I thought I would ignore the story you have read about in every publication: the unprecedented indictment of a former President of the United States. Special Counsel Jack Smith released the indictment yesterday, and I read every word. It is a dramatic narrative of a man who was determined to hold onto state secrets, storing them in public spaces, hiding them when necessary, completely indifferent to the law governing classified documents. The irony, as the indictment points out, is that Trump repeatedly lambasted Hillary Clinton in 2016 for being careless with state secrets and promised to enforce the law if elected.
If you haven’t read the indictment, please do so. At the least, it may make you wonder how Republicans can bring themselves, even now, to echo Trump’s claims that he is the victim of a witch-hunt.
Heather Cox Richardson summarizes the events of the past 24 hours and the underlying issues: can a former President be forgiven for taking home highly classified documents and refusing to give them back when asked? For not only refusing to return them but hiding them from those authorized to collect them? What were his motives? Just to show them off to prove what a big man he is? Or to sell them to foreign agents? Vanity or greed?
And my question: Why are Republicans stridently defending a man who knowingly put the lives of our military at risk and endangered our national security? Have they no shame? Why do they put their loyalty to Trump (or fear of him) above the nation’s security and their oath of office?
She writes:
At 3:00 today, Washington D.C., time, Special Counsel Jack Smith delivered a statement about the recently unsealed indictment charging former president Donald J. Trump on 37 counts of violating national security laws as well as participating in a conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Although MAGA Republicans have tried to paint the indictment as a political move by the Biden administration over a piddling error, Smith immediately reminded people that “[t]his indictment was voted by a grand jury of citizens in the Southern District of Florida, and I invite everyone to read it in full to understand the scope and the gravity of the crimes charged.”
The indictment is, indeed, jaw dropping.
It alleges that during his time in the White House, Trump stored in cardboard boxes “information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack.” The indictment notes that “[t]he unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military, and human sources and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods.”
Nonetheless, when Trump ceased to be president after noon on January 20, 2021, he took those boxes, “many of which contained classified documents,” to Mar-a-Lago, where he was living. He “was not authorized to possess or retain those classified documents.” The indictment makes it clear that this was no oversight: Trump was personally involved in packing the boxes and, later, in going through them and in overseeing how they were handled. The employees who worked for him exchanged text messages referring to his personal instructions about them.
Mar-a-Lago was not an authorized location for such documents, but he stored them there anyway, “including in a ballroom, a bathroom and shower, an office space, his bedroom, and a storage room.” They were stacked in public places, where anyone—including the many foreign nationals who visited Mar-a-Lago—could see them. On December 7, 2021, Trump’s personal aide Waltine Nauta took two pictures of several of the boxes fallen on the floor, with their contents, including a secret document available only to the Five Eyes intelligence alliance of the U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, spilled onto the floor.
The indictment alleges that Trump showed classified documents to others without security clearances on two occasions, both of which are well documented. One of those occasions was recorded. Trump told the people there that the plan he was showing them was “highly confidential” and “secret.” He added, “See, as president I could have declassified it….Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”
This recording undermines his insistence that he believed he could automatically declassify documents; it proves he understood he could not. In addition, the indictment lists Trump’s many statements from 2016 about the importance of protecting classified information, all delivered as attacks on Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, whom he accused of mishandling such information. “In my administration,” he said on August 18, 2016, “I’m going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law.”
The indictment goes on: When the FBI tried to recover the documents, Trump started what Washington Post journalist Jennifer Rubin called a “giant shell game”: he tried to get his lawyer to lie to the FBI and the grand jury, saying Trump did not have more documents; worked with Nauta to move some of the boxes to hide them from Trump’s lawyer, the FBI and the grand jury; tried to get his lawyer to hide or destroy documents; and got another lawyer to certify that all the documents had been produced when he knew they hadn’t.
Nauta lied to the grand jury about his knowledge of what Trump did with the boxes. Both he and Trump have been indicted on multiple counts of obstruction and of engaging in a conspiracy to hide the documents.
Eventually, Trump had many of the boxes moved to his property at Bedminster, New Jersey, where on two occasions he showed documents to people without security clearances. He showed a classified map of a country that is part of an ongoing military operation to a representative of his political action committee.
Trump has been indicted on 31 counts of having “unauthorized possession of, access to, and control over documents relating to the national defense,” for keeping them, and for refusing “to deliver them to the officer and employee of the United States entitled to receive them”: language straight out of the Espionage Act. Twenty-one of the documents were marked top secret, nine were marked secret, and one was unmarked.
These documents are not all those recovered—some likely are too sensitive to risk making public—but they nonetheless hold some of the nation’s deepest secrets: “military capabilities of a foreign country and the United States,” “military activities and planning of foreign countries,” “nuclear capabilities of a foreign country,” “military attacks by a foreign country,” “military contingency planning of the United States,” “military options of a foreign country and potential effects on United States interest,” “foreign country support of terrorist acts against United States interests,” “nuclear weaponry of the United States,” “military activity in a foreign country.”
Smith put it starkly in his statement, “The men and women of the United States intelligence community and our armed forces dedicate their lives to protecting our nation and its people. Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States and they must be enforced. Violations of those laws put our country at risk.”
On Twitter, Bill Kristol said it more clearly: “These were highly classified documents dealing with military intelligence and plans. What did Trump do with them? Who now has copies of them?” Retired FBI assistant director Frank Figliuzzi noted that there is a substantial risk that “foreign intelligence services might have sought or gained access to the documents.”
There is also substantial risk that other countries will be reluctant to share intelligence with the United States in the future. At the very least, it is an unfortunate coincidence that the Central Intelligence Agency in October 2021 reported an unusually high rate of capture or death for foreign informants recruited to spy for the United States.
Since Trump supporters have taken the position that Trump’s indictment over the stolen documents is the attempt of the Biden administration to undermine Trump’s presidential candidacy, it is worth remembering that Trump’s early announcement of his campaign was widely suspected to be an attempt to enable him to avoid legal accountability. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Special Counsel Jack Smith precisely to put arms length between the administration and the investigations into Trump.
Smith noted today, “Adherence to the rule of law is a bedrock principle of the Department of Justice. And our nation’s commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world. We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. Applying those laws. Collecting facts. That’s what determines the outcome of an investigation. Nothing more. Nothing less.
“The prosecutors in my office are among the most talented and experienced in the Department of Justice. They have investigated this case hewing to the highest ethical standards. And they will continue to do so as this case proceeds.”
Smith added: “It’s very important for me to note that the defendants in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter. Consistent with the public interest and the rights of the accused. We very much look forward to presenting our case to a jury of citizens in the Southern District of Florida.”
Likely responding to MAGA attacks on the FBI and the rule of law, Smith thanked the “dedicated public servants of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with whom my office is conducting this investigation and who worked tirelessly every day upholding the rule of law in our country,” before closing his brief statement.
The indictment revealed just how much detailed information Smith’s team has uncovered, presenting a shockingly thorough case to prove the allegations. Trump’s lawyers will have their work cut out for them…although the team has shifted since this morning: two of Trump’s lawyers quit today. The thoroughness of the indictment also suggests that Trump and his allies might have reason to be nervous about Smith’s other investigation: the one into the attempt to overturn results of the 2020 election.
Some of Trump’s supporters are calling for violence. After Louisiana representative Clay Higgins appeared to be egging on militias to oppose Trump’s Tuesday arraignment, Democratic senate majority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) issued a joint statement calling for “supporters and critics alike to let the case proceed peacefully in court.” Legal scholar Joyce White Vance noted that it was “extremely sad for our country that this isn’t a bipartisan statement being made by leaders from both parties.”
—
Notes:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/special-counsel-jack-smith-delivers-statement
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/09/politics/walt-nauta-trump-indicted/index.html
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.3.0_2.pdf
https://www.nola.com/news/politics/clay-higgins-urges-war-over-trump-indictments-author-says/article_db78acde-0701-11ee-af01-73c2414fd4d7.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/us/politics/trump-indictment-lawyers-trusty-rowley.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html
https://www.cornellpolicyreview.com/the-executive-records-recovered-from-mar-a-lago-and-the-c-i-a-s-missing-informants/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
Twitter links:
BillKristol/status/1667332834514616320
JRubinBlogger/status/1667287186616754177
JoyceWhiteVance/status/1667277258183065601
petestrzok/status/1667276941043351555
djrothkopf/status/1667237607388880922
petestrzok/status/1667276952439324674?s=20

Opening cartoon for Dr. Richardson’s Saturday matinee presentation:
LikeLike
I’m not saying the indictment isn’t deserved—it is a damning document and there is no principled defense of Trump.
But it saddens me nonetheless, because this will just accelerate the hyper-polarization of our politics. There is a very large portion of the public that will see this as a political prosecution, and those optics are just unavoidable, given that Trump is Biden’s leading challenger and he is being prosecuted by Biden’s DOJ. And this probably hastens the day when political rivals actually are prosecuted by the DOJ for nakedly political reasons. This is the cascading effect of Trump’s brand of chaos. It destroys everything, makes all institutions worse. We’re spiraling.
LikeLike
Flerp! One issue is the false idea that it’s “Biden’s DOJ.” CBK
LikeLike
Biden is President, the DOJ is under his direction. Yes, he’s insulated by Garland, who is insulated by the special counsel, but the optics are the same. Some day we will have a Republican President whose AG appoints a special counsel who embarks on a nakedly political prosecution of a political rival. The Republican President will say, “it’s not my DOJ.”
There’s nothing to be happy about here.
LikeLike
So you think that Trump should be immune from prosecution and above the law because of the optics? Trump thinks so too.
LikeLike
Flerp! the problem is, then, that the optics differ from the reality, which is wrongly understood.
We are looking at a severe lack of understanding BY a good number of American people, ABOUT their own governmental process . . . particularly the division of governmental powers and, in this case, of the place of the Rule of Law that (many do not understand) stands BETWEEN DOJ and the president’s wishes. (Biden understands this well, as does Garland.)
But exploiting their constituents’ lack of understanding is what Trump et al, as well as our capitalist freaks, are all about. And now, that lack of understanding is so ingrained and associated with all sorts of “red meat” social issues (like gays and trans?) and propagandist concepts (from basements of pizzerias to pedophiles, to own the lib, etc.) that even if many actually come to an understanding, they still don’t want to admit their own error or vote democratic.
Funny how public education has been slowly drained of its history and political science (civics) curriculum for years–absolute essentials for education in a democracy. Do you think there might be a relationship there? CBK
LikeLike
“So you think that Trump should be immune from prosecution and above the law because of the optics? Trump thinks so too.”
That’s not at all what I’m saying. I’m saying he must be prosecuted but I’m not happy that’s the case. Although later in the thread I realize this will be an extraordinarily fascinating trial, perhaps the most fascinating trial ever in the US. So I’m less sad now.
LikeLike
Flerp! Yes . . . fascinating . . . and the problem also is that Trump’s abuse of both law and protocols are an abuse of freedom itself. By failing to self-govern/control, he calls “down” the need for further formal laws, which tends to close the freedom gap . . . between us (as self-controlled) and “from above” controls. The term “poisonous” doesn’t cover it. CBK
LikeLike
Trump’s case has been referred to a federal judge he appointed. His case will be decided by citizens of south Florida.
LikeLike
Diane Lawrence Tribe (constitutional scholar) had some interesting comments about that judge and the Trump indictment this morning on “Velshi” (MSNBC). His “take” and discussion are worthy of attention. (My guess is he will show up elsewhere also . . . a favorite of Lawrence O’Donnell.) CBK
LikeLike
It’s surreal. Imagine trying to find an impartial jury anywhere, let alone there.
And all eyes will be on this judge. A judge that doesn’t like a case can end it. A few devastating rulings on motions in limine can undo a case. So can a judge’s general demeanor in the presence of a jury. I’ve seen juries pick up on not-so-subtle indications that a judge thought a case was bullshit. It’s the end of the case. And of course a judge can grant a motion for a directed verdict—dismissing the case on the basis that no reasonable jury could convict—before the case goes to the jury. A pre-verdict directed verdict ruling is unappealable.
The subject matter isn’t lurid, but this should be the trial of the centuries.
Lol, now I’m getting excited about it. I guess that beats sadness.
LikeLike
This is concerning. Florida politics are hyperpartisan. Democrats may want to appear impartial, but I am not sure that impartiality and respect for the rule of law are values held by the Florida GOP or the GOP in general.
LikeLike
retired teacher On the “I’m concerned” side, Mika (on Morning Joe) a few days ago talked about her Trump group that she fosters in order to find out “where they’re at” with their support of Trump. She related that most of them STILL see NO DIFFERENCE between Trump’s handling of classified documents and the fact that other past presidents and high officials, like Obama, had to be asked to return classified documents after they left office.
I hope I don’t have to explain the difference here; but I immediately thought of the right-wing Press and their daily spew of poisonous politics. I think many of their listeners are people who grew up listening to and watching dependable press, and still think that way. <–(I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt. My other thought is that they are just politically ignorant and like being that way, or at least don’t want their thinking disturbed–things ARE confusing out there. These are people, however, who will wait so long that, when they finally “get it,” it will be too late because the dogs will have been let loose.) CBK
LikeLike
DeSantis put out a statement regarding Trump’s indictment. Instead of castigating Trump, he is claiming that Democrats are playing politics. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4041851-trump-indictment-desantis-blasts-weaponization-of-federal-law-enforcement/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20weaponization%20of%20federal%20law,political%20affiliation%2C%E2%80%9D%20DeSantis%20tweeted.
LikeLike
Where to start- changing the minds of the 63% of Republicans who believe the election was stolen, 43% of whom base their view solely on suspicion? Other then ignoring bad behavior/attitude what can be done to change the illogic of a person who has a reasoning deficit? Legitimizing crazy/gullible seems like a flawed approach.
I know one Republican woman who opted out of voting for the reason that she didn’t like the reputation of being lumped with uneducated, bad and stupid people.
LikeLike
Is Clay Higgins the guy who’s been married 4 times (divorced 3) who brandished a Bible while opposing the 1st impeachment attempt against Trump? If so, it’s reported that his ex-wife thought he was $140,000 in arrears in child support. Family values based on right wing religion supported by Republican voters, what can be said?
LikeLike
Ms. Richardson, Thank You so much for this clear presentation of the facts and the truth of this historical moment. It is all about our Democracy and who we are as a nation.
May we also be mindful that the purpose of public education is that every one of us may participate meaningfully and effectively in Our Democracy as an educated citizen. Our system of public education is based on our principles and our notions of democracy. We must stand and protect it.
The Imperative of Democracy is essential to our well being as a free people. A zealous and free press as well as a Justice Department with high ideals and integrity are essential for the vigilant protection of our freedoms and “Our American Democracy.”
I have the highest respect for Jack Smith and his team of dedicated Americans, including the Grand Jury. They are Great Americans. They have handled this matter with the highest ideals of our legal profession.
LikeLike
There’s a fascinating article in Intercept about the former communications director of the Republican Governors Association. Digressing, Michael Cowen said in the last couple of days that attention should be focused on Trump and the Saudis. The former communications director, Gail Gitcho, is an agent for the Saudi LIV golf tournament. Gitcho’s been listed at the Women’s Democracy Network (maybe not anymore) which was created by the International Republican Institute. The Institute is, “staffed mostly by Republicans.” Intercept reports, we the taxpayers, are funding the Institute.
Recently Gitcho’s been a senior advisor to presidential GOP candidate Vivek Rammaswammy . In the past, she’s been professionally linked to DeSantis and Romney.The title of the article is, “GOP lobbyist claimed to be ’empowering women’ but worked for Saudi theocracy’s LIV Golf.
There’s no reason for a woman to vote Republican. Working for the anti-abortion campaigns, Moms for Liberty-type groups, education voucher advocates and, for Republican politicians- now, that may be lucrative…oh, and the Saudis.
LikeLike
While the GOP remains stuck on Hunter Biden’s alleged misdeeds, they continue to ignore Jared Kushner’s $2 billion dollar loan from the Saudis and Kushner’s attempt to conceal Saudi involvement.https://www.businessinsider.com/kushners-2-billion-investment-saudi-backed-fund-concealed-sec-rules-2023-2
LikeLike
What did Trump and Kushner give the Saudis in exchange?
LikeLike
So, what spies for what countries got hold of what material at Mar-a-lago or Bedminster? What material, if any, did Trump sell or trade to whom and for what?
LikeLike
I’m thinking of writing a play. In it, a malignant narcissist with a history of criminality attains the Oval Office. One scene goes like this:
DOOLITTLE [spreads out paper on Resolute Desk] C’mere. Look at this. It’s OK. It won’t bite.
SON IN LAW: Oh my God.
DOOLITTLE: I know, right? What do you think Mohammed bin Hacksaw would pay for that, huh?
SON IN LAW: Breathtaking amounts of money. He might, for example, finance a whole other golf league to compete with the PGA.
DOOLITTLE: I like how you think. Big league.
SON IN LAW: Literally. Or–how ’bout this?–invest billions in a venture capital slash private equity firm.
But, hey, too far fetched to be believable, right?
LikeLike
Grifts got to grift
LikeLike
I did the same, felt the same! (-Sara Roos, now CA CDP Children’s
Caucus chair, taking over from Ann Crosbie. Join Us!).
LikeLike
“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”
That quote is the beginning of the Constitutional Oath of Office that every president of the United States has taken starting with George Washington, and before we had a Constitution, Washington had his troops at Valley Forge take a similar oath so they wouldn’t take off during winter, everyone in the military, everyone working for the Federal government, everyone in federal law enforcement, every member of Congress, and from what I just read to make sure, every justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
I have called Trump, Traitor Trump many times in print. Still, until a final verdict from a court, he is only an alleged traitor. When I call him Traitor Trump, that is my individual opinion… until he is found guilty in court.
After the courts find Trump guilty and the word “alleged” is removed, any U.S. citizen that still supports Traitor Trump should be listed as a domestic terrorist and enemy of the United States. If anyone who has taken the oath still supports him, they should also be labeled traitors, including member of Congress that still supports the traitor, and they should also be removed from Congress and never allowed to hold public office again.
LikeLike
Two comments:
Trump’s actions are no different, though more serious, than those of the Air National Guardsman, Jack Teixeira. He wanted to show off to his buddies: look what I can do! What a childish betrayal of his country for self-aggrandizement.
Except Trump’s betrayal is much the greater. Does anyone believe that other nations have NOT placed spies within the Trump orbit? Why would they not when it would have been simplicity itself at Mar-a-Lago? We haven’t found out–yet–who the spies might be, but there is no reason to assume that they would not have taken advantage of the availability of the secret documents Trump opened for them. Go to the bathroom and read all about American nuclear vulnerability. Anyone wanna bet about moles emerging at home in FL?
LikeLike
The cynical stupidity is breathtaking. Since we’re into speculating as if it is the gospel truth, whadda ’bout the FACT that we don’t know who DID get access to the documents? I heard in passing that, I think it was David Frum who noted that any spy service that did not get something out of the Idiot should repay their governments. A good spy does their work when nobody notices. Nobody has a clue who the best spies are even after they die. Duty, honor, commitment and all that.
And the faux pearl-clutching is too much. How can any sane person take any of these insinuations seriously? Or lament about how the implementation of the rule of law is somehow a failure of the rule of law. I’m still betting on American fascism becoming our new normal in January 2025 when there are tens of millions of idiots out there that take any of this with even marginal seriousness.
LikeLike
Sorry, just adding to the comment. It kind of set me off in a wave of agreement.
LikeLike
How could anyone lament that the implementation of the rule of law is somehow a failure of the rule of law.
Good question
LikeLike
Last year there was a Russian speaking Ukrainian women that was at Trump’s estate in Florida according to numerous sources. https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2022/08/26/russian-speaking-immigrant-allegedly-entered-mar-a-lago-using-fake-identity-met-with-trump-report-says/?sh=7bbc1a72196a
LikeLiked by 1 person
cx: woman
LikeLike
Except Trump’s betrayal is much the greater.
So much greater. It is truly frightening how much this Russian asset might have compromised our defense and security, as well as the defense and security of our allies.
LikeLike
A couple of the incidents described in the indictment sound just like that–a moron blowhard bragging to acquaintances. But as you say, it’s far, far more serious than just that.
LikeLike
When it comes down to it, Trump is simply a deeply disturbed, crude criminal moron–very like John Gotti. So, are we a nation of laws in which there is equal justice under law? Or will he skate as he has done throughout his vile life?
LikeLike
At least Gotti wore it well.
LikeLike
But the closer you look, the more they seem like brothers from another mother. It’s uncanny. I remember how, after he continued to be exonerated time after time, the press portrayed him has some sort of secret mastermind. But then the FBI released the wiretaps. The guy was a cruel, breathtakingly ignorant and stupid thug, paranoid, clearly suffering from malignant narcissism. Couldn’t think straight. Bungling and bumbling. Ruthless. Utterly amoral.
LikeLike
And I doubt he had his steaks well done or slathered in ketchup (catsup?).
LikeLike
LikeLike
Couldn’t formulate a grammatical sentence. Like Donnie Boy.
LikeLike
There are questions that go far, far beyond Donnie Boy here. Just to what extent and in what ways did Trump compromise US defense and national security? Who got what secrets from him, either because he sold them or because he was so lax with the most sensitive information? What do the Saudis or the Russians know because of Trump that they are not supposed to know? How much has he compromised us? These are very serious questions that no one in the press is raising.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, thanks to Heather Cox Richardson for going there, for making clear how very serious this business is.
LikeLike
I long to hear journalists ask these Repugnican Senators and Representatives and Governors, “How can you expect the American people to take you seriously as someone with their interests at heart if you are DEFEENDING illegally hoarding many hundreds of documents containing information that, if possessed by our enemies, would pose the gravest possible threats to our defense and national security?”
LikeLike
Bob, when you wake up and realize that leaders of the world are working with Trump to get rid of the deep state and the sick pedophile ring happening with human trafficking. The border is a disaster which is on Biden not TRump as you all love to blame. We lived in the safest world with trump. No wars, no middle east craziness and look whats been happening with weak Biden and Obama. You all think Ukraine is innocent with 46 bio labs, money laundering from republicans and dems, nazis in the azov battalion and more. Trump will not be indicted he will be the next president suckers!!!!!!
LikeLike
Josh,
It’s okay, honey. We get where you are coming from.
Please try to get hold of the news stories about what FOX News hosts texted privately about Trump and the 2020 election. They knew he lost but they didn’t tell you. They knew he was a blowhard liar but they didn’t say so in air.
LikeLike
lol CNN and the liberal media have gotten it all wrong tender heart, yet you listen with your brainwashed brain. I do not even watch fox, I stopped watching them when they called Arizona or Biden early. I watch tucker and maria, that’s all. You have little cred since you believed all the russia lies, you believe the ridiculous impeachments. Trump would have been impeached 387347474784 timed with what Biden the morn, your champion has done.
Trump will win you will lose again and your brainwashed brains will be on survival mode.,
LikeLike