The NPR Politics Podcast - Donald Trump Charged With 37 Federal Crimes

Episode Date: June 10, 2023

Prosecutors say that the former president kept classified documents that he was no longer allowed to possess after leaving office and stored them in widely-accessible areas in his Florida club. He is set to appear in a Miami courtroom on Tuesday.And: upcoming Supreme Court decisions and a send-off for Scott Detrow, who is a new host at NPR's All Things Considered.This episode: White House correspondent Scott Detrow, White House correspondent Tamara Keith, national justice correspondent Carrie Johnson, and legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg. The podcast is produced by Elena Moore and Casey Morell. Our editor is Eric McDaniel. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi. Unlock access to this and other bonus content by supporting The NPR Politics Podcast+. Sign up via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Connect:Email the show at [e-mail] the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook Group.Subscribe to the NPR Politics Newsletter.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Support for this podcast and the following message come from Autograph Collection Hotels, with over 300 independent hotels around the world, each exactly like nothing else. Autograph Collection is part of the Marriott Bonvoy portfolio of hotel brands. Find the unforgettable at AutographCollection.com. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Scott Detrow. I cover the White House. I'm Tamara Keith. I also cover the White House. And I'm Carrie Johnson. I cover the Justice Department. And we are coming at you at 518 Eastern on Friday, June 9th, because in an era of unprecedented

political stories, today we have another one. Former President Donald Trump is facing 37 federal criminal charges related to his possession of classified documents and his refusal to return them to the federal government. We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. Applying those laws, collecting facts, that's what determines the outcome of an investigation. Nothing more, nothing less. That was special counsel Jack Smith speaking earlier today. Carrie, Trump posted news of his indictment on social media last night. This afternoon, shortly before Smith made that statement, the government released the details

in a 49-page document. What did it tell us? You know, it told a story, really. It was a narrative. Starting on the day that Donald Trump left the White House in January 2021, when the indictment says he personally helped pack some of these documents and boxes, commingled with newspaper clips, were extremely serious national security secrets. Moving into his time at Mar-a-Lago and Bedminster, his other resort in New Jersey, where he was bragging about secret materials and meetings with people who had no business knowing about any of that stuff because they had no security clearance, and then allegedly directing his lawyer to mislead the

FBI about what kind of papers that Trump actually had, overseeing a conspiracy, really. A lot in there. I was particularly struck by some of the transcripts of recorded conversations where Trump seems to admit that he knows he's not allowed to possess or share this information. There's one moment he's showing a military document and he says, quote, see, as president, I could have declassified it, but now I can't, you know, but this is still a secret. And then he says at another point, this totally wins my case, you know, except it is like highly confidential secret. And then he says at another point, this totally wins my case, you know, except it is like highly confidential secret. This is secret information. I mean, my legal career ended by taking the LSATs.

But like this seems like pretty solid evidence. Well, friend, the name of the law here is willful retention of information related to the national defense. And the quote you just read out there goes to the element of willfulness, of what Trump knew, what his state of mind was. In most cases, that can be really hard to prove. In this case, it appears the Justice Department has a tape of Trump saying that the person who was interviewing Trump recorded that, and now Jack Smith has it, too. Carrie, this makes me think about another thing that came up a couple of times in the indictment, which is they go through the evidence of what he

allegedly did, and then they have quotes of him in the past saying that's a terrible thing to do. And this is one of those cases where they had a quote from him saying, how are reporters getting classified information? Whoever is giving it to them is terrible. And then he was in an interview when he waved this document around, allegedly. made several remarks about the need to protect national security and not have stray documents, a club with which he used to beat then-candidate Hillary Clinton. Those words came back to bite him in his indictment, which, by the way, is the first federal indictment of a former president in United States history. Yeah. And, Tam, we had gotten a vague sense from some of the earlier filings and a lot of reporting around this what kinds of classified documents we were talking about here that Trump had in his possession. Can you give us a sense of what they actually were? Because this goes into detail.

The indictment goes into a lot of detail here, including about what these documents were. And I'm just going to read a few quotes here. One of them is a document from 2018 concerning White House intelligence briefing related material. There are a bunch of those, actually. That seems to be from the presidential daily brief that he must have kept. And then things like this. Undated document concerning military capabilities of a foreign country and the United States with handwritten annotation in black marker. And then this document dated June 2020 concerning nuclear capabilities of a foreign country. And the reason why that matters, aside from not wanting stray information about nuclear

capabilities rolling around, is that even if Donald Trump, if this case goes to trial, asserts a defense that he declassified some of these materials. The Energy Department, in fact, is responsible for declassifying nuclear-related secrets. So Trump would have had to go through a procedure. Doesn't seem he did. Trump, no surprise, has had a lot to say today. Tam, what has he been saying? He has been saying a lot on his social media app, Truth Social.

A lot of criticism in here for the special counsel, Jack Smith. He also says that he doesn't buy the argument that Joe Biden knew nothing of the indictment of his number one rival, me. And then additionally, he says that he's an innocent man and that this is all part of the broader witch hunt only that. He's also running for president. He is far and away the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. This you have someone like Ron DeSantis describing this as the weaponization of federal law enforcement. That's a theme you hear from a lot of Republican leaders. But then you also have Mike Pence in New Hampshire speaking today at a campaign event. He has drawn some separation between himself and Trump. But in this case, he is not drawing separation. I had hoped it wouldn't come to this. I had hoped the Department of Justice would see its way clear to resolve these issues with the former president without moving forward with charges. And I'm

deeply troubled to see this indictment move forward, believing it will only further divide our nation at a time that American families are facing real hardship at home. We'll talk about this on many podcasts to come, but it is just striking that even a candidate like Mike Pence, who is saying Donald Trump is unfit for the presidency and win against the Constitution, is defending him in this particular moment. Right. And the question is, will there come a time, and there may never come that time, but will there come a time when some of these candidates or when some in the Republican establishment or someone says, OK, this is just too much. This is one thing on top of another thing on top of another thing. This is just too much. But, you know, we've wondered when that would happen several times in the past through two impeachments and this previous indictment.

You know, it strikes me that the special counsel, Jack Smith, who broke his silence today after months and months of keeping his mouth shut, may have been speaking to a broader audience here. You know, beyond the audience of Republicans who are talking about the weaponization of the Justice Department, he tried to underscore the gravity of these charges and basically say that storing information in this way puts American service members at risk, members of the intelligence community at risk, and American allies at risk. And I wonder if that message resounds within some elements of the Republican Party. I guess we're going to find out. Last question to you, Carrie. What comes next? So Trump and his aide, Walt Nata, who's been indicted alongside Trump in this case, are supposed to appear Tuesday afternoon at the federal courthouse in Miami to have the charges read against them. We may get some next steps.

Interestingly, at least for now, the judge in charge of this case is Aileen Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Trump and made several favorable rulings to him last year before being overturned resoundingly by the appeals court. She's in charge. So she could help set the schedules. The special counsel says he wants a speedy trial. That could be a few months or more. But Trump could decide to slow things down by fighting this indictment with a bunch of pretrial motions. That's yet to be determined. And Carrie, you have regularly reminded us that Trump is also being investigated

in Georgia related to his attempts to overturn the election. And Jack Smith is also investigating other crimes related to that and to January 6th. Scott, you have not seen the last of Jack Smith, and you also have not heard the last from me on these subjects. And Carrie, I always love talking to you about those breaking news stories that you are so on top of. Thank you for joining us. My great pleasure. Thank you. Stick around, Tam. You and I are going to talk Supreme Court with Nina Totenberg when we come back.

We're going to take a quick break. We are back and we're joined by Nina Totenberg. Hi, Nina. Hi there, Scott. It's the month you're on the podcast the most. Oh, God, this is the month my husband says he never sees me. He goes on trips. I think most listeners know why, but that's because this is where all the major Supreme Court rulings come at the end of the term. We had a major ruling yesterday, a voting rights, a surprise ruling that upheld part of the Voting Rights Act. But there is a lot to come. I think the most high profile case would be a decision

that could end the process of colleges weighing an applicant's race as part of the criteria of who they admit. That would be a major deal. Yeah, the affirmative action case would be huge. And there are some who think that the voting rights case that happened yesterday was the precursor, the offsetter, in a way, to the affirmative action decision. Any sense from having heard the arguments, knowing the stakes of the case, whether this could apply to federal hiring, too? Yes and no. I mean, it certainly will apply to federal contracting. And it may go into people's decisions about whom to hire just the way it does in other places. And in those matters, I would assume there will be lawsuits. Some will be more difficult to bring than others, depending on how these programs operate.

So that's the stakes of that case. When that ruling comes, we will certainly talk about it at length on the Politics Podcast. What are the other cases that you're sitting there at gives a preference to Indian adoptive parents and Indian foster parents. And there's a challenge that says that's an unconstitutional racial preference. And so that's another race case. Then there's a huge case challenging whether businesses can refuse to provide their services to gay people because it violates their free speech. For example, this is mainly in gay marriage services. So in this particular case, it's a website designer who says, I don't want to design websites for somebody's gay marriage.

It's against my religious beliefs. And then there's a huge election law case about this, what used to be considered a fringe theory, the independent state legislature theory that says only legislatures can not only draw congressional and legislative lines, but you can't challenge them in the court. And they also are the only people who can write election laws. This is the most extreme version of it. And I think the court is going to actually, there are ways to get out of deciding this, but I think they want to decide it before the 2024 election. And the implications of that politically are huge. You know, the potential for election challenges. Yes, there will be election challenges. And if they don't settle it before 2024 or considerably before that, I think the court is going to hold on to this case, even though it may technically be moot because they just even though Joe Biden holds the White House and for a while had Democrats had control of the House and the Senate, Democrats have gotten so many losses on so many key issues they care about from the federal courts, from state houses where Republicans hold control. And these have all been instances where Joe Biden hasn't had much power other than to say this is wrong and I hope people turn out and vote, which by and large worked for him last

year. But but, you know, it's very limited. Nina's ticking off so many other areas that that Joe Biden cares deeply about and might get yet another big loss on. How is the White House thinking of responding to these rulings that are coming? They have had these sort of don't boo vote philosophy to all of these, which is, yes, they are outraged by the outcome. They say it's terrible. They say there is nothing they can do through executive action and you just have to go vote and make it the law or you just have to go vote and elect Democrats to Congress. So then Democrats in Congress can pass laws that will will remedy these concerns. And that is literally what they're saying about the Dobbs decision on abortion. And it's also what they're saying with regards to student loans. If they lose on student loans,

what the White House will be able to say is we tried. Give us credit for trying. This conservative court said we couldn't do this thing that we tried to do. But hey, young voters who we really need to turn out, at least we tried. All right, Nina Totenberg, I have a sneaky suspicion you will be on the podcast again in the next few weeks. I think so. I hope to be here every week of June. Every week. The regular Nina week. The regular Nina segment. It's like Shark Week, but Nina month. Yes. One more break.

And clearly we've started with the spirit already, but after this, can't let it go. And we are back. It is time to end the show like we do every week with Can't Let It Go, the part of the show where we talk about things from the week we cannot stop thinking about, politics or otherwise. I haven't been given the script for this segment, and suddenly Asma Khalid and Susan Davis stormed into the studio. So, hi, everybody.

Hi, Scott. Hey, Scott. I think it's fair to say that what we can't let go of, but we have to, is you. Scott's like, I'm too emotional. No, but for real. It's real. Yeah, I guess we should tell the listeners. Oh, wait, we haven't told them.

I guess we haven't. I'm going to be, this is my last day host hosting the podcast the last day hosting the podcast but not your last day host no i'm going i'm moving one flight down in our in our building and i'm going to be hosting all things considered on the weekends and i'm going to be doing the consider this podcast i'm going to be doing uh long form stuff in that podcast. I'm looking forward to that. But I've had a lot of feels about this segment and this show, which we have done for eight years, which is insane. Scott, you were here at its genesis. Yes. Scott is an OG.

2015, the fall of 2015 we started. Right? Yeah. Wow. We've been together a long time, guys. Yeah. It's hard to say goodbye. There were so many life moments.

I know. I was talking with Scott yesterday because, you know, I think it's, we've all known that Scott has wanted to be a radio host for a long time. So I think we're all really thrilled for you because we know that even before you came to NPR, this is sort of a fulfillment of a career goal and dream for you. And that is wonderful to see happen. But I was reminiscing a little bit with Scott yesterday because we're coming up to the two-year anniversary of the day that I think Scott Detrow proved to everybody in this building that he is great behind a live microphone. And when he was filling in as a guest host

on Weekend Edition, which is something we've all done, and it's a really fun thing to get to host a weekend show. It's always kind of breaks us away from the political grind and shortly before the show went live oh my god the entire comm system and npr went collapsed like there was no internal comms there was no way to even like google stuff you were alone in a studio with a live mic and i was actually called in to be a studio buddy with you to have somebody in there there to talk to if we couldn't get any other guests on the phone. And I sat in that studio with Scott and watched him work for two hours with basically no net and no notes. And it was very sweaty. It was a hard thing. I remember

being on the other end because our editor called me and was saying, just get in front of the microphone. Talk to Scott about whatever story you're working on this week. Unbelievable. I went back through my email and I found the note that I sent the desk after that all happened. And it just said, I need to echo the shout out to Scott. I had a front row seat to the madness. He was living every broadcaster's nightmare scenario. No comms, no email, no scripts, no prep time, and no clue what guest was coming up next or where in the world they were coming from until the minute they were live. Tape was crapping out and having to vamp throughout it with no notice, hitting and blowing up the clock mid-segment, and a tech workaround that involved having to read hastily written scripts sent via text message on a dying cell phone that needed to be charged in between hits. My phone was replaced the next day.

Not to mention having to pivot from live convos on Putin to the Westminster dog show. And he did this for hours. It was remarkable. And he handled it with grace. And yes, a fair amount of sweat. I salute you, my friend. You deserve this, but you truly earned it that day. And I hope that that was the hardest day you ever have in the chair, because then it's all downhill. Let's hope so. Thank you.

Thank you. I love that memory, Sue, because I think it tells people how phenomenal Scott is as a host. But the thing I keep coming back to is I think for a lot of us, we know Scott as just, you know, the human being and friend, journalistic collaborator that he is. I don't know that listeners always get that glimpse into what Scott is like. And I've been thinking about so many good memories. So Scott and I, I'm sure listeners know this, we long time reporting collaborators. We covered the 2016 election cycle and the 2020 election cycle, kind of, I would say, arm in arm. And there was this moment at the end, Scott, do not tear up. I'm looking at you across the computer right here. So there was this moment after the crazy Iowa

caucuses, remember the phrase that was? It was not decided in 2020. And Scott and I had to take a plane to New Hampshire. It's this weird plane that I think is chartered. I thought you were going to say it's this weird state. But it is this really weird plane ride. It's full of journalists. Those are the only people aboard this, I don't know what time was it, 2, 3 a.m. flight that we took? At least. From Iowa to New Hampshire. And for some reason, there was a camera crew on doing B-roll footage.

No, they were doing like a documentary and they were sitting right next to us. And we were like, no. And I remember telling Scott, I was like, you're worn out. I don't know about Scott, but like, you look like a mess. You're so tired. And I delegated Scott with one very dear friend duty. I was like, do not let them take any B-roll footage of me. And I am proud to say, I don't know. I've actually never seen this documentary, but I like to believe that Scott held by his word.

We are not in it. We are too not appeared in this. But I mean, those are the moments, Scott, that I'm really going to miss. I feel like you have been such a close collaborator. And we've been saying this, I think both of us, to each other all week, is that I don't know that I will ever have as close of a reporting partner as I have had in you. I think those are really rare to find. Even if for half of that election we were not in the same space. That's what I think is amazing.

Even covering the election through a pandemic, I felt like you were probably the closest reporting partner I've ever had, which to me just speaks volumes. And I'm going to miss you a lot. I am, like Sue said, very happy and proud for you. Thank you. But we are going to miss you so much. Can I steal one more memory real quick? Yes. My favorite Scott memory, I think, and I don't know how this happened exactly,

but we both had babies within a week of each other. Oh, yeah. And then we were on leave together at the same time. And so we went to a crybaby matinee with our babies. Ant-man 2. Ant-man 2. And Scott was like, I'm going to really just focus on living. And I am not going to like, I don't want to know about the news. I'm in a bubble for my paternity leave. And I was like, OK, cool story.

I will respect that, but that's not what I'm doing. And the movie starts and my watch starts going crazy because it's connected to our internal Slack and everything else. This was the day that Donald Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. Oh, yeah. And then had the press conference afterwards. And Scott and I watched that movie. And then we went out for lunch. And when he went to the bathroom, I checked my phone and read all of the things. Did you not tell him a word about it?

She respected it. I could see something. That is a good friend. I checked my phone and read all of the things. Did you not tell him a word about it? She respected it. I could see something. That is a good friend. I could see something and I was like, look, I really don't want to know. And Tam was like bursting. I was dying. And she didn't tell me. I went two weeks before I found out that happened. And then I was just like, oh my god! I'm like, what?

How did you not tell me? I'm amazed you went two weeks without looking at the news. Listen, I was really committed to hiding from the news that summer. I wasn't sure what I wanted to say, but I was thinking, I was looking back at pictures, and there's this picture from 2016, and Asma, it's you, me and Sarah McCammon. And we are all crowded together, sitting on the steps in the rafters of the Cleveland Arena in the middle of the 2016 Republican Convention. It's right before Donald Trump was giving his speech. And I like it because we all have these looks on our faces that say,

we're happy to be here and we're happy to be with each other, but we have no idea what the heck is going on. This is a strange place to be. And I feel like, like that was this podcast for me, right? Like we covered, including today,

so many unprecedented stories and, and, and things that no one has ever covered before because they haven't happened before. The crazy 2016 election, all of the investigations that launched, all of the things that happened during the Trump presidency. Two impeachments. Two impeachments. And acquittals.

Now two indictments of a former president. A global pandemic. Like so many things. But like throughout it, we were and still are coming to this podcast as reporters, but also like as friends talking about the news. And I feel like that's what makes this podcast special. And that is what I will miss when it comes to not being in it, but I'm excited to keep listening to it. And also to continue working with you all in the building and at NPR. But, yeah, it's been a very large chunk of my adult life,

which is something that's still hard to believe, that we've been doing this every day for so long. Also, it's not but goodbye. We're still going to see you all the time. Yes, yes. And we might bring you back for an extra special Can't Let It Go. We'll see. Yeah.

I think we will. I think so. I think so. But thank you all for coming and for being such good friends and collaborators and podcast co-hosts. Scott, will you come back? Will you come back

for the 4th of July episode where we read the speech from Independence Day? Oh, if you'll have me. Okay. I'd love to. I don't think we can do it without you. Put it on the calendar.

Also, if they do find intelligent life elsewhere, we're definitely bringing you back. I'm going to say it's been a big week for my side of that argument. I know, I know, I know. And I should say, I am leaving. You are all still co-hosting the podcast, but we've got another co-host joining you. And that is somebody I just mentioned a moment ago, Sarah McCammon, who is an an OG member of the Politics Podcast. She has been doing phenomenal reporting for NPR on reproductive rights and a range of other things. She's coming back to the desk and she's going to

be the co-host stepping in for me. And Sarah, we're thrilled to have you on the podcast. Yay! Welcome back! Welcome back, Sarah. Thank you, Scott. And congratulations. I've been sort of a fly on the wall for part of this, and I just want to add my congratulations and my good wishes. And I want to say that I'm so excited to be back on this team. Really, really looking forward to working more closely with you all again. Absolutely. And welcome back, Sarah. It does feel a bit like you know this beat, you know this podcast so well.

You were one of the original contributors. We were just talking about how we launched the show in 2015, which feels like eons ago. We were so young. We were so wide-eyed then. Oh, my God. But welcome back, Sarah. I use a lot more serum now than I did back then. So does the podcast.

That's right. All right. Well, Sarah, I'll be listening for you and be seeing you around the building too. And I'm so glad you're coming home to the Politics Podcast. Thank you. And I'll be listening to you. All right. And I think the last thing I want to say is that, you know, thank all of you. I want to thank everybody who has present and past produced and edited this podcast. I'm about to read the names of folks who do it right now. But you have put up with our nonsense and come up with good ideas and pivoted on a dime when unexpected news happens at all hours of the day. And I also want to thank everyone surprises for us as this podcast grew.

And the personal notes we get and the timestamps and the moments that people share with us. Thank you to everyone who's listened. And we'll keep listening to this podcast and, you know, maybe check out Consider This. What can I say? Consider it. You can I say? Consider it. You can consider it. Consider checking out that podcast as well. But that is a wrap for today. Our executive producer is Mathani

Mathuri. Our editor is Eric McDaniel. Our producers are Elena Moore and Casey Morrell. Research and fact checking by our intern Lee Walden. Thank you to Krishna and Lexi Schapito. I'm Scott Detrow. I cover the White House. I'm Tamara Keith. I also cover the White House.

And I'm Asma Khalid. I also cover the White House. And I'm Susan Davis. I cover politics. And I am clearly about to cry. Thank you for listening to the politics. Thank you. One last time. I'll get it right. Thank you for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.