« Tout y est. Il n’y a qu’à lire le document. C’est un test et la question est : « nous soucions-nous des faits et de la justice » explique Andrew Weissman, ex avocat général du FBI, sur CNN. C’est parfois minuté : « At 4:17 p.m.,the Defendant released a video message on Twitter that he had just taped in the White House Rose Garden ».
C’est donc la troisième inculpation diligentée contre Donald Trump. Le document de 45 pages détaille chronologiquement toutes les initiatives menées par Donald Trump et les 6 co-conspirateurs. D’abord au niveau des différents états qui pouvaient faire la différence dans le résultat final de l’élection : Arizona, Géorgie, Michigan, Pennsylvanie et Wisconsin. Ensuite au niveau du ministère de la Justice, puis du Vice-Président dans la certification des voix des grands électeurs et enfin en favorisant l’assaut du Capitole.
Jack Smith, le procureur chargé de l’affaire, prend le soin rappeler que Donald Trump a perdu les élections, qu’il sait qu’il a perdu les élections mais que pour rester au pouvoir, il a utilisé toutes sortes de moyens illégaux. Ce n’est pas le fait de mentir ou de dire n’importe quoi qui est répréhensible et autorisé par le Premier amendement, mais bien les actions entreprises qui sont illégales.
– The Defendant, DONALD J. TRUMP, was the forty-fifth President of the United States and a candidate for re-election in 2020. The Defendant lost the 2020 presidential election.
– Despite having lost,the Defendant was determined to remain inpower. So for more
than two months following election day on November 3,2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false, andthe Defendant knew that they were false. But the Defendant repeated and widely disseminated them anyway to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere ofmistrust and anger,and erode public faith in the administration of the election.
Les quatre chefs d’inculpation sont les suivants :
COUNT ONE
(Conspiracy to Defraud the United States – 18U.S.C. 371)
The Conspiracy
From on or about November 14, 2020, through on or about January 20, 2021, in the
District of Columbia and elsewhere, the Defendant, Donald J. Trump did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate , and agree with co-conspirators , known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to defraud the United States by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected,counted, and certified by the federal government.
COUNT TWO
(Conspiracyto Obstructan Official Proceeding 18U.S.C. § 1512(k))
From on or about November 14,2020, through on or about January 7, 2021, in the
District of Columbia and elsewhere , the Defendant, DONALDJ.TRUMP, did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators , known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to corruptly obstruct and impede an official proceeding, that is,the certification ofthe electoral vote, inviolation of Title 18, United States Code,Section 1512(c)(2).
COUNT THREE
(Obstruction of, and Attempt to Obstruct, an Official Proceeding 18U.S.C. §§ 1512( c) (2 ) , 2)
From on or about November14, 2020, through on or about January 7,2021, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, the Defendant, DONALD J.TRUMP attempted to,and did,corruptly obstruct and impede an official proceeding,that is,the certification of the electoral vote.
COUNT FOUR
(ConspiracyAgainst Rights 18U.S.C. § 241)
From on or about November14, 2020, through on or about January 20, 2021, in the
District of Columbia and elsewhere, the Defendant, DONALDJ. TRUMP, did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with co-conspirators, known andunknown to the Grand Jury, to injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate one or more persons in the free exercise and enjoyment of a right and privilege secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States that is,the right to vote, and to have one’s vote counted.
Les personnes qu’il a essayé de corrompre ne sont pas des libéreaux radicaux ou des gauchistes mais le plus souvent des républicains qui ont même voté pour lui, en 2016, voire en 2020.
« As a conservative Republican , I don’t like the results of the presidential election. I voted for President Trump and worked hard to reelect him. But I cannot and will not entertain a suggestion that we violate current law to change the outcome of a certified election » a déclaré le Speaker de la chambre des représentants de l’Etat d’Arizona.
« I fought hard for President Trump. Nobody wanted him to win more than me. I think he’s done an incredible job. But I love our republic, too . I can’t fathom risking our norms, traditions and
institutions to pass a resolution retroactively changing the electors for Trump, simply because some think there may have been enough widespread fraud to give him the win. That’s unprecedented for good reason. And that’s why there is not enough support in the House to cast a new slate of electors . I fear we’d lose our country forever. This truly would bring mutually assured destruction for every future election in regards to the Electoral College. And I can’t
stand for that. I won’t » a expliqué son homologue du Michigan.
Face à d’autant d’évidences sur cette affaire, qui ne fait que s’ajouter à toutes celles déjà existantes, quelles seront les lignes de défense des avocats de Trump ? Ils l’ont déjà expliqué dans différents interviews.
- Cette inculpation est une attaque contre le Premier amendement Free Speech ;
- Donald Trump croit sincèrement que les élections ont été frauduleuses ;
- Donald Trump a été conseillé par une équipe d’avocats reconnus en droit constitutionnel. C’est en s’appuyant sur leurs conseils avisés, qu’il a engagé toutes ses initiatives ;
- Les co-conspirateurs ont engagé toutes sortes d’action illégales de leur propre chef, sans avoir consulté Donald Trump. En gros, ils vont essayer de charger la barque des associés de Donald Trump pour alléger la sienne. Mais le document expose toutes les interactions entre l’accusé (Donald Trump) et les co-conspirateurs. Ils n’ont pas agi seuls mais bien en concertation avec lui et/ou sous sa direction ;
- L’inculpation est en fait une initiative politique de Joe Biden et de son ministre de la Justice Merrick Garland pour attaquer un candidat aux élections présidentielles et détourner les Américains des vrais problèmes ;
- Le District of Columbia, qui est largement démocrate, ne permet pas d’avoir un procès équitable. Aux élections de 2020, 92 % des électeurs de Washington D.C. ont voté pour Joe Biden ;
- Ils vont essayer de gagner du temps pour repousser le procès après les élections ;
- L’administration Biden a mis deux ans et demi pour cette inculpation et maintenant elle veut aller au plus vite. Ils feront tout pour que ce procès ait lieu après les élections. Après, Donald Trump reprendra la main et fera sienne le slogan de Louis XIV : « l’Etat c’est moi ».
La présomption d’innocence selon laquelle « everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty » est un principe de base de l’état de droit mais il faut bien reconnaître qu’il est difficile à appliquer à Donald Trump en général, et dans ce cas particulier. Avant même les élections, il avait commencé à déclarer que s’il perdait les élections, c’est qu’elles seraient frauduleuses. L’interaction décrite dans le document avec Mike Pence est aussi éclairant sur son état d’esprit :
« At the meeting in the Oval Office on the night of January 3 , Co -Conspirator 4 suggested that the Justice Department should opine that the Vice President could exceed his lawful authority during the certification proceeding and change the election outcome . When the Assistant
Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel began to explain why the Justice Department
should not do so,the Defendant said, No one here should be talking to the Vice President. I’m
talking to the Vice President , and ended the discussion.
On December 23, the Defendant re-tweeted a memo titled Operation PENCE CARD which falsely asserted that the Vice President could, among other things, unilaterally disqualify legitimate electors from six targeted states.
On several private phone calls in late December and early January, the Defendant
repeated knowingly false claims ofelection fraud and directly pressured the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the certification proceedingonJanuary 6 to fraudulently overturn the results of the election, and the Vice President resisted.
On January 1, The Defandant called the Vice President and berated him because he had learned that the Vice President had opposed a lawsuit seeking a judicial decision that, at the certification, the Vice president had the authority to reject or return votes to the states under the Constitution. The Vice President responded that he though there was non constitutional basis for such autority and itw as improper. In response, the Defendant told the Vice President, “You’re too honest”.
Also on January 5, the Defendant met alone with the Vice President. When the Vice President refused to agree to the Defendant’s request that he obstruct the certification,the Defendant grew frustrated and told the Vice President that the Defendant would have to publicly criticize him. Upon learning of this, the Vice President’s Chief of Staff was concerned for the Vice President’s safety and alerted the head of the Vice President’s Secret Service detail ».
U.S. v. Trump Will Be the Most Important Case in Our Nation’s History explique Richard L. Hasen professeur de droit à UCLA et directeur du Safeguarding Democracy Project. « Putting Trump before a jury, if the case can get that far before the 2024 elections, is not certain to yield a conviction. It carries risks. But as I wrote last year in the New York Times, the risks to our system of government of not prosecuting Donald Trump are greater than the risks of prosecuting him.
It’s not hyperbole to say that the conduct of this prosecution will greatly influence whether the U.S. remains a thriving democracy after 2024 ».
Trump lawyer calls new indictment ‘assault’ on free speech rights
Trump’s attorney: First Amendment protected Trump’s speech
Trump’s attorney blasts latest indictment as ‘attack on free speech’
Trump lawyer after third indictment: ‘We’re going to win’