• BREAKING - Prosecutors Ready To Ask For Trump Indictment On Obstruction

    From Bob@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 4 02:40:29 2023
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns, talk.politics.misc
    XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.politics.nationalism.white

    Prosecutors ready to ask for Trump indictment on obstruction and Espionage
    Act charges

    The Independent has learned that prosecutors are prepared to ask grand
    jurors to vote on charges as early as Thursday

    The Department of Justice is preparing to ask a Washington, DC grand jury
    to indict former president Donald Trump for violating the Espionage Act
    and for obstruction of justice as soon as Thursday, adding further weight
    to the legal baggage facing Mr Trump as he campaigns for his party’s
    nomination in next year’s presidential election.

    The Independent has learned that prosecutors are ready to ask grand jurors
    to approve an indictment against Mr Trump for violating a portion of the
    US criminal code known as Section 793, which prohibits “gathering,
    transmitting or losing” any “information respecting the national defence”.

    The use of Section 793, which does not make reference to classified information, is understood to be a strategic decision by prosecutors that
    has been made to short-circuit Mr Trump’s ability to claim that he used
    his authority as president to declassify documents he removed from the
    White House and kept at his Palm Beach, Florida property long after his
    term expired on 20 January 2021.

    That section of US criminal law is written in a way that could encompass
    Mr Trump’s conduct even if he was authorised to possess the information as president because it states that anyone who “lawfully having possession
    of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document
    ...relating to the national defence,” and “willfully communicates,
    delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or
    transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled
    to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on
    demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive
    it” can be punished by as many as 10 years in prison.

    It is understood that prosecutors intend to ask grand jurors to vote on
    the indictment on Thursday, but that vote could be delayed as much as a
    week until the next meeting of the grand jury to allow for a complete presentation of evidence, or to allow investigators to gather more
    evidence for presentation if necessary.


    A separate grand jury that is meeting in Florida has also been hearing
    evidence in the documents investigation. That grand jury was empaneled in
    part to overcome legal issues posed by the fact that some of the crimes allegedly committed by Mr Trump took place in that jurisdiction, not in Washington. Under federal law, prosecutors must bring charges against
    federal defendants in the jurisdiction where the crimes took place.

    Even if grand jurors vote to return an indictment against the ex-president
    this week, it is likely that those charges would remain sealed until both
    the Washington and Florida grand juries complete their work.

    Another source familiar with the matter has said Mr Trump’s team was
    recently informed that he is a “target” of the Justice Department probe,
    which began in early 2022 after National Archives and Records
    Administration officials discovered more than 100 documents bearing classification markings in a set of 15 boxes of Trump administration
    records retrieved from Mar-a-Lago, the century-old mansion turned private
    beach club where Mr Trump maintains his primary residence and post- presidential office.

    Over the course of the last year, grand jurors have heard testimony from numerous associates of the ex-president, including nearly every employee
    of Mar-a-Lago, former administration officials who worked in Mr Trump’s post-presidential office and for his political operation, and former high- ranking administration officials such as his final White House chief of
    staff, Mark Meadows.
    <p>Mark Meadows is said to be cooperating with the investigations into his former boss</p>

    Mark Meadows is said to be cooperating with the investigations into his
    former boss
    (EPA-EFE)

    Mr Meadows has already given evidence before the grand jury and is said to
    be cooperating with the investigations into his former boss. It is
    understood that the former North Carolina congressman testified as part of
    a deal for which he has already received limited immunity in exchange for
    his testimony.

    A source who was briefed on the agreement claimed that the alleged
    agreement will involve the ex-chief of staff entering pleas of guilty to unspecified federal crimes but an attorney for Mr Meadows, George
    Terwilliger, denied that to The Independent. Mr Terwilliger said that the
    idea that his client would enter any guilty pleas was “complete bulls***”
    but did not address the matter of immunity in a brief telephone
    conversation with this reporter.

    It is not yet known whether the testimony or the charges in question
    relate to the documents probe, or a separate investigation into the
    January 6 attack on the Capitol. Both investigations are being overseen by
    a Department of Justice special prosecutor, Jack Smith. According to ABC
    News, Mr Meadows has given evidence in both the documents matter and the January 6 investigation.

    In the documents matter, prosecutors are also prepared to ask grand jurors
    to indict Mr Trump on charges that he obstructed justice during the year-
    long investigation and caused false statements to be made to investigators
    by persons working for him.

    It is possible that such charges could stem from a declaration submitted
    to federal investigators roughly a year ago, when FBI agents and
    prosecutors visited his home to retrieve a sealed folder filled with 38 classified documents which Mr Trump’s attorneys turned over in response to
    a grand jury subpoena. If so, those charges could come in federal court in Florida, rather than in Washington.

    According to court documents, the government subsequently developed
    evidence indicating that documents had been removed from a storage room
    where his attorneys had stated that all such documents were being stored
    in the days following the receipt of the grand jury subpoena.

    Using that evidence, which reportedly includes surveillance footage taken
    by cameras placed in the interior of Mar-a-Lago, prosecutors obtained a
    search warrant for the property that was carried out by FBI agents on 8
    August last year.



    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump- indictment-espionage-prosecution-charges-b2353397.html

    During that search, special agents discovered 103 documents bearing classification markings, including 18 marked “top secret,” 54 marked
    “secret,” and 31 marked as “confidential,” including a number of documents
    that were stored in Mr Trump’s personal office.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)