If I did this correctly this article should publish while I’m out of pocket for an all day client meeting. As I drafted and edited this article late last night and into the weeeee hours of August 16th… crosses fingers and hope the scheduled publication option was properly used.
Unclear why there’s any confusion whether there was/is a Federal Grand Jury investigating Trump’s unlawful classified document retention given in May 2022 it was reported by Reuters & the NYTs
My educated guess regarding the Times Union filing is they must have run a similar ECF search as I did. However the Government recently filed a response which directly addresses the possibility of a second warrant. It makes sense to take the Government’s response on face value. Admittedly I view it as a carefully worded response with some semantics at play. But again that’s speculative on my end and it’s best to adhere to the “Res Ipsa Loquitur“ (the thing speaks for itself) —in accordance with last’s weeks Order (also I’ll repeat that the footnotes are really important and you should read them extremely closely, or not)
August 15, 2022 RESPONSE to Motion by USA as to Sealed Search Warrant re 54 MOTION to Open Search Warrant Affidavit(s) and Other Documents Replies due by 8/22/2022… see SDFL-ECF or via my Scribd Account
Again I think I’ve been pretty clear, stating the expectation that the Government and the Court would release the affidavit and/or it would be heavily redacted —and would have profound National Security Issues. That assertion was made at the onset and it turns out the Government’s August 15th response explains why;
“…The affidavit supporting the search warrant presents a very different set of considerations…”
Additionally I think it’s beyond reckless that Alt-Right “news outlets” like Briebart published the leaked warrant sans redactions. This put a literal target on two FBI special agents. One can’t help but wonder that was an intentional “error” was done at the behest of Trump. Irrespective of what the excuse is, Breitbart should be held accountable (see time date stamp of their article) but they won’t be because “freedom of the press”
—please pay very close attachment to the last sentence on page 1 and the full paragraph on Page 2, which reads in part;
There remain compelling reasons, including to protect the integrity of an ongoing law enforcement investigation that implicates national security, that support keeping the affidavit sealed….The government does not object to unsealing other materials filed in connection with
…the search warrant whose unsealing would not jeopardize the integrity of this national security investigation, subject to minor redactions to protect government personnel, namely: cover sheets associated with the search warrant application… the government now asks the Court to unseal the materials contained in that filing
Moving on to pages 3 & 4 —the subtext here is the Government has “grave concerns” that releasing the affidavit (even redacted) would change “the trajectory of the investigation” but more importantly it could adversely effect witness(es) testimony and put those witnesses in MAGA-GOP cross hairs. Which could result in fatal or severe injury to said witnesses. That’s not the Government being overly dramatic, those are real and particularized concerns. For Example in the days after the August 8th lawful execution of the search warrant:
ADAM BIES -arrested and charged after he threatened to kill FBI agents, an affidavit said. See Affidavit for case #:Case 2:22-mj-01108-LPL here
Do you know who’s not asking the MAGA-GOP to calm down and remain peaceful? That’s Donald Trump, Kevin QANON McCarthy and Mitch McConnell. This in fact feels like the months leading up to the deadly Jan6th Domestic Terror Attack carried out by the same domestic terrorist that Trump radicalized with the help of his aggressive echo chamber created by Fox News, Breitbart, OANN, NewsMax et al. Again Trump could tell his supporters to “stand back and stand down” but we all know how that worked out…And the aforementioned are only a tiny fraction of how just how violent Trump’s MAGA-GOP are. To be clear I’m not saying all of MAGA-GOP are violent. What I am saying is Donald J Trump knows exactly what he is doing and frankly he is giving coded “kill orders” —which is terrifying.
Furthermore when you are reading the Government’s filings, keep in mind prosecutions do not arbitrarily cite previous cases, there are specific reasons, for example:
(“if pre indictment proceedings were made public, many prospective witnesses would be hesitant to come forward voluntarily, knowing that those against whom they testify would be aware of that testimony,” and “[t]here would also be the risk that those about to be indicted would flee…)
The better view is that no First Amendment right to access pre-indictment warrant materials exists because there is no tradition of public access to ex parte warrant proceedings. See In re Search of Fair Finance, 692 F. 3d 424, 429-33 (6th Cir. 2012); Baltimore Sun Co. v. Goetz, 886 F.2d 60, 64 (4th Cir. 1989); Times Mirror Co. v. United States, 873 F. 2d 1210, 1212-18 (9th Cir. 1989). In any event, the Court need not determine whether a First Amendment right of access to search warrant affidavits attaches at this stage of an investigation because, even if there were such a right, a “compelling government interest,” Bennett, 2013 WL 3821625, at *4, favors keeping the remaining materials under seal for the reasons laid out below. (emphasis added)
“…Courts have also denied requests to partially unseal redacted versions of investigative materials where doing so would fail to protect the integrity of law enforcement investigations…”
Again what do I always say about the footnotes? Always and I mean always read them, because that’s where you tend to find tiny details that could have significant implications…for example, see footnote on page 5. Read it carefully because it’s pretty damn important:
…the government has a compelling, overriding interest in preserving the integrity of an ongoing criminal investigation. As the government has readily acknowledged, the circumstances here—involving a search of the premises for a former President—involve matters of significant public concern…
…Disclosure at this juncture of the affidavit supporting probable cause would…
Accordingly pages 7 & 8 the Government makes numerous compelling arguments that disclosing (even in redacted form) the Affidavit would have serious impacts on the ongoing criminal investigation. And most important it would “likely chill future cooperation by witnesses whose assistance may be sought as this investigation progresses..,” —additionally the Government argues that releasing the affidavit would also serve as a road map and “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. In addition, information about witnesses is particularly sensitive given the high-profile nature of this matter and the risk that the revelation of witness identities would impact their willingness to cooperate with the investigation. Disclosure of the government’s affidavit at this stage would also likely chill future cooperation by witnesses whose assistance may be sought as this investigation progresses…
It is clear (at least to me) the Government is going to the mat to protect their “sources and methods” and even if the Court allowed the Affidavit to be unsealed, it would be so heavily redacted that it wouldn’t make sense to most lay people but unsealing could have catastrophic consequences to the ongoing criminal investigation.
Do Trump’s Mar A Largo Attorneys have the required security clearance to view said documents?
Also it occurred to me, does anyone know if Trump’s Mar-A-Largo attorneys actually have the prerequisite security clearance which would allow them to review the “highly classified” unlawful material Trump took to Mar-A-Largo? While that’s a rhetorical question. We now know, based on CNN’s reporting from a few days ago, that back in June Trump’s attorneys did in fact sign a letter “that no remaining classified documents” are at Mar-A-Largo.
Clearly we all know that is not true. But Trump’s attorneys might end up looking down the barrel of an indictment and not the least of which a FL Bar ethics panel investigation…
Lastly in reading pages 10 thru 12 you’ll note that the Government’s correctly pointing out that the conglomerate of news outlets requesting the Affidavit to be unsealed, even the cases cited by the media , center around the “phase of the investigation” as in the “pre-indictment” stages —the Government argument here is basically it’s not the right time and prematurely disclosing the affidavit would not be in the public (or the pursuit of justice) best interest
In other cited cases that involved requests to unseal warrants in the investigation phase—in other words, before any charges—the court ultimately concluded that the government’s compelling interest in protecting the integrity of its investigation outweighed any public right of access…
What I’d look for next is the 3rd parties (see partial list here which also includes several open source links to the 3rd parties filings) —like I said it’s best to wait and see versus making a prediction that could ultimately be wrong…
And lastly your daily saltwater therapy —I’ve been in a red-kind of mood lately…
As I previously mentioned I’m at an off-site client location for the whole day and it’s unlikely I’ll publish an article but I did work on this one late last night and literally had 10 minutes to finish the edits. With any luck this article doesn’t have a plethora of spelling or grammatical errors but then again it should have plenty of spicy & snarky missives (snort) Have a good day -Filey
Thank you! Earlier this week Trump intermediary reached out to DOJ saying Trump was worried about violence breaking out because people were so mad etc but through this prism, it sounds more like coded language about an ultimatum to DOJ. Two of the female attorneys have been on right wing media saying they will find out the names of the informant anyway….which also sounds like a veiled threat. The other thing was Trump’s declaration to turn down the violent rhetoric while stoking more conspiracies surrounding the FBI search of Mar A Lago and NOT toning down the rhetoric. It feels like their move is to stoke violence and based on the number of threats to FBI and recorded alt right losers on tic toe declaring violence, things could get very ugly. Justice must prevail however and not indicting these criminals out of fear of retribution, is un-American.
Thank you! Earlier this week Trump intermediary reached out to DOJ saying Trump was worried about violence breaking out because people were so mad etc but through this prism, it sounds more like coded language about an ultimatum to DOJ. Two of the female attorneys have been on right wing media saying they will find out the names of the informant anyway….which also sounds like a veiled threat. The other thing was Trump’s declaration to turn down the violent rhetoric while stoking more conspiracies surrounding the FBI search of Mar A Lago and NOT toning down the rhetoric. It feels like their move is to stoke violence and based on the number of threats to FBI and recorded alt right losers on tic toe declaring violence, things could get very ugly. Justice must prevail however and not indicting these criminals out of fear of retribution, is un-American.
I love, love how you break it all down so I/we can better understand. You're the best and I only hope you know how much we appreciate you!