Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Documents at Mar-a-Lago could compromise human intelligence sources, redacted affidavit says.

By Curt_Anderson
August 26, 2022 10:31 am
Category: Crime

(0.0 from 0 votes)
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com

Share
Rules of
the Post

Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

America's “clandestine human sources” includes spies, informants and tipsters whose lives would be at risk if the wrong people read the top secret information that Trump had insecurely and sloppily handled. That is the sort of treasonous actions you should expect from a narcissist who cares only about his own well being.---CA

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department asked to search President Donald J. Trump’s Florida residence after retrieving an initial batch of highly classified national security documents, out of concern that their disclosure could compromise “clandestine human sources” used in intelligence gathering, according to a redacted version of the affidavit used to obtain the warrant.

The affidavit lays out a timeline starting with a criminal referral by the National Archives on Feb. 9, 2022, after it retrieved 15 boxes from Mar-a-Lago. The affidavit quotes the referral as indicating that the boxes contained “newspapers, magazines, printed news articles, photos, miscellaneous print-outs, notes, presidential correspondence, personal and post-presidential records and ‘a lot of classified records.’ Of most significant concern was that highly classified records were unfoldered, intermixed with other records, and otherwise unproperly [sic] identified.”


Cited and related links:

  1. nytimes.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Documents at Mar-a-Lago could compromise human intelligence sources, redacted affidavit says.":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on August 26, 2022 11:17 am

    Remember. This is an affidavit to support a request for a search warrant that would defy American history going back to 1776.

    Trump has not been judged guilty by a jury of his peers.

    Don't be po or isle now. Be sane.



  2. by Curt_Anderson on August 26, 2022 12:35 pm
    Why do you believe that the affidavit which justifies the need to search Mar-a-Lago is so unusual? Nor by the way, is it based on hearsay as you claim. The DOJ knew that Trump had classified documents and they rejected Trump's claim (through his lawyers) over the past many months that Trump declassified them unilaterally.

    Less certainty is required to obtain a warrant than a conviction. The FBI/DOJ obtained their search warrants by convincing a magistrate, Bruce Reinhart, that they have probable cause to believe that criminal activity occurred at Mar-a-Lago and/or that evidence of a crime may be found there.

    Beyond a reasonable doubt is the legal burden of proof required to get a conviction in a criminal case.



  3. by HatetheSwamp on August 26, 2022 12:45 pm

    Of course, the affidavit is hearsay.

    It's hearsay that law enforcement can use to attempt to convince a judge has a high probability of producing evidence, but any personal claim made to an investigator becomes hearsay when the investigator presents it to a judge.


  4. by Donna on August 26, 2022 12:51 pm
    I'm not a lawyer, but that sounds like horseshit.


  5. by Curt_Anderson on August 26, 2022 12:58 pm
    You have a funny idea of what constitutes hearsay, HTS. The FBI and DOJ had direct knowledge of what Trump had. There was no denial from Trump's legal team that he had classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. It was established that they were improperly handled. Trump's lawyers attempted to make that case that Trump had a right to keep them.


    Trump and his attorneys knew the FBI was about to get involved with the documents debacle since April, based on a May 10 letter between the National Archives and Tump's attorneys.

    Debra Steidel, acting archivist for the National Archives, told Trump's lawyers, including Evan Corcoran, that she would allow the FBI to review the batch of documents Trump returned in January, following weeks of delay.

    "It has now been four weeks since we first informed you of our intent to provide the FBI access to the boxes so that it and others in the Intelligence Community can conduct their reviews," Steidel wrote.

    Trump's attorneys previously asked for more time to review the documents to see if any of them fell within the purview of executive privilege, according to the letter.

    news.yahoo.com


  6. by HatetheSwamp on August 26, 2022 1:33 pm

    So, Curt, are you saying that the archives and the federales get to serve as investigator, judge and jury, but this is still America. That this is America is all Trump is claiming.


  7. by oldedude on August 26, 2022 1:47 pm
    CIs and CSs are usually withheld. At times, though, the warrant will say CS1 said this, CS2 said another thing. That isn't a "norm" because people can figure it out. Like I said before, I expected the sources would be redacted. Would I like them not to be if I were the Trump team? OH YEAH! But to expect it is silly.

    "IF" this includes "hearsay evidence," that is illegal. Something would have to happen (ala Steele dossier, which the sheeple still believe in) to show that it was a lie. Unless they can prove it, that is a trial question for the defense to prove in either cross, or their turn.

    ""It has now been four weeks since we first informed you of our intent to provide the FBI access to the boxes so that it and others in the Intelligence Community can conduct their reviews," Steidel wrote."

    That's the pot calling the kettle black. FBI & DOJ have not responded to subpoenas for years. Including information that's been classified (which usually takes longer). I would bring that up to the judge in the trial.

    It was established that they were improperly handled... Of most significant concern was that highly classified records were unfoldered, intermixed with other records, and otherwise unproperly [sic] identified.

    Most of those are not big things. Wrongly marked? Maybe from document to folder. That's lazyness. Mixed in with unclassified or work copies? again, that's just sloppy. If they were filed Classified and Unclassified together in the same folder or file, that might be a problem. You're supposed to keep working copies and your documents separate. They may be in the same safe, but a different drawer. The one item of concern are the unfoldered documents. It seems to me, someone was in the middle of working and was too lazy to clean the stuff up when they got done. As a whole, there might be concern. I would have been reprimanded pretty harshly by the Security Officer had I done that. My guess is that it would have gone to my director, and maybe the Agency director depending on my background, etc.

    IF being "mismarked" means they weren't also in the correct safe, or outside the SCIF without being locked up, open to his golfing buddies who just drop by, we are looking at a normal person may lose their clearance or put them on probation.

    So all that said, I think what I've been saying regarding Trump having a copy of the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE files is what they were looking for. They have them now, they can slap him on the fingers with a ruler and be on their way.


  8. by Ponderer on August 26, 2022 6:12 pm

    Oh man. The stupidity.

    It literally gushes from you.


  9. by oldedude on August 26, 2022 7:38 pm
    Bless your heart.


  10. by oldedude on August 26, 2022 7:45 pm
    And I know that you've never been trusted with any classified at all. It's seen in your personal instability. The point is that you absolutely cannot think of two opposed thoughts at once. And treat each one as equal. It's impossible for you.


  11. by oldedude on August 26, 2022 7:55 pm
    And you didn't read this...
    "by oldedude on August 26, 2022 1:47 pm
    CIs and CSs are usually withheld. At times, though, the warrant will say CS1 said this, CS2 said another thing. That isn't a "norm" because people can figure it out. Like I said before, I expected the sources would be redacted. Would I like them not to be if I were the Trump team? OH YEAH! But to expect it is silly.

    "IF" this includes "hearsay evidence," that is illegal. Something would have to happen (ala Steele dossier, which the sheeple still believe in) to show that it was a lie. Unless they can prove it, that is a trial question for the defense to prove in either cross, or their turn."


    I just supported the DOJ/FBI refusal to name Confidential sources/ Informants. One of our informants was found in a dumpster. Well, at least parts of him. Some other parts were used in dog-fighting matches, then burned the bones.

    I also just supported the affidavit as (my guess) being truthful. If you would bother to read or could comprehend, you would have seen that. I know I crossed Lead on both of these. But we are not one person. We have disagreed in the past, and my guess is that we'll disagree in the future. For us, that isn't saying we hate each other. We disagree. Most of what I write when I disagree is for him so he understands where I'm coming from. You? I don't care.

    So, little girl, whenever you might consider mocking me, I have witnessed things that in your mind you could never imagine.


Go To Top

Comment on: "Documents at Mar-a-Lago could compromise human intelligence sources, redacted affidavit says."

* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page


From our contributors:
Display Order:

NY Post: Sorry, Donald: Here are the real takeaways from The Twitter Files
Journalism by Curt_Anderson     December 4, 2022 8:04 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [3 views]


Donald Trump is an ignoramus about US History.
History by Curt_Anderson     December 4, 2022 11:39 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (4 comments) [95 views]


Trump: terminate the articles found in the US Constitution; declare me President
Politics by Curt_Anderson     December 3, 2022 4:41 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (15 comments) [170 views]


I go under the knife tomorrow
Medical by Curt_Anderson     December 4, 2022 9:28 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (8 comments) [45 views]


B'bye SPEAKER Pelosi
Politics by HatetheSwamp     November 16, 2022 4:21 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: islander (45 comments) [563 views]


pb's CFP prediction...for those who want to SS Post about sports
Sports by HatetheSwamp     December 4, 2022 4:01 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (2 comments) [19 views]


12/3 Weekly News Roundup
News by islander     December 3, 2022 2:19 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: islander (2 comments) [53 views]


Forbes: Trump did not disclose his foreign debt when running for president in 2016
Business by Curt_Anderson     December 4, 2022 9:07 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [4 views]


World Cup USA game thread
Sports by HatetheSwamp     November 29, 2022 11:49 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [34 views]


Finally, the proof Twitter invented a reason to help Joe Biden win in 2020
Media by HatetheSwamp     December 3, 2022 4:22 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (16 comments) [217 views]


Crime selectors, pages, etc.