U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart said the government is required by law to show why the redacted version should not be released, and prosecutors’ arguments Thursday failed to convince him. He gave them a week to submit a copy of the affidavit offering information he wants to keep secret after the FBI seized classified and top-secret information during a search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate last week.
The hearing was called after several news organizations, including the Associated Press, sought to release additional records related to last week’s search, including an affidavit. It is believed to contain key details about the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Trump kept and mishandled classified and confidential government documents.
The Justice Department strongly opposes releasing any part of the affidavit, saying it would jeopardize the ongoing investigation, expose the identities of witnesses and could prevent others from coming forward and cooperating with the government.
However, lawyers for the news organizations argued that the unprecedented nature of the Justice Department’s investigation required public disclosure.
“You can’t trust what you can’t see,” said Chuck Tobin, a lawyer representing the AP and several other news outlets.
In addition to the redaction order, the judge agreed to release other documents, including the cover page of the warrant, the Justice Department’s motion to seal the documents and the judge’s order requiring them to be sealed.
Those documents revealed that the FBI was specifically investigating the “deliberate withholding of national defense information,” the withholding or deletion of government documents and obstruction of a federal investigation.
Jay Bratt, the Justice Department’s top national security attorney, argued that the affidavit should remain withheld from the public. The unsealing, he said, would provide a “road map” of the investigation — which is in its “early stages” — and reveal the next steps federal agents and prosecutors should take.
He argued that it was in the public interest for the investigation to be conducted smoothly, including the examination of witnesses.
As the hearing began, a small motorcade of cars bearing Trump flags drove past the federal courthouse in West Palm Beach, Florida. Trump’s attorney, Christina Bobb, was at the courthouse Thursday, but said she was only there to observe the proceedings.
Brat argued in court that even a redacted version of the document could reveal investigative actions or create an opportunity for detectives or those under investigation to identify witnesses in the case. He also argued that the Justice Department has already taken rare steps to ensure transparency, including asking a court to unseal the warrant and asset recovery receipt that were released last week.
“There is heightened interest,” he admitted. “It’s probably an unprecedented situation.”
In a Truth Social post last week, Trump called for the unredacted affidavit to be released in the interest of transparency.
Reinhart gave the government until next Thursday to submit its version of the proposed redactions, along with a line-by-line written argument for each. He said he would then review the proposal and make his own proposed redactions, then perhaps meet with state lawyers to give them a final argument as to why specific information should be withheld.
Justice Department prosecutors have argued in court documents that the investigation into Trump’s handling of “top secret material” is ongoing and that the document contains confidential witness information.
In a recent statement, Brato and Juan Antonio Gonzalez, the U.S. Attorney in Miami, said the release of the affidavit “would cause significant and irreparable harm to this ongoing criminal investigation.”
“If disclosed, the affidavit would serve as a road map for the government’s investigation, detailing its direction and likely course in a manner that is highly likely to compromise future investigative actions,” they wrote.
FBI agents searched Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate on August 8, seizing 11 sets of classified documents, some of which were not only marked top secret, but also “classified information in compartments.” a receipt for what was taken was released on Friday. This is a special category designed to protect the country’s most important secrets that, if publicly disclosed, could cause “extremely serious” harm to US interests. Court records do not provide specific details about what the documents may contain.
Balsamo reported from New York.
https://www.gettysburgtimes.com/news/national/article_77d1ebab-3f35-5f7b-a0a8-d840bb0ffb76.html
