The affidavit attached to the FBI search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home has been unsealed and is available online. The heavily redacted document tells the story of why federal agents felt they needed to raid the home of the former president.
Per the filing, the case began with a referral from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) after that agency received 15 boxes of documents in January. Some of these boxes contained classified information.
Thanks for reading The Racket News! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
The FBI determined that it was likely that classified National Defense Information was still stored at Mar-a-Lago in addition to other documents that were subject to presidential records retention laws. The filing also says that the FBI believed it likely that evidence of obstruction would also be found.
The filing cites several relevant statutes including, 18 U.S.C. § 793(e), which pertains to defense information, and 32 C.F .R. Parts 2001 and 2003, which deal with classified national security information.
The filing goes on to say that the National Archives referral alleged that “highly classified records were unfoldered, intermixed with other records, and otherwise unproperly [sic] identified."
Federal agents examined the 15 boxes of documents provided to NARA and found that they contained “184 unique documents bearing classification markings, including 67 documents marked as CONFIDENTIAL, 92 documents marked as SECRET, and 25 documents marked as TOP SECRET. Further, the FBI agents observed markings reflecting the following compartments/dissemination controls: HCS, FISA, ORCON, NOFORN, and SI.” These are highly controlled classifications of documents.
The filing goes on to say that Trump was notified by a letter to his counsel that Mar-a-Lago was not authorized as a secure location to store classified documents. In this June 8 letter, the government noted that the documents “have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location. Accordingly, we ask that the room at Mar-a-Lago where the documents had been stored be secured and that all of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Mar-a-Lago (along with any other items in that room) be preserved in that room in their current condition until farther notice.”
This wording is not an indication that the government was okay with the status quo of the documents. To me, this sounds more like a warning that nothing should be touched until we get there. Don’t tamper with the evidence.
The filing also includes an attachment from M. Evan Corcoran, a Trump attorney, stating that a “president has absolute authority to declassify documents.” Corcoran also noted, “Beyond that, the primary criminal statute that governs the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material does not apply to the President.”
Donald Trump ceased being president on January 20, 2021.
A big piece to the puzzle might have fallen into place with a new CNN report. Per this reporting, Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch may have played a big role in encouraging Donald Trump to resist NARA requests for the documents at Mar-a-Lago. In a series of phone calls beginning last February, Fitton allegedly encouraged Trump to refuse to give up any additional records after the initial 15 boxes.
“The moment Tom got in the boss' ear, it was downhill from there,” said an anonymous Trump aide.
The affidavit confirms my initial suspicion that the FBI would not go into a former president’s home without strong probable cause. There seems to have been conclusive evidence that Trump unlawfully possessed classified documents and was storing them haphazardly in boxes with other unclassified materials. It also seems apparent that Trump pretended to be cooperative while obfuscating and hiding other documents.
While it is true that Trump could have declassified these documents while he was president, we have so far seen no evidence that he actually did so. What’s more, declassifying sensitive documents in order to take them home and leave them lying around the house is not exactly an argument that exonerates the former president of being careless with national secrets.
There are still many unanswered questions. Large sections of the affidavit are censored so we don’t know where the FBI got its tips about Trump’s stash. We also don’t know exactly what the raid yielded.
From what we know at this point, however, the raid was not only legal but was well-justified. Based on Trump’s lack of cooperation and dishonesty in dealing with the National Archives and the DOJ leading up to the raid, I would not be surprised to hear news of an indictment in the coming weeks.
That won’t be political persecution of a former president. That will be the fruit of his own bad behavior and disregard for the law.
A lot of people took some offense at a meme that Racket News posted in the wake of the student loan forgiveness story. I posted the meme myself and when I retweeted it, I added some context that you didn’t see in the original post.
I stand by the meme as far as it goes, but I don’t necessarily take it further. As I wrote in my earlier piece on the loan amnesty, I oppose Biden’s policy. That needn’t stop me from pointing out the hypocrisy in a lot of the plan’s opponents.
When it comes to Christianity, the entire religion is built upon forgiveness. That was the point of the meme.
It’s interesting to note but not really relevant to the current discussion that God instructed the ancient Israelites to cancel debts in every Sabbath year (Deuteronomy 15:1-2) while at the same time instructing believers both to be cautious about borrowing (Proverbs 22:7, 26-27) and to pay their debts when they did borrow (Ecclesiastes 5:5, Romans 13:7-8). There seems to be no evidence that the Israelites ever followed the instruction of debt forgiveness in the Sabbath years.
Instead, what is relevant is that Christ paid our sin debt to God. This is affirmed in several verses such as 1 Corinthians 7:23. Even the term “redeemer” has financial overtones. Dictionary.com’s first definition for the word is “to buy or pay off; clear by payment.”
This theme is also common in many hymns such as “Jesus Paid it All” and “I Will Sing of My Redeemer,” which says:
Sing, oh, sing of my Redeemer,
With His blood He purchased me,
On the cross He sealed my pardon,
Paid the debt, and made me free.
Now, I’m not saying that Biden’s loan forgiveness is Biblical or that Joe Biden is christlike, but I am pointing out that many of the political Christians have an unforgiving attitude.
It’s not hypocritical to say that a unilateral government program that transfers debt from the borrower to taxpayers is not real charity. That’s especially true when the program comes two months before an election and the president may not even have the legal authority to forgive the debt.
On the other hand, many of the critics had no problem with other giveaways such as Trump’s aid to farmers victimized by his tariff wars. Quite a few people virtue signaling about paying your debts were also quick to accept forgiveness of their own PPP loans.
As with many things, right and wrong seem to depend a lot on the specific issue and which side of the political aisle one sits on. Again, I oppose the program for a variety of reasons, but it isn’t as black and white as many critics would make it seem.
Do student borrowers deserve the forgiveness of their student loans? No, but then we don’t really deserve God’s forgiveness either, but I’m happy to take advantage of the offer.