The FBI said there was possibly “obstruction evidence” and classified defense documents
The FBI told US Judge Bruce Rinehart that the probe would likely find “obstructive evidence” beyond its explanation in court that there was “probable cause to believe” that classified national security material was improperly moved to “unauthorized” locations on the Trump compound . resort. “There is probable cause to believe that additional documents containing classified (National Defense Information) or constituting presidential records subject to record retention requirements currently remain at (Mar-a-Lago),” the FBI affidavit said. “There is also probable cause to believe evidence of obstruction will be found at (Mar-a-Lago.)”
The FBI found 184 classified documents from 15 boxes earlier this year
When the FBI in May examined the 15 boxes the National Archives recovered from the Florida resort in January, it found “184 unique classified documents,” the affidavit said. Among the materials were “67 documents marked CONFIDENTIAL, 92 documents marked CONFIDENTIAL and 25 documents marked TOP SECRET,” according to the filing. The agent who filed the affidavit noted that the documents were marked with multiple classified departmental checks, as he told the court that “[b]based on my training and experience, I know that documents classified at these levels usually contain national defense information. Also among the documents were handwritten notes from the former President, the affidavit said.
New details on how the Justice Department got involved in document destruction in the first place
FBI affidavit reveals new details about how the investigation began. It was launched following a criminal referral from the National Archives, which was sent to the Department of Justice on February 9.
The Archives told the Justice Department that the boxes recovered in January contained “newspapers, magazines, printed news articles, photographs, miscellaneous prints, memos, presidential correspondence, personal and post-presidential files, and numerous classified files.”
The Archives official said there was “significant concern” that “highly classified files were … mixed in with other files” and were not properly identified.
After receiving that information, the Justice Department and the FBI launched a criminal investigation into the matter, which led to the subpoena in June for classified material and the search of Mar-a-Lago earlier this month.
The fixes keep the occlusion details secret for now
An unredacted caption in the affidavit suggests probable cause that the FBI had to believe documents containing classified defense information and presidential records were at Mar-a-Lago.
Most of the section that follows is redacted, and the unedited subheading aligns with two of the criminal statutes in the affidavit cited at the outset.
But the third potential crime — obstruction — cited by the warrant materials has no corresponding unredacted subheading in the affidavit. The FBI would have to provide the court with its explanation of why it believed there was possible evidence of this crime at Mar-a-Lago, so the absence of any undisclosed details about that evidence signals that this part of the department is particularly sensitive about this aspect of her research being made public.
Alphabet Soup shows high sensitivity to documents Trump took from the White House
The affidavit used a handful of acronyms when describing the sensitivity of the documents recovered from Mar-a-Lago earlier this year. This alphabet soup is probably confusing to most Americans, but national security experts said it reveals the terrifying scope of this security breach. Some of the classified documents Trump brought with him from the White House to Mar-a-Lago contained references to “HCS, FISA, ORCON, NOFORN and SI,” according to the FBI affidavit. “HCS” indicates that the material is about human sources, or spies, who often work with the CIA. “FISA” relates to a court order that collects foreign intelligence, including wiretapping. “ORCON” means that the document is so sensitive that its author must approve any request to share it. “NOFORN” means that the material cannot be shared with foreign entities, even allies, without permission. “SI”, short for Special Intelligence, relates to interception of signals, which is usually managed by the National Security Agency. These sentences confirm what many feared — that documents that may have been illegally mishandled at Mar-a-Lago contained some of America’s most sensitive secrets.
The DOJ is keeping details about the personnel involved close to its chest
The department said in its legal brief justifying the memos that FBI personnel already identified as involved in the investigation had received “threats of violence from members of the public.”
The FBI told the judge that “[m]Minor but significant” changes to the affidavit were needed to “protect the safety of law enforcement personnel.”
Even with the redactions, the affidavit revealed some information about the professional background of the FBI agent who submitted the affidavit. The associate said they were trained in “counterintelligence and espionage investigations” at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia.
In the legal process over whether the affidavit should be released, the Justice Department has kept the number of its employees known to be involved limited. The legal filings in this dispute bear the signatures of only two DOJ attorneys: Juan Antonio Gonzalez, US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, and Jay Bratt, Chief of Counterintelligence for the DOJ’s Division of National Security.
Bratt supported the DOJ at last week’s court hearing to unseal the document — a notable choice given that there are many other lower-level DOJ lawyers who would be equipped to argue the criminal procedural issues central to the controversy.
Trump’s team claims it could unilaterally declassify the documents shown to the judge
When it sought the warrant, the FBI told the judge that Trump’s team had claimed that Trump had “absolute authority to declassify documents.” The affidavit cited, and included as an attachment, a letter sent to the Justice Department in May by Trump’s lawyer, Evan Corcoran, — after the existence of the investigation became public — asserting that Trump had such authority. As noted in the affidavit, the letter directed the Justice Department to provide the letter to any court considering motions related to the investigation. The affidavit also referred to a Breitbart article that quoted Kash Patel, a former Trump national security aide who was named as one of Trump’s nominees to handle issues with his presidential records in June, saying that the Trump had declassified materials retrieved from the National Archives in January. . The rest of the affidavit, however, is classified, so it’s unclear why federal investigators subpoenaed Patel’s comments. Following the FBI investigation, Trump has highlighted a January 19, 2021 memo declassifying documents related to the FBI’s Russia investigation. There is no evidence, however, that those materials were what the FBI was looking for when it searched Mar-a-Lago earlier this month.
The DOJ had hoped to keep the document secret
It’s important to remember the process that led to the unsealing of Friday’s blockbuster affidavit.
Shortly after the Mar-a-Lago search, news outlets including CNN urged the judge to unseal the entire court file to provide unprecedented transparency in an unprecedented investigation.
The Justice Department argued in court last week against releasing the affidavit, but its lawyers were unable to convince the court that the entire affidavit should be kept under seal. Instead, prosecutors were asked to prepare a version for the public with limited redactions that contained a surprisingly powerful amount of information.
When the Justice Department argued that the entire affidavit should be sealed, prosecutors argued that once all the necessary redactions were made to the affidavit, it would be devoid of any meaning that would serve the public interest in transparency.
What’s next?
What will come next in the Justice Department investigation is unclear. The files released on Friday, however, said that so far, a “significant number of civilian witnesses” have been implicated. When the FBI sought approval for the warrant, it told the court it planned to search “Office 45” at Mar-a-Lago, as well as “all storage areas and all other areas or spaces within the premises used or available used by the FPOTUS and his staff and in which boxes or documents could be stored, including all structures or buildings on the estate.” Trump waited two weeks to respond to the probe in court, and did so this week in a lawsuit, now before a different judge in the Southern District of Florida, that asks a so-called “special master,” that is, a third party, to oversee the FBI review of seized evidence. However, this lawsuit lacked much of the legal substance that should be expected from such a request. U.S. District Eileen Cannon, the Trump-appointed judge assigned to the case, ordered Trump to file additional filings clarifying what he is asking her to do and why she has the authority to do it. The filing deadline is midnight Friday — less than 12 hours after the redacted affidavit was released. This story has been updated with additional details.
