That much was evident earlier this month when the FBI raided Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate after he and his legal team had been cooperating for months with federal investigators sent by the National Archives to see what 'classified documents' he took with him after his stolen election.
During the unprecedented raid, according to Trump himself as well as various reports, agents confiscated several documents that should not have been taken -- those having to do with attorney-client privilege and executive privilege. And now, the former president wants them back but he isn't going to just rely on the Biden regime to do the right thing. As such, according to reports this week, he will ask a federal court to appoint an independent third party to review those documents and have them returned to him pronto.
“The request for a so-called special master to review the documents could be filed as soon as Monday in Florida, the person said, requesting anonymity because the matter isn’t public. Trump also plans to ask for a court order requiring the Department of Justice to provide more details about the property that was seized and to return materials that weren’t covered by the warrant, the person said,” Bloomberg News reported.
The outlet continued:
Trump had previously asserted that some of the records taken from his Mar-a-Lago resort were protected by attorney-client privilege.
Federal Bureau of Investigation agents carted away about 20 boxes containing 11 sets of classified documents — some of them labeled top secret — following the Aug. 8 search. Trump’s passports have already been returned, and it’s unclear what documents the former president claims are protected by the privilege.
Earlier Monday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, who signed off on the overly broad FBI search warrant in the first place, rejected a DOJ argument regarding document disclosure while calling the raid he authorized "unprecedented."
In a ruling, he wrote that he rejected “the Government’s argument that the present record justifies keeping the entire Affidavit" used to describe what was taken from Trump "under seal.”
“The Government argues that even requiring it to redact portions of the Affidavit that could not reveal agent identities or investigative sources and methods imposes an undue burden on its resources and sets a precedent that could be disruptive and burdensome in future cases,” Reinhart wrote. “I do not need to reach the question of whether, in some other case, these concerns could justify denying public access; they very well might.”
He noted further: “Particularly given the intense public and historical interest in an unprecedented search of a former President’s residence, the Government has not yet shown that these administrative concerns are sufficient to justify sealing.”
For the record, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution states plainly: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
This was not done in Trump's case; Reinhart authorized a warrant that was overly broad, overly specific, and did not "particularly" describe the "things to be seized."
Former Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), now CEO of Trump Media & Technology Group, ripped the raid as entirely political.
So again, this is a continued investigation of Trump and the Republican Party. It’s basically an investigation in search of a crime. And then conveniently, they brought back the Mueller witch hunt argument that ‘Oh, my God, he’s he’s obstructing justice,’” he said.
“Obstructing justice on what? You jerks!” Nunes added.
Sources include:
Please contact us for more information.
