Menu Bar

Home           Calendar           Topics          Just Charlestown          About Us
Showing posts with label Mike Pence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mike Pence. Show all posts

Monday, January 5, 2026

January 6 protests tomorrow

Why they are important

Here are two articles explaining why, one from Indivisible Rhode Island, host of a State House vigil tomorrow and from former US Sec. of Labor Robert Reich.

First, from Indivisible:

Indivisible Rhode Island: Why we will gather by candlelight on January 6 at the State House

Lev Poplow; Lead Organizer, Indivisible Rhode Island
MK Getler; Indivisible Rhode Island Steering Committee Member
Michaela Keegan; Indivisible Rhode Island Steering Committee Member

"Democracies do not fail all at once. They erode slowly in pivotal moments when truth becomes negotiable, and participation becomes optional..."

On January 6, 2026, as the Rhode Island General Assembly gavels in its first day of a fresh new legislative session, the members of Indivisible Rhode Island and our Chapters will gather quietly by candlelight.

We do so not to celebrate the occasion, but to honor the truth.

Five years ago, on January 6, 2021, our nation watched as a violent mob stormed the United States Capitol in an attempt to overturn a free and fair election. People were injured. Lives were lost. Democratic norms, the likes of which many of us had taken for granted, were shaken to their core. For some, the images feel like a distant memory. For others, especially those who work in public service, journalism, advocacy, and policy, that day fundamentally altered how safe and stable our democracy felt.

The candlelight vigil we are holding is first and foremost about those impacted by that day: Capitol staff, law enforcement officers, elected officials, their families, and everyday Americans who realized, perhaps for the first time, how fragile our democratic system can be when hateful rhetoric is allowed to metastasize into violence.

But this vigil is also about Rhode Island.

January 6, 2026, is not just an anniversary. It is the first day of legislation at the Rhode Island State House. The irony of that convergence is not lost on us.

However, kismet the dates may be, we choose to let them serve as a reminder that democracy is not an abstract ideal housed in Washington, D.C. It lives here in our tiny state. It dwells in our state house, city halls, school committees, and town councils. It lingers in the daily work of governance and in citizens’ responsibility to remain engaged, informed, and vigilant.

Indivisible Rhode Island believes that remembrance is not passive, and as such, this candlelight vigil is an action: a form of accountability and responsibility. When we forget, or worse, when we normalize political violence, we weaken the guardrails that protect a pluralistic democracy. A candlelight vigil is deliberate: quiet instead of chaos, reflection instead of rage, community instead of fear.

Some may ask why we are “looking back” when there is so much work ahead. Our answer is simple: We cannot move forward responsibly without reflecting on what has led us to this moment. Democracies do not fail all at once. They erode slowly in pivotal moments when truth becomes negotiable, and participation becomes optional.

As lawmakers return to the State House to debate policies that will shape the lives and wellbeing of Rhode Islanders, from housing and healthcare to education and climate resilience, we want to ground that work in a shared commitment to democratic principles: Respect for humanity. Civic disagreement without dehumanization. And equal rights for all.

Rhode Island has a long history of civic engagement and dissent rooted in a commitment to the common good. Gathering by candlelight on January 6 is our way of reaffirming that legacy. It is an invitation to lawmakers and neighbors alike to begin this legislative session with humility, inclusivity, and resolve.

Democracy is not self-sustaining. It asks something of each of us. It calls us to action and challenges us to pursue a more perfect society.

On January 6, we will show up not with slogans or speeches, but with light. A beacon of our state motto: Hope.

Source: SteveAhlquist.news is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The most shameful day in American history

We will never forget, and we will not let the nation or the world forget.

Robert Reich

Jan 05, 2026

Friends,

Five years ago tomorrow was the most shameful day in American history.

We must not allow Trump to persuade America that it did not happen or that he was innocent, or let him deflect the nation’s attention from the fifth anniversary of what occurred that day.

Less than three weeks ago, Jack Smith, the former special counsel to the Justice Department, appeared before the House Judiciary Committee and testified under oath:

“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power.”

The sole reason Donald Trump is not now behind bars is that Smith dropped the case after Trump was elected to a second term, because the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. United States — written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by five other justices, three of whom were nominated by Trump — prevented the prosecution of a sitting president.

Let us ponder this for a moment.

Although the peaceful transfer of power lies at the heart of American democracy, Trump sought to overturn the result of the 2020 election. He is now president once again.

Five years ago tomorrow, on January 6, 2021, when Vice President Mike Pence walked into the Capitol, he faced a withering pressure campaign by Trump.

Trump and his henchmen had already twisted the arms of governors and election officials around the country to change the result of the election in his favor. They had coaxed loyalists in five swing states to submit signed certificates falsely claiming they were “duly elected and qualified” members of the Electoral College.

Pence was about to throw out the slates of false electors. As he began the electoral vote count, thousands of Trump supporters — many of them armed — stormed the Capitol. Some chanted they wanted to “hang Mike Pence” for refusing to block the certification.

They came directly from a rally Trump held on the Ellipse, in which Trump repeated his false claim that the election had been stolen and told the crowd, “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

According to the criminal indictment,

“After it became public on the afternoon of January 6 that the Vice President would not fraudulently alter the election results, a large and angry crowd — including many individuals whom the Defendant had deceived into believing the Vice President could and might change the election results — violently attacked the Capitol and halted the proceeding.”

The FBI estimated that between 2,000 and 2,500 people entered the Capitol Building in the attack, some of whom participated in vandalism and looting, including of the offices of members of Congress. Rioters also assaulted Capitol Police officers. They occupied the empty Senate chamber while federal law enforcement officers defended the evacuated House floor.

Within 36 hours, five people died. One was shot by Capitol Police; another died of a drug overdose; three died of heart attacks or strokes, including a police officer who died the day after being assaulted by rioters. Many were injured, including 174 police officers. Four other officers who responded to the attack died by suicide within seven months.

“President Trump was wrong,” Pence said subsequently. “I had no right to overturn the election. And his reckless words endangered my family and everyone at the Capitol that day, and I know history will hold Donald Trump accountable.”

A week after the attack, the House of Representatives impeached Trump for incitement of insurrection. In February 2021, after he left office, the Senate voted 57–43 in favor of conviction but fell short of the required two-thirds majority, resulting in his acquittal.

Senate Republicans then blocked a bill to create a bipartisan independent commission to investigate the attack, leaving the House to organize its own select committee.

After an 18-month investigation including more than 1,000 witnesses and nine televised public hearings, the House’s select committee identified Trump as the “central cause” of the Capitol attack by the pro-Trump mob.

The panel, made up of seven Democrats and two Republicans, voted unanimously to recommend charges to the Justice Department to prosecute Trump for seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Following a special counsel investigation by the Justice Department, Trump was indicted on four charges in August 2023.

As I’ve noted, all charges against Trump were dismissed after his reelection to the presidency.

Of the 1,424 people charged with federal crimes relating to the riot, 1,010 pled guilty and 1,060 were sentenced and served time in prison. Enrique Tarrio, then the chairman of the Proud Boys, received the longest sentence, a 22-year prison term.

Upon retaking the presidency, Trump pardoned them all.

***

Trump and his lackeys in the Republican Party have since promoted a revisionist history of the event — downplaying the severity of the violence, spreading conspiracy theories, and portraying those charged with crimes as hostages and martyrs.

Trump has tried to recast the violent events as a “day of love.”

On December 8, 2024, in his first broadcast news interview since the 2024 election, Trump said members of the House committee that investigated the riot “should go to jail.”

***

We must never forget. We must teach our children and our children’s children and all future generations of Americans what happened on January 6, 2021— so that, as Mike Pence hoped, “history will hold Donald Trump accountable.”

January 6, 2021 was the most shameful day in American history. It should live in infamy, as should the traitor who refused to accept the election results and incited the attack on the U.S. Capitol — Donald J. Trump.

Monday, November 17, 2025

Trump Pardons His Co-Conspirators in 2020 Coup Attempt

If you are a Republican, you can do anything

Stephen Prager for Common Dreams

Donald Trump has given a “full, complete, and unconditional” pardon to a long list of allies who conspired to help him overturn his loss in the 2020 election.

Late Sunday night, Justice Department attorney Ed Martin posted a list of over 70 people who would receive pardons. Many of the figures included were named as unindicted co-conspirators or charged at the state level for their roles in the plot to knowingly spread false claims of widespread voter fraud in an attempt to push states to reject former President Joe Biden’s victories in key swing states and pressure Vice President Mike Pence into stopping the certification of the election.

Among those pardoned are Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who publicly promoted baseless claims of a vast conspiracy against the president to the public, claiming that the election was stolen by a cabal of foreign infiltrators and scheming election officials. They later faced defamation lawsuits for these claims, and in legal proceedings, Giuliani conceded he made false statements about election workers, while Powell’s lawyers argued that “no reasonable person” would conclude her public claims were statements of fact.

Trump also pardoned former chief of staff Mark Meadows, who acted as a facilitator between the president and state officials he attempted to bully into saying he won the election. Aside from the president himself, Meadows was the highest-ranking White House staffer on the phone call in which Trump asked Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” him enough votes to be declared the winner of the election.

Also receiving pardons were attorneys John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro. They were part of what Pence called Trump’s “gaggle of crackpot lawyers,” who concocted the tortured legal theory that the vice president could declare Biden’s victory in swing states illegitimate and anoint Trump as the winner. Eastman privately admitted to Trump that the scheme was illegal but pressed ahead with it anyway, culminating in the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol, during which Trump supporters chanted, “Hang Mike Pence,” and tried to stop the election results from being certified.

Monday, October 13, 2025

Trump offers another proof that he is demented

So what's wrong with this Trump claim?

1. Trump was still President on January 6, 2021. He seems to have forgotten this.

2. Trump appointee Jeffrey Rosen was serving as Trump's acting Attorney General.

3. Trump appointee Christopher Wray was serving as Director of the FBI.

4. Joe Biden was not inaugurated until January 20, three weeks after January 6.

5. Joe Biden had no control over the FBI or Justice Department until January 20.

6. Donald Trump directed his crowd to march on the Capitol and specifically to confront Vice President Mike Pence.

Thursday, August 8, 2024

JD Vance’s selection as Trump’s running mate marks the end of Republican conservatism

Fascism and Christian Nationalism now define the GOP

Karyn AmiraCollege of Charleston

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and
vice presidential candidate JD Vance at a campaign rally in
Michigan on July 20, 2024. AP Photo/Evan Vucci
Since Donald Trump chose Ohio Sen. JD Vance as his running mate, it’s been widely noted that Vance once described Trump as “reprehensible” and “cultural heroin.” However, the day after Vance won his own Senate race in 2022, he reportedly made it known that he would support Trump for president in 2024.

Given this dramatic change, what does Vance’s selection mean for the Republican Party and conservatism, the political philosophy that the GOP once claimed to embrace?

I am a political scientist whose research and political analysis focuses on the relationship between Trump, the Republican Party and conservatism. Everyday citizens define conservatism in different ways, but at its root it is a philosophy that supports smaller and less-centralized government because consolidated power could be used to silence political competition and deny citizens their liberties.

Since 2015, Trump has tightened his grip on the Republican Party, moving it further away from its professed conservative ideology. The choice of Vance as Trump’s running mate – and the competition that preceded it – are the latest steps in this process.

Political columnist George Will describes how Trumpism has steered the Republican Party away from traditional conservative views.

Vance came from a small pool of contenders that included other noteworthy politicians who likewise once vehemently opposed Trump. By examining their trajectories, we can see how the Republican Party has abandoned conservative values to serve a single man.

Saturday, June 29, 2024

Donald Trump ia a Profound Threat to Social Security, Medicare, and Seniors

How do we know? He's already told us—over and over and over again.

NANCY J. ALTMAN in Common Dreams

Donald Trump was the worst president for seniors in the history of the nation. That is not hyperbole. Alarmingly, if elected again, he will be even worse—and, worryingly, more effective.

When Trump ran for president in 2016, he claimed he would be the one Republican not to cut our earned benefits but, when he actually became president, every single one of his budgets proposed deep cuts to Social Security and Medicare, as well as Medicaid.

When Trump couldn’t get the cuts enacted, he employed the old tactic of “starve the beast.” Figuring tax cuts are easier to enact than benefit cuts, he cut income taxes which help to fund Medicare and Medicaid, and sought to defund Social Security, which has its own dedicated revenue source.

To advance his goal of undermining Social Security, Donald Trump grabbed the questionable power to go after its dedicated revenue unilaterally—something without precedent. Because Trump was limited to executive action, he was able to only defer the revenue, but he made clear that he would not just defer the revenue, but eliminate it, if he were re-elected. Insufficient dedicated revenue leads to automatic cuts. Conveniently, automatic cuts means there is no one to clearly be held accountable.

Trump’s goals to undermine these programs, so vital to seniors, have not changed. Trump continues to claim he won’t cut benefits despite his record to the contrary, but tells the truth from time to time. Moreover, he is reportedly considering, once again, defunding Social Security, if he has the chance. Trump also plans to continue to give his billionaire friends massive tax giveaways.

Friday, March 22, 2024

DO NOT let him do it again

Trump nearly derailed democracy once 

Richard L. Abel, University of California, Los Angeles

Elections are the bedrock of democracy, essential for choosing representatives and holding them accountable.

The U.S. is a flawed democracy. The Electoral College and the Senate make voters in less populous states far more influential than those in the more populous: Wyoming residents have almost four times the voting power of Californians.

Ever since the Civil War, however, reforms have sought to remedy other flaws, ensuring that citizenship’s full benefits, including the right to vote, were provided to formerly enslaved people, women and Native Americans; establishing the constitutional standard of one person, one vote; and eliminating barriers to voting through the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

But the Supreme Court has, in recent years, narrowly construed the Voting Rights Act and limited courts’ ability to redress gerrymandering, the drawing of voting districts to ensure one party wins.

The 2020 election revealed even more disturbing threats to democracy. As I explain in my book, “How Autocrats Seek Power,” Donald Trump lost his reelection bid in 2020 but refused to accept the results. He tried every trick in the book – and then some – to alter the outcome of this bedrock exercise in democracy.

A recent New York Times story reports that when it comes to Trump’s time in office and his attempt to overturn the 2020 election, “voters often have a hazy recall of one of the most tumultuous periods in modern politics.” This, then, is a refresher about Trump’s handling of the election, both before and after Nov. 3, 2020.

Trump began with a classic autocrat’s strategy – casting doubt on elections in advance to lay the groundwork for challenging an unfavorable outcome.

Despite his efforts, Trump was unable to control or change the election results. And that was because of the work of others to stop him.

Here are four things Trump tried to do to flip the election in his favor – and examples of how he was stopped, both by individuals and democratic institutions.

Thursday, March 21, 2024

Only Trumpers are allowed to be Republicans

The Republican Party is going through a nasty divorce

By Kerry Eleveld for Daily Kos

When former Vice President Mike Pence said last Friday that he would not be endorsing his old boss Donald Trump for a second term as president, it made for a good chuckle: Pence wouldn't be backing the guy who tried to have him hanged on Jan. 6, 2021.

But zoom out a bit and Pence's rejection of his former boss comes amid a potentially meaningful groundswell of opposition from many of those who worked closest with Trump—including his former top aides and Cabinet members.

The Biden campaign sure thinks it’s notable. Shortly after Pence's statement, the campaign's rapid response director, Ammar Moussa, blasted out a list to reporters of former Trump staffers who don't think Trump and his autocratic agenda should be "anywhere near the Oval Office."

Pence topped the list, followed by former U.N. ambassador and Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley—but let's put a pin in that for a moment.

Other former senior Trump officials who made Team Biden's "short list" were:

Tuesday, March 5, 2024

Trump Republicans are committed to abandoning America’s historic embrace of democracy.

MAGA’s Plan to Steal the 2024 Election, Legally

THOM HARTMANN in ThomHartmann.Com

Back on March 13, 2020—almost exactly four years ago—I wrote an article that was published at alternet.org laying out how Republicans were then, 10 months before January 6, planning to partially repeat the debacle of the election of 1876 by having then-Vice President Mike Pence refuse to certify swing state votes and thus throw the election to the House to keep the-President Donald Trump in office, no matter how the election went.

When I published the article 10 months before January 6, I received concerned and even alarmed communications from several Democratic strategists and a few elected officials who basically said they didn’t think there was any way Trump would try such an audacious move and, if he did, he wouldn’t get away with it.

But I was right and that was exactly what Trump had up his sleeve. We saw it play out on January 6. The only thing that stopped him was Pence’s unwillingness to go along with stealing an election.

Now I’m hearing a new story from those same GOP insiders (as well as other commentators) about Trump’s schemes for 2024. Here’s what I’m hearing Republicans are planning in the event Joe Biden wins re-election and Democrats hold the Senate and take the House this November:

First, Republicans need to make sure they’re in control of the House of Representatives on January 6, 2024, when the new president will be certified.

To do that, even though Democrats might have won enough seats to take back the House in the 2024 election, Speaker Mike Johnson will refuse to swear into Congress on January 3 a handful of those Democrats, claiming there are “irregularities” in their elections that must be first investigated.

Friday, January 5, 2024

Jan. 6 insurrection was an example of networked incitement

Will Trump do it again this year - or has he already begun?



The shocking events of Jan. 6, 2021, signaled a major break from the nonviolent rallies that categorized most major protests over the past few decades.

What set Jan. 6 apart was the defeated president of the United States using his cellphone to direct an attack on the Capitol, and those who stormed the Capitol being wired and ready for insurrection.

My co-authors and I, a media and disinformation scholar, call this networked incitement: influential figures inciting large-scale political violence via social media. Networked incitement involves insurgents communicating across multiple platforms to command and coordinate mobilized social movements in the moment of action.

The reason there was not more bloodshed on Jan. 6 emerged through investigation into the Oath Keepers, a vigilante organization composed mostly of former military and police. During their trials for seditious conspiracy, members of the Oath Keepers testified about weapons caches in hotels and vans, stashed near Washington, D.C. As one member described it, “I had not seen that many weapons in one location since I was in the military.”

Friday, November 3, 2023

With Shutdown Averted, Is Social Security Safe? Nope!

Taxing the rich is the best way to preserve Social Security and Medicare 

JAMES ROOSEVELT JR.HENRY SCOTT WALLACEJUNE HOPKINSTOMLIN PERKINS COGGESHALL for Common Dreams


Let’s talk Social Security. The government shutdown was averted (temporarily), so that’s a good thing, right? Trump is promising not to touch it. Benefits are not threatened, right?

Wrong. Social Security has a bullseye on its back. As descendants of the New Deal leaders who created it, we recognize the warning signs, and need to shout the alarm.

The right-wing hard-liners who fired House Speaker Kevin McCarthy—without a  replacement in sight—are determined to balance the budget by reducing spending. The word “revenues” is an obscenity to them. And defense spending is sacred and untouchable.

But even if they completely eliminated every single non-defense discretionary program—from food stamps to the FBI to border protection—it wouldn’t be enough. It would add up to about $900 billion, or about 15% of total federal spending, which would fall far short of balancing the budget. So their deficit-cutting zeal must inevitably turn to what is called mandatory spending, most prominently the largest government program of all, Social Security.

Republican presidential candidates are increasingly emboldened to touch this deadly “third rail” of American politics. Nikki Haley mocked other candidates for promising not to touch Social Security. Ron DeSantis wants to “revamp” it. Mike Pence wants to privatize it, turning it over to Wall Street and adding trillions to the national debt—to replace the New Deal with a “better deal.”

And although former President Donald Trump now swears he would never harm a hair on Social Security’s head, his history renders such assurances hollow. He has previously suggested that a second Trump term would mean cuts to Social Security and Medicare

Let’s not forget that his hugest unachieved social policy goal at the end of his presidency was the complete termination of Social Security’s principal funding source, the payroll tax.

Sunday, September 10, 2023

Governors may make good presidents

But not ‘imperial governors’ like DeSantis

Raymond Scheppach, University of Virginia

Nearly all are present or former governors. By Bill Day
Many people believe governors make good presidents. In fact, a 2016 Gallup Poll found that almost 74% of people say that governing a state provides excellent or good preparation for someone to be an effective president. As a result, many political commentators have tried to explain why Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is stumbling in his campaign for president.

Some say it is because he is stiff or awkward on the campaign trail, or his path to the nomination is not really to the political right of former President Donald Trump, or he needs to step up and directly confront the former president.

But as the former executive director of the National Governors Association for 27 years, I have worked with well over 300 governors. During that time I have been part of many conversations with governors regarding other governors running for president. 

So I know that some current and former governors on both sides of the aisle would have another reason for why DeSantis is stalling. If you were to ask them, I expect they would mostly smile and say quietly, “It is because he has become an imperial governor” – one who believes he is all-powerful and that all his decisions will be just applauded and never questioned or opposed.

Thursday, August 3, 2023

Such an outrage


 

Criminal law expert explains new charge based on Trump's role in Jan. 6 insurrection

Using ‘dishonesty, fraud and deceit’ to cling to power

Gabriel J. ChinUniversity of California, Davis

Special Counsel Jack Smith announces the second federal
indictment of Donald Trump on Aug. 1, 2023.
 AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin
The Justice Department announced its second federal indictment of former president Donald J. Trump on Aug. 1, 2023. The charges are groundbreaking and not just because a former president is facing multiple criminal charges.

It’s because these are the first federal charges alleging a former president effectively attempted a particular kind of coup, called an auto-coup, in which he attempted to keep himself in power by illegal means.

The indictment lists four felony charges. All of them rely on the same facts and boil down to the same set of five allegations, many of which have been previously reported.

All of the charges rest on the claim that Trump and his co-conspirators knew the former president lost the 2020 election, and that his claims of fraud and voting irregularity made before and on Jan. 6, 2021 were unfounded.

Three counts in this new indictment allege conspiracies: There is conspiracy to defraud the government; to obstruct an official proceeding – in this case, counting the electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021; and against the rights of the voters to cast ballots and have them fairly and honestly counted.

The remaining count alleges obstruction of an official proceeding – namely, tallying the electoral vote. The document states that Trump allegedly had the help of six co-conspirators, including four lawyers, a Justice Department official and a political consultant.

None of them are charged in the indictment, and they are identified by number, not name. This could mean one or more of these people are cooperating with the Justice Department, but not necessarily.

The indictment charges that all of Trump’s many claims of election irregularities “were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false.”

I am a scholar of criminal law and procedure. While Trump is facing multiple other charges, this indictment contains the most serious charges he has faced thus far.

Five people sitting on one side of a table with papers on the table in front of them.
Former President Donald Trump with his attorneys inside the
courtroom during his arraignment at the Manhattan
Criminal Court on April 4, 2023.
 Seth Wenig/POOL/AFP via Getty Images
In another case, Trump is being charged in New York with falsifying business records, which is, to some extent, a technical offense. 

And the Justice Department has charged him in Florida with illegally keeping national security documents, but there is no allegation they were disclosed to foreign agents or represented much more than souvenirs.

This indictment, by contrast, alleges that Trump knowingly worked to hold on to an office he knew he was not entitled to.

Tuesday, June 13, 2023

What do the latest felony charges against Trump mean?

Criminal law scholar explains what the charges mean, and what prosecutors will now need to prove

Gabriel J. Chin, University of California, Davis

These are TRUMP'S own words on
what should be done about Trump
Federal prosecutors on June 9, 2023, unsealed the indictment that spells out the government’s case against former President Donald J. Trump, who is accused of violating national security laws and obstructing justice.

The 49-page document details how Trump kept classified government documents – including papers concerning U.S. nuclear capabilities – scattered in boxes across his home at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, long after his presidency ended in 2021 and the government tried to reclaim them.

The indictment also shows that Trump shared classified national defense information with people without any security clearance, including someone on a political action committee.

There are 38 felony charges against Trump – 31 of these counts relate to withholding national defense information. Five counts relate to concealing possession of classified documents, and two relate to giving false statements.

“My office will seek a speedy trial in this matter, consistent with the public interest and the rights of the accused,” said U.S. special prosecutor Jack Smith, who was appointed to oversee the investigation into Trump’s holding of the documents.

The Conversation spoke to criminal law scholar Gabriel J. Chin at the University of California, Davis School of Law about the most important takeaways from the unsealed indictment – and the new, open questions it presents about Trump’s alleged criminal activity.

What is the significance of the Justice Department’s unsealing the indictment on June 9, ahead of Trump’s turning himself in to authorities?

In the federal system, indictments are not automatically sealed, and so either the U.S. special counsel did not request it to be sealed or a judge refused to seal it. I suspect it is more likely the former. This is not a case in which there are active components of the investigation still going on. The case was ready to go and there is no difference, from the government’s point of view, in disclosing the indictment today or not, because the case is in the can.

What stands out about the indictment?

One thing that really stood out was the extensive personal involvement of Donald Trump himself in this alleged activity. Normally, when a big company gets sued, the CEO doesn’t drop everything and start going through documents. That’s what various other professionals are for. The details of Trump’s alleged direct personal involvement in this case were striking.

Second, one of the challenges here is that prosecutors are trying to hold Trump responsible for an affidavit that a lawyer signed that included untrue statements that Trump did not have the documents the government was asking him to return. And to make that case stick, prosecutors will really have to show that Trump himself had some involvement with that.

White pages are shown with text, much of it blacked out.
Pages from the FBI’s redacted search warrant
affidavit for Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate are shown.
 Mario Tama/Getty Images
Count 32 in the indictment focuses on conspiracy and charges against Trump and his aide Walt Nauta, as well as “others known and unknown to the grand jury.” The U.S. attorney general is reserving the right to say other people were conspirators, and that will have consequences. 

Who are these other people? Is the government’s theory that Trump’s lawyers were innocent dupes and he fed them false information, or were they knowing participants in this criminality? No one else is named, but we are told – by that “others known and unknown” – that there definitely are others.

Why did the indictment focus on the movement of the boxes that held classified information at Mar-a-Lago?

The major reason is that all of the charges require some sort of intent. None of these charges would apply to someone who is trying to obey the law. Prosecutors have to show that what was going on here was an intentional, calculated act.

Another reason goes back to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , former Vice President Mike Pence and President Joe Biden, who have faced their own inquiries into possessing classified documents.

When former FBI Director James Comey said in 2016 that he wasn’t charging Clinton for using her personal email for government work, there were considerations that led him to do that. 

People who make honest mistakes and cooperate in good faith don’t get charged because, first, it is difficult to make the case of wrongdoing. And there is some level of fairness to say that you don’t want to make public service a booby trap, where if you drop your guard for a second you could wind up in prison.

In this indictment, prosecutors are making an effort to tell the full story and explain why the actions detailed are wrongful. They appear to want to explain why the circumstances in this case justified charges and that this is not a “gotcha!” situation where someone has kept 200 cases of documents that have been carefully screened and one or two documents accidentally got in the mix.

What’s the significance of the many felony counts facing Trump?

Under the sentencing guidelines, which are usually followed, conviction on all counts could likely lead to a relatively short sentence or to no incarceration at all. However, it is important to note that in theory, Trump could be sentenced to the maximum on each count. 

The sentence on all counts could be made to run consecutively, which would lead to a sentence in the neighborhood of 400 years. I do not think that would ever happen, but it does underscore the power of the judge in sentencing a case like this.The Conversation

Gabriel J. Chin, Edward L. Barrett Jr. Chair & Martin Luther King Jr. Professor of Law, University of California, Davis

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.