Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Aug 31, 2022 15 tweets 7 min read Read on X
Key in the DOJ brief are new revelations of facts that go to the core of Trump's criminal liability.

Fact-1: Trump never claimed the documents were declassified.

End of story on that attempted defense or attempt to deter prosecutors from indicting (as a discretionary factor).
2. Looks like Justice Department has one or more people dead to rights on obstruction, 18 USC 1519.

These newly revealed facts also goes to 18 USC 402 (disobeying the GJ subpoena).

@AWeissmann_ has identified 402 as potentially easiest road to an indictment for MAL.

Plus...
3. Plus these passages on obstruction directly implicate Trump's lawyers in the alleged crimes.

That's NOT going to play out well for Trump if DOJ follows past practice.

I discussed in earlier thread how prosecutors could put the lawyers on the stand.👇
4. There it is. In black and white.

The false certification by Trump's lawyers on June 3.

Note the yellow highlights (mine) that point directly to trouble for Donald Trump - for obstruction and concealment.
5. In another passage about June 3 retrieval of classified documents, DOJ states:

Yet again, never a peep by Trump's side with any claim that he had declassified the documents.

Plus Trump counsel's actions suggested they believed the docs were classified.
6. Hard to keep track of all the false statements by Trump's counsel to the Department of Justice/FBI!

Here are more:

- that all records from the White House were stored in one location
- that there were no records in Trump's office space
7. New facts: June 3 search turned up (based on FBI preliminary review):

38 documents with classification markings
16 SECRET
17 TOP SECRET

Including "markings reflecting sensitive compartments and dissemination controls" -- indicating government's most highly guarded secrets.
8. This line points directly at Donald Trump.

In August 8 search, classified documents were

- not simply found in MAL
- not simply found outside the storage room
- not simply found in Trump's office

but found in the desks in his office.

He needs to think about a plea deal.
9. More evidence Trump disobeyed subpoena and concealed more docs.

Recall Trump team certified on June 3 "a diligent search was conducted of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Florida."

Yet FBI found this on Aug 8👇

Including the unmissable colored cover sheets.
10. This is a powerful line, and one that a close reader has already come to think by this point.

It's incriminating that the FBI found "in a matter of hours" two times amount of docs with classified markings as Trump team had weeks to locate.

PLUS and this is a big plus...
11. Important what happens here:

June 3:
Trump team "explicitly prohibited" DOJ looking inside other boxes in storage room to see if other docs with classified markings there (p. 13).

August 8 FBI search:
FBI finds 76 docs with classified markings in same dang storage room!
12. Hats off to @AWeissmann_ who called it from the moment Trump team filed their motion with a litany of false statements.

It opened the door for DOJ to publicly correct the record in Response brief.

Trump's legal team, and their client, again with self-inflicted wounds.
13. Yep.👇

@ryanjreilly: "The passports themselves, and their location, are very good evidence that Trump unlawfully retained national defense information."

Active passports in same drawer as classified docs. Prosecutors could even note that at trial.
14. Keyword: comingled

When Trump/his lawyers say the FBI also took some personal belongings, remember:

That's apparently because it was comingled with classified docs and thus likely EVIDENCE he was willfully retaining the classified materials!

15. I'll end with this fine point by @waltshaub:

"If the FBI found these documents in your home, you would go to jail."

Now imagine being found with over 300 of these classified documents (and the first 100 documents totaling more than 700 pages)!

<end>

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ryan Goodman

Ryan Goodman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @rgoodlaw

Jan 12
A time for choosing, from main street to wall street.

"This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress’s oversight role. .... Those are pretexts."

Thank you, Chairman Powell.
2/ "I have served at the Federal Reserve under four administrations, Republicans and Democrats alike. ... Public service sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats."
3/ "I will continue to do the job the Senate confirmed me to do, with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people."

Full transcript:
federalreserve.gov/newsevents/spe…
Read 4 tweets
Jan 11
NEW

An initially-secret report for Customs and Border Patrol in 2013 found:

In many cases, the “driver was attempting to flee from the agents who intentionally put themselves into the exit path of the vehicle, thereby … creating justification for the use of deadly force.”
🧵
2/ I discuss this report at greater length on my YouTube channel and Substack

Substack: substack.com/home/post/p-18…
YouTube: youtube.com/watch?v=izontt…
3/ Customs and Border Patrol tried to keep the report’s findings secret from Congress.

Excerpt from LA Times Feb. 2014 (by @ByBrianBennett) ⬇️

latimes.com/nation/la-na-b…Image
Read 7 tweets
Jan 7
It was an honor to work with Brian Egan and Tess Bridgeman on this important piece.

- The President did not have constitutional authority for the Venezuela operation.

- It also violated the "supreme Law of the Land" - UN Charter, which the Senate passed 89-2.

1/ Image
2/ source

Congress, the President, and the Use of Military Force in Venezuela

By Brian Egan, Tess Bridgeman and Ryan Goodman

justsecurity.org/128211/congres…
3/ "Applying even the OLC’s expansive view from its recent opinions to Operation Absolute Resolve, the Executive action clearly crosses the threshold for requiring congressional authorization."
Read 5 tweets
Jan 4
I joined with two great legal experts on this analysis.

In this thread, I highlight 3 items you may not see covered in same way, if at all, elsewhere.

Panama 'precedent'
safeguards for Heads of State
Venezuelan nationals new legal protections in US

🧵
justsecurity.org/127981/interna…
2/ "Panama precedent" of 1989 US action to capture Noriega counts against, not in favor, of US actions in Venezuela.

a) UN General Assembly "strongly deplored" US 1989 action
b) HW Bush, James Baker, Amb Pickering cited justifications nowhere in Venezuela case

Excerpt⤵️ Image
3/ Maduro is a monster, but the U.S. action is also unravelling protections for Heads of State and Foreign Ministers around the world.

Just recently the United States government made this point on the "personal inviolability" of such foreign officials from criminal arrest.⤵️ Image
Read 7 tweets
Dec 31, 2025
WSJ report is extraordinary in implicating Mar-a-Lago in Epstein systematic sexual abuse.

It takes a close read, but looks like WSJ is reporting Trump was informed and told Mar-a-Lago manager to "kick out" Epstein in 2003 not from Mar-a-Lago, but from the Mar-a-Lago Spa.

1/
2/ Note the WSJ report says:

"But Epstein continued to attend parties and events at Mar-a-Lago."

gift link (reporting by @joe_palazzolo @rebeccaballhaus @khadeeja_safdar):
wsj.com/us-news/trump-…
@joe_palazzolo @rebeccaballhaus @khadeeja_safdar 3/ It's in the very headline Image
Read 5 tweets
Dec 13, 2025
With Admiral Bradley's lawyer speaking to Congress this upcoming week.

Threshold question is how ANY of these strikes are legal.

On Sept 2 strike: Q is whether they applied standard Collateral Damage Estimation Methodology.

Because look what it says (declassified 2012)⤵️
1/ Image
2/ The Collateral Damage Estimation Methodology goes to the heart of the latest DoD claims about the strike.

The claim is that the second strike was targeting the (possible) cocaine, not the shipwrecked.

I do not see how that could have possibly complied with the Methodology.
3/ As shown in the screen shot, the Methodology states:

The laws of war (LOW) require anticipated "noncombatant" deaths must not be excessive in relation to expected military advantage to be gained (the possible cocaine).

Noncombatants defined to include shipwrecked.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(