2. Audio recording is a meeting with several people who don't have security clearances.
If Trump discussed content of document it is even worse - and raises its own criminal exposure.
These individuals are all likely good witnesses, with disincentive to lie given their number.
3. Bedminster
CNN: The audio recording shows prosecutors "are not only looking at Trump’s actions regarding classified documents recovered from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, but also at what happened at Bedminster" summer 2021.
That's where meeting occurred.
4. War plans are among the most highly classified documents.
Puts pressure on DOJ to indict, and a jury to convict.
5. As CNN reporting notes, this recording also goes to show knowledge and intent:
"The recording indicates Trump understood he retained classified material after leaving the White House."
6. The recording also appears to knock a hole in already very weak (non-defense) defense of declassification:
"On the recording, Trump’s comments suggest he would like to share the information but he’s aware of limitations on his ability post-presidency to declassify records."
7. Make no mistake. This is squarely an Espionage Act case. It is not simply an "obstruction" case.
There is now every reason to expect former President Trump will be charged under 18 USC 793(e) of the Espionage Act.
The law fits his reported conduct like a hand in glove.
8. Prosecutors do not need to show motive for conviction, but it helps with a jury.
CNN report suggests motives: To hold onto docs as trophies, to use to settle scores or try to retain control over the narrative - here to try (in vain) to contradict @sbg1's reporting on Milley.
9. NYT corroborates CNN scoop plus with this specificity:
“Trump then began referencing a document that he had with him,”
saying it was compiled by Gen. Milley and related to attacking Iran.
Devastating first-hand witness to Alex Pretti's killing
Declaration filed in federal court:
"I don't know why they shot him. He was only helping. I was five feet from him and they just shot him."
2/ "The agents pulled the man on the ground. I didn't see him touch any of them-he wasn't even turned toward them. It didn't look like he was trying to resist, just trying to help the woman up. I didn't see him with a gun."
"I have read the statement from DHS about what happened and it is wrong. The man did not approach the agents with a gun. He approached them with a camera. He was just trying to help a woman get up and they took him to the ground."
Here's what the Justice Department actually told the Supreme Court, and how DOJ defends ICE's use of racially profiling.
Full analysis on my YouTube and Substack
🧵
2/ Shareable link to full analysis⤵️
A close look at what the DOJ left undisputed.
And how DOJ admitted to the courts that stopping racial profiling would “upend immigration enforcement efforts” in the way ICE currently carries it out.
3/ Document
U.S. Solicitor General to the Supreme Court arguing to allow racially profiling as a factor supporting ICE's "reasonable suspicion."
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."
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."
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
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."