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.
OAITW r.2.0
(24,570 posts)If so, understandable why he'd offer a quid pro quo.
blue-wave
(4,362 posts)Genki Hikari
(1,766 posts)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.
blue-wave
(4,362 posts)"Lock him up!!"?
OAITW r.2.0
(24,570 posts)sop
(10,233 posts)Trump just wanted to expose the FBI's sources and share the intel with Putin.
Turbineguy
(37,364 posts)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)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.
rubbersole
(6,723 posts)the possibilities are endless.
mwb970
(11,365 posts)Ford_Prefect
(7,918 posts)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.