Skip to content

The FBI search of Trump’s home probably wasn’t about the 15 boxes

As you know by now, the FBI conducted a search of Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump's Florida home, on Monday morning. For some reason, everyone assumes that they were looking for boxes of documents that Trump should have turned over to the National Archives but instead took with him when he left office.

That makes no sense. This was something that happened 18 months ago, and anyway, the Archives retrieved those boxes earlier this year. The FBI was obviously looking for something else.

But what? Nobody knows, but the reaction of Democrats and Republicans was nearly unanimously polarized:

Democrats: It takes a lot for a judge to approve a warrant like this. It's got to be something pretty serious.

Republicans: This is obviously a political motivated attack by the Department of Justice. Needless to say, Trump himself led the charge on this interpretation of events.

Now, I don't think this is politically motivated in any way. I'm not a huge fan of the FBI, but they have a long-time reputation for being a pretty conservative organization. What's more, Trump himself appointed the current head of the FBI.

On the other hand, I'm not so sure that judges require all that much convincing to approve an FBI warrant. Nor do I put it above the FBI to cut a few corners. They've certainly done it before.

I wouldn't be too surprised if the FBI's conduct wasn't entirely righteous, but I'd be very surprised if it was politicized in any serious way. As for what it was all about, we'll just have to wait and see.

69 thoughts on “The FBI search of Trump’s home probably wasn’t about the 15 boxes

  1. Jasper_in_Boston

    This is a reasonable take on Kevin's part, with the following tweak: I'd imagine both the FBI and the judge in question would have maximum incentive not to cut corners in any way whatsoever, given the certitude of both massive attention/publicicity vis a vis this development as well as fierce partisan pushback from Republicans. The latter will be looking for irregularities with which to impugn this investigation, and the FBI (and the judge) are surely cognizant of this. So I'm guessing all relevant parties were very careful.

    1. bebopman

      Agree. Any judge would want solid evidence before moving on any former prez, especially one whose fans might try to kill him.

    2. QuarterbackX

      That may sound like a reasonable thought at first. But, when given a little thought, the same could be said about the FISA Warrent on a Running Presidential Candidate and later sitting President. When questioned by a Senate hearing, DOJ Yates stated there was never even a shred of evidence to justify the FISA warrant. Which Declassified document of them CIA director had a meeting to tell Obama, before Hillary came out with the fake dossier, what Hillary was going to do before her doing it, and that it was fake. But, just a little thinking would and should had made the dossier highly questionable for the start.

  2. flounder_MA

    I tried to find how the fact that this involves classified information is established and the NYT article says "people familiar..." And then later in the article mentions Eric Trump as a source. Yeah that's not confirmation.
    I kinda think there's some wild goose chase going on, and I wouldn't be surprised if this involves the Truth Social and DWAC merger that basically gifts Trump 1/2 billion dollars. It pretty blatantly breaks the SEC rules over SPACS, Trump and Dim Jr. resigned their board seats the day after SEC announced and investigation, and the SEC would probably get FBI involved if they had evidence of two sets of books being run or something like that.

  3. KayInMD

    The WaPo journo I saw on MSNPC seemed to have DoJ sources for his statement that it was missing docs they were looking for. Specifically, while most of the 15 boxes have been returned, some of the classified documents, including some marked Top Secret, have not been returned. Apparently those are the documents the FBI was looking for.

      1. jte21

        He's such a colossal ass and egomaniac, I'm sure he just wanted them so he could take "extra special VIP" guests at Mar-a-Lago into his study, open his safe with much fanfare and show them real CIA sattelite or drone intelligence photos or something and tell them "I ordered them to do this!"

        1. Altoid

          On the one hand, yeah, he'd like to point to them up there framed on the wall. On the other hand, I ask myself how likely it is that the Saudis, say, threw that two billion at Jared just to be nice.

  4. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

    Oranqe Qounty Republiqan Qevin Drum is about half a step removed from saying Donald Trump is, once more, being kancelkultured. (He already was when he was banned from Twitter.)

    Question is, if Qevin & other GQP think this is jackbooted government overreach & malfeasance, why didn't Ronny D tip off the Trumps to clear out Maralago to make sure there is nothing at all there for the Democrat deep state to abscond with?

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      At least our catblogger isn't going Full Kkklay Travis & calling this a banana republic action of a flailing regime looking to ex out its competition for the next election.

      But, then, Qev can't put on his lawyer hat, as Kkklay can.

      1. J. Frank Parnell

        Eh . . . You are replying to yourself. Sort of like having a conversation with yourself on public transport.

        1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

          We can't all be semiretirees on Social Security with maybe a good twenty years left.

          I plan on making it to eighty, so I can't be copacetic with the status quo.

    1. RZM

      I guess you are trying to imply that Kevin is being inconsistent in his analysis, but that would mean that you think Hillary Clinton's emails were equivalent to whatever it is Trump has at Mar-a-Lago. By the time of Comey's announcement - which very likely changed the result of the election - the FBI had already investigated this several months earlier and concluded that her handling was careless but there was no criminal intent . Moreover, her use of a private phone/email was only different in quantity from some previous Secretaries of State who didn't use email much at all. I don't think we know enough about what the FBI and DOJ were looking for and why at Mar-A-Lago to rate these two different events as parallel. In short, it may turn out that these two things are very similar but we certainly don't know that yet so I think your trolling is premature.

      1. rick_jones

        It was as much a reaction to this assertion:

        Now, I don't think this is politically motivated in any way. I'm not a huge fan of the FBI, but they have a long-time reputation for being a pretty conservative organization.

        as anything else more than the specifics of either situation/event. I should have included that in the original, but I was operating off my phone rather than a "proper" computer with a proper keyboard 🙂

  5. kahner

    I don't think in every case it takes an immense amount of evidence for a judge to issue a warrant, or that the FBI would try to get one that isn't well supported, but in the case of a former president it sure as hell would take a rock solid case. screwing would be a career ender for people involved. not to mention the harrassment and likely risk of violence from trump supporters for months or years. The whole thing is still very confusing to me. Why would trump keep classified docs that he knew could trigger such a raid? If they had incriminating info, why not just destroy them as he has apparently done many times before. If not, what's the point in refusing to just return them and avoid all this? But whatever is going on here, it's not just about the 15 boxes that were returned and it's not some politicized scam. It would never get approved by everyone who would need to approve it in such a case.

    1. Austin

      Why would trump keep classified docs that he knew could trigger such a raid?

      Because his entire life experience of running illegal scams and breaking the law with impunity has taught him that he’s untouchable by police or prosecutors. If you broke 100 laws in the past, some in a full public spotlight, and nobody did anything about it, why wouldn’t you keep breaking laws?

      If they had incriminating info, why not just destroy them as he has apparently done many times before. If not, what's the point in refusing to just return them and avoid all this?

      You can’t sell intel to foreign entities that you’ve destroyed or returned. Trump never leaves a penny on the sidewalk.

      1. kahner

        I guess i may be underestimating trump's arrogance, sense of impunity and general stupidity but jesus, at least hide the stuff somewhere besides your personal residence. or maybe i'm just wrong about the severity of the consequences and this too will amount to nothing.

        1. kennethalmquist

          The story seems to be that Trump took documents he wasn't supposed to when he left office. The national archives discovered this and asked Trump to turn the documents over. Trump agreed to do so, but then turned over only some of the documents. So the FBI obtained a warrant to allow it to get the rest of the documents. The key claims that the FBI likely used to obtain the warrant were likely (1) some of the documents were classified, creating a risk to national security if they weren't recovered, and (2) the documents could not be recovered without a search warrant because they had already asked Trump to turn the documents over voluntarily and Trump had not done so.

          Now that it has recovered the classified documents and negated the national security risk, the FBI could decide that the matter is resolved. Alternatively, it could persue criminal charges against Trump, but I don't think there is reason to expect that at this point.

    2. Solar

      "If they had incriminating info, why not just destroy them as he has apparently done many times before. If not, what's the point in refusing to just return them and avoid all this? "

      Because they likely contain info that can be used to blackmail foreign leaders, and thus could be used by either Trump or to be sold to interested parties if needed.

    3. Yehouda

      "If not, what's the point in refusing to just return them and avoid all this?"

      It is not beyond trump to do it to intentionaly get investigated, so he can whinge about it. One of his ways of geting away with fraud is to make it looks like he is doing something bad even when he isn't, and then he can claim he is being persecuted without a reason.

  6. pokeybob

    The recipe for the MacDonald's Quarter Pounder, [The secret sauce]. And because we are just speculating, I wonder who made the fake toilet photos? If the photos were real the toilet would have been made of gold. [Or at least look like gold].
    Will the MAGA loyalists to do something rash? January 6 scale, only more violent.

  7. Citizen99

    Um . . . "I'm not so sure that judges require all that much convincing to approve an FBI warrant." . . .?
    Here's the conversation:
    FBI: "Your honor, we submit the following affidavits to support a search warrant for an individual's home and office."
    Judge: "Who is the individual?"
    FBI: "Donald J. Trump."
    Judge: "Whatever. No problem, go for it."

  8. haddockbranzini

    If the last several years have taught me anything, it is that the case against Trump is never as "certain" as it appears when the headlines break. I assume this could be proven wrong at any time, but I've long since stopped buying the hype.

    I've also realized I can get just as much information scanning headlines in Google News than watching CNN all day long.

    1. jte21

      A number of government officials over the years have been investigated (see Clinton, Hillary) for mishandling classified material. Some of them, like Sandy Berger's attempt to walk off with some classified documents from the NA were pretty serious. Others, like Clinton's, were closed without filing any charges. Berger, who claimed he was just confused about what documents he was putting in his bag, pled to a misdemeanor or something and paid a fine, iirc. So if they do find classified stuff at Mar-a-Lago, Trump will probably just claim it was an oversight and his lawyers will take care of it and he won't give the smallest shit whatsoever that he had spent years saying Hillary should be locked up forever for her private server. If, on the other hand, he lied to the NAA and FBI about turning everything over and/or compromised national security by leaving top-secret papers lying around Mar-a-Lago, that could be more serious of course.

    2. Mitch Guthman

      My impression is that the evidence has always been there and the cases h e been extremely strong. What’s been lacking in the past is the will to engage in conflict with Trump and his legions of deranged, heavily armed, and extremely violent followers.

      For example, Mueller’s obstruction case against Trump was as close to being airtight as any I’ve seen. The weakness was in the belief that Trump would be chastised by the investigation itself and would consequently begin behaving like a normal president.

      Similarly, in Scotland, the UK, and here there’s simply been no appetite for investigation into the sources of Trump’s cash or what appears to be a long running money laundering operation by the Trump Organization even though a truckload of published material suggests this would be low hanging fruit.

      And, along those lines, it’s worth noting that when Michael Cohen started making noises about possibly flipping against Trump, instead of a deal his prosecution was ramped up and it was Trump’s underlings who got immunity, apparently in return for not betraying him.

      1. jte21

        Similarly, in Scotland, the UK, and here there’s simply been no appetite for investigation into the sources of Trump’s cash

        Biden should telephone the next British PM and threaten tarriffs on British goods or some other kind of retaliation if they don't open an investigation into Trump's businesses there. I hear those conversations are "perfect" and totally not impeachable.

  9. jte21

    the Archives retrieved those boxes earlier this year. The FBI was obviously looking for something else.

    Unless when they went through those boxes, they found that a bunch of stuff was still missing. We haven't seen the warrant, so we can't be sure, but all the reporting I've seen indicates that they suspect he kept classified documents and lied to the NAA about turning them all over.

    Basically *exactly* what he accused Hillary of doing for years. The only thing left on Trump's projection irony tour now is finding out that he's actually a foreign-born secret Muslim.

  10. erick

    Trump is of course saying this was totally invalid, he also has a copy of the warrant, if he wants to prove that it is invalid there is one thing he could do, show the warrant.

    I'm not holding my breath

      1. jte21

        That's right. Once a warrant has been served, it's like it's being audited. Would love to, but can't release it.

  11. jte21

    On the other hand, I'm not so sure that judges require all that much convincing to approve an FBI warrant. Nor do I put it above the FBI to cut a few corners. They've certainly done it before.

    I'll leave it to the actual lawyers in this forum to speak to how easy getting a federal magistrate to sign off on a warrant for a former president would be, but I suspect it's not just a matter of some vague handwaving in an affadavit. Something this big would also have to be approved by Chris Wray (a Trump appointee, natch) and Merrick Garland, whose portrait is in the dictionary next to the word "cautious" (and also "methodical"). So I suspect there was probably some extra scrutiny of i-dotting and t-crossing in this case, to say the least. This wasn't a wiretap warrant for a third-tier Trump campaign flunky.

  12. iamr4man

    I’m pretty sure the FBI didn’t just break into his safe. I think that what probably happened was they requested it be opened and his attorney opened it. If they did break into it, it’s because his attorney refused to open in and in that case I think there was a good reason for the refusal and I hope they got what they were looking for.
    I also suspect that whatever the documents in question were, that they were subject to previous talks/negotiation for their return and Trump was dragging his feet as he always does in such matters.
    For sure Trump’s, and the Republicans are deliberately overreacting.

    1. jte21

      that they were subject to previous talks/negotiation for their return and Trump was dragging his feet as he always does in such matters.

      I don't think you get the FBI dropping in on you like this over some disputed documents. This had to be something bigger, like a national security breach or a cover-up or something that they had to act on *now*.

      1. iamr4man

        “The search came after an earlier visit this spring to Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s private club and residence in Palm Beach, Fla., by federal agents — including a Justice Department counterintelligence official — to discuss materials that Mr. Trump had improperly taken with him when he left the White House.

        Mr. Trump was briefly present for that earlier visit, as was at least one of his lawyers, according to people familiar with the situation.”
        https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/08/09/us/trump-fbi-search-news

        1. jte21

          Dollars to donuts he straight up lied to them during that first visit when they asked if all the material had been secured and returned to the NAA. The question is how they found out: an employee snitching? A counterintelligence operation picking up on Trump or someone in his circle telling others about the contents of certain top secret documents? Oh boy, this is getting good.

          1. iamr4man

            “Dollars to donuts” is an even bet these days. I find it hard to believe that any word out of Trump’s mouth isn’t a lie. He lied to them, for sure, and he’s lying now.
            I don’t know what ability the FBI has to push back against Trump’s characterization of the even as a “raid”. His people and I’m sure he, knew it was coming and I’d wager even the date and time.

    2. Altoid

      "They stormed in and broke into my safe" is trump-speak for "my people opened it for them on assurance from my lawyers that it was a lawful warrant, and the agents were completely professional and correct in their conduct."

  13. ctownwoody

    Kevin,
    1. Given the last Trump-related warrant issue, this one should be air-tight.
    2. Given the Merrick Garland memo that recently came to light about charging political individuals close to election, I would think this apply triple in this situation. No way that Garland didn't approve this.
    3. NO-KNOCK, apparently. Typically seen in drug busts or situations where armed resistance is expected (rightly or wrongly). That takes more.
    4. 15 Boxes full of paper files illegally taken. 15 boxes returned. Best guess was that files from the boxes were not returned or other files were thought to have been taken.

    1. jte21

      Best guess was that files from the boxes were not returned or other files were thought to have been taken.

      That's my bet as well. And I agree, Garland and Wray would not mickey-mouse something like this.

  14. Salamander

    Why should we assume that ONLY 15 boxes existed? Did anyone do an actual search of Mar-a-La-Go? No. And why this wasn't done when the FBI or archivists went down to steamy Florida to pick up the known boxes, is beyond me.

    One hopes the FBI also checked the commodes and the records of calls to the plumbers. Actual plumbers, not like Nixon's crew of ex-pat Cubans.

    Seriously. In the very first MONTH of that former guy's reign, even NPR was reporting on how he tore up and threw away any piece of paper handed to him, resullting in the Archivists having to piece them back together with scotch tape for the records. Everybody in the White House saw this. They also saw him, according to recent reports, just jamming classified documents into his pockets and walking off. They saw him flushing documents down the old commode, and somebody had to call the plumbers. Moreover, how about those plumbers?

    This went on a full FOUR YEARS and nobody called foul or held the so-called potus accountable. Each atrocity was the day's story, never again pursued, never emphasized. Even Democrats failed to take full advantage over the corruption of the Republicans, led by their great god trump.

    Sorry for the rant.

  15. Atticus

    Most republicans I know (friends and family) share my hope that Trump will be too damaged, either politically or legally, to run again (or at least win the nomination) in 2024. If, as a result of this FBI search, he's disqualified from holding office I think it will be a huge relief to the vast majority of the country.

  16. Altoid

    If you just want to retrieve papers, isn't that normally a job for the US Marshals? The FBI is investigative and centered on crime, not enforcement.

    They also do counter-espionage, which raises the possibility of some foreign entity communicating with trump and/or his people about something he has, because all communications across borders are routinely monitored. Something like that would be more likely to be time-sensitive than something just related to documents as such.

    Just spitballing, but Austin and others seem to have similar suspicions.

    1. jte21

      I think marshals would be involved if, say, you had been ordered to surrender some documents or something and you didn't and a judge ordered them to be seized. This appears to have been a counterintelligence operation. They found out he was still hanging on to top secret documents after claiming he had surrendered them all and was possibly leaking their contents to unauthorized parties (is my guess).

  17. HokieAnnie

    It IS all about the boxes, it is serious you know what to have classified documents in a non secure setting. Sandy Berger the Clinton admin official commited career suicide by trying to sneak out top secret documents in his socks about 20 years ago. He was lucky he had no jail time but probation and no more clearance to work in his field.

  18. gvahut

    I don't think the FBI acted on this with anything less than the full knowledge and consent of Merrick Garland. Don't shoot the messenger, Kevin. I am pretty sure Garland is directing the inquiry, and the FBI didn't do any of this independently.

  19. Dana Decker

    Wouldn't it be wild if the search warrant was for a transgression that's completely new?

    Not document retention, not J6 related, not mishandling donations, not Saudi/Russia/NorthKorea hijinks, or other activities we've read about.

  20. KawSunflower

    Even more good news:

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/09/politics/appeals-court-house-trump-taxes-opinion/index.html

    For the first in a long time, I have some faith that both the judge & FBI have acted with utmost care in this case, & hope that we all live to see the day when all of trump's appeals have failed, no lawyers are willing to represent him, & he has been successfully charged & convicted. Probably can't hope that his lunatic, dishonest supporters ever admit his guilt, any more than he will.

    OTOH, euronews just reported that rainwater anywhere on earth has unsafe amounts of "forever" chemicals, from which many of earth's humans & all of its other inhabitants are unprotected.

  21. Larry Jones

    This was something that happened 18 months ago, and anyway, the Archives retrieved those boxes earlier this year. The FBI was obviously looking for something else.

    Agreed. Since Trump knew he was busted a long time ago regarding those boxes of documents, there would be no reason to go to his house and look for the stuff he didn't return. Whatever that stuff was, it's undoubtedly been hidden away and will never be found -- unless someone in Trump's inner circle rats him out. All of which suggests that the object of this search had to be something else.

  22. pjcamp1905

    " I'm not so sure that judges require all that much convincing to approve an FBI warrant. "

    Maybe for the likes of you and me. But not for a former president*.

Comments are closed.