Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.
That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said.
The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.
This is one of those stories that is probably weeks old, but not reported by the media till after the election. Now none of this is to say that Trump did not have classified materials in his Presidential records or that he was wasn't feuding with the National Archives over these records. But at issue is whether or not Trump had some intention to break the law and use the information for some nefarious reason.
This is the classic Comey Clinton parcing of the law. While Clinton did openly break the law, Comey suggested that her motives were not to sell secrets or undermine the security of the Government, so charging her would be something that "no reasonable prosecutor" would do. In Clinton's case, her motives were simple. To hide what she was doing from any public scrutiny. While also fairly illegal to sidestep the FOIA, that explanation is not as nefarious as suggesting she was hiding documents to sell them to China.
So what does the DOJ do if they cannot actually pin any criminal motives on Trump? If they found no nuclear secrets or anything to suggest that he was looking to profit from those records? What if this really was nothing more than a pissing contest between the former President and the National Archives, where the Archives decided to go "tattle" on Trump to the DOJ?
If that is the final determination, then it would seem extremely petty and political for the DOJ to bring charges. After all they did not charge Clinton for the underlying crime of storing classified documents in unsecured locations, and they refused to bring any "obstruction" charges in spite of her deleting tens of thousands of emails and scrubbing subpoenaed electronic devices to wipe out the information being sought.
In the meantime, Trump had records (that were legally his to have when he was President) in a location that had top clearance to store classified information, which was under lock and key, guarded by Secret Service, and subject to security cameras. Keep in mind that there are also letters from the DOJ instructing Trump to leave the documents in place. Oh, and let's not forget the Trump claims (dubious or otherwise) that the materials had been declassified. Clinton had no authority to even claim that.
Bottom line: If none of that information was potentially harmful (nuclear secrets, etc) and there was no suggestion it was going anywhere...
That leave the DOJ in a precarious position. At this point many people are literally expecting an indictment against Trump. Failure to do so would create leftist angst against Garland. But if the DOJ were to charge Trump after not charging Clinton, then the calls of hypocrisy would be well founded. Either way, Garland faces heat.
Furthermore... now that the GOP owns the house and will likely be investigating the FBI and DOJ (possibly even calling for Garland's impeachment over politicizing the office) then this would seem to be a hard call to make. Charging Trump would seem to be openly amplifying the very claims of politicization and partisanship at our highest level of law enforcement... in the most blatant and hypocritical means possible.
All would have been much easier now... had Comey done the right thing in 2016.
