The main charges against Trump include: wilful retention of national defence information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document and record, corruptly concealing a document or record, scheme to conceal, false statements and representations, defying requests from the Justice department to hand over classified documents even after being subpoenaed, showing a highly sensitive classified document to someone in Mar-a-Lago club while acknowledging that it was still secret. It was the most serious one, about US nuclear programme. There was evidence that Trump shared US government's 'Iran Plan' with buddies at a golf course.

Trump's legal team issued a statement that US presidents have a traditional history of taking government documents with them while leaving the White House. The National Archives issued a rare statement in response. Detailing the aspect of Presidential Records Act, the Archives made it clear that "there is no history, practice or provision in law for presidents to take official records with them when they left office." The rules about classified information say that national security information was information owned by produced by, for and under the control of the US government. Pursuant to executive order 12958, signed on April 17, 1995, as amended by executive order 13292 on March 25, 2003 and executive order 13526 on December 29, 2009, national security information was classified as 'Top secret, Secret, or confidential'.

After his presidency was over, Trump retained classified documents originated by or implicating the equities of multiple USIC (United States Intelligence Community) members and other executive branch departments and agencies, including the followings: CIA, the Department of Defence, National Security Agency, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, Department of Energy, Department of State and Bureau of Intelligence and Research.

A federal judge of a Miami court in Florida, who was appointed by Trump, may oversee proceeding in the case. Trump is expected to surrender himself to authorities in Miami on Tuesday, June 13 at 3pm Eastern Time of US. Special counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the Mar-a-Lago document case said in a brief remark that his office intended to seek a speedy trial against Trump that was 'consistent with the public interest'. The charges are serious and the top charges, if proved could bring a penalty of 20 years of prison time. Federal charges over classified documents show momentum is building.

Donald Trump is the first former president in US history to face a federal criminal charge. He could join a notorious club of former head of states that includes Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, Nicholas Sarkozy and Jacques Chirac of France, Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung Bank of South Korea. All have been prosecuted and convicted of corruption in the last 15 years.

But here the prosecutors have a problem named Florida. Trying Trump in Florida brings risks for the Justice department that might go well beyond the strength of the prosecutors' case. Federal jurors in Florida have a long history of acquitting elected officials accused of wrongdoing by the Feds. In the criminal case if only one juror votes as not guilty, the accused gets acquitted. Also Florida's political dynamics can influence a case. The judge Aileen Cannon, who is going to be the judge in this case, is known Trump sympathizer. She was appointed by Trump and is Trump-empathetic in her previous pass in this case.

Knowing all these facts, special counsel Jack Smith decided to bring charges in a Florida court, which effectively is Donald Trump's home turf. Why? Washington Post's associate editor Jonathan Capehart answers this question when asked by Geoff Benaett of PBS. Capehart says: “Trump always says that any charges against him is false, rigged, bogus, politically vindictive and biased acts of corrupted DOJ. In this case, the presence of Judge Cannon is going to be harder for him to try to smear her as some apparatchik of the Justice department.

Similarly, with the Jury, this is going to be harder for Trump to cry foul about unfair treatment. Another reason behind the selection of venue is quick trial. The venue of the case, the southern district of Florida is known to be a 'Rocket Docket' court, a term used by legal professionals for venues that adhere to the swift trials. “You can expect a criminal case to be resolved within 60 days of an indictment issuing", Walter Norkin, a former federal prosecutor in the southern Dist. of Florida, told ABC News.

The political reaction was as virulent as expected. The Wall Street Journal wrote:“The indictment of Donald Trump over handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort throws another wild card into an intensifying 2024 presidential race and will test whether Republicans rally around the former president as they did when he was charged in a New York hush money case.”

The Republican Party expectedly issued strong statements against Trump's indictment. Speaker of the House of Representatives Kevin McCarthy tweeted: “It is unconscionable for a president to indict the leading candidate opposing him.” De Santis, the Florida Governor tweeted: “The weaponisation of federal law enforcement represent a mortal threat to a free society. Why so zealous in pursuing Trump yet so passive about Hillary Clinton or Hunter?” The White House kept almost mum. Under the present political situation, the White House knows it cannot afford to put a foot wrong. Joe Biden himself was under investigation by DOJ after some government documents were discovered from his Delaware house. The docs were related to the period when he was Vice President. The Attorney General, Merrick Garland, has also kept mum. Democrats, on the whole, lie low on this issue. They know law will take his own course.

After Trump was indicted in NY Manhattan court in the hush money case in April this year, his base support seemed to consolidate around him and he was able to raise $4 million from donation within a day or two. It's still not clear if that it would happen again. Though his opponents in Republican primary like De Santis, Nikki Haley and Mike Pence condemn his indictment, there might be a fissure in the process. Stealthily, they would enjoy it as a possibility of diminishing support for Trump. Former New Jersey governor Chris Christie slammed Trump saying that the facts of the indictment against the former president are devastating and calling Trump's conduct 'bad and irresponsible'. Invoking his own history as a federal prosecutor, Chris said on CNN that the indictment is 'very very evidence-filled, referring to tape recordings, text and emails and testimonies of dozens of people'. Former Arkansas governor Asa Hutchinson said that the indictment marked a 'sad day for our country' and reaffirms the need for Trump to respect the office and his campaign. Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell has been noticeably silent so far. Trump's attorney general Bill Barr, on Fox News Sunday, said that there was a strong case against Trump.

But among the far right supporters the reaction was extreme. Some of them copied Trump’s warning literarily calling to start a civil war. A rightist group warned that now is the time to kill (Democrats) and lay their bodies on the streets. Somebody tweeted that he knows the whereabouts of Merrick Garland's family.

“It is a serious issue that compromises national security”, said Democratic strategist James Carville, adding, “the politics surrounding the indictment are going to be just stupendous to watch”.

60% of Americans say that the federal charges Trump faces are very or somewhat serious, according to an ABC/IPSOS poll. 69% American feel it would be a security risk if Trump did have documents regarding nuclear system or military plan in his residence after leaving office, says CBS/YOUGOV poll. But most immediately, for the GOP primary neither poll suggests much movement in overall views of the former president among Republicans.

In the mean time, whatever be the political fallout of this indictment, the jargon that “nobody is above the law” wins, in the face of Trump's warning that he will terminate the constitution if he wins. Another winner in this whole debacle is Biden. It takes the heat off the president and his increasing fragility and own legal troubles.

Amidst all this chaos and turmoil, one question remains: can someone run for president while facing criminal trial, or even if being jailed? Yes, says Shugerman, noting that in the 1920s, the socialist Eugene V Debs ran as a third party candidate while he was imprisoned at the Atlantic Federal Penitentiary. “If Trump were to win the presidential election and lose any of his multiple trials, some of which are still pending indictments, he could simply pardon himself,” says Shugerman. A self-pardon, he argues, is likely not constitutional, but it's very much an open question among lawyers and legal scholars.

While some of the charges in the federal case will likely carry long prison sentences, it’s much more likely that a judge would seek to disqualify Trump from federal office that put him in jail. Especially, in this case a judge like Alleen Cannon, who is a known Trump sympathizer, will hesitate to put Trump in jail even proved guilty. To build out the hypothesis even further, “if Trump were to lose the election and his federal case, it is also likely that whoever is in office would issue clemency to release Trump from prison, rather than condone a former president's incarceration. I don't think we'll ever see Trump behind bars,” says Shugerman. (IPA Service)