Former US president Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference 2022 in Orlando, Florida. AFP
Former US president Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference 2022 in Orlando, Florida. AFP
Former US president Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference 2022 in Orlando, Florida. AFP
Former US president Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference 2022 in Orlando, Florida. AFP


Donald Trump is leaving the Justice Department no choice but to indict him


  • English
  • Arabic

October 19, 2022

Whatever happens in the US midterm elections next month, a truly historic American political earthquake is almost certainly coming: the federal indictment of former US president Donald Trump. There are at least six major investigations that could produce such charges, but it seems almost inevitable that the Justice Department must indict the former president regarding the unlawful removal and retention of government documents, including some of the most secret and sensitive in existence.

It is not just that Attorney General Merrick Garland adheres to the principle that no one is above the law. For whatever reason, Mr Trump appears to actually wish, and be working hard, to get indicted.

The case arises from hundreds of government documents, all of which belong to the public and by law must be held by the National Archive, unlawfully removed by Mr Trump when he left the White House. For months, the Archive sought to retrieve them, but got nowhere.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland (right) and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken at the opening of the US-Mexico High-Level Security Dialogue at the State Department in Washington, on October 13. Reuters
US Attorney General Merrick Garland (right) and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken at the opening of the US-Mexico High-Level Security Dialogue at the State Department in Washington, on October 13. Reuters

The Archive turned to the Justice Department, which succeeded in recovering some documents and securing an affidavit from one of Mr Trump's attorneys attesting that, after a thorough search, all remaining documents were returned.

There is at least one FBI informant in the former president's inner circle since authorities were alerted to the existence of large numbers of other government documents, some highly secret, still at Mr Trump's Florida residence. The FBI then famously executed an August 8 search warrant and retrieved hundreds of additional documents, including from Mr Trump's desk.

Had Mr Trump surrendered the documents at any time during the first 16 months of the saga, he would surely have been given a pass unavailable to any other private citizen or former official and the issue would probably have been considered resolved. But it strongly appears he deliberately sought to retain and conceal the documents and deceive the authorities.

Mr Trump repeatedly told his aides of the documents, 'it's not theirs, it's mine'

In February, Mr Trump instructed one of his attorneys, Alex Cannon, to swear under oath that all the documents had been returned. He refused because he suspected, correctly, that it was not true.

Another Trump employee, Walt Nauta, has reportedly admitted to the FBI that Mr Trump instructed him to move boxes of the documents out of a storage room to other parts of his Florida hotel shortly after the documents were subpoenaed by a grand jury in May. Mr Nauta reportedly denied moving the boxes until he was confronted with security camera footage secured by the FBI that shows him doing so.

This is plainly what prosecutors were referring to when they wrote in their August search warrant affidavit that “government records were likely concealed and removed from the storage room and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation.” That effectively accuses Mr Trump, backed up by apparently very strong evidence, of trying to hide the documents from the government.

According to The New York Times, Mr Trump told his aides late last year he might be willing to exchange the documents he retained for FBI files regarding the investigation into possible dealings by his 2016 presidential campaign with Russian operatives. He was told that was a non-starter because he had no right to the documents in his possession, which therefore could not be treated as bargaining chips, and that there was no baisis for the Justice Department to hand over any files to a private citizen.

Former President Donald Trump drives a cart at Trump National Golf Club with his son Eric Trump on his left, on September 12, in Sterling, Vermont, US. AP
Former President Donald Trump drives a cart at Trump National Golf Club with his son Eric Trump on his left, on September 12, in Sterling, Vermont, US. AP

In the waning days of his presidency, Mr Trump had been sternly warned on numerous occasions by key aides, including White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, that all presidential records, including those he was keeping in the White House residential areas, needed to be immediately surrendered to the Archive.

Senior Justice Department officials have reportedly bluntly told Mr Trump's attorneys that they strongly suspect that he continues to unlawfully retain government documents despite almost two years of this drama. The former president maintains numerous residences, and dozens of empty folders marked as containing classified information were discovered during the August search. The government may well be aware of specific documents that remain missing.

Moreover, the Archive has told Congress that the former Trump administration has not surrendered many known presidential record items.

As this extraordinary and unprecedented conduct developed over the past two years, some of Mr Trump's aides reportedly came to fear that he was intentionally seeking to bait the Justice Department into searching his property. It now looks like he is actively trying to provoke an indictment.

Not only does it strongly seem that he personally directed the removal, retention and apparent concealment of these documents, and ordered his attorneys to falsely assure the government that he had returned all of them, at his recent rallies he is surrendering the last possible defence to these major felonies, which would be the claim none of this was intentional.

It has long been reported that Mr Trump repeatedly told his aides of the documents, "it's not theirs, it's mine." At an October 9 rally, Mr Trump demanded the government "should give me back immediately everything they've taken from me [when the search warrant was executed on August 8], because it's mine."

This is the clearest possible statement of intent. He took the documents, retained them, concealed them, falsely claimed to have returned them, and intended to keep them in perpetuity – or strike a bargain with them – and may well be still hiding more, "because they're mine".

This all means that it is simply no longer reasonable for the Justice Department to fail to charge Mr Trump in this matter with obstruction of justice, probably violating the Espionage Act, and certainly “the wilful and unlawful removal of government records with the intent to conceal or destroy such records.”

What's most perplexing is why, at almost every step, Mr Trump seems to have systematically cut off any avenue of retreat for the Justice Department, making it clear he was personally and deliberately responsible for all of these apparent unlawful actions, by publicly insisting that "they're mine" and demanding the immediate return of all the documents, even trumpeting his motive.

Mr Garland has no choice, because Mr Trump has left him none. Is it possible the former president believes being put on trial for these major felonies will be politically, personally or financially beneficial? That seems preposterous, but for whatever reason he appears determined to stand trial on these very serious charges.

Trump v Khan

2016: Feud begins after Khan criticised Trump’s proposed Muslim travel ban to US

2017: Trump criticises Khan’s ‘no reason to be alarmed’ response to London Bridge terror attacks

2019: Trump calls Khan a “stone cold loser” before first state visit

2019: Trump tweets about “Khan’s Londonistan”, calling him “a national disgrace”

2022:  Khan’s office attributes rise in Islamophobic abuse against the major to hostility stoked during Trump’s presidency

July 2025 During a golfing trip to Scotland, Trump calls Khan “a nasty person”

Sept 2025 Trump blames Khan for London’s “stabbings and the dirt and the filth”.

Dec 2025 Trump suggests migrants got Khan elected, calls him a “horrible, vicious, disgusting mayor”

Dolittle

Director: Stephen Gaghan

Stars: Robert Downey Jr, Michael Sheen

One-and-a-half out of five stars

 

 

Ten tax points to be aware of in 2026

1. Domestic VAT refund amendments: request your refund within five years

If a business does not apply for the refund on time, they lose their credit.

2. E-invoicing in the UAE

Businesses should continue preparing for the implementation of e-invoicing in the UAE, with 2026 a preparation and transition period ahead of phased mandatory adoption. 

3. More tax audits

Tax authorities are increasingly using data already available across multiple filings to identify audit risks. 

4. More beneficial VAT and excise tax penalty regime

Tax disputes are expected to become more frequent and more structured, with clearer administrative objection and appeal processes. The UAE has adopted a new penalty regime for VAT and excise disputes, which now mirrors the penalty regime for corporate tax.

5. Greater emphasis on statutory audit

There is a greater need for the accuracy of financial statements. The International Financial Reporting Standards standards need to be strictly adhered to and, as a result, the quality of the audits will need to increase.

6. Further transfer pricing enforcement

Transfer pricing enforcement, which refers to the practice of establishing prices for internal transactions between related entities, is expected to broaden in scope. The UAE will shortly open the possibility to negotiate advance pricing agreements, or essentially rulings for transfer pricing purposes. 

7. Limited time periods for audits

Recent amendments also introduce a default five-year limitation period for tax audits and assessments, subject to specific statutory exceptions. While the standard audit and assessment period is five years, this may be extended to up to 15 years in cases involving fraud or tax evasion. 

8. Pillar 2 implementation 

Many multinational groups will begin to feel the practical effect of the Domestic Minimum Top-Up Tax (DMTT), the UAE's implementation of the OECD’s global minimum tax under Pillar 2. While the rules apply for financial years starting on or after January 1, 2025, it is 2026 that marks the transition to an operational phase.

9. Reduced compliance obligations for imported goods and services

Businesses that apply the reverse-charge mechanism for VAT purposes in the UAE may benefit from reduced compliance obligations. 

10. Substance and CbC reporting focus

Tax authorities are expected to continue strengthening the enforcement of economic substance and Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting frameworks. In the UAE, these regimes are increasingly being used as risk-assessment tools, providing tax authorities with a comprehensive view of multinational groups’ global footprints and enabling them to assess whether profits are aligned with real economic activity. 

Contributed by Thomas Vanhee and Hend Rashwan, Aurifer

Updated: October 20, 2022, 9:49 AM