Judge Orders Justice Dept. to Redact and Release Version of Affidavit Used to Search Trump's Home

[swag]

Source: New York Times

By Patricia Mazzei and Alan Feuer
Aug. 18, 2022, 2:20 p.m. ET

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A federal judge on Thursday ordered the government to redact and ultimately release a version of the highly sensitive warrant affidavit that was used to justify a search by the F.B.I. last week of former President Donald J. Trump’s private home and club.

Ruling from the bench, the judge, Bruce E. Reinhart, said that there were portions of the affidavit that “could be presumptively unsealed.”

“Whether those portions would be meaningful for the public or the media,” he added, was not for him to decide.

Judge Reinhart’s surprising decision struck a middle course between the Justice Department, which wanted to keep the affidavit entirely under wraps as its investigation into Mr. Trump’s handling of classified documents continued, and a group of news media organizations, which requested that it be released in full to the public.

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/18/us/politics/trump-fbi-affidavit-warrant.html

[onecaliberal]

1. Redact it all and release it. This is fucking bonkers.

[we can do it]

2. This 👆🏽is bonkers.

drump wants the affidavit unsealed because it will let him know who to intimidate and attack for outing him. Plus, it will compromise any ongoing investigation.

[Claustrum]

3. Also to intimidate any potential people that is involved that might be subpoena at a later time.

He did it during the Mueller investigation and he kept contacting people that were going to testify/speak to Mueller.

[SheltieLover]

33. Absolutely!

[SheltieLover]

32. This!👆

[JustAnotherGen]

58. This

[FarPoint]

10. Exactly

Much more redaction than even the Muller report....just give name/ tRump, address, time, date....

[ananda]

18. Exactly. Redact all names but Trump's.

...

[Rebl2]

41. Sounds good

possibly

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. What is the judge's legal justification for this?

Commentary I had heard before now said "you don't release affadivits before any charges are made, there's no legal requirement to". NYT paywall, so I can't look further. Being between the DoJ and media organizations is not legal reasoning; it's a strategy for timid commentators or politicians (eg Andrew Yang).

OK, the media argument seemed to be "we want it now, we're impatient, and we get what we want!!!". And the judge is siding with the toddlers:

Attorneys for media outlets including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, ABC News and NBC News are asking a US magistrate judge, Bruce Reinhart, to unseal the affidavit and other related materials filed with the court, saying the public’s right to know and the historic significance of the search outweigh any arguments to keep the records sealed.

“The affidavit of probable cause should be released to the public, with only those redactions that are necessary to protect a compelling interest articulated by the government,” attorneys for the media companies wrote in a filing.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2022/aug/18/trump-affidavit-fbi-hearing-weisselberg-pence-politics-latest-updates?page=with:block-62fe78d28f083ef020e70410#block-62fe78d28f083ef020e70410

I can see it's good for business, but surely we haven't reached the point where "what's good for NBC is good for America" is legal doctrine?

[Alexander Of Assyria]

7. So the DOJ is good with the decision...so I m good with it!

tRump will learn nothing that reveals sources or menthols…or ongoing investigative techniques.

He will cry! Mark it on your diary!

[agingdem]

15. The judge played Trump and his screeching minions

and Garland knows it..Donnie, his vile little GOP playmates, and the MSM want names..redactions, anyone???

[Alexander Of Assyria]

16. Fairly clear all tRump will get is procedural papers shedding zero light on anything much!

As it should be and has always been with investigatory warrants.

[Fullduplexxx]

25. Next they llbitch about the redactions

[agingdem]

26. releasing the affidavit was never about the search

it was about exposing the "rat", doxxing the the FBI agents, and unleashing Trump's rabid dogs..

[muriel_volestrangler]

44. I have no idea where you've got "the DOJ is good with the decision" from

A magistrate judge in Florida on Thursday said, despite Justice Department objections, he may seek to unseal portions of the affidavit supporting the search warrant executed at former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate last week.

After hearing in-person arguments on a request from a coalition of media outlets to make the affidavit public, the judge said might decide that at least a portion of could be unsealed with government redactions.

The Justice Department had urged the judge, Bruce Reinhart, to keep the affidavit fully under seal, arguing that if it were to be made public it could "cause significant and irreparable damage" to an ongoing criminal investigation involving highly classified materials related to national security.
...
DOJ would likely seek an immediate appeal on any ruling by Judge Reinhart that would reveal further substantive details underlying their investigation.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/judge-seek-unseal-portions-mar-lago-affidavit-doj/story?id=88492541

A federal judge in Florida on Thursday ordered the US justice department to redact and prepare for possible release the affidavit used to justify the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump’s home, earlier this month.
...
The Department of Justice (DoJ) opposed release of the affidavit. Reinhart said portions of it “could be presumptively unsealed”.

“I’m not prepared to find that the affidavit should be fully sealed,” Reinhart said, adding that he believed there were “portions” that could be released.

Reinhart asked the justice department to provide him proposals for a redacted version within seven days which he would then consider.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/18/trump-redacted-affidavit-release-mar-a-lago-fbi-search

A federal magistrate judge has given the Department of Justice one week to provide a redacted copy of the affidavit used to justify the unprecedented FBI search of former President Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence, saying that he believes the affidavit should be partially released.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart ruled the DOJ must turn over the redacted version by next Thursday at noon. The affidavit will remain sealed during any appeals, he said.
...
While the Justice Department asked the court to unseal the warrant, citing intense public interest, it has argued strongly against releasing the affidavit, saying doing so could compromise its investigation, other probes, the possibility of future witness cooperation and the safety of agents and individuals named in the affidavit.

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/18/1118240659/justice-department-must-provide-redacted-mar-a-lago-affidavit-judge-says

[Bev54]

39. It is not really what he said, he asked them to come back next week with whatever

they think they could redact for release and/or they will have a one on one talk with the judge at that time. If the DOJ shows that there would primarily be an almost fully redacted document therefore would do no good for any public interest, the judge could just decide not to bother releasing it. This was a kick the can down the road because he did not ask the DOJ prior hearings what they thought would be redacted.

[IndianaDave]

52. I'm glad that you clarified this.

A lot of folks have misinterpreted what the judge actually said and did. As you point out, he has given the DOJ time to show him what a rdacted affidavit would look like, and - eventually - he and the DOJ will decide if it's worth releasing, in view of the expected large amount of redacted material. Good info! Thanks, Bev!

[muriel_volestrangler]

53. He said he wants some of it released

“I’m not prepared to find that the affidavit should be fully sealed,” Reinhart said. “There are portions of this affidavit that can be unsealed.”

https://www.voanews.com/a/judge-considers-releasing-redacted-affidavit-used-in-trump-search/6706548.html

So there isn't an "if it's worth releasing"; he said he'll release something, and others can decide if it's meaningful:

The judge said he believes there are portions of it that presumptively could be unsealed -- whether they would be meaningful is for someone else to decide, he said. The government may disagree with him on some points, he said, giving DOJ until next Thursday to file its proposed redactions.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/expect-thursdays-hearing-unsealing-mar-lago-search-affidavit/story?id=88492541

[Bev54]

60. And the DOJ can appeal his decision so it is kicking the can down the road.

I hope by the time they get to the actual final decision, Trump et al will be charged and make the decision mute.

[muriel_volestrangler]

61. No, a judge making a decision that can be appealed is not "kicking the can down the road"

All kinds of judicial decisions can be appealed; we don't say they are "kicking the can down the road".

[Novara]

5. This isn't a done deal yet

The DOJ will present a redacted version to the judge next Thursday and then he'll decide if it's OK. If not, they dicker over it some more.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

17. Shhhh....how will media pundits make any money off of facts and knowledge of the law??

[lark]

21. I totally expect there to be several rounds on this thing.

DOJ redacts everything, judge says no, they release a little more, judge still says no, etc. I could be mistaken, but hope & expect Garlands DOJ stands firm on removing all names and national security information and hope this judge doesn't put his thumb on the scale for drumpf and against America.

[Novara]

42. I think that's likely

But wouldn't it be great if the DOJ indicts the motherfucker before then, making the whole thing moot?

[lark]

54. Yes.

.Although I think you are being quite optimistic.

[Novara]

55. hey, a girl can dream

[lark]

57. & that is an awesome dream, for sure!!

[slightlv]

47. He did say something in the article

about expecting the redacted version to sound like gibberish. Or at least, not being surprised it would sound like gibberish to the average individual reading the redacted version.

[Lochloosa]

6. My guess this will be appealed and overturned.

Without charges being filed, and in the middle of an investigation, this is nuts.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

8. DOJ is good with it! Meaning the media is not! Interlocutory judgment, not appealable.

[Lochloosa]

19. Thanks

[SheltieLover]

34. I sure hope so!

Nuts is right!!!

[msfiddlestix]

9. Fair enough, I think this can be done in the interest of some measure of transparency

carefully redact what is necessary to protect the investigation/prosecution

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. Other sources are describing this as "minor procedural documents", not the affidavit itself

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217059099

DOJ is apparently in agreement with the ruling.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. No, other sources are saying the minor procedural documents must be released in full

That's the part the DoJ is OK with. The DoJ argued that the affidavit should not be made public at all.

[OneCrazyDiamond]

12. Let it be as redacted as the Mueller Farse. n/t

[inthewind21]

13. This

is not accurate. The judge asked the DOJ to redact it and send to him. There will be another hearing to decide if it gets released or not.

[Ferrets are Cool]

30. This was my understanding.

[SheltieLover]

35. Ty for clarifying!

[EndlessWire]

14. Chipping away at America's security.

I thought that this court action was the result of Trump's lawyers plus various newsgroups requesting the release of the affidavit. Now, the lawyers are not mentioned.

“This is going to be a considered, careful process,” Judge Reinhart said.

Aw, bullshit. You caved. If anything happens to any of the affidavit names, it's on you. And, it sounds to me like you are just going to pick any version that has the most info on it.

And shame to the newsgroups who demanded this. You could have found out when Trump is indicted. But, like mercenary fucks, you don't care what you do to the rest of us.

Everyone wants to know what's in the affidavit. So do I. But, not at the expense of some witness's safety. Or, the various leads that might be visible.

Anybody else and this would be a non issue. Next, if it is heavily redacted, they'll complain that the stuff they can't see is the very stuff that they need to know about.

Just indict the asshole already.

[Katinfl]

20. The media is requesting for it to be unsealed

Not trump’s lawyers. There were in court but said nothing. The press is the reason this is in court. First amendment right and all that I guess. The DOJ should redact the hell out of it so it makes no sense when opened.

[Karma13612]

22. Does the public

USUALLY get to see affidavits?

If not, then why the f*ck are they giving in?

It’s an ongoing investigation FFS.

[Deminpenn]

23. It's going to be mostly redacted like the parts of

the Mueller court documents and others were there were entire pages blacked out.

[C Moon]

24. The GOP has found a way to make a traitor to his own country, appear to be the victim.

Now the media is going to spread this like a California wildfire.

[BumRushDaShow]

27. All the big news sources are issuing corrections to say the judge did not order "release"

just "redaction" and then he'll decide what can be released later.

Just saw the NYT changed their headline to - "Judge May Release Affidavit in Trump Search, but Only After Redaction" and WaPo just sent a breaking saying that they "mischaracterized a judge's order".

Judge signals he’s willing to unseal some of Mar-a-Lago affidavit


By Josh Dawsey and Perry Stein

Updated August 18, 2022 at 3:02 p.m. EDT|Published August 18, 2022 at 11:37 a.m. EDT

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A federal judge said Thursday that he is “inclined” to unseal some of the affidavit central to last week’s FBI search of former president Donald Trump’s Florida home, instructing the Justice Department to redact the document in a way that would not undermine its ongoing investigation if made public.

Federal Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart said from the bench that he would make a determination next Thursday, after the government submits proposed redactions.

Reinhart convened the hearing after multiple news outlets, including the Washington Post, called on the court to release all of the materials related to the search for classified documents at Mar-A-Lago, Trump’s Florida home and residence. Attorneys for those organizations have argued that the affidavit should be made public given the “historic importance” of the Justice Department’s investigation.

“Transparency serves the public interest in understanding and accepting the results. That’s good for the government and for the court,” Charles Tobin, a lawyer representing the media outlets, said in court on Thursday. “You can’t trust what you cannot see.”

(snip)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/18/trump-mar-a-lago-affidavit/

[onetexan]

49. I heard Neal Katyal confirm such as well

[BumRushDaShow]

50. They have been changing their headlines and content to walk it back a bit

although I know they were the main initiators of getting access, so they all seemed to jump the gun when they saw some sign that the judge found merit in their request.

I think they will probably get some portion of it - heavily redacted - but probably not all of it (even if redacted).

[skypilot]

28. Next up:

Screaming and whining for the unredacted version.

[Scalded Nun]

29. Redact away, ala Muller. Just be sure to protect the innocent!

[KS Toronado]

31. Redact it all except "DOJ vs FailedCoupGuy"

[SheltieLover]

37. This!👆

[ThoughtCriminal]

36. Republican reaction

But if names and positions are redacted, we won't know what witnesses to intimidate!

I guess they will just have to threaten everyone.

[somaticexperiencing]

38. what an asshole. is everyone an asshole now? what legal purpose does this serve?

how is justice to be done under these conditions?

[kacekwl]

40. Just black the whole thing out

Except the parts that expose trump.

[GreenWave]

43. What did Garland want released last week if Trump did not object?

Is this different?

Sorry only 10 meetings at job today.

[muriel_volestrangler]

46. That was the warrant, which had already been given to Mar-a-Lago and Trump's lawyers

That told Trump et al what the FBI were allowed to do. This is about the underlying DoJ case that they presented to this magistrate judge. They want to keep that inside the DoJ.

In TV police terms, think of this as the media asking to be allowed into the police incident room before any charges are laid, to look at the big board with all the photos, connecting lines and so on. The judge is saying "let them in, after you've sorted out with me what to cover".

[GreenWave]

48. TY!

[jgo]

51. Unless I'm missing something ...

this judge is plain nuts. All he is doing is adding to the sideshow nature of the affair. There apparently is no case law or precedent that supports this - (lawyers welcome to chime in). This could establish a new precedent for every warrant executed, that a redacted version needs to be produced - doesn't make any sense. It seems like the judge is just making things up. DOJ should appeal this, independent of whether it helps or hurts in this case. The appeal process will drag out for a long time, fueling the sideshow.

[LiberalFighter]

56. Review the judge's finances.

[JustAnotherGen]

59. The irony is

The media will place a headline -

Affidavit Released!

Then do a hit job about 'Democrats in Disarray' and Hunter's laptop, and 2024 and, and, and . . .

They aren't going to do anything but turn it into a referendum on Biden, Schumer, and Pelosi.