The Department of Justice on Friday released a heavily redacted version of the affidavit used to justify the raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, showing that the FBI believed there to be probable cause of “evidence of obstruction” in the building.
The mostly blacked-out document lays out a timeline of what led up to the raid, showing that the criminal investigation began after the National Archives sent a referral to the Department of Justice on February 9, 2022, after they seized 15 boxes of documents from Mar-a-Lago. The affidavit does not, however, reveal new information pertaining to the eleven boxes of documents seized in the August 8 search.
After the FBI reviewed the initial 15 boxes, they determined that “there is probable cause to believe that additional documents that contain classified [National Defense Information] or that there are Presidential records subject to record retention requirements currently reside in the PREMISES,” the affidavit said.
“There is also probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found at the PREMISES,” it added.
The 15 boxes retrieved from Mar-a-Lago by the National Archives and Records Administration in January included “newspapers, magazines, printed news articles, photos, miscellaneous print-outs, notes, presidential correspondence, personal and post-presidential records and ‘a lot of classified records,’” according to the affidavit.
A search of the boxes revealed certain items marked classified, including “184 unique documents bearing classification markings, including 67 documents marked as CONFIDENTIAL, 92 documents marked as SECRET, and 25 documents marked as TOP SECRET,” the affidavit read.
Some of the sensitive documents had to do with the HUMINT Control System, which is a system “designed to protect intelligence information derived from clandestine human sources.”
“Of most significant concern was that highly classified records were unfoldered, intermixed with other records, and otherwise unproperly [sic] identified,” the affidavit read.
The markings also pertained to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which is designed to “protect intelligence information derived from the collection of information authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”
The DOJ also released a heavily-redacted legal brief justifying the redactions, saying, “the government has well-founded concerns that steps may be taken to frustrate or otherwise interfere with this investigation if facts in the affidavit were prematurely disclosed.”
U.S. magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart approved the release of the redacted version on Thursday, arguing that the DOJ’s redactions “are narrowly tailored to serve the Government’s legitimate interest in the integrity of the ongoing investigation.”
Reinhart said the DOJ convinced him that some parts of the affidavit should be redacted, as unsealing it fully would reveal “(1) the identities of witnesses, law enforcement agents, and uncharged parties, (2) the investigation’s strategy, direction, scope, sources, and methods, and (3) grand jury information.”
Reinhart, who also approved the warrant allowing the FBI to search Mar-a-Lago, ordered the DOJ to submit their redactions after a host of media outlets, including CNN, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, filed a motion requesting that the affidavit be unsealed.
The DOJ had previously said it would not unseal the affidavit, arguing that the release would interfere with the ongoing criminal investigation into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents.
Trump has called for the “immediate release” of the “unreacted” affidavit.
“In the interest of TRANSPARENCY, I call for the immediate release of the completely Unredacted Affidavit pertaining to this horrible and shocking BREAK-IN,” Trump said on Truth Social. “Also, the Judge on this case should recuse!”
The former president has also filed a lawsuit calling for the review of the seized materials to be stopped until a watchdog is appointed, and for the FBI to return all items not in the scope of the search warrant. The suit claimed he has been “fully cooperative.”