Trump has been charged by the Department of Justice with the following four counts:
-
A conspiracy to defraud the United States “by using dishonesty, fraud and deceit to obstruct the nation’s process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election,” according to the special counsel’s office.
-
A conspiracy to impede the Jan. 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified.
-
A conspiracy against the right to vote and to have that vote counted.
-
Obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct and impede, the certification of the electoral vote.
In criminally charging former president Donald Trump for his efforts to reverse his 2020 election loss, federal prosecutors allege that Trump enlisted six co-conspirators to “assist him in his criminal efforts to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election and retain power.”
-
Rudy Giuliani
-
John Eastman
-
Sidney Powell
-
Jeffrey Clark
-
Kenneth Chesebro
-
Unknown political consultant
Updated 8/3/2023 by Jordan Lund
Washington, D.C. - 4 felonies, January 6th Election Interference
Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
(Lawyers have until 8/10 to submit requested trial dates, which will be announced on 8/28)
Trial
Conviction
Sentencing
Georgia - Election Interference
Investigation <- You Are Here
2 new grand juries were impaneled on 7/11/2023.
Indictment - July 11th to September 1st.
(Grand Jury work expected July 31 to Aug. 18)
Arrest
Trial
Conviction
Sentencing
New York State - 34 felonies, Stormy Daniels Payoff
Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - March 25th, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing
Florida - 40 felonies, Federal documents charges
Investigation
Indictment
The original indictment was for 37 felonies.
3 new felonies were added on July 27, 2023.
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - May 20, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing
Other grand juries, such as for the documents at Bedminster, have not been announced.
The E. Jean Carroll trial for sexual assault and defamation, where Trump was found liable and ordered to pay $5 million before immediately defaming her again, resulting in a demand for $10 million, is not listed as it’s a civil case and not a criminal one.
Sources:
Trumps 3rd Indictment - Conspiring to Defraud the United States - 1 August 2023
NBC News: Grand jury charges Trump in 2020 election probe: Highlights
Vox: Trump was just indicted for trying to steal the 2020 election
CNN: August 1, 2023 Trump indicted in special counsel’s 2020 election interference probe
Washington Post: Here are the Trump co-conspirators described in the DOJ indictment
Reason: Trump Indicted for Attempting To Overturn 2020 Presidential Election
FiveThirtyEight: All Of Trump’s Indictments Could Seriously Bog Down His Campaign
Trump’s Arraignment - 3 August 2023
AP: Trump is due to face a judge in DC over charges he tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election
CBS News: Trump pleads not guilty to federal charges in special counsel probe
Chicago Tribune: Trump pleads not guilty to federal charges that he tried to overturn the 2020 election
The Independent: Trump appears to stumble over his name and age at arraignment
Official Documentation
They never took that position at all, deliberately said so even. Quit with that antagonistic, unnecessarily hostile Reddit-style garbage.
Their second to last paragraph reads like we should lament the fact that all the sweet MAGAs will lose faith in the system… Implying that it would be better if they didn’t lose faith in the system by letting their dear leader walk free.
Also, the irony is their leader is a guy who basically wants to destroy the system and install himself as dictator. If nothing else, he’s pledged to remove huge amounts of government workers on ideological grounds. Also his advisor and strategist, Bannon, openly says he wants to disrupt and destroy the American system of government. So, either we reject that and deal with them feeling let down, or what, just let them literally wreck the government?
Just wanted to point out that it’s never a good thing for any society for a statistically significant percentage of the population to lose faith in the systems underpinning said society and it’s social compacts. That’s what the CIA did/does to countries to destabilize them, and those never end well.
I’m not claiming there is necessarily a better option in this case, because all authority needs to be kept to a higher standard and punished when they fail, from the town treasurer up to the President. Trippley so for the police, but I won’t be holding my breath there either
No, objectively it doesn’t. You are projecting your own strong feelings and aren’t being objective at all.
It’s a normal human tendency, but you should be aware of it.
I really can’t understand how you could read it that way, when the last phrase is “or will they simply forget Trump given time”. The poster sure seemed to go out of their way to not describe a preferred outcome but just to wonder how this turns out, how his supporters will respond, and how much their response even matters. If they’re questioning whether those people’s reaction even matters, does that sound like advocating on their behalf?
I understand interpretation of written text is always a little ambiguous, but jumping to “you’re saying Trump should go free so his supporters aren’t sad?!” - nearly your direct words - just feels like either a very intentional misreading or just the briefest possible look at what the poster wrote. It just isn’t there at all and you came across weird and hostile.