FBI: Trump mixed top secret docs with magazines, other items

1 / 4
The 17th page of the redacted version of an affidavit by the FBI in support of obtaining a search warrant for former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 27 August 2022
Follow

FBI: Trump mixed top secret docs with magazines, other items

  • FBI agents recovered plenty of classified documents, including many labelled "top secret" during a search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida
  • No space at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate was authorized for the storage of classified material, according to the court papers

WASHINGTON: Fourteen of the 15 boxes recovered from former President Donald Trump’s Florida estate early this year contained classified documents, many of them top secret, mixed in with miscellaneous newspapers, magazines and personal correspondence, according to an FBI affidavit released Friday.
No space at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate was authorized for the storage of classified material, according to the court papers, which laid out the FBI’s rationale for searching the property this month, including “probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found.”
The 32-page affidavit — heavily redacted to protect the safety of witnesses and law enforcement officials and “the integrity of the ongoing investigation” — offers the most detailed description to date of the government records being stored at Mar-a-Lago long after Trump left the White House. It also reveals the gravity of the government’s concerns that the documents were there illegally.

The document makes clear how the haphazard retention of top secret government records, and the apparent failure to safeguard them despite months of entreaties from US officials, has exposed Trump to fresh legal peril just as he lays the groundwork for another potential presidential run in 2024.
“The government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records,” an FBI agent wrote on the first page of the affidavit.




Pages from the affidavit by the FBI in support of obtaining a search warrant for former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate are photographed on Aug. 26, 2022. (AP)

Documents previously made public show that federal agents are investigating potential violations of multiple federal laws, including one that governs gathering, transmitting or losing defense information under the Espionage Act. The other statutes address the concealment, mutilation or removal of records and the destruction, alteration or falsification of records in federal investigations.
Trump has long insisted, despite clear evidence to the contrary, that he fully cooperated with government officials. And he has rallied Republicans behind him by painting the search as a politically motivated witch hunt intended to damage his reelection prospects. He repeated that refrain on his social media site Friday, saying he and his representatives had had a close working relationship with the FBI and “GAVE THEM MUCH.”

The affidavit does not provide new details about 11 sets of classified records recovered during the Aug. 8 search at Mar-a-Lago but instead concerns a separate batch of 15 boxes that the National Archives and Records Administration retrieved from the home in January. The Archives sent the matter to the Justice Department, indicating in its referral that a review showed “a lot” of classified materials, the affidavit says.
The affidavit made the case to a judge that a search of Mar-a-Lago was necessary due to the highly sensitive material found in those 15 boxes. Of 184 documents with classification markings, 25 were at the top secret level, the affidavit says.




The 17th page of the redacted version of an affidavit by the FBI in support of obtaining a search warrant for former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate. (Reuters)

Some had special markings suggesting they included information from highly sensitive human sources or the collection of electronic “signals” authorized by a special intelligence court.
And some of those classified records were mixed with other documents, including newspapers, magazines and miscellaneous print-outs, the affidavit says, citing a letter from the Archives.
Douglas London, a former senior CIA officer and author of “The Recruiter,” said this showed Trump’s lack of respect for controls. “One of the rules of classified is you don’t mix classified and unclassified so there’s no mistakes or accidents,” he said.
The affidavit shows how agents were authorized to search a large swath of Mar-a-Lago, including Trump’s official post-presidential “45 Office,” storage rooms and all other areas in which boxes or documents could be stored. They did not propose searching areas of the property used or rented by Mar-a-Lago members, such as private guest suites.
The FBI submitted the affidavit, or sworn statement, to a judge so it could obtain the warrant to search Trump’s property. Affidavits typically contain vital information about an investigation, with agents spelling out the justification for why they want to search a particular location and why they believe they’re likely to find evidence of a potential crime there.
The documents routinely remain sealed during pending investigations. But in an acknowledgment of the extraordinary public interest in the investigation, US Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart on Thursday ordered the department by Friday to make public a redacted version of the affidavit.
In a separate document unsealed Friday, Justice Department officials said it was necessary to redact some information to “protect the safety and privacy of a significant number of civilian witnesses, in addition to law enforcement personnel, as well as to protect the integrity of the ongoing investigation.”
The second half of the affidavit is almost entirely redacted, making it impossible to discern the scope of the investigation or where it might be headed. It does not reveal which individuals might be under investigation and it does not resolve core questions, such as why top secret documents were taken to Mar-a-Lago after the president’s term despite even though classified information requires special storage.




Pages from the affidavit by the FBI in support of obtaining a search warrant for former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate are photographed on Aug. 26, 2022. (AP)

Trump’s Republican allies in Congress were largely silent Friday as the affidavit emerged, another sign of the GOP’s reluctance to publicly part ways with the former president, whose grip on the party remains strong during the midterm election season. Both parties have demanded more information about the search, with lawmakers seeking briefings from the Justice Department and FBI once Congress returns from summer recess.
Though Trump’s spokesman derided the investigation as “all politics,” the affidavit makes clear the FBI search was hardly the first time federal law enforcement had expressed concerns about the records. The Justice Department’s top counterintelligence official, for instance, visited Mar-a-Lago last spring to assess how the documents were being stored.
The affidavit includes excerpts from a June 8 letter in which a Justice Department official reminded a Trump lawyer that Mar-a-Lago did not include a secure location authorized to hold classified records. The official requested that the room at the estate where the documents had been stored be secured, and that the boxes that were moved from the White House to Mar-a-Lago “be preserved in that room in their current condition until further notice.”
The back-and-forth culminated in the Aug. 8 search in which agents retrieved 11 sets of classified records.
The document unsealed Friday also offer insight into arguments the Trump legal team is expected to make. It includes a letter from Trump lawyer M. Evan Corcoran in which he asserts that a president has “absolute authority” to declassify documents and that “presidential actions involving classified documents are not subject to criminal sanction.”
Mark Zaid, a longtime national security lawyer who has criticized Trump for his handling of classified information, said the letter was “blatantly wrong” to assert Trump could declassify “anything and everything.”
“There are some legal, technical defenses as to certain provisions of the espionage act whether it would apply to the president,” Zaid said. “But some of those provisions make no distinction that would raise a defense.”
In addition, the affidavit includes a footnote from the FBI agent who wrote it observing that one of the laws that may have been violated doesn’t even use the term “classified information” but instead criminalizes the unlawful retention of national defense information.


Over 100 former senior officials warn against planned staff cuts at US State Department

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Over 100 former senior officials warn against planned staff cuts at US State Department

  • State Secretary Rubio faulted for recklessness in amid "unprecedented challenges from strategic competitors, ongoing conflicts, and emerging security threats"

WASHINGTON: More than 130 retired diplomats and other former senior US officials issued an open letter on Thursday criticizing a planned overhaul of the State Department that could see thousands of employees laid off.
“We strongly condemn Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s announced decision to implement sweeping staff reductions and reorganization at the US Department of State,” the officials said in the letter.
The signatories included dozens of former ambassadors and senior officials, including Susan Rice, who served as national security adviser under President Barack Obama, a Democrat.
The timing of the cuts remains unclear, with the US Supreme Court expected to weigh in at any moment on a bid by US President Donald Trump’s administration to halt a judicial order blocking the firings.
The administration in late May notified Congress of a plan to overhaul its diplomatic corps that could cut thousands of jobs, including hundreds of members of its elite Foreign Service who advocate for US interests in the face of growing assertiveness from adversaries such as China and Russia.
Initial plans to send the notices last month were halted after a federal judge on June 13 temporarily blocked the State Department from implementing the reorganization plan.
The shake-up forms part of a push by Trump to shrink the federal bureaucracy, cut what he says is wasteful spending and align what remains with his “America First” priorities.
“At a time when the United States faces unprecedented challenges from strategic competitors, ongoing conflicts, and emerging security threats, Secretary Rubio’s decision to gut the State Department’s institutional knowledge and operational capacity is reckless,” the former officials wrote. 

 

 

 


US Supreme Court sides with Trump in South Sudan deportation fight

Updated 22 min 32 sec ago
Follow

US Supreme Court sides with Trump in South Sudan deportation fight

  • Trump administration has sought to deport 8 migrants to unstable South Sudan
  • District judge had said the deportation attempt violated his injunction

WASHINGTON: The US Supreme Court again sided with President Donald Trump’s administration in a legal fight over deporting migrants to countries other than their own, lifting on Thursday limits a judge had imposed to protect eight men who the government sought to send to politically unstable South Sudan.
The court on June 23 put on hold Boston-based US District Judge Brian Murphy’s April 18 injunction requiring migrants set for removal to so-called “third countries” where they have no ties to get a chance to tell officials they are at risk of torture there, while a legal challenge plays out.
The court on Thursday granted a Justice Department request to clarify that its June 23 decision also extended to Murphy’s separate May 21 ruling that the administration had violated his injunction in attempting to send a group of migrants to South Sudan. The US State Department has urged Americans to avoid the African nation “due to crime, kidnapping and armed conflict.”
Two liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented from the decision.
The court said that Murphy should now “cease enforcing the April 18 injunction through the May 21 remedial order.”
Murphy’s May 21 order mandating further procedures for the South Sudan-destined migrants prompted the US government to keep the migrants at a military base in Djibouti. Murphy also clarified at the time that non-US citizens must be given at least 10 days to raise a claim that they fear for their safety.
After the Supreme Court lifted Murphy’s April injunction on June 23, the judge promptly ruled that his May 21 order “remains in full force and effect.” Calling that ruling by the judge a “lawless act of defiance,” the Justice Department the next day urged the Supreme Court to clarify that its action applied to Murphy’s May 21 decision as well.
Murphy’s ruling, the Justice Department said in court filings, has stalled its “lawful attempts to finalize the long-delayed removal of those aliens to South Sudan,” and disrupted diplomatic relations. Its agents are being “forced to house dangerous criminal aliens at a military base in the Horn of Africa that now lies on the borders of a regional conflict,” it added.
Even as it accused the judge of defying the Supreme Court, the administration itself has been accused of violating judicial orders including in the third-country deportation litigation.
The administration has said its third-country policy is critical for removing migrants who commit crimes because their countries of origin are often unwilling to take them back. The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal members dissented from the June 23 decision pausing Murphy’s injunction, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor calling it a “gross abuse” of the court’s power that now exposes “thousands to the risk of torture or death.”
After the Department of Homeland Security moved in February to step up rapid deportations to third countries, immigrant rights groups filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of a group of migrants seeking to prevent their removal to such places without notice and a chance to assert the harms they could face.
In March, the administration issued guidance providing that if a third country has given credible diplomatic assurance that it will not persecute or torture migrants, individuals may be deported there “without the need for further procedures.”
Murphy found that the administration’s policy of “executing third-country removals without providing notice and a meaningful opportunity to present fear-based claims” likely violates due process requirements under the US Constitution. Due process generally requires the government to provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking certain adverse actions.
The Justice Department on Tuesday noted in a filing that the administration has received credible diplomatic assurances from South Sudan that the aliens at issue will not be subject to torture.”
The Supreme Court has let Trump implement some contentious immigration policies while the fight over their legality continues to play out. In two decisions in May, it let Trump end humanitarian programs for hundreds of thousands of migrants to live and work in the United States temporarily. The justices, however, faulted the administration’s treatment of some migrants as inadequate under constitutional due process protections.

 


Russian shelling kills five in and near eastern Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk

Updated 57 min 6 sec ago
Follow

Russian shelling kills five in and near eastern Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk

  • Two people had been killed in Pokrovsk, a key logistics hub

KYIV: Russian shelling killed five people on Thursday in and near the eastern Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk, the regional governor said, a key target under Russian attack for months.

Vadym Filashkin, writing on the Telegram messaging app, said two people had been killed in Pokrovsk, a key logistics hub, where local authorities have been urging residents to evacuate.

Two died in Bylitske, northwest of Pokrovsk, and another in Illinivka, between Pokrovsk and Kramatorsk, another frequent target in Russia’s slow westward advance through Donetsk region.


University of California reiterates ban on student government boycotts of Israel

Updated 03 July 2025
Follow

University of California reiterates ban on student government boycotts of Israel

SAN FRANCISCO: The president of the University of California this week reiterated that student governments are prohibited from financial boycotts of companies associated with any particular country, including Israel, as the Trump administration continues its probe of alleged antisemitism on college campuses.
Michael Drake did not mention Israel by name, but he did single out student governments in a letter he sent to chancellors of the university system. He said that while freedom of speech and inquiry are core commitments of the university, its policies also require that financial decisions be grounded in sound business practices, such as competitive bidding.
“This principle also applies to student governments,” he wrote. “Actions by University entities to implement boycotts of companies based on their association with a particular country would not align with these sound business practices.”
UC spokesperson Rachel Zaentz said in a statement that the letter is in keeping with the university’s opposition to financial boycotts of companies associated with a particular country.
“While our community members have the right to express their viewpoints, financial boycotts are inconsistent with UC’s commitment to sound business practices, academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas,” she said.
College campuses exploded with pro-Palestinian protests in the wake of the war in Gaza, including a particularly brutal clash involving police at the University of California, Los Angeles last year. At the start of his term this year, President Donald Trump launched antisemitism probes at several universities, including the University of California, Berkeley.
The US Department of Health and Human Services and National Science Foundation are requiring research grantees to certify they will not engage in boycotts of Israel or promote diversity, inclusion and equity or risk federal funding.
The UC Student Association, which represents students across the campuses, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But its president, Aditi Hariharan, told the Los Angeles Times that she disagreed with the ban.
“Students already have little influence on how the university works, and student government is one of the few places where they can really get involved and have their voices heard,” she said in an interview before the letter was released.


Putin told Trump will not ‘give up’ aims in Ukraine: Kremlin

Updated 03 July 2025
Follow

Putin told Trump will not ‘give up’ aims in Ukraine: Kremlin

  • The two leaders spoke as US-led peace talks on ending the more than three-year-old conflict in Ukraine have stalled
  • Putin said the Russian side was ready to continue negotiation process

MOSCOW: Russian leader Vladimir Putin told US President Donald Trump by telephone on Thursday that Moscow will not “give up” on its aims in Ukraine, the Kremlin said.
The pair spoke as US-led peace talks on ending the more than three-year-old conflict in Ukraine have stalled and after Washington paused some weapons shipments to Kyiv.
The Kremlin said the call lasted almost an hour.
Trump has been frustrated with both Moscow and Kyiv as US efforts to end fighting have yielded no breakthrough.
“Our president said that Russia will achieve the aims it set, that is to say the elimination of the root causes that led to the current state of affairs,” Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters.
“Russia will not give up on these aims.”
Moscow has long described its maximalist aims in Ukraine as getting rid of the “root causes” of the conflict, demanding that Kyiv give up its NATO ambitions.
Moscow’s offensive in Ukraine has killed hundreds of thousands of people and Russia now controls large swathes of eastern and southern Ukraine.
Even so, Putin told Trump that Moscow would continue to take part in negotiations.
“He also spoke of the readiness of the Russian side to continue the negotiation process,” Ushakov added.
“Vladimir Putin said that we are continuing to look for a political, negotiated solution to the conflict,” Ushakov said.
Moscow has for months refused to agree to a US-proposed ceasefire in Ukraine.
Kyiv and its Western allies have accused Putin of dragging out the process while pushing on with Russia’s advance in Ukraine.
The Kremlin said that Putin had also “stressed” to Trump that all conflicts in the Middle East should be solved “diplomatically,” after the US struck nuclear sites in Russia’s ally Iran.
Putin and Trump spoke as Kyiv said that Russian strikes on Thursday killed at least eight people in Ukraine.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was visiting ally Denmark on Thursday.
A senior Ukrainian official told AFP that Trump and Zelensky planned to speak to each other on Friday.
The US deciding to pause some weapons shipments has severely hampered Kyiv, which has been reliant on Western military support since Moscow launched its offensive in 2022.
Zelensky told EU allies in Denmark that doubts over US military aid reinforced the need for greater cooperation with Brussels and NATO.
He stressed again that Kyiv had always supported Trump’s “unconditional ceasefire.”
On Wednesday, Kyiv scrambled to clarify with the US what a White House announcement on pausing some weapons shipments meant.
“Continued American support for Ukraine, for our defense, for our people is in our common interest,” Zelensky had said on Wednesday.
Russia has consistently called for Western countries to stop sending weapons to Kyiv.