DEVELOPING: President Trump Receives Crucial Evidence From Pending Indictment
President Trump is finally out of the shadows when it comes to the pending federal indictment against him.
Because the Biden administration, rogue Soros-backed DAs, and the Department of Justice are all working off of never-before-seen legal theories, it has likely been difficult for President Trump’s legal team to adequately plan a defense.
How can one know what to defend against or what strategies to employ if something like this has never happened before? Where is the legal precedent?
While none of these questions have yet to be answered, at least the first discovery materials are in. …
On Wednesday, the DOJ announced that it provided President Trump’s legal team with the first batch of discovery documents detailing the alleged evidence against him, as well as who will be testifying.
Legal expert Will Scharf provided a detailed analysis of why the pending federal case against President Trump is ‘outrageous and shocking.’ Scharf explained:
“I want to make a different point relating to the intent elements in § 793(e) of the Espionage Act, the statute Trump is being charged under.
Section 793(e) requires the government to prove that the Defendant KNEW he had National Defense Information (NDI) in his possession, and also that the Defendant KNEW that there was a government official entitled to receive the Information, and also that the Defendant then WILLFULLY failed to deliver it to that official.
This is a very high set of mens rea bars to jump, in any circumstance. Proving a Defendant’s intent and knowledge can often be tough. But it’s even tougher here.
The Presidential Records Act sets up a system where the president designates all records that he creates either as Presidential or Personal Records. 44 U.S.C. § 2203(b). A former president is supposed to turn over his Presidential Records to NARA, and he has the right to keep his Personal Records.”
(1) Interplay between the Espionage Act and the Presidential Records Act
A lot of my friends have spoken insightfully about the scope of the Presidential Records Act. I’d direct you to Mike Davis’s (@mrddmia) commentary on the subject, and also Michael Bekesha of…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
(3) Walt Nauta and DOJ Misconduct
Far and away the most troubling side story to emerge from this saga so far are the allegations made by Trump aide and co-defendant Walt Nauta’s lawyer last week.
You may have missed it if you blinked. Not surprisingly, the mainstream media has…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
(5) Timing: Why now?
This is not a legal defect in the indictment, but it’s an important point. Why are they bringing this case now?
They know that Trump is the leading candidate for president. They know he’s beating Biden in the polls. They must know how bad it looks for a…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
The Epoch Times shared these details regarding the first set of discovery documents:
Nauta’s June 2022 grand jury testimony was part of the first set of materials, as were copies of interviews Trump did with non-government entities, including a July 21, 2021, interview with an unidentified publisher and writer that was quoted in the indictment.
According to the government, Trump told the writer and publisher at the time that he possessed a plan to attack another country that was formulated by a senior military official, with the government indicating the official was Gen. Mark Milley.
It’s been pointed out to me that the final vote on McDonnell v. United States was 8-0, not 9-0, because Justice Scalia passed away before the opinion was issued.
My point still stands. The Supreme Court unanimously said that Smith overstepped and smacked him down for it.
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
Daily Wire adds:
A federal judge issued a protective order on Monday blocking Trump from being able to release any of the evidence that prosecutors turn over to his defense team during the discovery process.
