BOMBSHELL: Trump hit with NEW INDICTMENT

Summary

In the latest 'Legal Breakdown', it's revealed that Donald Trump faces a superseding indictment in his DC case, maintaining the original four felony charges despite the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling. Prosecutor Jack Smith has meticulously revised the indictment to exclude any evidence that might contravene the new immunity standards, presenting a stronger case that could lead to a trial. The development is seen as a significant step towards holding Trump accountable for his alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Takeaways

• 📜 Donald Trump has been hit with a superseding indictment in his DC case, which includes the same four criminal charges from the initial indictment.
• 🚨 The charges stem from Trump's alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.
• 🛡 In response to the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity, the new indictment has been carefully curated to exclude any evidence that could be seen as violating the ruling.
• 🔍 Prosecutor Jack Smith and his team have conducted a line-by-line comparison of the original 45-page indictment to ensure compliance with the Supreme Court's decision.
• 🗂️ The new indictment is 36 pages long, with some evidence removed to respect the Supreme Court's ruling on immunity.
• 📉 Removed evidence includes discussions Trump had with Department of Justice officials and a tweet from the Oval Office, which were considered as potentially within presidential duties.
• 📈 Despite the removal of certain evidence, the four felony charges against Trump have been maintained as sound and prosecutable.
• 🏛 The case will now proceed to be litigated before Judge Chuin, who will determine if the new indictment meets the Supreme Court's standards.
• 🔄 The process may eventually go back to the DC federal circuit court of appeals and possibly to the Supreme Court again.
• 🎯 The use of a new grand jury for the superseding indictment is a strategic move to ensure the case is not tainted by previous evidence that could be seen as inadmissible.
• 📆 The timeline for the case may be extended slightly due to the new indictment, but the overall scheduling track is expected to remain the same.

Q & A

What is the significance of the superseding indictment against Donald Trump?

The superseding indictment is significant because it maintains the same four felony charges against Donald Trump, despite the recent Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. It shows that the prosecution believes they have enough evidence to proceed with the trial.

How did the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity affect the indictment?

The Supreme Court's ruling led the prosecution to review the original indictment and remove any evidence or information that could be seen as violating the court's decision on presidential immunity. This resulted in a pared-down indictment of 36 pages, compared to the original 45.

What was the original length of the indictment against Donald Trump, and how did it change after the Supreme Court's ruling?

The original indictment was 45 pages long. After the Supreme Court's ruling, the prosecution revised it to 36 pages, removing evidence that could be considered as violating presidential immunity.

What was an example of evidence removed from the indictment due to the Supreme Court's ruling?

An example of evidence removed includes conversations Donald Trump had with Department of Justice officials, attempting to influence them to support his claims of election fraud, as the Supreme Court ruled that a president's core constitutional functions involve communication with the attorney general and Department of Justice officials.

Why was a new grand jury involved in the superseding indictment?

A new grand jury was involved to ensure that the indictment was untainted by any evidence that the Supreme Court had deemed inadmissible. This prevents any potential legal challenges based on the grand jury having been exposed to inadmissible evidence.

What is the role of Judge Chuin in the ongoing case against Donald Trump?

Judge Chuin is the presiding judge in the DC case against Donald Trump. She will review the new indictment and decide whether the charges and evidence presented by the prosecution meet the Supreme Court's standards on presidential immunity.

What is the current status of the case after the superseding indictment?

The case is expected to proceed with the current schedule, with the next step being a hearing where Judge Chuin will decide on the admissibility of the charges and evidence. The prosecution has already suggested that Donald Trump does not need to be physically present for his arraignment on the new indictment.

How does the press release from Jack Smith's spokesperson reflect the approach taken by the prosecution?

The press release is brief and to the point, indicating that the new indictment respects and implements the Supreme Court's holdings and remand instructions. It shows the prosecution's commitment to proceeding with the case in a manner that is legally sound and ethical.

What is the potential impact of the superseding indictment on the timeline of the case?

The superseding indictment may cause a slight delay as the new information needs to be processed, and Donald Trump will have to be arraigned on the new charges. However, the prosecution does not expect a significant extension of the timeline, and the case is likely to remain on a similar scheduling track.

What are the implications of the prosecution's decision not to insist on Donald Trump's physical presence for arraignment?

The decision not to insist on Donald Trump's physical presence for arraignment shows the prosecution's confidence in the strength of the charges and their willingness to proceed without additional procedural complications, which could further streamline the legal process.

Outlines

00:00

📜 Trump's Indictment Update: Supreme Court Ruling's Impact

The video script discusses the recent developments in Donald Trump's legal case in Washington D.C. Despite the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity, a new superseding indictment has been issued against Trump, which intriguingly includes the same four criminal charges as the initial indictment. The discussion highlights the proactive measures taken by the prosecution, led by Jack Smith, to ensure the charges are airtight and in line with the recent court ruling. The script explains how the prosecution meticulously reviewed the original 45-page indictment, removing any evidence that could be seen as violating presidential immunity, resulting in a streamlined 36-page indictment. It also touches on the significance of presenting the case to a new grand jury, untouched by previous evidence that may have been affected by the Supreme Court's decision, and the strategic brilliance of this move to preempt any potential defense arguments.

05:01

🏛️ The Legal Process Post-Indictment: What's Next for Trump's Case?

This paragraph delves into the anticipated legal process following the new indictment against Donald Trump. It suggests that Judge Chuin, known for her experience in handling serious cases, is likely to support the prosecution's decision to proceed with the charges. The script outlines the potential steps, including the submission of joint proposals by the prosecution and defense regarding the admissibility of evidence, and the likelihood of the case moving through the federal court system, possibly reaching the Supreme Court again. It also addresses the different circumstances of the Florida prosecution, where most of Trump's alleged criminal acts occurred post-presidency, and the distinct legal strategies that may be employed there. The paragraph concludes by discussing the surprise element of the new indictment and the proactive approach taken by the prosecutor, Jack Smith.

10:01

🕰️ Timeline and Implications of the Superseding Indictment

The final paragraph of the script provides insights into how the new superseding indictment might impact the timeline of the case. It mentions an upcoming deadline for the parties to submit proposals on the next steps in the trial, including the potential exclusion of evidence due to the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling. The script speculates that Judge Chuin may extend the timeline to accommodate the new indictment, requiring Trump's arraignment on the new charges. However, it is suggested that the prosecution may waive Trump's physical appearance for the arraignment, keeping the case on a similar scheduling track. The paragraph also discusses the implications of the new grand jury's involvement and the strategic move by the prosecution to present the case to jurors who have not previously heard potentially disallowed evidence, thereby avoiding potential legal challenges from Trump's defense.

Keywords

💡Superseding Indictment

A superseding indictment is a new indictment that replaces a previous one, often used to add or modify charges. In the context of the video, it refers to the legal action taken by Special Counsel Jack Smith against Donald Trump, where the original indictment was reviewed and revised in light of the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity, without dropping any of the four felony charges against Trump. This is exemplified in the script where it mentions, 'a new indictment was just handed down by a brand new grand jury' and the effort to 'respect and implement the Supreme Court's holdings' [^1^].

💡Four Felony Charges

This term refers to the specific charges that Donald Trump was facing, which were unchanged despite the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. The script explains that 'all four felony charges remain' after the new indictment was filed, indicating the seriousness of the legal situation and that the charges were considered solid enough to withstand the Supreme Court's recent decision [^1^].

💡Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court ruling mentioned in the script is a reference to a decision made by the Supreme Court that impacts the case against Donald Trump. The ruling is noted to have influenced the reworking of the initial indictment, as the script states, 'they took the Supreme Court absolute immunity ruling and they went through every line every word every charge of that first 45 page indictment' [^1^].

💡Legal Breakdown

The term 'legal breakdown' is used in the script to describe the analysis of the legal situation surrounding Donald Trump's case. It is the theme of the video, where the hosts discuss the implications of the new indictment and the Supreme Court's ruling on the case. The script opens with 'you're watching the legal breakdown', indicating that the video will delve into an in-depth analysis of the legal issues at hand [^1^].

💡Presidential Immunity

Presidential immunity refers to the protection from legal proceedings that a sitting president may have. The script discusses the impact of the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity on the indictment against Donald Trump, noting that 'in the aftermath of the Supreme Court horrendous ruling on presidential immunity' the team had to reassess the charges [^1^].

💡Department of Justice Officials

This term is used in the script to refer to the officials within the Department of Justice who were allegedly involved in Donald Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. The script mentions conversations that Trump had with these officials, which were initially part of the first indictment but had to be removed due to the Supreme Court ruling [^1^].

💡Oval Office

The Oval Office is the official office of the President of the United States, located in the West Wing of the White House. In the script, it is mentioned in the context of Donald Trump's tweeting activities, which were part of the initial indictment but were later removed due to the Supreme Court's ruling that these could be seen as part of his official presidential duties [^1^].

💡Capitol

The Capitol refers to the United States Capitol Building, which is the home of the U.S. Congress. The script mentions an incident involving 'folks who were beating the hell out of police officers at the Capitol,' which was part of Trump's alleged conduct that was initially included in the indictment [^1^].

💡Federal Court

A federal court is a court whose jurisdiction is established by the United States Constitution and laws passed by Congress. In the script, it is mentioned that the case against Donald Trump will proceed in a federal court in DC, indicating the high level of jurisdiction and importance of the case [^1^].

💡Judge Chuin

Judge Chuin, or Judge Tanya Chutkan, is the presiding judge in the DC case against Donald Trump. The script discusses her potential role in deciding on the evidence presented in the new indictment and the likelihood of her being persuaded by the arguments made by Jack Smith's team [^1^].

Highlights

Donald Trump received a superseding indictment in his DC case with the same four criminal charges as the initial indictment.

The indictment comes after the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity.

All four felony charges against Trump remained intact despite the Supreme Court ruling.

The first indictment was 45 pages long detailing Trump's actions and statements.

Prosecutors reviewed and redacted the initial indictment to comply with the Supreme Court's immunity ruling.

The new indictment is 36 pages long after removing evidence that could violate presidential immunity.

Conversations with Department of Justice officials were removed as they could be seen as part of presidential duties.

Trump's tweets from the Oval Office were also redacted from the indictment.

Prosecutors believe the remaining evidence is sufficient to try and convict Trump.

The new indictment was presented to a new grand jury to ensure no tainted evidence was considered.

Prosecutors expect the case to be litigated before Judge Chuin and may eventually reach the Supreme Court.

The Florida prosecution case is in a different legal posture due to the timing of Trump's actions.

Jack Smith's team issued a press release explaining the superseding indictment and its compliance with the Supreme Court's holdings.

The use of a new grand jury is seen as a strategic move to avoid any potential bias from previous evidence.

The timeline for the case may be extended slightly to accommodate the new indictment and arraignment.

Judge Chuin is expected to review the charges and evidence proposed by Jack Smith in an upcoming hearing.

The superseding indictment does not necessarily delay the overall timeline of the trial.

Transcripts

you're watching the legal breakdown

Glenn we've got some bombshell news here

Donald Trump was just hit with a

superseding indictment in his DC case uh

but notably the four charges that he was

hit with are the exact same four

criminal charges that he was hit with in

his initial indictment can you explain

what's going on here Brian are you ready

for some good news on the legal front oh

oh how I've been yearning to hear those

words so in the aftermath of the Supreme

Court horrendous ruling on presidential

immunity we've all been waiting to see

will Jack Smith have to get rid of one

of the charges two of the charges three

of the charges will the indictment

against Donald Trump survive um this is

the indictment for him trying to

overturn the results of the 2020

presidential election and boy did we get

good news a new indictment was just

handed down by a brand new grand jury

different separate and distinct from the

first Grand Jury that returned the first

indictment against Donald Trump the

first indictment had four felony charges

against Donald Trump we were waiting to

see how many might drop out as a as a

result of the Supreme Court ruling guess

what none of them dropped out all four

felony charges remain here's some

important takeaways the first indictment

against Donald Trump on those four

felony charges it was 45 pages long

there was a whole bunch of stuff about

what Donald Trump said what Donald Trump

did that constituted the the various

crimes that were indicted against Donald

Trump so what Jack Smith and his team

did is they took the Supreme Court

absolute immunity ruling and they went

through every line every word every

charge of that first 45 page indictment

here's what they did Brian I've been

doing a line by line comparison they

pulled out any information any evidence

that might have run a foul of the

Supreme Court's absolute immunity ruling

but what they concluded was all four

criminal charges remain are sound and

can be prosecuted even after the Supreme

Court decision the new indictment for

criminal charges paired down to 36 Pages

let me give you an example of what they

took out so there was a lot of um talk

in the first indictment about

conversations that Donald Trump had with

his various Department of Justice

officials trying to you know we the

Department of Justice corrupt the

Department of Justice have the

Department of Justice send letters to

Battleground States saying oh there's

tons of fraud so let's just go with

alternate electors I'm taking Liberty

with the language there but a lot of

that does not survive the Supreme Court

ruling why because the Supreme Court

said well a president's core

constitutional functions involve talking

to his attorney general and his

Department of Justice officials so Jack

Smith said fine I will pull all of that

evidence out of the indictment and yet

there's still enough evidence even

redacting that stuff out to bring the

charge to try the case and to convict

Donald Trump this is really

exceptionally good news let me give you

another example in the first indictment

there was something about Donald Trump

tweeting from the Oval Office that we

love you you're very fine people he said

to the folks who were beating the hell

out of police officers at the Capal

um and so what Jack Smith did is he said

well that could be viewed as an official

presidential Duty tweeting out a message

to the masses from the Oval Office so

I'll pull it out but guess what it

doesn't undercut the four felony charges

on which Donald Trump is indicted so you

know this is an indication that Jack

Smith believes all four felony charges

survive the Supreme Court ruling and

he's ready to move in the direction of a

trial now with that said all of this was

done to make this indictment airtight

against Donald Trump and obviously all

four charges remain even even without

the added benefit of the other uh the

other evidence that could be perceived

as as uh as falling under the under the

realm of the uh the umbrella of the

immunity ruling but who's the final

Arbiter of whether this will indeed

satisfy the Supreme Court's new

threshold is that going to be judge

chuin is that going to be the Supreme

Court itself Brian you had to burst our

bub you had to bring us all down didn't

you I'm I'm a realist if because you're

teasing it up and you're making me tell

the viewers okay I'll take the bait we

all know that this is going to end up

back in front of the Supreme Court but

here's what Jack Smith will be able to

do first this is all going to be

litigated uh before judge chuin the

presiding judge in the DC case and Jack

Smith is going to make his argument that

judge we took out the stuff that could

be perceived as violating the Supreme

Court ruling on presidential immunity

and we still have plenty of evidence to

try and convict Donald Trump and then

judge chuckin in the first instance will

look at it and say yay or nay I have a

feeling given you know what I know of

judge chuckin from trying murder cases

against her when she was a public

defender back in the day and watching

her career as a federal court judge in

Washington DC she is going to be

persuaded by Jack Smith's imminently

supportable decision and then it's going

to go back to the DC federal circuit

court of appeals and back to the Supreme

Court this is still a really important

step albeit a step that is still three

or four steps removed from a jury being

uh seated in that Federal courtroom in

DC and Jack Smith's people giving their

opening statement on these four felony

charges Glen if Jack Smith had the

foresight to do this in the DC case all

the I mean he's been doing this for a

while presumably as soon as the immunity

ruling was handed down if because if the

superseding indictment was already laid

out today just a few weeks after the

immunity ruling was handed down

presumably we can assume that he got to

work on it almost immediately are we

likely to see the same thing happen in

the Florida prosecution I think that

case is in a different posture first of

all most of the criminal acts by Donald

Trump occurred after he left the

presidency so I don't think you have

necessarily the same factors that are at

play in the DC case when he committed

all these crimes while he was still

president even though many of them were

after he lost the election but he was

still in the white house until January

20th um and the cases are in a different

posture because Jack Smith just filed

his appeal of uh judge Canon's dismissal

her Lawless dismissal because it

violated Supreme Court precedent

dismissal of Donald Trump's classified

documents case so that is now being

litigated in the 11th Circuit Court of

Appeal so cases are in different

postures and the criminal charges arise

sort of under different circumstances

Glenn did it surprise you that Jack

Smith would take such a proactive step

here I mean I mean like I said before he

had to move quickly in order to do this

uh and I think it came as a surprise to

to most of us seeing this that all of a

sudden a superseding indictment was

dropped yeah I don't know if this is

going to make sense Brian but it caught

me by surprise but it didn't surprise me

because Jack Smith has been pushing as

fast as hard as aggressively ethically

so as I think a prosecutor can push and

can I share one more thing with our

viewers that just warmed this old

Prosecutor's Heart You Know Jack Smith's

press person is probably the person who

works the least in Washington DC because

they don't issue a whole lot of press

releases or make statements to the media

however to accompany this new indictment

we got a press release from Jack Smith's

spokesperson let me read it it's very

short today a federal grand jury in the

District of Columbia returned a

superseding indictment charging

defendant Trump with the same criminal

offenses that were charged in the

original indictment the superseding or

second subsequent indictment which was

presented to a new grand jury put a pin

in that that had not previously heard

evidence in this case reflects the

government's efforts to respect and

implement the Supreme Court's Holdings

and remand instructions here's why I

said put a pin in the fact that a brand

new grand jury who had not heard any

evidence previously was the grand jury

that returned this indictment this is a

stroke of

Genius after the Supreme Court said well

you know what you can't use evidence a

evidence B evidence c um against Donald

Trump for any reason and so that's the

stuff that Jack Smith pulled out of the

indictment but you know what Donald

Trump's lawyers would have yelled and

screamed if Jack Smith had not used a

brand new grand jury they would have

said wait a minute that first grand jury

heard all that offending stuff all of

that stuff that the Supreme Court said

has no business being presented to any

finder of fact when they're deciding

whether to indict Donald Trump or not so

Jack Smith in very forward-leaning

proactive fashion said fine I'm going to

present all the evidence to a new grand

jury but I'm not going to present the

stuff that the Supreme Court in

hindsight has said no grand jury should

have heard so this grand jury is

completely un tainted it was a brilliant

move that cuts off a line of attack that

I promise would have come from Donald

Trump's lawyers had Jack Smith not gone

down this path okay let's finish off

with this how does this impact the

timeline does the fact that a

superseding indictment was handed down

have to make a start from the beginning

or can we start from the immediate spot

that we're at right now in this trial uh

where are we yeah great question so we

have some concrete information that can

begin to answer that question first of

all this coming Friday judge chuin had

asked the parties the prosecutors and

the defense attorneys to submit a joint

proposal about what these hearings

should look like moving forward you know

what evidence do we think survives the

Supreme Court's presidential immunity

ruling and which evidence has to be

tossed out Jack Smith has gotten in

front of that so what I think will

happen is Judge chuin first of all will

probably say you know what I was going

to ask y'all to submit I had ordered you

all to submit these joint

recommendations to me this Friday and

then I was going to have you come into

court next week I think on September 5th

and we were going to begin talking about

this stuff I suspect you're going to see

an order from Judge chuin maybe even

supon before any of the parties ask her

or suggest that there should now be a

timetable or schedule she'll probably

say you know what we're going to extend

this by a couple of weeks because this

is new information Donald Trump has to

be arraigned on this indictment just

like he was arraigned that's a fancy

term for your Force first court

appearance when the judge reads you the

charges and put you on formal notice of

what you have just been indicted on I

suspect you're going to see that

arraignment date in the next week or two

however there's reporting that Jack

Smith has already said listen Donald

Trump's been arraigned once on a similar

indictment same for charges we will not

insist that he be physically present in

the courthouse when he is arraigned we

will wave his appearance so I don't

think you're going to have Trump pulled

back into federal court just to be

arraigned on his indictment and then

ultimately does this extend things

farther out into the future I think the

answer is no when a superseding

indictment is returned particularly on

the same four charges and the evidence

is paired down not even beefed up I

think we remain sort of on the exact

same scheduling track that this case is

on of course the next stop on the

scheduling track is to have that hearing

where judge chuin says yay or nay with

respect to all four of these charges and

the evidence Jack Smith proposes to

introduce to support or all four of

these charges okay well obviously a lot

to stay on top of here as this process

continues to play itself out but some

good news here some rare good news out

of the Trump trial happening in DC so

for those watching right now if you want

to follow along please make sure to

subscribe the links to both of our

channels are right here on the screen

I'm Brian teller Cohen and I'm Glenn

kersner you're watching the legal

breakdown

[Music]