Judge says he's inclined to unseal portions of Mar-a-Lago search affidavit, orders government to submit redactions
Category: News & Politics
Via: gregtx • 3 years ago • 35 commentsBy: Marc Caputo, Dareh Gregorian and Rebecca Shabad (NBC News)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
WEST PALM BEACH — A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Justice Department to unseal at least some of the probable cause affidavit used to secure a search of former President Donald Trump's Florida estate.
"On my initial careful review ... there are portions of it that can be unsealed," Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart said after a hearing where a top government lawyer contended the document's release could jeopardize an investigation that is still in its "early stages."
Reinhart said he would "give the government a full and fair opportunity" to make redactions to the document, and ordered them to turn in the redacted version by next Thursday. He said he would then review the document and either order its release if he agrees with the redaction or hold a closed-door hearing with the government if he disagrees.
The judge added that if they can't agree, "obviously I'd win" that argument, but he'd allow the government time to appeal his ruling.
During a hearing that lasted just over an hour, Jay Bratt, a top counterintelligence and national security official at DOJ, argued the "detailed and reasonably lengthy" document needed to be kept completely under wraps because it contains "substantial grand jury" information in a "unique" case with "national security overtones."
He also said the government is "very concerned about the safety of the witnesses" in the case whose identities could become compromised if the affidavit is unsealed. Bratt pointed to "amateur sleuths on the internet" who could "maybe find personal information." He noted that FBI agents involved in the search have been doxxed online, and noted last week's nail gun attack at a Cincinnati FBI building by a Trump supporter who was outraged by the search.
"This is a volatile situation with respect to this particular search across the political spectrum," Bratt said, adding with "one side in particular."
Charles Tobin, one of the lawyers for the media organizations arguing for the document to be unsealed, said a search warrant being executed at a former president's home is a matter of a tremendous public interest and the affidavit should be unsealed. He called it "one of the most significant law enforcement events in the nation's history."
"The time for everybody to get it right is now," Tobin said.
James Moon, a lawyer for the conservative group Judicial Watch, said the government could black out portions of the document. "I don't think anybody is asking the floodgates be opened," he said.
Trump lawyer Christina Bobb also was in court for the proceedings but did not make any arguments.
Reinhart scheduled the hearing Tuesday after the Department of Justice had informed him that while it didn't oppose unsealing some innocuous documents related to the warrant, it was vehemently opposed to the affidavit being made public.
Lawyers for the department said the release of the document, which lays out the evidence of possible crimes that were the basis for the search warrant request, could "cause significant and irreparable damage to this ongoing criminal investigation."
"If disclosed, the affidavit would serve as a roadmap to the government's ongoing investigation, providing specific details about its direction and likely course, in a manner that is highly likely to compromise future investigative steps," they wrote, warning it could also impact cooperation from witnesses.
Trump and his lawyers have publicly called for the affidavit to be unsealed for the sake of "transparency," but did not file any court papers arguing for its release.
The hearing was granted after a group of news organizations, including NBC News, filed court papers asking Reinhart to publicly release the affidavit, citing the "historically significant, unprecedented execution of a search warrant in the residence of a former president."
"[N]ot since the Nixon administration had the federal government wielded its power to seize records from a former president in such a public fashion," the filing said, arguing that "'clear and powerful interest' in understanding these unprecedented events 'weighs heavily in favor of unsealing' the entire record filed with this court."
The FBI executed the search warrant on Trump's Mar-a-Lago property on Aug. 8. A copy of the search warrant and a property receipt unsealed by Reinhart at the government's request Friday showed agents removed 11 sets of classified documents, including some labeled secret and top secret.
A document attached to the search warrant said agents were searching for "physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime and other items illegally possessed in violation of" three laws, including a part of the Espionage Act. The section cited in the search warrant "applies to activities such as gathering, transmitting to an unauthorized person, or losing, information pertaining to the national defense, and to conspiracies to commit such offenses," according to the DOJ's website.
Investigators were still sifting through the documents on Wednesday, sources told NBC News.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing.
Tags
Who is online
67 visitors
The 'fun' part of the 'game':
"Trump and his lawyers have publicly called for the affidavit to be unsealed for the sake of "transparency," but did not file any court papers arguing for its release."
They took Garland at his word - advocating 'transparency', just not too much, eh?
If by 'they' you mean Trump and his lawyers, that's a delusional comment.
Exactly, why would anybody take the FBI or DoJ at their word?
So, I gather that means you don't back the blue Greg.
Why would you think that?
You imply that you do not take the DOJ or the FBI at their word Greg.
I don't want to imply. I'll say it openly: the FBI has been politicized and weaponized. As for the DOJ, they should have called for a special counsel investigation in this case and the Hunter Biden case. And let us not forget that Garland has broken with the Justice Department practice of not commenting on pending investigations. He made a statement last week, remember? He claimed that the Justice Department routinely uses the evidence-collection method that is least intrusive under the circumstances, and that its searches are narrowly tailored to collect relevant evidence. That would be the opposite of the intrusion into a former President's home with a warrant that was so broad as to allow the FBI to collect every single scrap of paper.
And that is why many people no longer trust the FBI or Merrick Garland.
Great? Now Vic, all you have to do is admit that it has been since its inception. Of course, much of that time, it was used against 'the left', so it got a pass from you and yours. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, y'all want to pretend it's a resent thing that must be exposed and stopped.
Why?
Vic, let's not forget that YOU posted a seed that included the FACT that the Judge ORDERED the DOJ to reply to media's, [including one of your favorites, Judicial Watch], demands to release of the warrant ect. THAT is what Garland commented on.
Major FAIL.
The DOJ had already run the gamut of 'less intrusive methods' Vic. They informally asked nicely. They FORMALLY asked nicely. They sent their top dude to ask nicely AGAIN. They issued a subpoena.
As proven by the content of the inventory seized, it's obvious to any thinking person that Trump still insisted that he is somehow a special snowflake who isn't governed by the rule of law.
That's false Vic. Rinsing and repeating that falsehood fails to make it true. Just stop.
Then 'many people's' lack of trust is based on bullshit.
it's important to note that trumpski is the one that alerted the media to the FBI search of mar-a-lardo.
Interestingly, Trump and his lawyers haven't filed a wrongful search suit either.
His 'lawyers' in this case are looking for lawyers of their own.
... nor have they filed to block release.
My comment had nothing to do with releasing anything. Try to keep up.
File that under playing both sides of the coin in a shell game.
“My comment had nothing to do with releasing anything.”
It didn’t have much relevance to the topic either. Let us know if they buy a goat this week.
Your inability to recognize it's relevance is on your squiggy.
Let ME know when you'd like to adult.
You've never seen my squiggy.
"...when you'd like to adult."
When I do, it'll be in English.
No interest in doing so.
Thanks for admitting you've yet to do so.
... a false substitution of past for future.
There is no historical evidence of that in your comments.
”…that…”
Unintelligible reference.
Well, it's YOUR reference, so there you go.
There is no historical evidence of that in your comments.
WTF are you babbling about?
"WTF are you babbling about?"
Try to keep up.
With babbling? Why bother?
My understanding is that they have called for the release of the affidavit in its entirety, not redacted. That's not gonna happen.
This legal decision is a yawner.
How so?
The affidavit is not going to prove Trump was treated unfairly , nor will a redacted version prove the true extent of the investigation.
Perhaps, we won't really know till it's released. But I don't think that's what this is really about, otherwise Trump's team would have filed to have it released in full. In my opinion this is about trying to calm the bubbling waters of public opinion.
After Biden's DOJ made this daylight raid by the FBI such a media event in order to embarrass and harass Trump, the people want answers as to why this unprecedented seizure required such urgent action at this time. Every day that passes with no transparency seems to show this is just partisan political theater
Trump is the one that made it a 'media event'.
Right, because the documents seized are fake news. /s