Donald Trump faces his second criminal indictment

June 9, 2023: Twice-impeached former President Donald Trump faces his second criminal indictment, adding to his challenges in his bid to regain the White House.

Trump’s recent social media post accurately acknowledged the severity of the indictment against him for alleged mishandling of classified documents. However, he conveniently avoided taking any personal responsibility for the matter.

This unprecedented indictment of a former president by a federal grand jury has plunged the country into a dangerous and unprecedented moment. It comes when America is already deeply divided over political issues.

Republicans, led by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, immediately claimed that the indictment was evidence of the Biden administration’s “brazen weaponization of power” ahead of the upcoming election. This showcases the significant test currently faced by the country’s judicial institutions. McCarthy’s unwavering loyalty to Trump, who remains popular among Republican voters, is noteworthy, considering that the evidence against the former president has not been made public yet. While Trump is entitled to the presumption of innocence, the rush to judgment implies that some of his supporters believe he is above legal scrutiny, despite being impeached twice, accused of attempting to steal an election and facing another criminal trial in March. This viewpoint carries significant implications for US democracy.

In developing countries, it may be common for former presidents and current presidential candidates to face criminal investigations. However, this is uncharted territory in the United States, especially for an ex-commander-in-chief who has previously incited violence to further his political goals and is now vying for the White House again.

To make matters worse, these federal charges, related to classified documents taken by Trump to his Mar-a-Lago resort, arose when he was the front-runner for the Republican nomination in 2024.

These seven charges bring numerous political complications. The Justice Department will argue that it is simply following the evidence and demonstrating that no one, including former presidents, is above the law.

Simply put, Trump will be brought to trial by the Justice Department of his successor, President Joe Biden. Biden may face Trump as his opponent in the 2024 general election in a twist of fate. This scenario would inject new energy into Trump’s claims of being a victim of politically motivated justice. Trump’s supporters already believe that an invisible “deep state” establishment is working against him, and this situation will only reinforce that belief.

Trump has been preparing for a potential federal indictment for months and has convinced his supporters that any scrutiny of his life, political decisions, or business affairs is an act of politicization. He wasted no time making this argument, declaring his innocence and accusing his detractors of election interference in a video statement. Trump is due to appear in court in Miami on Tuesday for an arraignment.

This new indictment holds more gravity than the previous one. Trump already made history as the first ex-president to be criminally charged when a Manhattan grand jury indicted him on over 30 counts of business fraud related to a hush money payment in 2016. The trial for this case is scheduled for next March, right amid the primary season. Trump has pleaded not guilty.

The special counsel’s indictment in the case of the document is even more significant and politically sensitive since it originates from Biden’s Justice Department. Trump’s attorney, Jim Trusty, stated on CNN that Trump is facing charges under the Espionage Act, obstruction of justice, destruction or falsification of records, conspiracy, and false statements.

Though the specific charges against Trump are not yet clear, they strike at the heart of some of the most serious responsibilities of the presidency, including safeguarding the nation’s most critical secrets. Any allegations of obstruction also involve a fundamental duty of a president to uphold the law.

The current situation will test whether the United States remains a nation governed by the rule of law. If there is evidence that Trump violated the criminal code, a decision not to charge him would undermine the principle of equal treatment under the law. However, some may question whether the indictment truly serves the national interest, considering the anticipated backlash against democratic and judicial institutions that the ex-president will likely incite.

The indictment news triggered a strong reaction from Republicans eager to demonstrate their loyalty to Trump. House Speaker McCarthy called it a “dark day for the United States of America” and expressed support for Trump, citing Biden’s possession of classified documents after leaving office as a comparison. However, in this case, the distinction hinges on whether Trump actively obstructed government efforts to retrieve classified information and willfully misused it.

Republican Representative Elise Stefanik echoed Trump’s political argument, claiming that the “radical Far Left” would stop at nothing to interfere with the 2024 election to support Biden’s presidency.

GOP Senator Josh Hawley tweeted that if those in power could jail their political opponents at will, it would undermine the republic. However, his comments overlook that the ex-president can defend himself in court.

While we don’t have all the details of special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, recent reports suggest an aggressive probe nearing its conclusion:

• CNN reported in May that prosecutors obtained an audio recording in which Trump acknowledged holding classified Pentagon documents related to a potential attack on Iran. This undermines his previous claims of declassifying everything he took from the White House.
• CNN exclusively revealed that an employee at Mar-a-Lago drained the resort’s swimming pool, causing flooding in a room containing computer servers with surveillance video logs. This incident occurred amid suspicious events investigated by federal prosecutors and the FBI regarding White House records at the resort.
• It is now known that the special counsel has been using two grand juries, one in Washington, DC, and the other in Miami. This suggests that Smith is considering bringing parts or all of the criminal case to Florida federal court instead of the nation’s capital.
• Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows testified before a grand jury about Trump’s handling of classified documents and attempts to overturn the 2020 election, which the special counsel is investigating.
• A key former White House official, who served under both Trump and Obama, was interviewed by special counsel prosecutors and stated that Trump knew the proper process for declassifying documents and followed it correctly at times. This information contradicts Trump’s claims that he could declassify material at will and raises questions about his intent, a crucial factor in a criminal case.

The political repercussions of the document’s case are significant. The Republican primary field is becoming increasingly crowded, but Trump’s rivals struggle to define their candidacies in a party still dominated by him. Trump’s legal troubles unfold amidst uncertainty about how multiple indictments could affect his ability to campaign and whether they will lead Republican voters to scrutinize his vulnerabilities in a general election.

With a trial scheduled for March in the Manhattan case, Trump will likely find his calendar filled with court dates, hearings, and other legal obligations. This could become a serious issue for the former president, especially if he faces multiple days in court next year.

While Trump has managed to leverage his legal issues in the campaign, it is uncertain whether this advantage will hold as the election draws nearer. His legal troubles have alienated swing voters, harming the GOP in recent elections.

However, it is important to note that Trump, like any defendant, is entitled to the presumption of innocence and the right to present a strong defense within the constitutional and judicial system he has often criticized.