Judge paves way for partial release of affidavit into FBI search against Trump

Washington: The US media argued full disclosure was in the public interest.

The Federal Justice Department warned its investigation could be compromised.

And in the end, the judge overseeing the case found some middle ground, ordering the government to produce a redacted version of the affidavit used to justify the FBI raid against Donald Trump.

Former US president Donald Trump.Credit:Bloomberg

Ten days after the unprecedented search for classified documents at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property, Judge Bruce Reinhart ruled on Friday (AEST) that sections of the affidavit “could be presumptively unsealed”. He has given the Justice Department a week to redact the documents in a way that would not compromise its probe if details were to be made public.

The ruling paves the way for the partial release of crucial information that could shed further light on the reasons for last week’s search. It came after a 90-minute hearing that was set in motion by media outlets – including The New York Times, The Washington Post, NBC and CNN – calling for the affidavit to be fully unsealed.

“Before the events of this week, not since the Nixon administration had the federal government wielded its power to seize records from a former president in such a public fashion,” they said in a court filing.

The Justice Department, however, disagreed. Last week, it approved the release of the search warrant and property receipt into the Mar-a-Lago raid, which revealed the FBI had retrieved 11 sets of classified documents as part of a probe into potential violations of the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice laws.

The department opposed unsealing the affidavit: The head of the Justice Department’s counterintelligence division Jay Bratt explained in court that doing so would “provide a roadmap to the investigation” into Trump’s potential mishandling of the documents, which he said was still “open and in its early stages”.

He also said the nation was in a “volatile” state and that releasing sensitive information could “chill” current and future witnesses.

“This is not a precedent we want to set,” said Bratt. “The government is very concerned about the safety of witnesses in this case.”

Reinhart, however – whose own life has been threatened by Trump supporters since he signed off on the warrant – said he was “not prepared to find that the affidavit should be fully sealed”.

He has given the department until midday next Thursday (US time) to suggest which portions should remain a secret before making a final decision.

The battle over the affidavit is the latest development in the ongoing criminal investigation stemming from Trump’s decision to take sensitive documents from the White House when his term ended last year.

But while Trump on Monday used his Truth Social platform to call for the affidavit to be released unredacted “in the interest of TRANSPARENCY”, his lawyers have so far not filed a motion to support this push.

Allen Weisselberg, chief financial officer of Trump Organization Inc., center, departs from criminal court in New York, on Sept. 20, 2021. Credit:Washington Post

Meanwhile, in a New York courthouse about 1900 kilometres away, another legal case involving the former president had a significant development: a former executive of the Trump Organisation pleaded guilty to criminal tax fraud and other charges.

Allen Weisselberg, the long-time top financial officer of the company who spent decades as one of Trump’s closest business associates, was indicted last year for a scheme in which he and the company concealed certain financial compensation to avoid paying taxes.

The indictment alleges that the Trump Organisation paid the rent and bills for a Manhattan apartment where Weisselberg lived and paid the leases for his Mercedes-Benz, but failed to report this to evade paying taxes – hiding about $1.7 million from authorities over more than a decade.

He initially insisted he was innocent but issued a guilty plea on Friday(AEST) and agreed to testify at a pending trial against the Trump Organisation if called to do so.

Protesters in front of Trump Tower in New York after the raid on his Mar-a-Lago estate.Credit:AP

As part of his plea agreement, the 75-year-old would spend five months in jail, followed by five years of probation, rather than risk the possibility of a much higher prison sentence.

While Trump and his allies have branded the case as yet another “witch hunt” by Democrats, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a statement that Friday’s plea agreement “directly implicates” the Trump Organisation in a “wide range of criminal activity”.

“Furthermore, thanks to the incredibly hard work and dedication of the team prosecuting this case, Weisselberg will spend time behind bars,” he said. “We look forward to proving our case in court against the Trump Organisation.”

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for the weekly What in the World newsletter here.

Most Viewed in World

From our partners

Source: Read Full Article