ADVERTISEMENT

22 - mj - 8332 - USA v. Sealed Search Warrant - Docket Thread

AuroraHawk

AuroraHawk

HR Heisman
Dec 18, 2004
7,537
10,386
113
August 5, 2022
Docket #1 - Sealed Search Warrant

August 10, 2022
#2 - Sealed
#3 - Sealed
#4 - Motion to Unseal filed by Judicial Watch
#5 - Court Order giving DOJ until 8/15 to respond to #4
#6 - Letter to Court by Times Union seeking to have documents unsealed
#7 - Court Order giving DOJ until 8/15 to respond to #6
#8 - Non-Specified Party Motion to Intervene for purposes of seeking to have documents unsealed
#9 - New York Times' Motion to Intervene for purposes of seeking to have documents unsealed

August 11, 2022
#10 - Procedural Order detailing clerk of court error regarding #8 (#8 was actually filed by New York Times; re-docketed as #9)
#11 - Order Granting NYT's Motion to Intervene for purposes of seeking to have documents unsealed
#12 - Omnibus Order directing DOJ to respond to any and all motions filed seeking to unseal documents - deadline 8/15
#13 - Motion by out of state attorney to appear as pro hac vice counsel for Judicial Watch
#14 - Motion by out of state attorney to appear as pro hac vice counsel for Judicial Watch
#15 - Sealed document
#16 - Sealed document
#17 - Sealed document
#18 - DOJ motion to unseal Docket #17 (that would be the search warrant and the redacted inventory)
#19 - Order setting deadline of 3:00 p.m. on 8/12 for the former President to respond to DOJ motion to unseal (docket #18)
#20 - CBS Motion to Intervene
#21 - Return of Service executed
#22 - NBC, CNN, Washington Post's joint Motion to Intervene
#23 - Palm Beach Post's Motion to Intervene
#24 - Order granting motion (#13) to appear pro hac vice for Judicial Watch's out of state attorneys
#25 - Order granting motion (#14) to appear pro hac vice for Judicial Watch's out of state attorneys
#26 - Order granting motions to intervene for purpose of seeking to have documents unsealed (#20, #22 and #23)
#27 - Motion by out of state attorney to appear as pro hac vice counsel for NBC, CNN, Washington Post

We should know by 2:00 p.m. CDT whether there will be any objection filed by the former President's legal team to the unsealing of the actual search warrant and the redacted inventory of items seized and taken from the property. If no objection is filed, I'd anticipate that the judge will enter an Order granting the motion to unseal and order that the documents be unsealed immediately. Given the intense publicity and scrutiny in the case, I cannot envision that a federal judge would let the issue linger through the weekend.

If the former President's legal team resists the motion to unseal, there will likely be another round of filings (my guess would be a tight timeline - no later than Friday of next week) and perhaps even an oral argument scheduled (in an abbreviated time frame as well)

The interesting question arises if the former President's legal team does not file anything. Would the judge consider the former President's social media posts? Would the judge consider "silence" as the equivalence of "no objection?" Would the judge unilaterally grant an extension of time? (unlikely)

My crystal ball says that the former President's hand has been forced. Logic dictates that he can't go public and claim that he won't object to the unsealing of the documents but then file a resistance to the unsealing in court. That written, using logic to predict how he will act can be a fool's errand. His base will lap up anything he says as Gospel. The bigger question is how will the "middle" react to the inconsistent positions?

I expect that he will file something that constitutes a "no objection" but will be riddled with wild accusations of conspiracy, mistreatment and victimization.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: iowahaha1, Thunderlips71, hawkbirch and 1 other person
confused-conan.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL, Jerome Silberman, pink shizzle and 3 others
Important to keep in mind . . . there is nothing (absolutely NOTHING) that would prevent the former President's legal team from scanning the warrant and inventory into .pdfs and publicly releasing them. They could have done that from the start. They received a copy of the warrant and the inventory on August 8th.

In contrast, the DOJ has rules it must follow. The DOJ followed its rules and protocol by filing the documents under seal.

Thus, of the two parties - USA and former President - only one of them possessed the unilateral and unfettered ability to immediately release the contents to the public. That discretion was solely left to the former President. Thus, claims of "hiding contents" of documents and "secret filings" ring awfully hollow in reality but have fired up the uninformed base and the former President appears to have benefitted financially (once again) through fundraising efforts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_b29nm7v7dwp6r, claykenny, pink shizzle and 13 others
AuroraHawk said:
The interesting question arises if the former President's legal team does not file anything. Would the judge consider the former President's social media posts? Would the judge consider "silence" as the equivalence of "no objection?" Would the judge unilaterally grant an extension of time? (unlikely)
Click to expand...
My guess is that the judge would ask the government if Trump's legal counsel has replied to them or otherwise indicated that they intend to object. The bottom line is a failure to formally object in a timely fashion would normally constitute implied consent to the government's request.
 
AuroraHawk said:
Thus, claims of "hiding contents" of documents and "secret filings" ring awfully hollow in reality but have fired up the uninformed base and the former President appears to have benefitted financially (once again) through fundraising efforts.
Click to expand...
This phenomenon makes me want to quit my job and go sell used cars in the Trumpiest part of the country.

"People are saying that you really need the truecoat, believe me, believe me. Everybody is saying this truecoat is the best."
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Menace Sockeyes, unsubstantiated, Torg and 13 others
Would this be the “why” the search warrant or the “results” of the search warrant?

I would be interested in what they found and not really interested in what they hoped to find.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Movillehawk and goldmom
onlyTheObvious said:
Would this be the “why” the search warrant or the “results” of the search warrant?

I would be interested in what they found and not really interested in what they hoped to find.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see the Affidavit in Support of Search Warrant. This document would be a sworn declaration by DOJ officials which provide some detail of the evidence gained through investigation which supports a probable cause finding. The judge relies on the testimony within this document, in large part, in determining whether or not to issue a search warrant.

I understand that the Affidavit is not included in the the government's motion and will not be unsealed - likely primarily for national security reasons. I read his morning that Lindsey Graham wants the Affidavit unsealed. I believe the DOJ will fight hard to keep that document sealed for a number of important reasons.

The Inventory of items seized pursuant to the execution of the search warrant has already been provided to Trump and will be unsealed if the judge grant's the government's motion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AuroraHawk
nu2u said:
My guess is that the judge would ask the government if Trump's legal counsel has replied to them or otherwise indicated that they intend to object. The bottom line is a failure to formally object in a timely fashion would normally constitute implied consent to the government's request.
Click to expand...

"Would 'normally' constitute implied consent." Wholeheartedly agree.
Given the circumstances, I'm far from certain that "normally" would dictate the result.
 
nu2u said:
I'd like to see the Affidavit in Support of Search Warrant. This document would be a sworn declaration by DOJ officials which provide some detail of the evidence gained through investigation which supports a probable cause finding. The judge relies on the testimony within this document, in large part, in determining whether or not to issue a search warrant.

I understand that the Affidavit is not included in the the government's motion and will not be unsealed - likely for national security reasons. I read his morning that Lindsey Graham wants the Affidavit unsealed. I beleive the DOJ will fight hard to keep that document sealed for a number of important reasons.

The Inventory of items seized pursuant to the execution of the search warrant has already been provided to Trump and will be unsealed if the judge grant's the government's motion.
Click to expand...
Would also think that affidavit might be something they’d want to use in trial potentially as well. Not to mention possibly protecting the identity of a witness/informant at this point..

I think we all know that if they did release that as well, it would just be something else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom and nu2u
onlyTheObvious said:
Would this be the “why” the search warrant or the “results” of the search warrant?

I would be interested in what they found and not really interested in what they hoped to find.
Click to expand...
The "where" the search would occur would be disclosed. "What" was being sought would be disclosed. And a redacted "what" was seized would be disclosed. The "why" will not be disclosed (i.e. the affidavit) but there is quite likely enough "there there" to make some educated conclusions.
 
nu2u said:
I'd like to see the Affidavit in Support of Search Warrant. This document would be a sworn declaration by DOJ officials which provide some detail of the evidence gained through investigation which supports a probable cause finding. The judge relies on the testimony within this document, in large part, in determining whether or not to issue a search warrant.

I understand that the Affidavit is not included in the the government's motion and will not be unsealed - likely primarily for national security reasons. I read his morning that Lindsey Graham wants the Affidavit unsealed. I believe the DOJ will fight hard to keep that document sealed for a number of important reasons.

The Inventory of items seized pursuant to the execution of the search warrant has already been provided to Trump and will be unsealed if the judge grant's the government's motion.
Click to expand...

The new media is clamoring for the unsealing of the affidavit too. I don't think the search warrant return will contain much detail about what specific documents were seized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AuroraHawk
nu2u said:
I'd like to see the Affidavit in Support of Search Warrant. This document would be a sworn declaration by DOJ officials which provide some detail of the evidence gained through investigation which supports a probable cause finding. The judge relies on the testimony within this document, in large part, in determining whether or not to issue a search warrant.

I understand that the Affidavit is not included in the the government's motion and will not be unsealed - likely primarily for national security reasons. I read his morning that Lindsey Graham wants the Affidavit unsealed. I believe the DOJ will fight hard to keep that document sealed for a number of important reasons.

The Inventory of items seized pursuant to the execution of the search warrant has already been provided to Trump and will be unsealed if the judge grant's the government's motion.
Click to expand...

Typically, the Affidavit remains sealed until an indictment is filed. That written, in my original post, I focuses on (a) existing contents of docket and (b) impact of 3:00 p.m. deadline for the former President's legal team to respond to the request to unseal the actual search warrant and the redacted inventory of property seized.

What cannot be lost in the equation is that the media outlets' motions to unseal are NOT limited to the actual search warrant and the redacted inventory of property seized. The media outlets want all of the documents, unredacted, including the Affidavit in support of the warrant. The DOJ's deadline for responding/resisting those motions is Monday (federal court filings can be done up to 11:59:59 p.m. of the due date). EDIT: Once the former President's legal team files their respective Appearances, they can also chime in on the issue of whether they want the Affidavit unsealed or whether they'd resist the media outlets' efforts.

Thus, even though we cannot reasonably anticipate seeing or reading about the contents of the Affidavit later this afternoon, there will be further filings and arguments made in an effort to unseal the Affidavit. Looks like the judge is going to keep things moving quickly in this regard.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nu2u
pablow said:
The new media is clamoring for the unsealing of the affidavit too. I don't think the search warrant return will contain much detail about what specific documents were seized.
Click to expand...
Spot on. You posted this as I was typing post #16.
 
Radical Right media sure hasn't made much effort to address the nuclear component since the info was released.

Still deflecting for the pinheads that they call their audience.
 
The party grows . . .

August 12, 2022
Docket #28 - Attorney appearance filed for CBS and New York Times
Docket #29 - Attorney appearance filed for CBS and New York Times
Docket #30 - "Florida Center for Government Accountability" files an expedited motion to intervene and join in the motions to unseal all documents
Docket #31 - Miami Herald and Tampa Bay Times file a motion to intervene and join in the motions to unseal all documents
Docket #32 - Dow Jones & Company files a motion to intervene and join in the motions to unseal all documents
Docket #33 - Associated Press files a motion to intervene and join in the motions to unseal all documents
Docket #34 - Order approving motion to appear as out of state attorney for NBC, CNN, Washington Post (Docket #27)

#30 has some interesting advocacy:
"Since the execution of the search warrant, political figures have demonized the FBI, the Attorney General, and others. For example, one senator characterized the search by federal agents as akin to the infamous acts of Nazi Germany’s Gestapo. Others have suggested that those responsible for the search warrant are part of a conspiracy to assassinate Former President Trump or plant incriminating evidence against him. Threats against officials involved in the search include that they will soon be incarcerated."
"This is a perilous time for democracy. The ubiquity of social media has contributed to public disinformation on a scale never seen before. Information is weaponized for political gain. The general public that consumes this information is uncertain about what is truth and what is fiction."
"The United States has also moved to unseal the search warrant, two attachments, and a redacted property receipt listing items seized pursuant to the warrant. The limited release of information sought by the United States, however, does not satisfy the compelling reasons justifying a full disclosure of the search warrant materials, including the affidavit submitted in support of the warrant."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: flyfishstout_CO
This is getting humorous:

Docket #36 - Judicial Watch files a Notice of Filing Statement by the former President. They filed the statement that was released last night which includes all of the claims of "victimization" and "mistreatment" that the former President has been forced to endure.
Docket #37 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Dow Jones and Company
Docket #38 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Dow Jones and Company
Docket #39 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Florida Center for Governmental Accountability

Nothing has been filed by the former President's legal team. That written, based upon reporting, it appears that the Wall Street Journal has received and reviewed a copy of the search warrant and inventory of items seized.

EDIT: Breitbart apparently received and reviewed a copy as well.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Movillehawk and Thunderlips71
The media companies make sense but how can Judicial Watch and Florida Center for whatever become intervening parties?
 
StormHawk42 said:
The media companies make sense but how can Judicial Watch and Florida Center for whatever become intervening parties?
Click to expand...
The Center is a open records type organization.

flcga.org

Florida Center for Government Accountability (FLCGA)

The Florida Center for Government Accountability, a non-partisan nonprofit, focuses its government accountability and journalistic efforts primarily on local governments, providing support and assistance for citizens and investigative journalists working to hold government accountable.
flcga.org flcga.org
 
Federal dockets update in real time. The 2:00 p.m. CDT deadline has now elapsed and there was nothing filed on the docket by the former President's legal team.

Now . . . it is entirely possible that his legal team sent an email to the presiding judge identifying the former President's position on the issue and that the email has not been filed by the Court. Thus, I don't want to jump to any conclusion that the former President informed his legal team to not respond.

I do find it interesting that one of two things has occurred: (a) the former President chose not to respond by the deadline or (b) the former President didn't want to make a public filing identifying his position on the matter.

@nu2u - perhaps we will get an answer to the speculation of whether the court will follow "normal" circumstances and rule that, in the absence of a filing, consent has been impliedly conferred.
 
AuroraHawk said:
This is getting humorous:

Docket #36 - Judicial Watch files a Notice of Filing Statement by the former President. They filed the statement that was released last night which includes all of the claims of "victimization" and "mistreatment" that the former President has been forced to endure.
Docket #37 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Dow Jones and Company
Docket #38 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Dow Jones and Company
Docket #39 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Florida Center for Governmental Accountability

Nothing has been filed by the former President's legal team. That written, based upon reporting, it appears that the Wall Street Journal has received and reviewed a copy of the search warrant and inventory of items seized.

EDIT: Breitbart apparently received and reviewed a copy as well.

View embedded media
Click to expand...

If true (which would be a first for Breitbart)...

BTW, I believe 2071 is punishable per document, and it's up to 5 years. So, 10 documents, 50 years, 20 docs, 100 years...you get the idea.


 
  • Like
Reactions: lucas80 and Bonerfarts
AuroraHawk said:
This is getting humorous:

Docket #36 - Judicial Watch files a Notice of Filing Statement by the former President. They filed the statement that was released last night which includes all of the claims of "victimization" and "mistreatment" that the former President has been forced to endure.
Docket #37 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Dow Jones and Company
Docket #38 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Dow Jones and Company
Docket #39 - Notice of Attorney Appearance for Florida Center for Governmental Accountability

Nothing has been filed by the former President's legal team. That written, based upon reporting, it appears that the Wall Street Journal has received and reviewed a copy of the search warrant and inventory of items seized.

EDIT: Breitbart apparently received and reviewed a copy as well.

View embedded media
Click to expand...
So Trump is releasing names of the federal agents that searched his house? If true that is horrible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GES4
A receipt accompanying the search warrant, viewed by POLITICO on Friday, shows that Trump possessed documents including a handwritten note; documents marked with “TS/SCI,” which indicate one of the highest levels of government classification; and another item labeled “Info re: President of France.”

www.politico.com

FBI search warrant shows Trump under investigation for potential obstruction of justice, Espionage Act violations

A search warrant viewed by POLITICO reveals that the FBI is investigating Donald Trump for potential violations of the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice laws.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
 
August 12, 2022
#40 - DOJ files Notice of Parties' Position on unsealing documents. US Attorney files documents indicating that there has been a "meet and confer" with the former President's legal team and that the former President's legal team has no objection to the motion to unseal the search warrant and the redacted inventory.

EDIT: I suspect that the federal judge will enter an order before 5:00 p.m. EDT unsealing the search warrant and redacted inventory and that those documents will be publicly available thereafter.

The next mystery is how the DOJ will respond to the numerous requests to unseal the Affidavit and the extent to which the former President's legal team will weigh in. Deadline for the DOJ's response is Monday.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GES4 and Bonerfarts
Brendan gives a recent example of charges/punishment stemming from similar crimes.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cigaretteman

Trump seeks to appeal judge’s order keeping Fani Willis on Georgia case

Replies
2
Views
65
Off Topic
BGHAWK
B
RicoSuave102954

Appellate court rules Trump can post a lower bond of $175M to cover his civil fraud judgment!

Replies
16
Views
451
Off Topic
nu2u
nu2u
cigaretteman

‘Very, very troubling’: Judges, lawyers flummoxed by Judge Cannon

Replies
11
Views
439
Off Topic
lucas80
lucas80
cigaretteman

‘The threat is very real’: Trump’s defense of his attacks is rejected

Replies
14
Views
381
Off Topic
FAUlty Gator
FAUlty Gator
Sharky1203

Names in Jeffrey Epstein court documents to be unsealed in New York on Wednesday

Replies
3
Views
147
Off Topic
jasonrann
jasonrann
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back