Below is my column in the New York Post on the opposition of the Justice Department to release of even a redaction affidavit in the ongoing controversy over the raid at Mar-a-Lago. As this litigation unfolds (including a key filing today), the Justice Department has been reportedly leaking some of the very same information to the press. In addition, National Archives and Records Administration released a letter contradicting claims of the Trump team, including refuting claims of cooperation or transparency by the former president. There has never been a more important time for Attorney General Merrick Garland to show leadership in plugging his leaky ship while ordering the release of a redacted affidavit. As discussed below, the release of substantive portions of an affidavit can ordinarily be made without compromising confidential informants or undermining the investigation. It could well support criminal allegations or contradict the former president as being claimed by unnamed sources. However, he has waived objections to the release and there is a clear public interest in greater transparency.
Here is the column:
This week, a curious scene will play out in a Florida courtroom. A federal magistrate will be asked to uphold what are expected to be extensive redactions of the affidavit supporting the search warrant on Mar-a-Lago. The judge, however, will be able to read an array of the same details at breakfast in newspaper accounts leaked by the government.
The feds have maintained that absolute secrecy is essential to protect their investigation and national security while reportedly leaking some of the very information the affidavit contains. It is an all-too-familiar pattern for some of us who have litigated national-security cases against the government.
The Washington Post and The New York Times have published a series of leaks clearly designed to put Donald Trump and his team on the defense in the media, including claims that he was hiding sensitive nuclear-weapons material and details on how the search was prompted by video surveillance outside the storage room at Mar-a-Lago.
Most recently, a Times report disclosed that the Justice Department recovered more than 300 documents with classified markings, citing multiple sources connected to the investigation. The leak further revealed that the government collected more than 150 documents marked as classified in January and another 150 in June and in the August raid. It also recounted specific meetings and individuals involved in past discussions.
The Times story made the purpose of the leak evident when reporters concluded that the divulged information “suggested to officials that the former president or his aides had been cavalier in handling it, not fully forthcoming with investigators, or both.”
This is precisely the type of information the government has refused to release under a claim that any disclosures would materially endanger the investigation and national security.
In addition, both the Trump team and the National Archives and Records Administration have released accounts of the communications leading up to the raid. NARA put out a letter from May 10 that suggested the Biden White House was involved in the controversy and detailed how Trump sought repeatedly to block the archives from sharing documents taken from Mar-a-Lago with the FBI.
Despite the leaks and these public accounts, the Justice Department is still implausibly insisting that no substantive information can be released in a redacted affidavit. These affidavits commonly have sections on the case background that can be released in redacted form without compromising sources, including confirmation of how the FBI presented facts the Trump team and NARA allege.
There are also common legal sections that discuss the basis for probable cause. The government alleged that Trump was “unlawfully” holding material that he claims to have declassified. It references presidential papers Trump holds, but the ability of presidents to retain documents under the Presidential Records Act remains a matter of intense debate.
On both the legal and factual background, a redacted affidavit could reveal whether this information was presented fairly and accurately. It is a reasonable concern for many in the public given the record of the FBI and the Justice Department in falsifying information or misleading courts on prior Trump investigations. During the Russian-collusion investigation, some of us flagged Justice officials using the presumptively unconstitutional Logan Act. The legal sections could reveal both the basis and nexus used to establish probable cause of criminal acts. It could well support the government and show not just contradictions of the claims of the former president but criminal acts. Yet, there is no reason why some of the factual and legal background cannot be released in part.
These sections could also shed light on why the court approved a warrant that was ridiculously broad. It allowed the FBI to seize not only any box containing any paper with any classification marking, but then allowed it to take every other box stored with that box. It also allowed the seizure of any paper created during the Trump presidency. It had all the selectivity of a cyclone. The legal section of the affidavit could disclose how such a seemingly limitless warrant was justified under the law.
Some of these sections could also explain how the department justified this extraordinary action very different from how it treated past figures like Hillary Clinton and her associates who resisted inquiries into classified material kept on unsecured servers, including top-secret material. There were also allegations of efforts to influence investigators.
These are legitimate questions that could be answered through the redacted affidavit or simply an independent Justice Department disclosure. Attorney General Merrick Garland has had at least four opportunities to take modest steps to assure the public on the department’s motives and means in this controversy. This includes the use of a special master to sort through the documents seized in this overbroad search. Garland failed to take any of these steps as he lashed out at those who question his department’s integrity.
The fact is that affidavits are routinely released after charges to the defense. Though it’s certainly less common before charges, this is a unique circumstance that justifies greater transparency while recognizing the need to protect confidential sources and methods. The Justice Department does not deny it can release a redacted affidavit but insists any material would be so limited and disconnected as to be incomprehensible.
That simply doesn’t appear to be true. It is plainly implausible that these sections cannot be released in some form without compromising confidential sources or the already publicly known investigation. Garland cannot ignore his department’s checkered history in Trump-related investigations or the contrast in treatment with past investigations like Clinton’s classified emails. That does not mean this investigation is baseless or that there were no crimes committed. But with modest disclosures, Garland can earn the trust of the public rather than simply demand it.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
Reason may surface, as Learned Hand said some time back. Trump’s complaint regarding the search of MAR and his request for the appointment of a Special Master has been assigned to US District Judge Aileen Cannon, Southern District of Florida, who received her JD from University of Michigan, is originally from the beautiful Andean city of Cali, Colombia, and was appointed by POTUS Donald Trump in May 2020 and confirmed by the Senate (56-21) in November 2020.
JJC,
That “motion” filed by his “lawyers” was a complete mess. First of all there’s the problem of that judge even having jurisdiction over the case. It seems Trump stupidly thought he can just pick any judge he wants, preferably one he appointed as more friendly towards his arguments.
He’s not going to get a special master. Because his “motion” didn’t have any legal reasoning behind it. It’s been panned as a really amateurish attempt at “fighting back” against the DOJ.
That judge is not going to be able to do anything because she has no clue what Trump wants her to do because his incompetent lawyers are idiots.
I understand your anger and dislike of our former president but saying what you’ve said hardly makes it so. Trump’s attorneys did a fine job of framing the issue and he has a right to assert lawyer-client privilege that the court, in turn, has an obligation to protect. When you reduce your arguments to ad hominem insults of the persons involved, you move from having a logical and legally reasonable position to one of ridicule.
JJC,
It’s not anger of former president Trump. Just the basic fact that every single competent lawyer and legal analyst including the judge have pointed out how bad this “motion” really is. If they did a “fine job” why did the judge ordered Trump’s lawyers to clarify what exactly did they want her to do? That doesn’t say they did a ” fine job”. EVERYONE is mocking this “motion” because it is that bad. It is already well known that Trump is having trouble getting a competent lawyer and so far the ones he currently has are just not experienced enough and knowledgeable enough to adequately defend Trump and it clearly shows.
As I noted earlier the problem for Trump is the judge he “picked” may not have jurisdiction over the case since Judge Reinhart is already handling this case. This is why the judge is so puzzled as to why she should be making any rulings about asking for a special master. This is why so many in the legal profession are mocking these “motion”. We’ll find out Friday if Trump’s lawyers managed to “clarify” what they were asking in their “motion”.
Judge Cannon disagrees with you. She required Trump’s lawyers to address multiple issues by tomorrow that they failed to include in their motion and that are necessary: “The Court is in receipt of 1 Plaintiff’s Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional Relief. To facilitate appropriate resolution, on or before August 26, 2022, Plaintiff shall file a supplement to the Motion further elaborating on the following: (1) the asserted basis for the exercise of this Court’s jurisdiction, whether legal, equitable/anomalous, or both; (2) the framework applicable to the exercise of such jurisdiction; (3) the precise relief sought, including any request for injunctive relief pending resolution of the Motion; (4) the effect, if any, of the proceeding before Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart; and (5) the status of Plaintiff’s efforts to perfect service on Defendant.”
“he has a right to assert lawyer-client privilege”
But he didn’t do that in his motion. He asserted executive privilege, which is different, and he can assert EP against the Executive Branch.
We know the White House is lying about not being infromed about the talks between the National Archivist and DoJ, with Trump. We know the Archivist went to the White House with concerns. More than likely the White House went to the archivist to borrow their letter head not write to Garland (scenes from the National Association of Schoolboards). The National Archivist knows or should know, the PRA is civil, not criminal law.
Presidents can declassify at will, are NOT bound by procedure. The President creates Procedure. So there are no classified documents at the Presidents home. All of this collapses on this simple fact.
You have no idea what documents Trump declassified and what documents he didn’t. Your argument collapses on that simple fact.
Also, the alleged crimes do not depend on whether the documents were classified.
You have no idea what documents Trump declassified and what documents he didn’t. Your argument collapses on that simple fact.
What everyone knows, the DoJ has no means to prove a document is not classified.
“What everyone knows, the DoJ has no means to prove a document is not classified.”
The DOJ HAS proof that documents were NOT declassified. They are currently in possession of those documents and it is one reason why they are in the middle of a criminal investigation.
Here’s an interesting point for you to consider. What if President Biden re-classified all those documents? Because according to Trump’s reasoning he can do anything as president. So Biden can simply say those documents are all now classified. No?
And as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, none of the alleged crimes depend on the classification status of the documents. You keep harping about classification, even though it’s not particularly key.
If Trump was the rightful owner of these papers, then why did he hand over the 15 boxes back in February?
A very pertinent question.
The current administration, correctly, treats the DOJ as separate and independent entity. So I believe that the White House did not have prior knowledge of the search of MAL.
Those who leak on the street should used the bathroom or peerooms.
“the Justice Department has been reportedly leaking some of the very same information to the press”
Also reportedly, Trump and his team have been giving information to reporters that is then attributed to a DOJ leak.
“National Archives and Records Administration released a letter contradicting claims of the Trump team…”
That letter first appeared in a column by John Solomon and was reportedly given to him by Trump’s team.
“As discussed below, the release of substantive portions of an affidavit can ordinarily be made without compromising confidential informants or undermining the investigation. ”
A truthful person would not pretend to know what could be released from the affidavit, when he hasn’t read the affidavit. It’s also striking that Judge Reinhart released an opinion on Monday morning discussing the various factors for and against unsealing the affidavit, and Turley is silent about that discussion.
“The judge, however, will be able to read an array of the same details at breakfast in newspaper accounts leaked by the government.”
Turley has absolutely no idea whether the information that has been made public is or is not in the affidavit. Because he hasn’t read that sealed affidavit. He shouldn’t pretend to know things he doesn’t know.
The DOJ will propose redactions, and Judge Reinhart will make a decision, and if we simply wait a few days, we’ll all know what he decided / what info will be unsealed.
“National Archives and Records Administration released a letter contradicting claims of the Trump team”
Statement of John Solomon regarding Daily Beast smear of my coverage of Archives memo
I wrote the story because it was accurate, true and important to the public.
The Daily Beast, where I once worked, has provided a fresh example of the failing state of American journalism. The site’s media reporter is under the illusion I wrote a story to try to help a particular politician. That may be the standard at The Daily Beast today, but it is not my standard.
I wrote the story because it was accurate, true and important to the public. I know it was news because every major news organization followed my reporting, with many crediting Just the News. The Archives agreed to release the memo as a result. I appreciate that gesture enabling other reporters to see what we wrote was true, accurate and important.
Secondly, this reporter seems to be under the illusion that the Archives letter was the first time America learned TS-CI secrets were found in Mar-a-Lago. In fact, that information had been made public in an Aug. 13 letter from Reps. Adam Schiff and Carolyn Maloney. You can read that here:
Finally, before The Daily Beast presumes to judge my accurate, award-winning journalism, maybe they should put a mirror to their own record of reporting, like this doozy from December 2018.
The Daily Beast actually claimed Robert Mueller found Russia-Trump collusion. Those who read Just the News know Mueller found: “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
If you think this sort of dishonest journalism has no place inside The Daily Beast, let Editor Tracy Connor know.
If you want Turley to correct his statement about how the NARA letter first became public, email him. His email is public: https://expert.gwu.edu/display/jturley
Statement of John Solomon regarding Daily Beast smear of my coverage of Archives memo
One can add the links to his statement at:
https://justthenews.com/accountability/media/statement-john-solomon-regarding-daily-beast-smear-my-coverage-archives-memo?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
“Dig In” Leads to Schiff’s letter etc.
Trump is a private party – he can not “leak”.
He and his people are free to share whatever they want with the press.
They are also free to do so anonymously or to pretend to be govenrment sources.
All of that is legal.
It is also legal for government sources to “leak” FALSE information.
What is illegal is for those in govenrment to leak truthful information about an ongoing investigation.
It is the responsibility of the media to vet leaks.
A good journalist knows that no one provides them information without ulterior motives, and that many providing them information are lying.
That is why there used to be rules in journalism about anonymous sources and getting multiple sources and using credible sources.
John Solomon bases most of his reporting on Documents – not sources. Often obtained through FOIA requests.
I have no doubt that DOJ/FBI are leaking lies like a seive.
I have no doubt that Trump people are countering these – possibly with lies of their own – or pretending to be DOJ sources.
I a sure that Trump and associates are having great fun playing the media.
It is as an example entirely possible that the “nuclear secrets” leak came from a Trump insider – deliberately raising uproar.
Though in the short term that harms Trump – in the long run DOJ ends up having egg on its face when it can not prove the nuclear documents claim. It ends up sounding like DOJ was lying to the press.
DOJ can solve the problem of being sabotaged by fake DOJ leaks trivially.
STOP LEAKING.
Regardless, this whole mess was a big mistake by DOJ/FBI/Biden and it is likely to be a story for a long long time.
It is going to be the next Collusion Delusion – only worse – because the Biden WH is part of this.
It is entirely possible that the Biden WH got played by Trump on this.
That from the start Trump was trying to create a record of cooperation while trying to goad the Biden WH into doing something stupid.
I do not beleive that is true – but it is not impossible. Trump is not stupid, and what better way back into the news and the top of the polls than to goad the Biden WH and the idiot children running the country into behaving stupidly.
Regardless, no matter what Trump’s role – the WH is responsible for its own actions.
And they screwed up big time.
I have not seen Turley accuse the Supreme Court ITSELF of malfeasance because some one leaked the draft of the Dobbs decision (overturning Roe v. Wade). So why does he assume that the Dept. of Justice or the FBI is the leaker here? There is no evidence that the heads of those agencies had anything to do with these leaks. If there were such evidence, I am sure that Turley would have told us about it.
There is no evidence that the heads of those agencies had anything to do with these leaks.
Past history informs the DoJ and the FBI have an infrastructure in place to leak info to support the Democrat party narrative.
Trump did not leak the story about Nuclear documents. Trump is not leaking the inventory that adds up the number of “marked” classified documents.
“Past history” shows the pendulum swings both ways…
Teddy Roosevelt established the Bureau of Investigation in 1908, which was the precursor to the FBI. His stated goal was to use the Bureau to spy on Democratic legislators.
During the McCarthy days, the FBI engaged in excessive use of wiretapping of leftist politicians. Here is a report of a leak to McCarthy in 1951: https://vault.fbi.gov/Sen.%20Joseph%20%28Joe%29%20McCarthy/Sen.%20Joseph%20%28Joe%29%20McCarthy%20Part%2050%20of%2056
You cannot selectively choose a particular time in history to make such a broad claim.
I did not choose a specific time. You have. I have not. I said the FBI/DoJ has an infrastructure in place to leak information to the media. That came out of the IG report on FBI corruption. There is no doubt the FBI/DoJ ‘plants’ information with the media, to push public opinion
You cut off…. “to support the Democrat party narrative.”
History also shows that the FBI has “infrastructure” in place to support the Republican party narrative. Thus, “history” doesn’t prove anything, ergo there is no evidence of the source of the leaks.
I suspect that Merrick Garland awaits his marching orders from Biden’s handlers before making any moves. Wouldn’t it be fascinating to hear the conversations between those telling Garland what to do and what he can say and Garland himself? Maybe we need a whistleblower or two in the WH and the Justice Department.
Professor Turley,
You note that releasing an affidavit is “less common” before charges. Can you please provide an example of when this has been done before? Any statistics on the prevalence of such a practice?
Also, please provide the nonpublic information that you have regarding the source of the leaks.
Assuming the leaker is the DOJ is just as irresponsible as assuming the SCOTUS leaker was liberal or conservative. Not long ago, you attacked Nina Totenberg for doing precisely what you are doing now: https://jonathanturley.org/2022/05/09/the-only-one-that-makes-sense-nprs-totenberg-claims-the-leading-theory-is-that-the-leaker-is-a-conservative-clerk/.
You should know better than to use facts on this blog. The Cult45 crowd could care less. And Turley proves it almost daily.
You’d hope Professor Turley would have viewpoint consistency from May to August on the exact same issue… for anyone who doubts he has now picked a side, here it is!
Your logic is impeccable. The leaks might not originate at the DoJ (including the FBI) at all. Every afternoon at 5, NYT reporters meet over steaks and scotches and concoct alleged leaks to fill out page 1 in the morning and outdo the WaPo. There’s a pee tape from a security camera in the restroom as they refine their inventions.
This guy makes Holder look like a saint.
Professor, in light that President Biden
* waved his predecessor’s “Executive Privileges” in 10/21 (J6) and,
* according to 5/12/22 NARA-letter, this opened the door for a grand jury subpoenia and
* the approve of a search warrant by a (biased) Magistrate instead of an Article III judge.:
An affidavit, redacted or not, shows one side of the coin: After the public will know part of Governments PoV:
Which kind of unsealed findings made you believe that AG will “earn trust of the public” from those who have an unfavorably opinion of Garland?
It’s entirely routine for search warrants to be approved by magistrate judges rather than Article III judges, and unless you’ve read the affidavit, you have no basis for calling Reinhart “biased” for approving the warrant. As he said, “the Court issued a search warrant for the Premises after finding probable cause that evidence of multiple federal crimes would be found at the Premises (“the Warrant”). … Having carefully reviewed the Affidavit before signing the Warrant, I was — and am — satisfied that the facts sworn by the affiant are reliable.”
Trump shouldn’t have taken material belonging to the government, and even after it was subpoenaed, he didn’t return it all. Trump is welcome to make his case to the court it he objects. So far, his lawyers have made such a bad argument that the other judge they were assigned to (Judge Cannon) has ordered them to submit another motion: “The Court is in receipt of 1 Plaintiff’s Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional Relief. To facilitate appropriate resolution, on or before August 26, 2022, Plaintiff shall file a supplement to the Motion further elaborating on the following: (1) the asserted basis for the exercise of this Court’s jurisdiction, whether legal, equitable/anomalous, or both; (2) the framework applicable to the exercise of such jurisdiction; (3) the precise relief sought, including any request for injunctive relief pending resolution of the Motion; (4) the effect, if any, of the proceeding before Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart; and (5) the status of Plaintiff’s efforts to perfect service on Defendant.”
1- If it’s ” entirely routine”,
* why did AG Garland revoke his decission, that DoJ speaks through its court filings?
* which events triggered AGs decission to go public after search warrant was executed?
* AG is Cabinet member in charge: How many cases went all the way up to his desk to seek a search warrant?
* How many search warrants got personally stamped by AG?
* why do we still discuss about this matter more than two weeks later?
2. For the bias: Search for “Bruce Reinhart John Lewis” or “Reinhart Trump Clinton”. At least some results share my sentiments.
To conlude: As President Biden will host a “United We Stand” summiit at WH on 9/15/22, everybody will decide if these actions will add to unite or devide America.
“It’s entirely routine for search warrants to be approved by magistrate judges . . .”
Not by one who clearly detests, and is biased against, the target of that warrant:
“John Lewis is the conscience of America. Donald Trump doesn’t have the moral stature to kiss John Lewis’s feet.” (Judge Bruce Reinhart)
You’re not quoting Reinhart. You’re quoting Robert Reich.
“You’re not quoting Reinhart. You’re quoting Robert Reich.”
You’re either lying or you’re lazy.
I already linked to a tweet where Reich said it. Here it is AGAIN:
https://twitter.com/rbreich/status/820328580731183104
Though I believe this, can we trust one who lies so much? Who invents stories?
“I already linked to a tweet . . .”
Again, you are either lazy or you are dishonest:
“Thank you, Robert Reich, for saying what many of us feel, ‘John Lewis is the conscience of America. Donald Trump doesn’t . . .” (Judge Reinhart — the judge who approved the General Warrant raid of MaL.)
(You are now free to disappear into, all by your lonesome, into usage obscurity.)
What does “usage obscurity” mean?
You’re admitting that Reinhart didn’t say what you dishonestly attributed to him. Instead, he said that he agreed with Reich.
Next you’ll be telling me that if I quote Turley and agree with what he said (which I do on occasion), that means the quote is my own words rather than his. It’s a ludicrous stance to take, especially given that you claim to have been a teacher.
Reinhart repeated what Reich said – that is SAYING IT.
You clearly don’t understand how quotation marks work.
Here is the entire tweet. Punctuation games do not save you even a tiny bit.
Reinhart not only quoted, but amplified, and endorsed Riechs remark.
He owns it.
https://100percentfedup.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/reinhart.png
I find the arguments of you left wing nuts very odd.
I am sure you would praise Reinhart for his attack on Trump – which is fine.
But then you want to argue that the attack wasn’t an attack when it might require him to recuse himself.
You can not have it both ways.
That is called logic.
And to be clear – This does not hinge on quotation marks – which is why YOU do not understand quotation marks.
“And to be clear – This does not hinge on quotation marks – which is why YOU do not understand quotation marks.”
ATS makes ridiculous arguments mostly attacking the fringes of another’s argument. You provided the context of the quote and ATS will still find another crazy item to argue over.
These targeted leaks are politically motivated, in order to bias the country against a former president. They have selected injurious leaks while withholding information that would benefit Trump.
There is systemic injustice in the Justice Department.
Karen S: as usual, you don’t know what you’re talking about. TRUMP’S lawyer leaked the letter. There’s no proof the DOJ leaked anything, and the NARA also published a letter. The NARA is NOT the DOJ. Turley is paid to throw dirt on the Biden Administration and to defend Trump. In the process, he is destroying whatever credibility he may have had as a legal scholar. Turley KNOWS that before an indictment, the object of an inquiry is NEVER given the Affidavit. Turley also KNOWS that the real reason Trump wants the Affidavit is to identify the snitch. He already knows the chain of events leading up to the search warrant–he was directly involved. He wants the snitch identified so their life can be put in danger, so they can be harassed and threatened and skewered in the alt-right media instead of being praised as the brave patriot he or she is. Trump is just manipulating the situation for his own benefit–and dupes like you fall for it every time.
What information “could benefit Trump’? He’s a proven thief and liar. It’s not subject to debate whether he stole TS/SCI documents. He did. According to reports, Pat Cipollini TOLD Trump that he had to turn them over–but he didn’t, so he can’t claim that he didn’t know it was wrong. It’s not subject to debate that he KNEW he had TS/SCI documents. They were packed up in the residential quarters of the White House, a location where they never should have been taken in the first place. Even sitting members of Congress cannot have copies and must view them only in a SCIF for national security reasons. Any number of maids, visitors, guests, florists, you name it, could have had access to them there. He personally went through the papers himself in December, and claimed, according to multiple sources: “they’re not theirs, they’re mine”. It’s not subject to debate that the NARA did everything short of a search warrant to get them back, beginning with polite requests, then a subpoena that yielded a perjurious affidavit from a Trump attorney, attesting that all of them were returned, more negotiations, and then, a search warrant. It’s not subject to debate that Trump sought to portray himself as a victim and has fund raised over this incident that is completely his own fault. Any patriot who cares about national security should be outraged.
I again ask the question: when will the Trump disciples wake up here and see what’s going on? Trump is dangerous. He has NO respect for national security. He keeps trying to play like he’s President, like he’s important, like the rules don’t apply to him, that he can do whatever he wants to, and that he will call down his army of disciples on the FBI or anyone else who crosses him. One of them is dead already due to his attacks on the FBI for requiring him to comply with the law on national security. He has put our sources and methods at risk. And when he is forced to comply with the law, he plays the victim of a situation that HE caused, and even solicits money.
Natacha, it must be a fractured and scary place inside your mind. You seem to have made an art form of dismantling. For proof: reread your own words. I hope you’re paid by the word.
Tootsiebug
It was Jim Comey who introduced the art of “official” leaks. This has been going on for decades, probably since the days that LBJ would have long private conversations with people like Joe Alsop from The Washington Post. This was a time when reporters valued their access and in turn were used by politicians to gauge public opinion. The technique morphed over time to where each side would use the other to advance something. In the case of the reporter, it was her career; in the case of the politician it was her career, too. How this process came to influence pubic policy is a facinating mutancy of what began as something beneficial. J. Edgar and Jack Anderson used it effectively to garner support against the Russians and Chinese. Comey used it to garner support against Trump. This latter use – or misuse – seems to be continuing with Comey’s successors at DOJ/FBI. How this will end, no one now knows but it certainly does need to end. The public is growing weary of having a corrupt media that supports a corrupt government. Perhaps Ron DeSantis will run for POTUS on a ticket that promises, if elected, he will appoint Donald Trump as director of the FBI. Now that would really upset the cognoscenti! 🙂
Darren,
It appears JetPack or WP seems to be having an issue.
A recent update that may have a bug?
It does seem to be a common problem lately. I checked but was unsuccessful in finding a list of problems with those services. The issue with logged in users showing as anonymous problem is in my view under the control of the entity that deals with the authentication handling and ordinary webmasters who host blogs do not have access to the code or modules that facilitate this bug. Sorry, but I don’t have an answer for this. About every year or so there is a low level bug that hits WordPress and affects many users. It usually is resolved within a few days.
DS: Thanks for tackling the problem so quickly and for the update.
Test Post
It failed again. Something is clearly wrong with the posting via the HTML version.
Have there been any leaks out of the DOJ that are harmful to Hunter or even Joe Biden? No? Imagine that. How about ‘leaks’ that intentionally harm Democrats? None? Imagine that.
Just because the Cult45 crowd likes to make up things, it doesn’t make them true.
FishWings wrote, “Just because the Cult45 crowd likes to make up things, it doesn’t make them true.”
After all the fabrications, lies and innuendo filled propaganda that was spewed by the Democratic Party, Democrats and the anti-Trump media since 2016 that statement from you is pure psychological projection.
The initial raid on Mar-a-Lago, the constant leaks from the investigation of anti-Trump propaganda ammunition to the media, the outright denials of involvement by the White House (plausible deniability?), the refusals of the Justice Department to give complete transparency and the refusal to immediately appoint a “master” to sort the documents when the FBI obtained them are all hallmarks of this being an unwarranted witch hunt motivated by pure politics. Now they’re going to try to destroy Trump with trickles of leaks generating libelous and slanderous propaganda while they intentionally strip Trump of the ability to refute any of the propaganda claims/innuendo.
I don’t like Donald Trump one darn bit, but if you ignore the real problems with what’s happening right now regarding this witch hunt then you are part of the problem.
Again, that’s my comment. I don’t know why it’s not posting my information.
That happens to me now too. I am Wen Bars, and yet everytime I post anything…I am now one of those Anonymous idiots.
Wen Bars
I can’t imagine anything worse than being mistaken for ATS.
Please, please sign your posts.
It seems to only be happening to conservative posters. I have not experienced that problem yet. Secret censorship by Turley perhaps?
Anonymous, you are not looking to marry DJT. You are looking for an administrator and leader. The only question is, do you like Trump’s policies, or prefer alternatives provided by Biden and the left?
Why do you justify your comments by saying, you don’t like? It sounds like virtue signaling. That is not helpful to the nation because the nation requires clarity based on facts and policy preferences.
There is no reason to appoint a special master. Trump says he wants to assert executive privilege, but the DOJ is part of the Executive Branch. Trump cannot assert executive privilege against the Executive Branch, and privileged documents by definition belong with NARA, not with Trump.
“There is no reason to appoint a special master.”
Of course there is. The Biden government raided Trump’s home, stole his property and now is using his personal documents to help the Biden Government maintain power.
The government didn’t steal anything. The had a legal warrant, and if Trump wants to challenge it, the place to do so is in court. But he’s going to need a better filing than the mess his lawyers submitted on Monday. Even the Trump-nominated judge that their motion was assigned to politely chided them about legal aspects that they failed to include but need to address. They have to submit a follow-up by tomorrow.
Anonymous:
You said, “the government didn’t steal anything.” That depends on whether they took more than the warrant, whether the warrant was overly broad, and if they did, in fact, seize privileged information.
Obama’s administration spied on Trump’s campaign, and then lied about it. Biden’s administration approved an armed raid on Trump’s private residence, and refused to allow his attorneys to observe what they did. Biden has already lied about not being briefed.
There is a pattern of abuse of power and the politicization of 3 letter agencies.
The only “pattern of abuse of power and politicization” is by Trump. He was told by his White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, and Pat Philbin, that ALL records generated during his failed “presidency” had to be given to the NARA. He refused to do it. The NARA tried for over a year and a half to get him to voluntarily return the documents. In response to a subpoena, he only turned over 15 boxes. His lawyer lied under oath about ALL NARA documents being returned. Further efforts to get voluntary return of the papers were futile-Trump forced the DOJ to obtain a warrant, which yielded 24 or so more boxes of documents, some of which were not only TS/SCI, but SAP–the highest possible level of sensitivity. All of this could have been avoided if Trump would simply have cooperatd with the NARA and not have taken the documents in the first place. Now, he’s once more playing the victim of problems he is totally responsible for causing. Plus, he raised over a million dollars over the “outrage” of “invading my beautiful home”.
Obama’s administration did not “spy” on Trump’s campaign. Our national security routinely monitors contacts between Russia and US people, and THAT’s what happened. That is routine surveillance. Biden was NOT briefed before the warrant was executed–there’s no proof of that. Trump wasn’t even there–but the Secret Service was.
Karen,
Trump cannot assert executive privilege against the DOJ, as it is **part of the Executive Branch**. On the contrary, his claim of executive privilege only underscores that the documents should have been in the possession of NARA. Trump has not asserted any other privilege.
Trump’s lawyers are so incompetent that Judge Cannon ordered them to “file a supplement to the Motion further elaborating on the following: (1) the asserted basis for the exercise of this Court’s jurisdiction, whether legal, equitable/anomalous, or both; (2) the framework applicable to the exercise of such jurisdiction; (3) the precise relief sought, including any request for injunctive relief pending resolution of the Motion; (4) the effect, if any, of the proceeding before Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart; and (5) the status of Plaintiff’s efforts to perfect service on Defendant.”
The FBI didn’t steal anything unless they took something that wasn’t covered by the warrant, which I doubt and which you certainly haven’t presented any evidence of.
“Of course there is. The Biden government raided Trump’s home, stole his property, and now is using his personal documents to help the Biden Government maintain power.”
LOL!! it wasn’t his property, to begin with. That is why the government went into MAL because he had stolen government property in his possession. Don’t get why trump supporters who are all about following the law cannot grasp the concept that Trump was NOT following the law. That is exactly why he is in trouble right now.
Amazing, the mouth can speak despite the lack of a brain.
For some reason this blog is posting my comments as “Anonymous”. It’s only started doing that in the past week or so. I am not Anonymous.
I’ve been having the same problems posting in the HTML version of this blog, I now have to post from within WordPress to get it to post my information. This is a new issue and one that needs to be addressed.
I am posting from WordPress and it shows up as anonymous.
Same
Test
I’m beginning to believe that the reason that the dems are so obsessed with Jan 6 is because they realize that we, the citizenry that still supports the constitution, know that it is time to rid ourselves of this tainted corrupt govrnment and start fresh. That would truly put the hurt to the lifestyles of certain government employees. There is no saving this government, at this point, by means of constitutional methods short of renouncing it and replacing it. The 3 branches of government are so infiltrated with partisans and corrupt ideologues that they cannot be moved. Evidence of this is easily seen in just the handling of hunter biden, hillary clinton and the covid event. A surplus of other evidence is easily available at any turn. The reason our founding fathers wanted small government is precisely because large bureaucracies will succumb to the lower proclivities of men and should, therefore, limit their access to power.
It’s rather ironic that Obama moved presidential records, mementos, etc. to a storage facility at the end of his presidency and the Archives went along with it. But then the archivist, Daniel Ferriero, was an Obama appointee just as the current archivist (acting) is a Biden appointee. By the way, Ferriero has expressed strong dislike for Trump and Republicans in general.
“Obama moved presidential records, mementos, etc. to a storage facility at the end of his presidency and the Archives went along with it.”
Nope. All of his records are in the possession of the Archives, which moved them to a storage facility. NARA is not Obama.
in other words the DOJ (FBI,DHS, IRS, CDC, EPA, NSA, etc) are 100% corrupt for Democrats!
Time to cut 50% of Federal Spending and move 75% of DC federal Government to the Heartland…DC is LOST!
I don’t have a problem with that. The Capitol should have been moved a century and a half ago when California became a state.
Democrat are fighting a civil war…Republicans aren’t!
Democrats are stealing as they can