Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,170 posts)
Tue Oct 11, 2022, 07:22 PM Oct 2022

Legal experts: Russia link to Trump documents means it's a matter of "when, not if" he is indicted

Former President Donald Trump sought to cut a deal with the National Archives to trade records he took from the White House to Mar-a-Lago late last year for "sensitive" documents about the FBI investigation of his 2016 campaign's ties to Russia, according to The New York Times.

The exchange never happened but Trump floated the idea to his aides. The National Archives had pressed Trump to return the documents stored at his Florida estate, but Trump spent a year and a half delaying their requests. He was upset with the National Archives' unwillingness to hand over the documents that ostensibly backed his claims in the Russia probe, per the Times.

Upon entering the White House, Trump formed a habit of bringing documents back to his bedroom, according to the report. Halfway through his term, tracking files in the White House became an obstacle and, by his third year, some documents ended up in places where they should not have been, according to individuals familiar with the situation who spoke with the Times.

At the end of his presidency, White House counsel Pat Cipollone called for Trump to return documents that "had piled up in boxes in the White House," according to archives officials the Times reported.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/legal-experts-russia-link-to-trump-documents-means-it-s-a-matter-of-when-not-if-he-is-indicted/ar-AA12PN3F?cvid=74cc88b655844436966700acb6c720c0

Sounds like attempted extortion to me.

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Legal experts: Russia link to Trump documents means it's a matter of "when, not if" he is indicted (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2022 OP
Did Trump have access to the intel showing his complicity to Putin? OAITW r.2.0 Oct 2022 #1
It's been my sneaking suspicion all along blue-wave Oct 2022 #3
I've always thought that most of what that..thing...took Genki Hikari Oct 2022 #7
Is it OK now for democrats to yell blue-wave Oct 2022 #2
His projection will be his reality.nt OAITW r.2.0 Oct 2022 #4
Trump knew those documents about his 2016 campaign's ties to Russia wouldn't exonerate him. sop Oct 2022 #5
Imagine Turbineguy Oct 2022 #6
If you had a two-year-old Genki Hikari Oct 2022 #8
Oh, if only you could put donnie dollhands on the hood of your car... rubbersole Oct 2022 #9
Or strap him to the roof of the car on your next trip... mwb970 Oct 2022 #11
The simple facts are these: as president he had access to virtually anything classified he wanted. Ford_Prefect Oct 2022 #10

OAITW r.2.0

(24,570 posts)
1. Did Trump have access to the intel showing his complicity to Putin?
Tue Oct 11, 2022, 07:36 PM
Oct 2022

If so, understandable why he'd offer a quid pro quo.

 

Genki Hikari

(1,766 posts)
7. I've always thought that most of what that..thing...took
Wed Oct 12, 2022, 01:12 AM
Oct 2022

Was to cover up its own crimes, especially with the classified data files. If no documents of Cantaloupe Caligula's treason exists, then no treason, amirite?

That...thing...is far too stupid to know what docs to get for selling to our enemies without outside help.

I would guess the vast majority of what that...thing...took was all about its traitorous dealings with Russia.

sop

(10,233 posts)
5. Trump knew those documents about his 2016 campaign's ties to Russia wouldn't exonerate him.
Tue Oct 11, 2022, 07:51 PM
Oct 2022

Trump just wanted to expose the FBI's sources and share the intel with Putin.

Turbineguy

(37,364 posts)
6. Imagine
Tue Oct 11, 2022, 07:52 PM
Oct 2022

being an aide to that dumbfuck. Saying, "Sir, that is a dumbfuck idea" all day long. Having to be polite.

 

Genki Hikari

(1,766 posts)
8. If you had a two-year-old
Wed Oct 12, 2022, 01:16 AM
Oct 2022

You knew the futility of trying to explain, well, anything to them. My son got it in his head that he wanted to ride on the car hood, and not in his kiddie seat. You just had to ignore him and strap him in, anyway, no matter how much he kicked and screamed.

Same thing.

Ford_Prefect

(7,918 posts)
10. The simple facts are these: as president he had access to virtually anything classified he wanted.
Wed Oct 12, 2022, 12:44 PM
Oct 2022

Putin or his front men in DC told Donald what they'd like to know. He'd get it and convey it. Same for MBS, Kim and anyone he met with where no one else was allowed, foreign or domestic.

I have no doubt he knew the value these people put on the information. I am sure he believed he received good value for it or the obligation of a favor owed.

As it happens Trump has an enormous ego and no sense of boundaries regarding anyone else at all. It is not hard at all to see that since he thought the president was king of America that the papers he handled actually were his to dispose of, keep or flush. Those with security markings and classification restrictions were for other lesser people to treat with care. King Donald the one and only was above petty laws and security restrictions.

Without regard for the damage he's done he knowingly broke the law when he took the paper out of the White House. He knows it now and he knew it then. The papers were never his to keep or distribute. As others more versed in the law have pointed out Judge Cannon grossly exceeded her authority in her rulings attempting to supersede settled law and accepted practice over handling and ownership of classified documents thus returning them to Trump's possession. I believe Judge Cannon is due a serious review of her abilities, judicial practices and performance on the job. Incompetence and probable malfeasance strike me as possible reasons to critique her actions and raise the question of whether she belongs on the bench anywhere.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Legal experts: Russia lin...