Trump has been charged by the Department of Justice with the following four counts:
-
A conspiracy to defraud the United States “by using dishonesty, fraud and deceit to obstruct the nation’s process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election,” according to the special counsel’s office.
-
A conspiracy to impede the Jan. 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified.
-
A conspiracy against the right to vote and to have that vote counted.
-
Obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct and impede, the certification of the electoral vote.
In criminally charging former president Donald Trump for his efforts to reverse his 2020 election loss, federal prosecutors allege that Trump enlisted six co-conspirators to “assist him in his criminal efforts to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election and retain power.”
-
Rudy Giuliani
-
John Eastman
-
Sidney Powell
-
Jeffrey Clark
-
Kenneth Chesebro
-
Unknown political consultant
Updated 8/3/2023 by Jordan Lund
Washington, D.C. - 4 felonies, January 6th Election Interference
Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
(Lawyers have until 8/10 to submit requested trial dates, which will be announced on 8/28)
Trial
Conviction
Sentencing
Georgia - Election Interference
Investigation <- You Are Here
2 new grand juries were impaneled on 7/11/2023.
Indictment - July 11th to September 1st.
(Grand Jury work expected July 31 to Aug. 18)
Arrest
Trial
Conviction
Sentencing
New York State - 34 felonies, Stormy Daniels Payoff
Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - March 25th, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing
Florida - 40 felonies, Federal documents charges
Investigation
Indictment
The original indictment was for 37 felonies.
3 new felonies were added on July 27, 2023.
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - May 20, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing
Other grand juries, such as for the documents at Bedminster, have not been announced.
The E. Jean Carroll trial for sexual assault and defamation, where Trump was found liable and ordered to pay $5 million before immediately defaming her again, resulting in a demand for $10 million, is not listed as it’s a civil case and not a criminal one.
Sources:
Trumps 3rd Indictment - Conspiring to Defraud the United States - 1 August 2023
NBC News: Grand jury charges Trump in 2020 election probe: Highlights
Vox: Trump was just indicted for trying to steal the 2020 election
CNN: August 1, 2023 Trump indicted in special counsel's 2020 election interference probe
Washington Post: Here are the Trump co-conspirators described in the DOJ indictment
Reason: Trump Indicted for Attempting To Overturn 2020 Presidential Election
FiveThirtyEight: All Of Trump's Indictments Could Seriously Bog Down His Campaign
Trump's Arraignment - 3 August 2023
AP: Trump is due to face a judge in DC over charges he tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election
CBS News: Trump pleads not guilty to federal charges in special counsel probe
Chicago Tribune: Trump pleads not guilty to federal charges that he tried to overturn the 2020 election
The Independent: Trump appears to stumble over his name and age at arraignment
Official Documentation
I think the document's indictment will secure a conviction more easily than this, even if this is the one that should see him sent to prison forever.
The reason is simple - the documents crime is self evident - removal of classified documents, attempts to hide their return and an obvious attempt to obstruct an investigation into their whereabouts.
Where as the Jan 6 stuff has enough of a complex timeline that prosecution could screw it up, or the defendant's lawyers could throw all the co-conspirators under a bus to exclaim Trump was simply given bad advice by his lawyers.
I think you are missing some of the important subtext within the indictment itself. I would highly encourage you to read it, as it covers the timeline of events in question in significant detail. Here is an abridged response to the concerns you raised though:
Mark Meadows (Trump Chief of Staff) has certainly been a cooperating witness since March, or potentially even earlier. He has made no public statements in almost a year, and was notably not insinuated to be a co-conspirator in this indictment. We can infer from this information that there is a strong likelihood that he struck a deal to avoid some or all prosecution in exchange for his testimony. Mark Meadows is where all the bodies are buried pertaining to January 6th. There's too much information to get into in one comment on this subject, but there is plenty of quality information regarding his involvement from the Congressional Committee as well as from other sources close to the Trump Whitehouse.
It is extremely likely that some or all of the co-conspirators in this indictment that have not yet been charged will be falling all over themselves to strike their own deals based on the information contained in the public indictment alone. This will give the special prosecutors office additional first hand testimony that speaks to Trumps involvement and awareness both relating to the insurrection as well as the fake electors scheme.
Mike Pence has already testified before the grand jury, and will certainly be used as a material witness in this case. That is extremely bad for Trump because Pence will likewise be asked to testify regarding Trump's personal involvement in the fake electors scheme.
The judge presiding over this case already sentenced multiple different defendants pertaining to January 6th, some of whom received prison time well above the charging guidelines. She will also cut through the attempts by Trump's attorneys to obstruct the timely procession of this case, and is backed up by an appellate court that is also well versed in striking down frivolous fillings made by previous and existing members of Trump's legal team.
This case is being tried in Washington DC, and it is much less likely that there will be jurors who attempt to game the jury selection process in order to hang the jury during deliberations. It will also be next to impossible for Trump to tamper with said jury or witnesses without being swiftly met with additional charges or sanctions up to and including incarceration for the duration of the proceeding as well as a gag order. Any attempts at exerting undue influence in this case would be the final nail in the coffin of his defense.
Lastly, it is true that Trump may publicly claim that he was simply given bad legal advice. However, that argument breaks down the second that there is first party testimony that implicates Trump in directing the decision making of his staff, and co-conspirators against the explicit advice of Chief Whitehouse Counsel Pat Cipollone and others who will also be called to testify. No matter how jaded all of us are (and rightly so) regarding the legal system in this country, I firmly believe that Trump is up against the kind of asymmetrical information warfare the likes of which he has never seen. When it gets down to brass tacks there are a lot of people here who could conceivably die in prison if they do not do the smart thing and flip to save themselves. We are FIRMLY in the find out stages of the game, and I don't believe for one second that anybody is going to risk their freedom for the rest of their natural life to save Trump's ass on this one.
I have read the indictment and it's clear that this is going to be a LONG trial and there is going to be a lot of cross examination with lots of witnesses and complexity of threading the needle. It's also using more novel statutes which in themselves might bring issues.
So my point is the other indictment is just more straightforward. It's the old Al Capone analogy of trying to prove an entire criminal enterprise or just hit him for his tax returns. The same is true for Trump except in this case it's statutes regarding classified documents which he demonstrably violated. Either way he'll die in prison so I don't mind as long as he's convicted of something.
What do you mean precisely by using novel statutes? I'm assuming you are referring to the use of these specific charges requiring some level of novel legal interpretation. I'm not sure I agree, but I am interested in your perspective as to why you think that is the case if you have the time/are so inclined. Either way, appreciate your response!
One thing he is being charged with is conspiracy against the right to vote. That is a reconstruction era law to stop the KKK intimidating voters and suchlike. Not saying it's not a relevant thing to charge him with (it seems to be), but it's a rarely used law and I'm certain defense will be arguing hard to strike it out. The other conspiracies also will require a prosecution to present an actual conspiracy through dozens of witnesses and hundreds of pieces of evidence and I'm sure defense lawyers will be working hard to pretend Trump was mislead by a cabal of greedy lawyers exploiting his better nature.
By comparison unlawful retention and possession of classified documents is pretty yes/no thing with obstruction on top for good measure.
Wonderful post.
He may beat the rap, but he sure as hell isn't beating the ride. And it's going to be one damn crazy ride for him, at one of the most inopportune moments.
His financial backing is already starting to crack, and there's indications his various backers/base might not have the stomach to keep throwing money into this dumpster fire.
On top of all that, he's getting pretty fucking old, and all this added stress would be enough to make a man's heart pop even decades younger.
Lastly, our justice system would be remiss if it didn't carry through with holding him and his cronies responsible.
I was suspended from Twitter one time (pre-Musk even!) for saying that I thought he would simply be too old and unhealthy to run for President next year, considering he is almost 80 and lives an unhealthy lifestyle. That’s all I said, no opinion, just that belief. According to them that was “wishing harm or violence upon others”.
Likely true, but having all these different indictments going at once really shows how much he’s fucked up. Plus it spreads his lawyers thin trying to handle everything
Trump isn't even contesting that he took the classified documents. His defense is "I was President so I'm allowed to take anything I want." Obviously, there's zero legal basis for this. It's complete garbage, but this is the legal defense he wants to go with.
Unless Judge Cannon invents new Presidential rights out of thin air, Trump's going to easily be found guilty.