Dispatch Live: Trump Indicted, Again

Join us for our weekly livestreamed conversation.

By
13

Tonight, Kevin will be joined by Mike and Price to chat about The Dispatch’s latest reporting on the allegations of impartiality against Judge Aileen Cannon, Trump’s indictment and how it affects the 2024 primaries, and more. 

Grab a drink (or a few), get your questions ready, and join us at 8 p.m. ET on YouTube for this week’s Dispatch Live.

Dispatch Live recordings are made available as a members-only podcast on select platforms. If you can’t make it for the live broadcast, see below for information on how to access the podcast. 

Q&A: We want to hear from you during the show. To ask questions of our panelists and interact with other members you can use the YouTube Live chat feature or simply comment on this post during the broadcast.

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
13
By
Comments (13)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Not sure if I’ve commented this before, but Kevin does a really good job of hosting these. I think he’s probably the best host of anyone at the Dispatch.

    Collapse
  2. Mlowrey

    Just as I suspected. A whole thread of whataboutism about Hilary, Comey, & Biden’s garage. This place is no different than the National Review cesspool.

    Collapse
  3. Michael.Terrien

    Judge Ito was on CourtTV. No cameras in federal courtrooms. She will not become the national figure he did.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    WKDawson

    Most quotable:

    𝑁𝑜 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑠 "𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑠𝑛'𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑚𝑝 𝐼 𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑤". 𝐸𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑠 "𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑒𝑥𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑚𝑝 𝐼 𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑤."

    Whatever comes of this (and presently, I am very pessimistic), that actually makes some sense of this madness. The one thing I can trust is his insatiable greed.

    Collapse
  5. Chucksimonton

    Your note includes this: "latest reporting on the allegations of impartiality against Judge Aileen Cannon...". There are commentators that are complaining that the judge will be fair? And not biased toward former president Trump? Or against him?

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Jimmcmia

    I have perhaps a whimsical question: why would Trump take all those classified documents which he probably never read nor knew or understood what they contained? My whimsical answer might be that maybe he thought he could trade them to his good friends Putin and Kim for the rights to build the Moscow and Pyongyang Trump Towers if his bid for a second term failed and he needed to run from US jurisdiction. Something to ponder in happier moments.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Electricrook

    Let's visit the tale of two guys who kept classified documents in their homes.

    One guy has the power to declassify documents on a whim (but didn't), kept classified documents in the current living quarters which is heavily guarded.

    The other guy who didn't (at the time) have the power to declassify documents, kept classified documents in the garage of the unguarded vacation home he rarely visited.

    But our TDS prevents us from being open minded enough to go visit this story.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      JohnF

      You didn't read the indictment, did you?

      Collapse
  8. Kmsinatra

    I won't be able to make the live show but I always listen when they are released on podcast. I do have one question/point to raise. Every time I hear journalists comparing/contrasting the HRC case with Trump, I never hear anyone raise the point that there was no smoking gun for her -- there was no recording of her basically admitting guilt like there is of Trump-- do you think there still would be charges against Trump without the tape recording and lawyers' contemporaneous notes? If not, can one really compare it to HRC and Comey's decision? (I am not saying the Dispatch is comparing the two, just something to raise that I have not heard talked about elsewhere).

    Additionally, having had a TS/SCI/G/TK clearance, it is actually impossible to get a classified document into an email on an unclassified account which means any classified material (I KNOW THERE WAS CLASSIFIED INFO--dont @me) would likely not have been marked like in Trump's case -- it probably would have been in the content but not portion marked.

    I don't know if you all will discuss HRC but please keep these points in mind. Thank you Dispatch!

    Collapse
    1. Chucksimonton

      Your comment about the impossibility of getting SCI (marked) content to an unclassified email system is hopefully correct now, but was almost certainly not the case during HRC's time as SecState. Manning and Snowden committed their crimes concurrent to her time in office. I don't remember and won't try to confirm now, but I believe some of the products they leaked were SCI.

      Collapse
      1. Kmsinatra

        No it was the same. You cannot email between systems - S and TS are air-gapped. Manning and Snowden didn't use email. I think you are correct that at least Snowden was SCI. Probably Manning too since he leaked source material.

        Collapse
        1. Chucksimonton

          Yes, one can't email between networks, but once that SCI product is on transfer media, it's game over. Admittedly it's not clear (to me at least)that HRC shared classified products that had been transferred using her home-brew server, but it is certainly possible.

          Collapse
          1. Kmsinatra

            Yes you are absolutely right. The only reason why I don't think that is likely is based on what Comey said were the reasons he did not indict:

            "All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the United States or efforts to obstruct justice."

            I feel like uploading TS media and emailing would constitute "Intentional and willful." My point in raising the email issue was it was not like she could easily email portion marked documents "accidently" or even on purpose. Trump however didn't retain TS scribbled notes with classified material but stole clearly portion-marked documents. I hope the distinction I am trying to make makes sense. Again, I think HRC should have been charged - I am in no way defending her. Just trying to raise an issue I have not heard discussed much. Maybe because its a trivial/silly point!

            Collapse