By Aaron Miller-
Nuclear weapons documents were believed to be in the trove the FBI was hunting in Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort.
The report came hours after the attorney general, Merrick Garland, said he had personally authorised the government request for a search warrant and revealed that the justice department had asked a Florida court for the warrant to be unsealed, noting that Trump himself had made the search public.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The justice department motion referred to “the public’s clear and powerful interest in understanding what occurred in its contents”.
Trump later released a statement saying he would not oppose but rather was “encouraging the immediate release of those documents” related to what he called the “unAmerican, unwarranted, and unnecessary raid and break-in … Release the documents now!”
On Friday morning, Trump further stated, via his social media platform Truth Social, that he believes the “nuclear weapons issue is a hoax”, comparing it to other investigations he has called hoaxes in the past, including the Mueller investigation into allegations of collusion between his 2016 election campaign and the Russian government and his historic double impeachment.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
“Some sleazy people involved,” he said, adding “planting information, anyone?”
Garland’s announcement followed a furious backlash to the search from Trump supporters who portrayed it as politically motivated. On Thursday a man who tried to breach the FBI’s Cincinnati office was shot and killed by police after he fled the scene.
The court told the government to present its motion to Trump’s lawyers and to report back by 3pm on Friday on whether Trump objected to the warrant being unsealed.
Several US national media outlets, including the New York Times, CBS, the Washington Post, CNN and NBC have asked the court to unseal everything related to the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago.
However , indication that the search was associate to nuclear weapons first revealed in the Washington Post, sought to explain why Trump’s lawyers were not allowed to be present during the search.
Information about nuclear weapons is especially sensitive and usually restricted to a small number of government officials, experts said. Publicizing details about U.S. weapons could provide an intelligence road map to adversaries seeking to build ways of countering those systems.
Garland spoke moments after Justice Department lawyers filed a motion seeking to unseal the search warrant in the case, noting that Trump had publicly revealed the search shortly after it happened.
“The public’s clear and powerful interest in understanding what occurred under these circumstances weighs heavily in favor of unsealing,” the motion says. “That said, the former President should have an opportunity to respond to this Motion and lodge objections, including with regards to any ‘legitimate privacy interests’ or the potential for other ‘injury’ if these materials are made public.”
Trump expressed great interest in the U.S nuclear arsenal while he was in the White House, and boasted about being privy to highly secret information.
In the summer of 2017 he told US military leaders he wanted an arsenal comparable to its cold war peak, which would have involved a ten-fold increase, a demand that reportedly led the then secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, describe him as a “fucking moron”. Trump publicly threatened to obliterate both North Korea and Afghanistan.
However, in any event the unsealing of the documents reveal nothing consequential. Trump would receive a psychological boost in suggesting the raid was unwarranted and the claims of a search for classified documents relating to nuclear weapons were a hoax.
In a statement on his Truth Social network late Thursday, the former President said he would not oppose the release of documents related to the “unAmerican, unwarranted and unnecessary raid and break-in” of his home. He did not say exactly which documents he would be ready to see released. And the FBI search was not a break-in; it was legally authorized by a warrant approved by a judge who would have had to have found probable cause that a crime had been committed.
Mr Trump has reacted angrily on his social media site, Truth Social.
“Nuclear weapons issue is a Hoax, just like Russia, Russia, Russia was a Hoax, two Impeachments were a Hoax, the Mueller investigation was a Hoax, and much more. Same sleazy people involved.
“Why wouldn’t the FBI allow the inspection of areas at Mar-a-Lago with our lawyer’s, or others, present. Made them wait outside in the heat, wouldn’t let them get even close.”
Search warrants are generally kept under seal to protect the reputation of the person they apply to. But Trump himself broke news of the search, thereby shattering his own expectations of privacy, in order to orchestrate a political firestorm to discredit the investigation. And if Trump fought to keep the document sealed, he would look even more like he has something to hide.
“This is a pro move,” Phil Mudd, a former FBI and CIA official, said of Garland’s actions on “The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.”
“This is not the movement of a pawn. This is a movement of something between a rook and a queen.”
If Trump decided to contest the unsealing of the warrant — a step that could neutralize GOP claims that the ex-President is a target of political victimization — his lawyers would have to explain why in court.
The judge in the case, who has received death threats and abuse on social media from Trump supporters, could still decide to support the Justice Department’s motion, even if the former President wants to keep the information secret.
“This is what it looks like when you see the rule of law fighting back against Trump’s lies,” Nick Akerman, a former assistant US attorney for the Southern District of New York, told CNN’s Erin Burnett.
“I think it is extremely unlikely that Donald Trump is going to prevail here.”
Garland’s play is a clear attempt to push back on the fury from Republican officials over the unprecedented search warrant at the former President’s home. Lawmakers, media pundits and Trump supporters have unleashed unhinged claims that the US is now nothing more than a police state, with a Gestapo-like secret police, and has descended into tyranny.
In deciding to come before the cameras at the Justice Department, Garland did not just call Trump’s bluff and bow to pressure from Republican leaders who have demanded to know the justification for the search. He sought to protect his department and the judicial process as he insisted every step in the probe was taken with deliberation. His short appearance, in which he did not take questions, was scripted to rebut specific criticisms and the out-of-control conspiracy theories on the right.
“Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy,” Garland said.
“Upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly, without fear or favor,” he said, implying that not even ex-presidents are shielded if there are suspicions that they have committed a crime. Garland also spoke out forcibly in defense of the FBI and Justice Department rank-and-file, calling them “dedicated, patriotic public servants,” as Trump’s lackeys portray the bureau as a politicized arm of Democratic chicanery.
The attorney general’s remarks, a dramatic Washington moment, were a sign of the extraordinary sensitivity and significance of the investigation into the former President. Generally, the FBI says little about ongoing probes unless someone is charged — a step that, if it happens, seems some ways away in this case.
An unsealed search warrant will not comprehensively establish whether the department’s move against Trump was justified or was an overreach. But Garland’s initiative does suggest firm confidence in any case the bureau is building against Trump. It also shows that the department, right from the top, stands behind the decision to press ahead with a search — in the obvious knowledge that it would trigger an extraordinary and vehement backlash from Trump.
The idea that the entire affair is just some politically motivated plot hatched by legal hacks — the essential Trump case against it — is much harder to believe after Garland’s appearance.
Woodward said he was later told the US did indeed have an unspecified new weapons system, and officials were “surprised” that Trump had disclosed the fact.
Cheryl Rofer, a chemist who worked on nuclear weapons at the Los Alamos national laboratory said there were varying classification levels applying to different kinds of documentation.
“Information about the design of nuclear weapons is called Restricted Data and is ‘born classified’. That means it is assumed to be classified unless declassified,” Rofer, who writes a blog titled Nuclear Diner, wrote on Twitter. But she added: “There’s no reason for a president to have nuclear weapons design information that I can see.”
Among the nuclear documents that Trump would routinely have had access to would be the classified version of the Nuclear Posture Review, about US capabilities and policies. A military aide is always close to the president carrying the “nuclear football”, a briefcase containing nuclear strike options, but it would be unusual for those documents to be taken out of the football.
Another possibility Rofer pointed to is that Trump could have retained his nuclear “biscuit”, a piece of plastic like a credit card with the identification codes necessary for nuclear launch. Those codes would have been changed however the moment Biden took office at noon on 20 January 2021.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar