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.
2/ Along with the Heat Map is essential analysis by leading expert @thomasjoscelyn.
He explains how the Proud Boys orchestrated January 6th attack and risks of resurgence – especially in the event of pardons that former President Trump has suggested.
1/@jacklgoldsmith wrote a NY Times piece attacking special counsel Jack Smith.
@AWeissmann_ and I are refuting the baseless attack.
Compare:
Goldsmith 2020: Bill Barr has "enormous discretion" to ignore 60 day rule
Goldsmith 2024: "Crucial" for Garland to comply with the rule
2/ On left:
Goldsmith piece, “Jack Smith Owes Us an Explanation”
(He thinks DOJ defied a 60-Day rule in recently filing a brief showing details of alleged Trump crimes, and demands explanation)
On right:
Goldsmith shows no awareness DOJ gave the explanation TWICE.
3/ The DOJ explanation is solid.
Simply put, DOJ’s 60-Day Rule against taking actions before an election DOES NOT APPLY and apparently never has to a case after an indictment has been filed. . At that point, it is an open matter and in the hands of the court.
Trump and Vance's racist smears of Haitians - who are legally present in Springfield, Ohio - has led to bomb threats closing City Hall, schools and a motor vehicles office.
"Wittenberg University announced the cancelation of all events and activities Sunday ... after an email 'threatened a potential shooting,' campus police said in a statement. The threats reportedly targeted Haitians." fox8.com/news/universit…
3/ Trump-Vance racists smears of Haitians continue to have reverberating effect on Springfield:
"Clark State College, based in Springfield, will close all of its campuses and move to remote classes Monday through Friday as a result of two email threats." springfieldnewssun.com/news/springfie…
The racist smears of Haitians in Springfield, Ohio shows how easily these influencers' position against "illegal immigrants" slides into being against legal immigrants (of color)
"The city also says that the Haitian immigrants are in the country legally under a federal program"
2/ JD Vance expands racist smear to "communicable diseases like HIV and TB have skyrocketed in this small Ohio town."
Of a piece with Trump as President saying of Haitians "they all have AIDS" and didn't want to accept “people from shithole countries.”
1/ On Friday night, Jack Smith offered to file a new brief that could provide the public "the first glimpse of the government’s evidence beyond the four corners of the indictment—an explosive prospect.”
2/ “It is conspicuous that the special counsel does not appear to be opposing such a mini-trial, which may be important to Judge Chutkan as prosecutors would likely see tradeoffs with such public hearings.”
analysis by @NormEisen @Matt_Seligman @Edanyaperry @JoshuaGKolb
@NormEisen @Matt_Seligman @Edanyaperry @JoshuaGKolb 3/ A mini, mini trial?
“A reasonably prompt evidentiary hearing — or 'mini trial' — on immunity… may focus on the specific allegations that most deserve such an inquiry (e.g., the allegations involving former Vice President Mike Pence).”
NYT: "Moms For Liberty can get a bit carried away —one of their local chapters once accidentally quoted Adolf Hitler."
On right:
No accident. The Moms for Liberty group attributed the statement to Hitler.
h/t @jamisonfoser
2/ Also, "once accidentally quoted Hitler"?
Nope.
"After initially defending the quote, the chapter was forced to apologize."
The New York Times know that. The latter quote is from the NYT's own reporting at the time ().nytimes.com/2023/06/29/us/…
3/ The Southern Poverty Law Center classifies Moms for Liberty as an extremist group⤵️
Plus "the national organization and individual chapters have ties with groups that SPLC has designated as hate or extremist" including Proud Boys, others.