Donald Trump has been notified that his indictment by the DOJ is imminent and will occur “next week,” according to sources.
Jack Smith, the special counsel assigned to investigate the former president by current AG Merrick Garland, will reportedly be charging the former president with “gathering, transmitting, or losing” national defense information (The Post Millenial)
A federal indictment brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith could be handed by a federal grand jury to Trump as early as next week.
Smith’s prosecutorial team informed Trump’s team in recent days that the charges he faces include a violation of 18 US Code Chapter 37 Section 793 which prohibits the “gathering, transmitting or losing” of national defense information. Other charges reportedly being considered are alleged false statements and obstruction of justice.
Prior to Trump’s indictment in Manhattan by Alvin Bragg, variously reported timelines turned out to be wrong, so take “early next week” with some caution. Because the case is still technically with a grand jury, things could change.
Regardless of the exact day the indictment happens, the described charges track with past reports that the DOJ is focused on a taped conversation between Trump and representatives of Mark Meadows. In it, Trump allegedly described a government document dealing with an invasion of Iran and indicated that he knew it was still classified. It is important to note, though, that just because the DOJ claims something, that doesn’t make it true. It also does not mean it will hold up in a court of law.
Lastly, the broader timing of all this should infuriate Republicans. The DOJ is about to do what many feared and predicted (including myself), which is to wait around to indict Trump so that the trial takes place after he’s already possibly gained the Republican nomination. Given that a conviction would then be probable (especially if the case is tried in an unfriendly jurisdiction), this could turn out to be the biggest example of election interference in American history. It’s unconscionable, no matter what one thinks of the general merits of the case.