The US Department of Justice on Friday released a heavily redacted copy of the FBI affidavit used to acquire search warrant for the former president’s Mar-a-Lago estate earlier this month. In the affidavit, prosecutors wrote there was “probable cause to believe evidence of obstruction will be found.” The warrant was issued after investigators searched 15 boxes of White House documents from Mar-a-Lago that Trump turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration earlier this year. According to the affidavit, 14 of those boxes contained classified documents, many of them top secret. Trump says he has fully cooperated with investigators and has called the investigation a politically motivated witch hunt designed to hurt his re-election prospects. Gene Rossi, a former US federal attorney and former Democratic candidate for lieutenant governor of Virginia, spoke to As It Happens guest host Susan Bonner about the affidavit. The following is part of their conversation. Mr. Rossi, what do these documents tell you about the ongoing investigation into former President Donald Trump? He tells me, as a former federal prosecutor, that this investigation has reached a very high level. To obtain a search warrant against him [former] the speaker of the united states house is a monumental question on the part of the justice department. And they went through an incredibly thorough process to develop probable cause for the following: When President Trump left office, he left the White House, he committed at least two crimes, arguably, according to a Justice Department affidavit. One, break it [Presidential] Records Act. No. 2, he violated the Espionage Act when he left. Because why? Deliberately and knowingly, he allegedly took documents that were top secret SCI [sensitive compartmented information]. This is the golden rule of classified documents. They should never leave a secure facility. He brought them to his cottage, if you will, and kept them in an insecure location. This is a violation of the law. Period. End of story. So this is a very serious investigation. Pages from the FBI’s affidavit in support of obtaining a search warrant for ex-Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property have been largely redacted to protect witnesses and the integrity of the investigation. (Jon Elswick/The Associated Press) He does not dispute that he had the documents. Clearly, their boxes have been removed on two separate occasions — once with the search warrantand 15 boxes before that. So this is not disputed. But the former president says [he] he didn’t do anything wrong because [he] declassified these documents in the past [he] left the office. What is your answer to this? My answer to that is if you’re a drug dealer and you’re caught with five kilos of cocaine, you’re going to say, “Yeah, I’ve got it, but I didn’t mean to deal it.” Donald Trump has to admit he owned them, and it wasn’t by accident. The whole thing was intentional. Did he deliberately, with intent, break the laws relating to the protection of documents … and the Espionage Act? His intention is negated because his legal counsel and other people said: You can’t do this. You can’t take top secret documents out of the White House when you leave. And if you do, you need to keep it in a secure installation, which it doesn’t. So the argument that he dismissed waving a magic wand, from this talisman that gets rid of all problems, is not an argument that has ever been successfully used in court. In this affidavit, the Justice Department makes the assumption that investigators … will find evidence of impeachment. What is the significance of this? The [potential violations of the Presidential Records] pretend [and] espionage, these are what I call substantial crimes. What prosecutors love, and what I used to love, is when a potential defendant – potential – obstructs, obstructs, obstructs, enhances, conceals [or] destroys evidence that is the subject of an investigation. In other words, obstruction becomes a separate crime in itself. And when added to the substantive crimes, this is a prosecutor’s dream. A police officer was seen outside Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla., on August 9, a day after the FBI searched the property. (Giorgio Viera/AFP/Getty Images) Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, who chairs the intelligence committee, said …. that “among the classified documents at Mar-a Lago were some of our most sensitive intelligence.” What kind of documents might we be talking about? OK, I’m speculating and using the word “maybe”. What would be most concerning is if he had information or files on confidential human sources – people who are used as agents, undercover agents, spies for the United States, or are people who want to be double agents, want to leave the country, or provide information against our adversaries, whether it’s our spy or a potential spy trying to help us and there’s an adversary. These files, this information, can lead to the death of people. This information should be guarded like the crown jewels. And Donald Trump treated it like it was People magazine. That affidavit also reveals that investigators were talking to multiple people as they looked into what was going on with those documents. There are references to a significant number of political witnesses, a wide range of witnesses. What does that tell you? What is important about this is that this affidavit is not based on just one partner. It doesn’t rely on a helper, an insider. In my opinion, as you just said, it includes a whole range of people who corroborate the allegations in the affidavit. Now, it’s just a probable cause document. This is light weight. But it suggests to me that they have a lot of witnesses in the bullpen, if you will. Trump supporters gathered near Mar-A-Lago on August 9. (Giorgio Viera/AFP/Getty Images) And the affidavit, as well as the legislative memorandum also released today, cautions against the danger of providing too much information about what they describe as a “road map” for their investigation. How concerned are you that today’s release might undermine that research? I am very worried and I will tell you why. Before anyone is charged [and] defendant, it is exceedingly rare—I have never seen—where an affidavit of this kind is unsealed. Typically, after someone is charged and awaiting trial, it is unsealed because the defendant is entitled to it under federal discovery rules. But before someone is indicted — and last I looked, President Trump hasn’t been indicted yet — it’s extremely rare. And the reason is this: it has the potential effect of obstructing investigations, obstructing investigations. And even though the names are redacted, people can pick up on some inferences — who’s cooperating and when — and that could lead to witness intimidation. May I ask you, as you read this document, did you see anything that would indicate a motive for these alleged crimes? In the document itself? Not really, because everything is edited. But I can speculate. There’s only one reason I can think of why President Trump was so willing to get these documents, willfully and intentionally…and that was that he wanted to share it in some way for some potential gain, whether financial, political or whatever another. There is no reason for him to have these documents except for malicious purposes. And I’m speculating about it. There is nothing in the affidavit to suggest this, because it is almost all redacted. But there’s no reason I can think of for him to have that. And how worried do you think the former president should be after seeing this document? I think the amount of sweat on his forehead probably increases every week. I didn’t think he would be charged in the first impeachment trial. The jury is still out on whether [the] January 6 [Capitol Hill riots] will lead to a lawsuit. This is on another level. I predict that there is probably a 60 percent, maybe 70 percent, that by May of next year, he will face charges related to this search warrant. Written by Sheena Goodyear with files from The Associated Press. Interview produced by Kevin Robertson. The Q&A has been edited for length and clarity.
