unique threats to American democracy, and there could eventually be a move to allow surrogates and leading Democrats, even if not the president himself, to squarely address the criminal charges. But Biden to this point has been explicit: The entities that the White House controls, which includes the reelection campaign and the Democratic National Committee, are not to publicly discuss any of the criminal investigations into Trump. Those closest to the president are deeply wary of any perception that Biden is trying to influence the investigations. “I have never once — not one single time — suggested to the Justice Department what they should do or not do, relative to bringing a charge or not bringing a charge,” Biden told reporters Thursday. “I’m honest.” Some left-leaning groups outside Biden’s control have already commissioned ads about Trump’s legal woes, which Democratic officials believe helps do the dirty work for them. And first lady Jill Biden did venture a public comment, bemoaning the Republicans standing by Trump in the face of the indictment. “My heart feels so broken by a lot of the headlines that we see on the news,” she told donors at a fundraiser Monday night in New York. “Like I just saw, when I was on my plane, it said 61 percent of Republicans are going to vote, they would vote for Trump.” “They don’t care about the indictment. So that’s a little shocking, I think,” she added. But those groups and the first lady have a more limited reach than the party’s political apparatuses and the president himself. Biden has privately told aides that he is disgusted by Trump’s behavior but is adhering to his promise that the Department of Justice would have independence from the White House. The DNC, meanwhile, has advised members of Congress seeking guidance on what to say that they should not comment on the Trump probes if they are speaking publicly in their role as Biden campaign surrogates. While Biden has framed his stance as in line with longstanding tradition, it is not uncommon for presidents to occasionally weigh in on ongoing criminal investigations. Biden has at times done so himself — including weighing in before the verdict was announced in the 2021 trial of the white Minneapolis police officer who killed George Floyd. Some people in Biden’s orbit believe that the moment calls for his imprimatur, outlining for the nation the gravity of a former president facing charges in a federal court. Others believe it would be political malpractice to not make Trump’s woes a campaign issue and privately said that they wish the president’s campaign would take on the issue directly. They argue that the charges connected to Trump’s alleged reckless mishandling of some of the United States’ top secrets shows that he is unfit for the job. And they believe that both the ongoing January 6 and Georgia election interference probes illuminate their central campaign arguments. “It’s a pretty easy argument to make,” said one senior Democrat not authorized to publicly discuss private conversations. “Vote for our guy, because the other guy is going to jail.” There is a possibility that the decision could be revisited next year, multiple people close to the process said this week. One option being bandied about is that while Biden would maintain his silence on the Trump investigations, other top Democrats and surrogates would take up the argument. But even that — which aides warn may not ever happen — would likely not occur for months, perhaps after a possible conviction, or after Trump has clinched the GOP nomination. And advisors acknowledge that Biden himself may need to weigh in at a moment when it would be impossible not to comment, like a potential general election debate against Trump. Some aides also think that if Trump were to be charged for his actions on Jan. 6, Biden would feel comfortable enough talking about the tragedy of that day without linking it to any crimes allegedly committed by his predecessor. Other Democrats believe the current silent treatment is the right approach — and don’t want to inadvertently get in the way of a bad Trump news cycle. “The Justice Department needs to be able to make its prosecutorial decisions independent of influence from any administration,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said to Politico on Tuesday. “Donald Trump tried to use the Justice Department as a political tool. Joe Biden has said he absolutely will not do that, and I respect that.” Those close to the president also acknowledge a particular sensitivity at the moment on matters related to the Department of Justice, which is believed to be nearing a charging decision in its investigation into Biden’s son. Hunter Biden is being probed for tax crimes and a potentially illegal purchase of a firearm. While the president has maintained his public silence on the case — other than to offer support for his son — he has privately expressed frustration at the length of the investigation and worries about the outcome of the probe, according to two people close to him. Latest News on the Trump Indictment Legal Jack Smith wants to tell jury about Trump’s earlier attempts to sow doubt about elections By Legal Bid to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6 violence stalls at appeals court By and Legal Trump is fighting an uphill battle in his fraud trial. But it could be years before penalties kick in. By LEGAL How one judge is slowing down one of Trump’s biggest criminal cases By Q&A ‘Did Trump Change, or Did You?’: We Asked a Pro-Impeachment Republican Why He’d Back Trump By Previous Slide Next Slide While Biden has tried to maintain a distance from DOJ affairs, Republicans have been hammering home the talking point that he is using his Department of Justice to investigate his top political rival ahead of 2024. “The Biden Administration continues to egregiously weaponize the federal government against Joe Biden’s top political opponent,” said Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), a member of the House GOP leadership, at a House Republicans news conference Tuesday. “The unequal application of justice by Joe Biden’s DOJ must be stopped. There cannot be one set of rules if your last name is Biden or Clinton and another set of rules for everyone else.” Those supporting or working on Biden’s re-election ultimately believe they have other compelling arguments to make beyond pointing to Trump’s legal troubles. They believe the president’s week provides an advantageous split screen set nicely against the backdrop of chaos that has descended upon the Republican-controlled House after nearly a dozen far right members rebelled against Speaker Kevin McCarthy. The president will hit a lot of key 2024 issues, including civil rights, environmental causes, the GOP tax plan and gun regulations, as well as appear with Vice President Kamala Harris at a rally with union workers Saturday in Philadelphia. The White House, Biden campaign and the Democratic National Committee all, fittingly, declined to comment. Jennifer Haberkorn, Adam Cancryn and Holly Otterbein contributed to this report. Filed under: White House, Joe Biden, Joe Biden 2024, DNC, Department Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump 2024, Jill Biden, Legal, Trump Indictment POLITICO Link Copied About Us Advertising Breaking News Alerts Careers Credit Card Payments Digital Edition FAQ Feedback Headlines Photos POWERJobs Press Print Subscriptions Request A Correction Write For Us RSS Site Map Terms of Service Privacy Policy Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information and Opt Out of Targeted Advertising © 2023 POLITICO LLC

Napoleon Bonaparte famously said, “When you notice that an enemy is making an error, take care not to interfere with the enemy from completing it so you can take advantage at the right time.”

[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/13/biden-dnc-trump-indictment-00101821]

Trump tweets imaginary law that doesn’t exist to threaten protesters

Impeached president Donald Trump today tweeted an imaginary law that does not exist.

There is no such law.

It doesn’t exist.

Complete fiction.

[Boing Boing]

Trump Commutes Sentence Of Longtime Friend And Adviser Roger Stone

President Trump on Friday evening commuted the prison sentence of his longtime friend Roger Stone, a veteran Republican operative who was convicted of lying to Congress about his efforts to contact WikiLeaks during Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

“Roger Stone is a victim of the Russia Hoax that the Left and its allies in the media perpetuated for years in an attempt to undermine the Trump Presidency,” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said in a statement. “There was never any collusion between the Trump Campaign, or the Trump Administration, with Russia.”

“Roger Stone has already suffered greatly,” she continued. “He was treated very unfairly, as were many others in this case. Roger Stone is now a free man!”

Stone’s attorney Robert Buschel told NPR, “We are grateful and relieved. Glad this nightmare is over.”

The commutation, which Trump issued days before Stone was to report to federal prison, brings an end to Stone’s legal fight — but only further inflames the political battle over his prosecution and the broader Russia investigation.

Earlier Friday evening, a federal appeals court had denied an emergency bid from Stone to stay out of prison.

The case against Stone was brought by then-special counsel Robert Mueller as part of his probe into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and possible ties between Moscow and the Trump campaign.

Stone was indicted on charges of lying to Congress, witness tampering and obstruction. The charges related to his efforts during the 2016 presidential race to act as an intermediary between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks was releasing Democratic emails stolen by Russian intelligence services, and Stone publicly and privately presented himself as someone with inside knowledge about the group’s operations.

After the election, when Stone was questioned under oath about the matter by the House Intelligence Committee, he lied to lawmakers about his efforts to contact WikiLeaks. He also tried to prevent an associate from testifying before the committee.

After a tumultuous runup to his trial, during which the presiding judge, Amy Berman Jackson, imposed a gag order on Stone after he published a threatening photograph of her, a jury found him guilty on all seven counts in November.

After his trial, Stone raised allegations of juror misconduct and tried to get the verdict dismissed. Jackson entertained the motion, even holding a hearing in which she brought back members of the jury for questioning, but she ultimately rejected Stone’s bid for a new trial and sentenced him to more than three years in prison.

Stone has since appealed his conviction.

In an interview this month with ABC News, Attorney General William Barr called Stone’s prosecution “righteous” and said the sentence handed down was “fair.”

On Twitter Friday night, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, said that “commuting Roger Stone’s sentence is a terrible blow to justice and the rule of law.” He added: “Through this act, Trump is saying: ‘If you lie for me, if you cover up for me, if you obstruct for me, I will protect you.’ “

Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, the lone Republican to vote to convict Trump in his impeachment trial, also blasted the commutation, calling it “[u]nprecedented, historic corruption” on Twitter on Saturday morning.

[NPR]

Trump visits private golf course as US battles rapid surge in coronavirus cases

Donald Trump visited one of his own private golf courses in Virginia on Saturday as America continued to see fallout from a rapid surge in coronavirus cases. The trip came a day after the US president said he would stay in Washington DC to “make sure law and order is enforced” amid ongoing anti-racism protests.

The president has been frequently criticized for the scale of his golfing habit while in office. CNN – which tallies his golfing activities – said the visit to the Trump National course in Loudon county, just outside Washington DC, was the 271st of his presidency – putting him at an average of golfing once every 4.6 days since he’s been in office. His predecessor, Barack Obama, golfed 333 rounds over the two terms of his presidency, according to NBC.

The visit comes as the number of confirmed new coronavirus cases per day in the US hit an all-time high of 40,000, according to figures released by Johns Hopkins on Friday. Many states are now seeing spikes in the virus with Texas, Florida and Arizona especially badly hit after they reopened their economies – a policy they are now pausing or reversing.

Trump has been roundly criticized for a failure to lead during the coronavirus that has seen America become by far the worst hit country in the world. Critics in particular point to his failure to wear a mask, holding campaign rallies in coronavirus hot spots and touting baseless conspiracy theories about cures, such as using bleach.

On Friday night Trump tweeted that he was cancelling a weekend trip to his Bedminster, New Jersey golf course because of the protests which have rocked the capital, including taking down statues of confederate figures.

“I was going to go to Bedminster, New Jersey, this weekend, but wanted to stay in Washington, D.C. to make sure LAW & ORDER is enforced. The arsonists, anarchists, looters, and agitators have been largely stopped,” he tweeted.

Trump’s latest visit to the golf course put him in the way of some opposition. According to a White House pool media report: “A small group of protesters at the entrance to the club held signs that included, ‘Trump Makes Me Sick’ and ‘Dump Trump’.
A woman walking a small white dog nearby also gave the motorcade a middle finger salute.”

It is not yet known if Trump actually played a round of golf. But a photographer captured the president wearing a white polo shirt and a red cap, which is among his common golfing attire.

[The Guardian]

Trump Defends Confederate Monuments in ‘Police Reform’ Speech: ‘We Must Build on Our Heritage, Not Tear it Down’

At a White House event on police reform, President Donald Trump seemed to reference the recent destruction of Confederate monuments by protesters, but again made clear he favors preserving those memorials to the pro-slavery South.

During remarks on what the White House calls his “Executive Order on Safe Policing for Safe Communities,” Trump concluded a riff on the coronavirus crisis by saying, of a potential vaccine, that “even without it, it goes away.”

“But if we had the vaccine, and we will, if we had therapeutic or cure, one thing is sort of blends into the other, it will be a fantastic day and I think that’s going to happen, and it’s going to happen very soon,” Trump added.

“Americans can achieve anything when we work together as one national family,” he continued. “To go forward we must seek cooperation not confrontation, we must build upon our heritage, not tear it down. And we must cherish the principles of America’s founding as we strive to deliver safe, beautiful, elegant justice. And liberty for all.”

Trump’s remarks in the Rose Garden were for the purpose of announcing an executive order that was prompted by nationwide protests over the police killing of George Floyd — a strange setting for Trump to renew his longtime defense of the Confederacy and its symbols.

[Mediaite]

1 2 3 11