Obama was very concerned about giving the appearance of bias. It’s one reason why he had the DOj under him not publicize that Trump was being investigated even though they were publicly discuss investigating Hillary Clinton.
What I find most compelling about the affidavit is that it looks like there are many in Trump’s inner circle who are not so loyal to him that they will risk breaking the law and / or putting national security at risk.
We don't know what's in the redacted sections for sure. But I can guarantee what isn't there. Nothing in the redactions says anything close to "JK... Psych!!!... April Fool!" Or anything that would eliminate the probable cause they had, the materials recovered, or the lies told by Trump and his team.
"you must be suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, this kind of thing happened all the time." - @Os Trigonum
We know the threat to people cooperating and enforcing the nation's laws, where Trump is concerned, is not hypothetical as the judge said. There have already been attempts on the lives of FBI agents. So trying to protect the lives of witnesses, agents and anyone else is absolutely serious and warranted.
...I shudder to think what state secrets Obama must've shared with Jay-Z or Beyonce or Matt Damon, when he had them over all the time for fried chicken and grits...
Libtards spreading fake news again. Donald Trump has the largest penis of any president ever. That’s why the world respected us when he was president! Now Mexicans just come here freely and plant fake documents at his Mar Lagoon house!
He also had that Lebron in the White House. Who hates America almost as much as Colin Kapernick! You idiots are falling for the demoncrats witch magic!!!
WSJ editorial this morning https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ma...merrick-garland-11661547313?mod=hp_opin_pos_1 The Mar-a-Lago Affidavit: Is That All There Is? The redacted 38-pages add to the evidence that the FBI search really was all about a dispute over documents By The Editorial Board Aug. 26, 2022 6:51 pm ET A federal judge on Friday released a heavily redacted version of the FBI affidavit used to justify the search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, and we can’t help but wonder is that it? This is why agents descended on a former President’s residence like they would a mob boss? It’s possible the redactions in the 38-page document release contain some undisclosed bombshell. But given the contours of what the affidavit and attachments reveal, this really does seem to boil down to a fight over the handling of classified documents. The affidavit’s long introduction and other unredacted paragraphs all point to concern by the FBI and the National Archives with the documents Mr. Trump retained at Mar-a-Lago and his lack of cooperation in not returning all that the feds wanted. A separate filing making the case for the redactions, also released Friday, focused on the need for witness and agent protection from being publicly identified. That filing also contains no suggestion of any greater charges or a larger investigation than the dispute over his handling of the documents. As always with Mr. Trump, he seems to have been his own worst enemy in this dispute. He and his staff appear to have been sloppy, even cavalier, in storing the documents. Classified records found in boxes were mixed in with “newspapers, magazines, printed news articles, photos, miscellaneous print-outs, notes,” and presidential correspondence, the affidavit says. This fanned suspicion that important documents were still floating around the house, where bad actors hanging around the Mar-a-Lago resort might pilfer them. The affidavit also contains references to comments by Mr. Trump and his associates that didn’t tell the truth about what was classified or what he had turned over to the National Archives before the search. This appears to have frustrated the bureau enough that it felt he might be guilty of obstruction of justice by his lack of cooperation. To put it another way, the FBI thought Mr. Trump was behaving badly, as he so often does. But that didn’t mean the FBI and Justice Department had to resort to a warrant and federal-agent search that they knew would be redolent of criminal behavior. They had to suggest probable cause of criminal acts to get their extravagant warrant, which they knew would create a political firestorm. Instead they could have gone to a district court and sought an order for the proper handling and storage of documents. It surely would have been executed. If Mr. Trump then failed to comply, he could have been held in contempt. On the evidence in the warrant and the affidavit, and even based on the leaks to the press so far which all focus on the demand for documents, the search on Mar-a-Lago was disproportionate to the likely offense. It’s hard to believe that a dispute over documents would yield a criminal indictment. Attorney General Merrick Garland would have to explain to the public why Mr. Trump’s behavior was so much more nefarious than other cases of mishandled classified documents. That includes former national security adviser Sandy Berger, who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. And Hillary Clinton, who got off with a sanctimonious lecture from then FBI director James Comey. We aren’t defending Mr. Trump’s behavior in any of this. He brings much of his trouble on himself. But his political enemies make it worse when they break political norms themselves. They also help Mr. Trump by making him into a political martyr. If you’re going to indict a former President, you’d better have him dead to rights on something bigger than mishandling documents. Appeared in the August 27, 2022, print edition as 'Is That All There Is?'.
There was concern, justified, that Trump would destroy the documents before returning them and that they were not properly secured. Even if we assume the documents did not contain particularly sensitive information (despite being labeled as such, kind of a leap for the WSJ Editorial board to make), the documents do not belong to him and he demonstrated he can't be trusted to secure them properly. His insistence that the documents are really his put them even more at risk.
Hmmm, why do individuals act like this is no big deal? Why couldn't Trump and his staff just turnover the documents when they were asked to do so? Seems like a simple task to me. Just follow the rules and all would be fine. Instead this drama queen wanted to make it a big deal and refused to return the documents and therefore, more extreme measures needed to be taken.
From the WSJ editorial above: This is just weird to me. The dispute over handling of documents is because it is potentially relevant to "a larger investigation". The DOJ is not required to spill details about that larger investigation or what possible charges might come out of it. This is the link to the separate filing mentioned that explains the reasons for the redactions: gov.uscourts.flsd.617854.98.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com) Quoting: For the reasons explained below, the materials the government marked for redaction in the attached document must remain sealed to protect the safety and privacy of a significant number of civilian witnesses, in addition to law enforcement personnel, as well as to protect the integrity of the ongoing investigation and to avoid disclosure of grand jury material in violation of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. ... The Court found that disclosure of the Affidavit would likely result in witnesses being "quickly and broadly identified over social media and other communication channels, which could lead to them being harassed and intimidated." Id. at 9. The Court gave "great weight" to "the significant likelihood that unsealing the Affidavit would harm legitimate privacy interests," with disclosures potentially serving to "impede the ongoing investigation through obstruction of justice and witness intimidation or retaliation." Id. at 9-10. And the Court found that the Affidavit contains "critically important and detailed investigative facts: highly sensitive information about witnesses; specific investigative techniques; and information required to be kept under seal pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)," the disclosure of which "would detrimentally affect this investigation and future investigations." ... As the Court has found, "(p]rotecting the integrity and secrecy of an ongoing criminal investigation is a well-recognized compelling governmental interest. " D.E. 80 at 6 (citing, inter alia, United States v. Valenti, 986 F. 2d 708 , 714 (11th Cir. I 993)). Indeed, "[a]t the pre-indictment stage, the Government's need to conceal the scope and direction of its investigation, as well as its investigative sources and methods, is at its zenith ." That seems to very clearly suggest "a larger investigation".
This is a weird argument for the WSJ to make. Of course it is about documents. These are classified documents that contain information that could potentially cripple the US and lead to the deaths of many human intelligence sources. Yes making sure those documents don’t fall into the wrong hands is very important.
What are the political norms when a former president steals classified documents? More dumb justifications.
The WSJ EB should re-read the redacted version of the search warrant. It clearly spells out what laws could be violated and it also said that it has not yet identified all potential crimes and collected all evidence (obviously for an ongoing criminal investigation).
Yes. It is about documents. Also according to the affadavit it's about obstruction. And all of it is criminal and all of it is important for matters of national security, safety, and an ongoing investigation. Why would you or the Wall Street Journal not believe that is important?
