FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024

[Morgyn]

@Buck_Godot

There is absolutely zero chance of that. There hasn’t been a federal execution since McVey in 2001, and Biden is generally anti-death penalty. If the feds tried to get Trump on death row, even I would protest that as an abuse of executive power.

I don’t want him dead, I just want him cut off from communication with anyone ever again. I’m tired of hearing his whiny voice or reading his whiny words.

[Sage_Rat]

@Jas09

I wonder, not being a lawyer, how much a judge would consider that sort of legal argument when authorizing a search warrant. It seems more like an issue for a trial judge (if charges were brought) than a magistrate approving a warrant.

I would think law enforcement could search for evidence of a crime even if there was a possible defense argument as to whether the crime was committed.

So I’m not sure the fact that the search warrant was authorized means this particular judge had an opinion regarding the “everything was declassified” argument.

For issuing a search warrant on a former president, I think it’s safe to assume that they’ll have extended Trump the maximal amount of leniency and stretched contrivance.

With a regular perp, sure, they might go with the idea that, “He can fight it later, in court.” I don’t think they’re going to have that sort of bravado in this instance.

[Northern_Piper]

@Sage_Rat

Not too much of interest. I’d say that the only thing that jumps out at me is the non-redacted portion about Kash Patel, and that only because it means that they were aware (before the search) that people in Trump’s orbit claim that he had declassified the documents and that, within the redacted portions, there must be material that refutes or renders irrelevant that concept, and that the refutation was sufficient to convince the judge to go forward.

Footnote 2 on p. 22 appears to respond to that argument:

18 U.S.C. § 793(e) does not use the term “classified information.‘’ but rather criminalizes the unlawful retention of “information relating to the national defense.” The statute does not define “information related to the national defense.” but courts have construed it broadly. See Gorin v. United States, 312 U.S. 19, 28 (1941) (holding that the phrase “information relating to the national defense” as used in the Espionage Act is a “generic concept of broad connotations, referring to the military and naval establishments and the related activities of national preparedness”). In addition, the information must be “closely held” by the U.S. government. See United States v. Squillacote, 221 F.3d 542, 579 (4th Cir. 2000) (‘’[I]nformation made public by the government as well as information never protected by the government is not national defense information.”); United States v. Morison 844 F.2d 1057, 1071-72 (4th Cir. 1988). Certain courts have also held that the disclosure of the documents must be potentially damaging to the United States. See Morison, 844 F.2d at 1071-72.

[CoolHandCox]

re: search warrant. @emptywheel on Twitter is a good person to follow if you’re interested in the nerdy/granular details of what the affidavit/legal jargon actually means. She’s generally very accurate in her analysis and is able to “see” things I’d never even consider.

For example (boldlng mine)…

Note: The Statutory Authorities does NOT include the Atomic Energy Act; that’s the section I predicted where we’d find what he’s believed to have stolen. So if he stole nuke docs, they are nuke docs about ANOTHER country, not our own.

Also:

Trump Had Human, Signals, and FISA Intelligence in an Insecure Room at Mar-a-Lago for a Year

[Northern_Piper]

@CoolHandCox

Note: The Statutory Authorities does NOT include the Atomic Energy Act; that’s the section I predicted where we’d find what he’s believed to have stolen. So if he stole nuke docs, they are nuke docs about ANOTHER country, not our own.

Is it necessary to cite that Act, though? Wouldn’t docs relating to the US nuclear program be “information relating to the national defense”, and therefore caught by the Espionage Act provisions cited? The theme of the footnote is that classification is a separate issue from unauthorised possession of such information. Classification under the Atomic Energy Act would greatly help in demonstrating that the classified document is “information relating to the national defense”, but would that mean that a prosecution could only be done under the AEA?

[Sage_Rat]

@Northern_Piper

Footnote 2 on p. 22 appears to respond to that argument:

Yes, there’s the “classified” vs “government owned national defense information” legal argument - which they do make in the document, but if Trump declassified it and gave it to the public then it’s not classified, it’s not owned by the government, and its existence in “the public” renders it irrelevant as defense information. If the New York Post has already published the name and address of every agent that we have in Djibouti then those agents are just goners and there’s no defense aim to be had by trying to hide the documents again. It’s sort of like trying to claim that you’re a virgin when every orifice has been popped, and you’re on to the nooks and crannies.

The FBI officer will have needed to demonstrated that there was no declassification, that the documents were still being kept secret from the general public, and that they were still a threat to the nation.

[Skypist]

I’ve been reading her blog, which brought up a thought I hadn’t had before. What happened to the documents that were in the supposed SCIF at Mar-a-Lardo? Trump and his minions might have pretty easily just stolen documents right out of there before it was decommissioned, and I guess no one was watching because no one can question a president, even a genuine candidate for the 25th Amendment.

[ShadowFacts]

An interesting tidbit from the NY Times article on this:

And for the first time it reveals the government’s source for information on the movement of documents into, and within, the Mar-a-Lago complex, “a significant number of civilian witnesses” with knowledge of Mr. Trump’s post-presidential actions.

[Biotop]

Feds Probe Fake Heiress Who Infiltrated Mar-a-Lago and Trump’s Inner Circle

I hope the padlock was good.

[CoolHandCox]

That’s a great question and well above my pay grade. I was mostly introducing anyone to emptywheel as good source - especially when I, like others, saw the affidavit and did not find many, or any, “new” things I didn’t already know. Some people are able to see it differently and read between the lines in an analytical way that’s plausible - it generally pans out for her.

If you’re on Twitter, you can ask her and it’s not uncommon to get a response. Generally, when I’ve asked a question like yours to “people in the know”, they tend to not know and loop empytwheel in to get an accurate response.

[ShadowFacts]

Another interesting note from Maggie Haberman at the NY Times:

It’s important to note that some Trump allies have tried to suggest that since some of the material was not a presidential-generated record, it therefore doesn’t qualify under the Presidential Records Act. But it’s still a federal record and could ensnare Trump in a potential violation of the Federal Records Act, which has a stronger enforcement mechanism.

He really does surround himself with the best people…

[smithsb]

Light humor to brighten the day.

Many people, the best people, with tears in their eyes reported that the papers and files in the bedroom were for spanking. These were first on the agenda for contact DNA analysis.

[Steve_MB]

@Buck_Godot

If the feds tried to get Trump on death row, even I would protest that as an abuse of executive power.

Personally, I would protest because, after watching what he’s done to my country, I damned well deserve many years of knowing that he’s locked up in a cell, powerless and irrelevant, and that it’s eating him alive.

[smithsb]

Trump Claims Seized Classified Documents Had Been In His Family For Generations

[running_coach]

@smithsb

Trump Claims Seized Classified Documents Had Been In His Family For Generations -

I’m actually shocked The Onion beat him to it.

[Cardigan]

@Si_Amigo

I still contend that it was one or a couple of Secret Service agents that “spilled the beans” and kept watch of “the beans”. They are sworn government agents that are tasked to protect the TFG, not cover up for his crimes. If they witnessed a crime it is there duty to report, its not really an option. They don’t arrest them, but they are allowed, if not duty bound, to keep the investigators informed of the location of evidence. Just guess who knew Trump wasn’t going to be in town that day.

Even if it comes out later that someone else leaked the information you could bet the its the SS covering its tracks. Trump may think all these guys are his buddies, but that’s what government agents want you to think.

I’m convinced this is the case as well. It’s the only explanation where all the pieces fit together. How else is someone going to track an individual’s movements and activities over a months long period of time, unless they are someone assigned to be around that individual every day and have full access to their environment?

[tripthicket]

@ShadowFacts

And for the first time it reveals the government’s source for information on the movement of documents into, and within, the Mar-a-Lago complex, “a significant number of civilian witnesses” with knowledge of Mr. Trump’s post-presidential actions.

Oh, that’s delicious. I see ‘civilian witnesses’ at MAL and I think of all the undocumented workers he’s been known to have hired in the past. (“They’re cheap and they don’t complain about how I treat 'em!”)

[silenus]

Wouldn’t “civilian” rule out the SS narcing on him? Or does it have some weasel words like “among other sources?”

[Si_Amigo]

Much is redacted, why would they play that card now and blow their inside guys, when they have multiple sources. Most Likey federal agents put the squeeze on someone and they sang. Let him be suspicious of everyone and watch him spew while they sit back and watch, pulling the strings.

You don’t reveal your best sources until trial. They just revealed enough to justify the warrants. Prosecutors play the long game. Someone like Trump who reacts to everything is easy to play.

[bobot]

It gets asked during times of Trump trouble, and so I ask it now: How is Faux reporting today’s events?