Charges added to Trump indictment for having govt records at MAL, a 3rd defendent charged

Right on schedule! Hunter's plea deal fell thru so punish Trump some more. Drive Biden family corruption off the weekend news shows.

Does anyone think this is coincidental? I was expecting action against Trump on Monday, or when Devon Archer testifies before the committee. Either Georgia or Jan. 6
It didn't even occur to me that they would just pile on new charges on any of these 3, all the way up to election! What milage they will get!

They don't care that we know what they are up too. It's now open warfare.

Imagine, we will have one candidate under impeachment and the other under all these indictments going into the election!

Story of the week:

www.cnbc.com...

I said it before: What a country!

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Any thoughts on the fact that a Trump employee has testified they were approached by De Oliveira and told them that the "boss" had requested that he destroy the surveillance camera footage just days after Trump had received a subpoena for that footage?

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Who cares that Hunter's plea deal fell through? He was going to plead, so if he now goes to trial and he's found guilty, no big deal. I don't know of anyone defending Hunter or trying to spin that he's innocent in that case.

We have been hearing talk of superseding indictments for quite a while. It appears from the indictment with text messages that De Oliveira, Nauta and Trump sought to delete surveillance video after receiving the subpoena for it, and Trump is also being charged for the Top Secret doc referenced in the audio.

Guessing you may have some not so happy weeks coming up, indictments are expected, per Trump's Truth post about his target letter in the J6 special counsel and barriers have started going up outside the Fulton County GA court house, possibly for Fani's indictment. No one is trying to cause any distraction. Most people are capable of following more than one thing at a time, and there will be no news of Hunter until he goes to court again, I mean besides Maga constantly pushing a lot of "ifs" and "maybes".

You can download the superseding indictment here

a reply to: Threadbare

My thoughts are that this is political. This is intended to influence the election. And this is to deflect from Biden family crimes.

a reply to: frogs453

Yes, they will be able to pile on charges all the way until the election, influencing their little hearts out!

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Trump is accused in a new superseding indictment with his valet, Walt Nauta, of an attempt to delete video surveillance footage at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida during the summer of 2022.

Uh, scuze me...but I was told no reasonable prosecutor would try these types of crimes/cases.......

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Any thoughts on the fact that a Trump employee has testified they were approached by De Oliveira and told them that the "boss" had requested that he destroy the surveillance camera footage just days after Trump had received a subpoena for that footage?

Being our resident hypocrite, happy to see you weighing in as we just had a sparring match over removal of subpoenaed evidence where you were defending it.

Well done...again.

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

What crimes? Hunter is going to court for the charges, we already know this. Comer and Grassley again and again state, they have no direct proof, both have flat out stated that, and both continously state "if true", "possibly true" "maybe happened". McCarthy is back pedaling on an impeachment.
Trump himself through Lev Parnas and his own DOJ spent years on his behest and no criminal charges have been filed, except the tax and gun charge.

It's cool that your thoughts are that this is political. From those of us who've read the indictments and the information/ testimony in the indictments, think it's because the former President blatantly broke the law.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Any thoughts on the fact that a Trump employee has testified they were approached by De Oliveira and told them that the "boss" had requested that he destroy the surveillance camera footage just days after Trump had received a subpoena for that footage?

Rotflmao!

This is just like all of the TDS yammering during the Mueller lunacy, and it will end the same way...

a reply to: tanstaafl

Hmm, you really think so? Trumps own attorneys testified, they have employees texts, they have audio, they have other employee testimony, surveillance video, photos. They are all what, "deep state actors", "Dem plants", other various excuses?

a reply to: JinMI

Where did I support it? My point in the other thread is that no evidence existed that Hillary ordered emails to be deleted after the subpoena was issued. And that's true.

That doesn't seem to be the case here.

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

So even though the DOJ has strong evidence that Trump violated the law you believe he should be allowed to skate because he announced his candidacy almost a year after the investigation was launched?

a reply to: Threadbare

Not support, defended. But if you wish to believe that someone else ordered those emails deleted (Mills) without being asked to, you may believe that.

So, where are those immunity deals for Trumps blue collar workers?

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: CoyoteAngels

So even though the DOJ has strong evidence that Trump violated the law you believe he should be allowed to skate because he announced his candidacy almost a year after the investigation was launched?

You believe the DoJ has strong evidence.


That's all this is and all it has ever been regarding Trump.

Duped again?

a reply to: JinMI

Mills instructed Platte River Communications to set a 60 day retention policy on Hillary's emails in December 2014. Three months before the subpoena.

On March 9th, 2015, a few days after the subpoena was received, she then reached back out to Platte River and told them to preserve any emails still on the server.

If Nauta and De Oliveira were willing to cooperate with investigators they would get immunity. They chose to be loyal to Trump and are more facing 65+ years of jail.

a reply to: JinMI

I think they have strong evidence. Multiple grand juries think they have strong evidence. Former Trump lawyers think they have strong evidence. Multiple judges think they have strong enough evidence that they ordered attorney-client privilege to be pierced.

Even Trump seems to think they have strong evidence considering he's trying to get the trial delayed to after the election in hopes he wins and has the power to quash the case.

a reply to: Threadbare

I bet you do.

Do you understand the mechanics of a Grand Jury?

The elements? The prosecutions "side?"

For the record, you are cheering on tyranny. Again, the double standard is blazingly obvious.

a reply to: JinMI

I bet you do.

Well when you actually read the court filings instead of just going with what Trump posts on Truth...

a reply to: Threadbare

a reply to: frogs453


Same old, same old.

When you guys gonna answer these questions?

Name 5 things Biden and his gang of goons have done to help regular American citizens since taking office.

Name 5 things Trump did policy wise that made you hate him.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI

I bet you do.

Well when you actually read the court filings instead of just going with what Trump posts on Truth...

You think I read Truth Social?

You think I get my information from a 3 letter age...news station?

When you are able to look in the mirror and understand how your irrational bias clouds rational thinking......