Donald Trump faced 4 separate court cases in 2024
1. Classified Documents Case (indicted June 2023 federal court): Trump was indicted on charges related to his handling of classified documents after leaving office. The charges include obstruction of justice and unlawful retention of national defense information. This case stems from allegations that he took classified documents to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and obstructed efforts to return them.
2. Election Interference Case (indicted August 2023 federal court): Trump was indicted in connection with his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. This includes charges related to his role in the January 6th Capitol riot and efforts to disrupt the certification of the election results. He faced charges like conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding.
3. Georgia Election Interference Case (indicted August 2023 State court): Trump was indicted in Georgia over his alleged attempts to influence the 2020 election results in the state. This includes charges related to the infamous phone call where Trump allegedly pressured Georgia officials to "find" votes to overturn the election results.
4. Hush Money Payments Case (indicted March 202, state court): (indicted /March 2023) Trump faced charges in relation to a 2016 payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, which was allegedly made to keep her quiet about an affair. The charges include falsifying business records to cover up the payment as part of an alleged scheme to influence the election.
(In USA indictment is a Formal accusation after a grand jury reviews the prosecution evidence and agrees there is enough to charge someone/a suspect who is not present [They are not defendants until indicted]. A grand jury is more than the usual 12 jurors, up to 23. Indictments are for serious crimes of fraud , conspiracy and murder. After an indictment, the person is legally considered charged and will face further court proceedings)
Whats happened
The first three cases were able to be delayed due to being filed several months later than the hush money case. And, 2 cases are in federal jurisdiction and complexities of federal jurisdiction, which provides more room for legal motions and procedural delays (by Trumps lawyers) , allows more flexibility in scheduling. The 3rd one of election interference in Georgia state has multiple defendants, 19 including trump. These delays are not unusual in high-profile criminal cases and have attracted significant attention due to the political and public interest in Trump's legal battles.
Meanwhile the hush money case, being in state court, faced less room for delay due to its, tighter court scheduling , the cases already long-standing investigation, and significant public and political pressure for a timely resolution. Meaning it is the only one making it to trial so far and probably will likely be the only one, at least while Trumps President .
The hush money case consists of 34 criminal charges of falsifying business records in the first degree related to payments made to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election. The hush money payment to Stormy Daniels became campaign finance fraud because it was made shortly before the 2016 election to prevent a scandal, with the intent to influence the election, and was falsely documented, violating campaign finance laws by failing to report it as a campaign expenditure. As this was before he was president he could not obtain immunity from it. The trial began on April 15, 2024; Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts on May 30, 2024.
Due to Trumps defense team filed motions for various reasons, such as challenging certain aspects of the charges or the sentence itself and for other reasons sentencing was able to be delayed 8 months until 10 Jan 2025.
In sentencing Trump was unconditionally discharged , this means the conviction stands but there is no penalty's or conditions imposed on him such as prison time, fines or probation.
“This court has determined that the only lawful sentence that permits entry of a judgment of conviction without encroaching upon the highest office in the land is an unconditional discharge,” Judge Juan Merchan explained . (Guardian)
Trump of course claims he was innocent and will appeal.
While it is uncommon for first-time offenders in cases like Trump's hush money case to receive jail time, they typically face penalties such as fines and probation, with the latter often including conditions like not committing further offenses.
Regarding the 3 outstanding delayed cases .
Just hours after his declared win on November 6, federal officials were already looking at ways of winding down two cases relating to election interference and mishandling of classified documents under the assumption that sitting US presidents cannot be prosecuted or jailed while in office. That assumption is based on a longstanding US Department of Justice policy dating back to 1973 and reaffirmed in 2000 that maintains sitting presidents cannot be tried or jailed while in office. ALjazeera .(He would also pardon himself once in office , which he can do in the 2 of the 3 that are federal cases).
ABC has said Trumps documents case would be dismissed . After U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Trump's criminal case for retaining classified documents and obstructing the government's efforts to retrieve them, Smith asked an appeals court to reinstate the case. Once Trump enters office, prosecutors will likely have no choice but to withdraw their appeal, according to Friedman Agnifilo, cementing Judge Cannon's dismissal of the case. Judge Cannon herself a right wing judge VOX who does not follow the legal rules of office here.
Does it hold immunity forever thou ? The question that has to be answered is, was he fulfilling/discharging a public duty when in office ? While Trump has claimed immunity for all 4 court cases he was not in office for the hush money or the documents cases so that only leaves the 2 election interference cases immunity possibly applies to. And that seems unlikely as interfering in elections is not an official duty. However USA legal system is a fickle thing that does not apply equally to all persons.
Trump, who has denied all allegations and called the cases politically motivated, has vowed to fire Jack Smith -- the special counsel who has brought two federal cases against him -- "within two seconds," and has said he would punish the prosecutors and judges overseeing his cases.
This shows with the judge not giving at a minimum a fine and probation which would not stop Trump going into office that this is another example that the rich and powerful are above the law and the legal system does not apply to all equally and is therefore broken. It also gives another example that USA 3 branches of government are less separated than other better and normal western countries like NZ.
Meanwhile in the federal election interference case (Jan 6 riots), from a reddit politics page;
Read Jack Smith’s final report on Trump’s Jan. 6 case here
In case someone doesn't feel like reading all 174 pages
Here is an analysis and summary of the key details from the document, Final Report of the Special Counsel's Investigations and Prosecutions, Volume One: The Election Case, submitted by Special Counsel Jack Smith on January 7, 2025:
Summary
The report outlines the Special Counsel’s investigation into former President Donald J. Trump’s efforts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election. It covers actions taken by Mr. Trump and his co-conspirators to overturn election results, legal charges filed, and prosecutorial decisions.
The investigation found evidence of widespread attempts to interfere with election processes, involving multiple co-conspirators and false claims of election fraud. Although initial indictments were issued, the case was ultimately dismissed after Mr. Trump was re-elected in 2024, citing the Department of Justice's policy that prohibits indicting a sitting president.
Key Details and Insights
Scope of the Investigation
Focus: The investigation targeted efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, including:
Pressuring state officials.
Creating fraudulent elector slates.
Misusing Department of Justice resources.
Pressuring Vice President Mike Pence to obstruct certification.
Inciting violence on January 6, 2021.
Legal Basis: The investigation was carried out under 28 C.F.R. § 600.8, which governs the appointment and duties of special counsels.
2. Charges and Indictments
Original Charges (August 1, 2023): Mr. Trump was charged with four felony offenses:
Conspiracy to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371).
Obstruction of an Official Proceeding (18 U.S.C. § 1512).
Conspiracy Against Rights (18 U.S.C. § 241).
Other criminal violations related to election interference.
Superseding Indictment: After the Supreme Court ruled that Mr. Trump was immune from prosecution for certain actions while in office, a revised indictment was issued focusing on non-immunized conduct.
Dismissal of the Case: Following Trump’s re-election in 2024, the Department of Justice moved to dismiss the case due to longstanding constitutional prohibitions against indicting a sitting president.
3. Findings on Trump’s Actions
Deceptive Strategies: Evidence showed Mr. Trump knowingly spread false claims about election fraud. Examples include:
False Claims About Voting Machines: Allegations of vote switching were widely disproven.
Baseless Fraud Allegations: Trump claimed dead or non-resident individuals cast votes, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Co-Conspirators: The report identified several unnamed co-conspirators who assisted Trump:
Co-Conspirator 1: A private attorney spreading false claims.
Co-Conspirator 2: Developed a plan to leverage Pence’s role.
Co-Conspirator 6: Helped create fraudulent elector slates.
January 6, 2021: Trump encouraged his supporters to disrupt the certification of electoral votes, culminating in the Capitol riot.
4. Legal and Ethical Decisions
The Special Counsel adhered to the Principles of Federal Prosecution, ensuring decisions were impartial and evidence-driven.
The decision to prosecute was justified based on:
Protection of the electoral process.
Prevention of violence against government officials.
Ensuring the evenhanded administration of the law.
The team’s work was guided by the mandate to uphold the rule of law, regardless of political consequences.
5. Challenges
Supreme Court Ruling: Limited prosecutorial scope due to immunity for some of Trump’s actions.
Public and Legal Scrutiny: Intense political polarization, threats to witnesses, and legal complexities related to executive privilege and presidential immunity.
Specific Evidence
False Fraud Claims: Evidence from Trump’s own advisors and campaign officials showed he was aware of the lack of election fraud (e.g., Arizona and Georgia election audits disproving his claims).
Pressure on Officials: Trump directly pressured state legislators and election officials to alter certified results (e.g., Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger).
Misuse of DOJ Resources: Trump worked with a DOJ official (Co-Conspirator 4) to promote baseless fraud investigations.
Conclusion
The report underscores a systematic effort by Trump and his allies to subvert democracy and retain power through illegal means. Despite sufficient evidence to prosecute, Trump’s re-election halted legal proceedings under DOJ policy. The investigation reinforces the importance of upholding the rule of law and accountability, regardless of an individual’s political status.
Don't forget page 145:
The Department's view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a President is categorical and does not tum on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government's proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Office stands fully behind. Indeed, but for Mr. Trump's election and imminent return to the Presidency, the Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.
That right there just locks in that democracy and the rule of law is dead.
You can do anything to win the election - as long as you win it. Because you're untouchable once elected.
Comments
Post a Comment