This week on Tuesday, Donald Trump was indicted in a Federal Criminal Case. I will be breaking everything down for you in this video and answering the question, will Donald Trump go to prison?
Let me start off by telling you where I stand. I am not pro-Trump and I am not anti-Trump. I am undecided on who to vote for yet. What I usually do is wait to see people get up on the debate stage and defend their policies. Then I will decide who to vote for. That is how I always approach elections. In fact, if you have an opinion on who I should vote for, leave it in the comment section down below.
Also, I am not a lawyer. But I do cover a lot of government corruption on this channel, so I know what to look for in this indictment. We are going to go over:
- Legal Standard
- Applicable Law
We have to start with the background, because it is strange that this indictment was issued the same week that credible evidence was uncovered by Congress that Joe Biden took $10M in bribes from Ukraine to sell out the American people. Suddenly the sitting President is charging his top political rival for the upcoming election. This had better be a solid indictment, or it seems like this the weaponization of the justice department against political rivals.
The Lead Prosecutor on the case, Jack Smith, gave a press conference where he justified these actions by saying, “We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone.” How can he say that with a straight face? The head of the FBI was being held in contempt of Congress just last week for refusing to turn over evidence against Joe Biden. What about the classified documents found in Joe Biden’s garage next to his corvette? Those classified documents go all the way back to when Joe Biden was a Senator. So that means Joe Biden took documents, somehow hid them in his pants, walked them out of a secure SCIF, and kept them in his house. And no one at the FBI is looking into this? We recently received the Durham report which proved that the FBI and DOJ were working behind the scenes illegally for years to attack Republicans and protect Democrats. This seems like an unequal application of justice to me. And what about Hillary Clinton’s emails? Hillary Clinton’s staff were smashing their phones with hammers to destroy classified emails. The FBI has not charged Hillary Clinton. The FBI has not charge Joe Biden. But now they are charging Donald Trump. Already, from this initial press conference by the prosecutor, something does not add up.
You need to understand that just because the government issues an indictment, does not mean it is true. It could be full of lies. They could have made the whole thing just to get Trump. And I bring this up because we just saw an example of this. Just last week, new evidence was revealed in the trial of one of the January 6 protestors. The protestor was being accused of damaging the tarps on the bleachers at the Capitol. Well, it turns out from the body cam footage of the DC metro police officers, that the police officers themselves committed the damage and blamed it on the protestors. The protestors were being framed. Here is the video. You can see this cop cutting the barrier. This is a video of a crooked cop planting evidence to frame a January 6 protestor. You can see it with your own eyes. This cop then gets on the stand in court and lies about it. It was a lie and everyone knew it. All his cop buddies were standing around watching him do it. This is just a fresh example that you cannot necessarily trust these prosecutors are telling you the truth. These people are LIARS. You just saw an example of it. This prosecution against Donald Trump could be just as corrupt.
Now Donald Trump will not be able to talk about any of this background information in the court case. But it does matter, because everyone in that courtroom will know, the DOJ is applying a double standard when it comes to Trump. When there is such a large public outcry from a case being so unfair, that can impact the case.
So, who is this prosecutor, Jack Smith? It turns out, he has a history. Do you remember the scandal with John Edwards? Edwards was a front runner in the 2008 Democrat primary for President against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. John Edwards had an affair while his wife was dying from cancer. He paid $900,000 from his campaign to the woman. Jack Smith was the prosecutor who charged John Edwards with campaign finance violations. John Edwards of course dropped out of the race from the scandal. What he did was horrible, but it was not clear that he actually broke any laws. In fact, the case ended in a mistrial, and the DOJ dropped the case. That is strange. Was the case just a political hit job to smear an opponent to Hillary Clinton? For such a high profile candidate for President, shouldn’t it have been a rock solid case before indicting someone? That is kind of a strange thing for a prosecutor to do… to frivolously file a weak lawsuit against a candidate for President. It is interesting that this is Jack Smith’s history.
It would be one thing if it was just one incident, but Jack Smith was the prosecutor on four cases of high profile politicians. It seems like Jack Smith has a pattern of losing cases. It seems like he is bringing weak cases just to smear the candidates. There was the Bob McDonnell case, who was a potential Republican candidate for president. The case was unanimously overturned by the Supreme court. There was the Rick Renzi case. Renzi was convicted, but maintains that he was wrongly convicted by a Department of Justice that engaged in witness tampering, illegal wiretapping, and gross prosecutorial misconduct.” Renzi was pardoned by Donald Trump. There was the Bob Menendez case. The case ended in a mistrial. So, Donald Trump is the fifth example of Jack Smith going after prominent politicians. This had better be the world’s strongest indictment. Because if Jack Smith does not convict Donald Trump, he should be kicked off the bar. If this case establishes a pattern of bringing weak cases to smear politicians, that is an abuse of power.
But it goes further than that. Jack Smith was involved in the Lois Lerner scandal at the IRS. Lois Learner targeted Tea Party conservatives with audits to interfere with the 2012 election of Obama. Jack Smith was Lois Lerner’s counterpart at the DOJ and worked with her on these issues. Why does Jack Smith keep coming up in these scandals? It is still unclear whether Jack Smith was pressuring Lois Lerner to target conservatives. But he was involved in weaponizing the government against the American people.
So, we know there is corruption in the DOJ from the Durham report. There is evidence Joe Biden is involved in millions of dollars in bribes from foreign countries. And the prosecutor on this case has a shady history. With all of that, this indictment has got to be for some huge scandal. Wait, what is this? This is about paperwork? This history making case is about Donald Trump mishandling paperwork? Now that is a little suspicious if you ask me.
Doubt is going to be important in this case. Since this is a criminal case, Jack Smith has a high legal standard he has to meet. He has to prove that Donald Trump is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That means that twelve random people in Florida are going to be chosen to sit on this jury. If there is any reasonable doubt in their mind that Donald Trump is guilty, then they are going to decide that he is innocent and he gets to go free. So, we are going to look at the legal documents right now, and let us see if there is any doubt in your mind.
In this case, there are 37 charges. If Donald Trump receives the maximum penalty, he can be sentenced to 400 years in prison. This is a trick that prosecutors use a lot. They make a huge list of charges to make things seem worse than they are. For instance, they say that each document that was mishandled is a separate charge. So, charges 1 through 31, are for 31 separate documents. This is really just the one charge of mishandling documents that has been repeated 31 separate times. What will probably happen is the judge will reduce this down to only a few charges. Once again, it appears that the DOJ is exaggerating their claims to smear Donald Trump.
There are actually two people charged in this complaint. Donald Trump and his aide Walt Nauta. Walt was essentially Donald Trump’s secretary. He was allegedly involved in putting documents in boxes or moving boxes, which is what secretaries generally do. He is important for two reasons. One of the charges against Donald Trump is conspiracy, which only applies if two or more people are involved. So, if Walt turns out to not be guilty of conspiracy, than Trump cannot be guilty. So, the Department of Justice needs Walt. A tactic the DOJ sometimes uses is they will charge a low level employee, like a secretary. And they try to pressure that person to flip and testify against their boss. They will give that person a choice. Either they spend years fighting the DOJ and spend millions defending themselves, or they cut a deal and admit to being part of a conspiracy, whether they did it or not. I think they are trying to do this to Walt. Because if Walt does not go against Trump, it will be very hard for the DOJ to prove conspiracy.
We saw this same thing happen to Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen was Trump’s lawyer. He was arrested and agreed to testify against Trump. He made various accusations about Trump including hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. It was determined that his statements were not credible. Michael Cohen ended up going to prison for lying under oath and tax fraud. It will be interesting to watch if Walt buckles under pressure and follows the same path as Michael Cohen.
I do have to say, that what is happening to Walt, I find really disgusting. He is just a secretary. I find it really unlikely that this guy is part of a massive conspiracy. He is doing normal secretary activity, and the DOJ is trying to ruin his life. It is all based on a weak case in order to get Donald Trump. If the DOJ wants to get Trump, go after Trump. Do not go after some random secretary. Walt is a former Navy veteran. He served his country. He served his President. It is sad what is happening to him, and these people are disgusting.
In every indictment, they have to list out the laws that apply. You have to tell people what law they have broken. When I was reading through the document, I was kind of surprised. I was expecting it to talk about the Presidential Records Act, but it never mentions it. Instead, it alleges that Trump violated the Espionage Act. It claims that Trump was a spy! It also says Trump was involved in a Conspiracy, Obstruction of Justice, and Lying to the FBI.
I think this is the biggest problem with this indictment. How can you have a case about the President and classified documents, without ever referring to the Presidential Records Act. They never even mention it. Isn’t that strange? Obviously, that would be the most relevant law for the situation. The Espionage Act is a bit of a stretch. So, the DOJ is ignoring the most obviously related law, and stretching this other law to try and fit the case. That is going to create problems for the DOJ.
Trump has claimed many times that he declassified the documents by his authority under the Presidential Records Act. If the records were declassified, there is no case. There is nothing. The entire thing will be thrown out.
There is a lot of legal precedent that supports Donald Trump’s position under the Presidential Records Act. Specifically, Bill Clinton’s sock drawer case. Bill Clinton kept tape recordings hidden in his sock drawer that he refused to turn over to the archives. Trump is now receiving the exact same type of requests from the archives. In the Clinton case, the judge determined that “The [Presidential Records Act] does not confer any mandatory or even discretional authority on the archivist. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the president.”
That law seems pretty clear to me. The President is in charge. So, why would the DOJ not even mention the Presidential Records Act? Probably because it would throw out their entire case. Donald Trump can decide what is classified and what is not. This whole notion, that there is some process that Donald Trump had to go through to request permission from other people to keep personal records is silly. That is like the deep state thinking they have more power than the President. The President is in charge, not the deep state. He does not have to get permission from them.
Here is what I think is going to happen. Trump’s lawyers are going to file a motion with the judge, and say the indictment is based off the wrong law and it should fall under the Presidential Records Act. The judge should agree with this. Since the DOJ indictment does not include a single argument that there was any violation of the Presidential Records Act, the entire case would be thrown out. The case would be over before it ever went to trial. It is the DOJ’s fault that they did not mention it in the indictment. You cannot charge someone with a crime under the wrong law.
But let us assume that the judge somehow agrees with the DOJ to let the case go to trial under the Espionage Act. The DOJ then has to prove that Donald Trump is a spy and disclosed sensitive government information. Let us look at the evidence that is in the indictment. What is this? It turns out that there is very little evidence that Donald Trump is a spy.
A lot of the evidence has to do with Trump’s private conversations with his lawyers. This is a big problem for the DOJ. Lawyers are normally covered by attorney-client privilege, and any discussion Trump had with them, is in confidence. In this case, Trump’s lawyers were forced by a judge to testify in front of a Grand Jury and disclose their private conversations with Trump. This is only allowed under very rare circumstances. Trump’s legal team is arguing that this was done improperly by the DOJ. An improper situation would be if the DOJ did this without mentioning the Presidential Records Act. That would be improper. If this is true, the entire case could be thrown out, or at least, that evidence would not be allowed to be used during the trial. If that happens, the DOJ loses most of the evidence in the case.
So, what other evidence is there besides the protected conversations with the lawyers? The indictment talks about two separate conversations. The first one is a taped interview with a writer. On the tape, Donald Trump shuffles papers around and pulls out what he calls a “plan of attack.” He says, “As president I could have declassified it… Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.” The DOJ claims this is an admission by Trump that he was giving away classified documents.
There are a couple of problems with the DOJ’s allegations. You can interpret this recording a whole bunch of different ways. The DOJ is interpreting this in the worst possible way, that Donald Trump was a spy, disclosing sensitive information to a writer. However, he could have just been exaggerating. It would not be out of character for Donald Trump to be using puffery to make himself look more important in front of a writer. How do we know that the document was classified in the first place. He could have showed the writer a random piece of paper. On the tape, Donald Trump used the phrase “a secret” not “Top Secret,” not “classified.” He said, “A secret.” That could mean anything. If it was actually a classified document, why wouldn’t he call it specifically “Top Secret?” He didn’t. I think it is also telling that the DOJ does not mention that they have the document in question. I bet they do not even have this alleged document, otherwise, they would have referenced it. Now the DOJ has to prove Trump gave away a document that they cannot even prove exists. Also, I see no indication that Trump even let the writer read the document. Maybe he just held the document up and did not let him see it. There are so many ways that you can interpret this conversation. I think the DOJ’s interpretation, that Donald Trump is a spy, is the least likely explanation. It is also possible that Donald Trump was just making a joke. He happens to be a very funny person.
The second incident seems to be a conversation Trump had with a PAC representative. It is similar to the recording, but there is no corroborating evidence that this conversation ever happened. It could have just been made up. It could be another lie, just like the crooked cop in the January 6 trial.
So, to review so far. If the conversations with the lawyers gets thrown out, and the tape recorded conversation ends up just being Donald Trump telling a joke, and there’s no proof the second conversation even happened, what evidence is left? Not much.
Then there are the pictures of the boxes. There are boxes everywhere. Boxes everywhere! Look at all these boxes. One of the boxes is tipped over! But I do not think these pictures tell us that there were any crimes committed at all. If you look closely at this photo, there are just newspaper clippings and photos. I am guessing, this is what most of the boxes are. Since the indictment is only talking about 31 documents, what do the boxes have to do with anything? These are his personal records. The DOJ is implying that they are moving the boxes around in a sinister plot to destroy the country. But isn’t it more likely that he is just storing his newspaper clippings? That is what I see when I look at these pictures. I do not see espionage. Do you see espionage? If the DOJ is alleging the boxes are not being stored properly, that is a problem for the DOJ. Because the boxes were behind a locked door that the FBI agreed to in a previous meeting with Trump’s lawyers. This indictment disagrees with their own previous guidance on the boxes.
Then there is the obstruction of justice charge. I think this is the hardest charge for DOJ to argue. It is not illegal to have hard negotiations with your lawyers and there is plenty of correspondence going back and forth between the legal teams. The FBI cannot claim that Donald Trump was not working with them. When the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago, it seems like the FBI were the ones acting in bad faith, not Donald Trump. I do not see how the DOJ can win any of the obstruction arguments, because they were the ones who did not want to work with Trump’s lawyers.
Remember, this is an accusation that Donald Trump is a spy. If this Florida jury has any reasonable doubt, they are going to declare him innocent. I just tore this indictment apart in 20 minutes, and Trump’s lawyers are going to be a lot better than me. I think the jury is going to have a lot of doubt.
I want to return back to Walt Nauta, because I feel so bad for this guy. One of the charges against him, is that he allegedly lied to the FBI. The indictment includes a one page transcript of his interrogation by the FBI. The FBI asks him if he knew about the boxes. He says “I wish, I wish I could tell you. I don’t know. I don’t- I honestly just don’t know.” The FBI alleges this was a lie. This makes him a criminal, and he should go to prison. He did know about the boxes, and he said he did not know about the boxes. He was the secretary, he clearly was involved with boxes. Well, I find this accusation hard to stomach. The transcript is clearly a snippet from a much longer interrogation. What was the context of this question? Were you talking about specific boxes? Maybe he did not know what specific boxes they were asking about? Maybe he did not remember? Maybe he did not know the exact location things were stored? Maybe he was confused. It seems to me to be such a stretch to take this one response from Walt, and claim he was lying to the FBI and involved in a massive conspiracy to commit espionage. He was a secretary. If he did pack boxes or move boxes, he probably had no idea what was even inside. I find the persecution of this poor secretary disgusting.
But it gets worse… Walt Nauta’s lawyer has filed a complaint alleging prosecutorial misconduct by the DOJ. Apparently, the lead DOJ prosecutor, Jay Bratt, came to the lawyer and offered him a bribe. If he would convince Walt to flip and testify against Donald Trump, they would reward him with a cushy job as a Federal judge. This is a horrible claim. Prosecutors do not have any control over picking judges. But you know who does? Joe Biden. This means that Prosecutors were working with the White House to offer this bribe. There are multiple witnesses of this. The Guardian reported “This incident with Jay Bratt is widely known inside the National Security Division and is being viewed as a problem.” If these allegations are true, a judge could throw out the entire case.
What do you think? We have gone through the evidence. Is there any doubt in your mind whether Trump is guilty? Because if you have any significant doubt, you cannot say that he is guilty. I do not know about you, but I have a lot of doubt. I do not see any way how the DOJ wins this case against Donald Trump. It is a weak case. I know that there are all these people going on the news shows saying that Donald Trump is in trouble and that he is doomed. Those people should be ashamed of themselves. I think they are either idiots, or they are working for the deep state to smear Donald Trump. There just is not very much in the indictment. For this case to be legitimate, there would have to be something massive going on, like Joe Biden’s $10M bribery scheme. That is massive.
The most sinister part of this is that I think the DOJ knows they cannot win this case. It appears to me that they are just doing this to smear Donald Trump and interfere with the election, just like Jack Smith has done to four other politicians before. This will be his fifth politically motivated case, and I think we need to be looking into disbarring Jack Smith for abuse of power.
At this point you might be getting discouraged. There are people in this world that are so evil, that they will lie and cheat, and they do not care. I think people call them sociopaths. And it gets discouraging. How are you supposed to win in life against people who will lie about everything? All they care about is power and abusing the system to keep that power. Well, there is something you can use against them… the truth. The truth is the most powerful weapon against these people. It is sharper than any sword, and they are terrified of you figuring this out. Because there is no way they can fight against the truth. If you expose them, what can they do? They cannot argue with the truth. So, if you are watching this video, please share this with a friend. Share it on social media. Tweet it out. Because the news is not telling the truth about what is going on.
Donald Trump’s situation reminds me of an old story about someone named Joan of Arc. She was a teenager in France in the 1400s. At the time, France was separated into different factions who were all fighting with England in the 100 Years War. Joan of Arc believed she was called by God to unite the people of France and push out England. She led armies. She rallied troops. She traveled around France holding massive rallies. And it started to work. The people loved her.
Then she was captured. At the time, the court system was managed by the church. But the English had infiltrated the church with people who would be pro-English. The crooked prosecutors and crooked judges were pro-English and wanted to make an example of Joan of Arc. They made fake charges and a fake trial. And they convicted Joan of Arc of heresy. This 19 year old girl was burned at the stake.
Here’s what happened next. The country of France united and pushed the English out, winning the 100 years war and changing the course of history forever.
Now some people might not agree there is a comparison between Donald Trump and Joan of Arc. But I think it is pretty accurate. We are dealing with corrupt people who want to manipulate the court system to keep themselves in power. Now, hopefully Donald Trump does not have to actually be burned at the stake. But that does not have to happen this time. All it takes is for people to stand up for the truth.
There is a saying they use in France that goes: Vive la France. It stands for Long Live France. I think we need something similar here. Only this time it would be Vive America.
CBS boxes https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-indictment-pictures-photos-documents-boxes-mar-a-lago-bathroom/
Hillary Clinton aides destroy phones with a hammer https://www.businessinsider.com/how-hillary-clinton-aide-destroyed-phones-2016-9?amp
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@FinanceWolves
Leave a comment down below letting me know what you think!
If you find these videos helpful, please subscribe to my YouTube channel.
Neither Zach De Gregorio or Wolves and Finance shall be liable for any damages related to information in this video. It is recommended you contact a CPA in your area for business advice.