Jack Smith Florida Indictment then supeseding indictment

Jack Smith DC Indictment

Bragg NYC Indictment

Letitia James civil case.

Fani Willis possible indictment.

so I don't know how you count those, as VFD mentions, there's dozens of charges involved in these three indictments so far.

Will there be others.....reading the tea leaves.

Point A. The DC indictment for Jan 6 names multiple conspiracies and list 6 un-named conspirators. Probably one with come for them (plus possibly others).

Point B. Bernie Kerik just met with the special prosecutor, his lawyer said they were asking about fundraising in addition to what Rudy was doing.

In a closed-door interview on Monday with Bernard Kerik, investigators asked multiple questions about the Save America PAC’s enormous fundraising haul in the weeks between Election Day and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, according to Kerik’s lawyer, Tim Parlatore, who was present for the interview and shared details with POLITICO.

“It’s a laser focus from Election Day to Jan. 6,” Parlatore said.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/08/jack-smith-donald-trump-pac-00110279

Point C. Is there some clues in the Mar a Lago indictment? In discussing what De Oliveira did, they say

DE OLIVEIRA told Trump Employee 4 that "the boss" wanted the server deleted. Trump Employee 4 responded that he would not know how to do that, and that he did not believe that he would have the rights to do that. Trump Employee 4 told DE OLIVEIRA that DE OLIVEIRA *would have to reach out to another employee who was a supervisor of security for TRUMP's business organization. *

The indictment doesn't say any more. But if they reached out to another employee. That employee would be in NYC. And would either be a witness or if anything happened, that could mean an federal indictment in NYC.

A few months ago when Employee 4 went to talk to the grand jury the NY Times ran a story that contained a lot of the details that ended up being charged in the superseding indictment. When you read it now you recognize all the names. There are two big things mentioned in this article that no one has been indicted for.

1. There are gaps in the footage turned over to the DOJ

The prosecutors appear to have sought the footage in order to get a clearer picture of the movement of the boxes of documents at Mar-a-Lago. But there were gaps in the footage, the person said, and the prosecutors have also been examining whether someone intentionally stopped the tape or if technological issues caused the gap.

2. The DOJ might have been able to get the original footage from the cloud.

The prosecutors have also subpoenaed a software company that handles all of the surveillance footage for the Trump Organization, including at Mar-a-Lago

https://web.archive.org/web/20230601000145/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/31/us/politics/security-footage-trump-documents.html