After federal officials disclosed previously blacked-out details in the Florida classified documents case against former President Donald Trump, critics struggled to find justifications for the redactions and the revelations.
Negative Perceptions
Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, told The Epoch Times that people have already become very distrustful of the DOJ in the wake of President Trump’s indictments and a series of other events.In addition, when people learn that the DOJ seems to be withholding information without apparent good reason, “it just adds one more reason to be suspicious of the Justice Department,” Mr. Levey said.
“It erodes people’s faith in the Justice Department when people see that ... the government is trying to keep things secret that really have no reason to be secret.”
At worst, officials could be “covering up crime” by hiding documents and statements, Mr. Levey said, a concern that “might be more applicable to the Biden probe.”
But redacting or otherwise withholding information could be “more innocuous, where they’re just engaging in an overreaction,” Mr. Levey said.
Principle Versus Practice
The U.S. government says a “presumption of openness” guides its records-release decisions (pdf). Yet the government’s actions appear to often conflict with that principle. Mr. Levey noted government agencies tend to clamp down on information more than necessary.At the same time, officials also have been known to divulge details that arguably should be exempt from disclosure. That practice raises concerns about hidden motivations that could be driving such decisions.
For example, Mr. Levey and former Trump White House staffer Kash Patel both had trouble figuring out why the DOJ would hide, then disclose, certain statements in the Florida case against President Trump. He has pleaded not guilty to 40 federal charges alleging mishandling of classified information, citing court rulings declaring that presidents possess absolute authority to declassify documents.
The former president has also pointed out that no charges have been filed against President Joe Biden, who remains under investigation for possessing classified documents from his time as vice president, when he lacked the authority to declassify those records.
After months of records disputes between President Trump and the National Archives and Records Administration, the FBI swooped in on President Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida. During the raid on Aug. 8, 2022, the FBI confiscated records. Three days earlier, an unnamed FBI agent had filed an affidavit outlining why a judge should allow the search.
After reviewing the differences between the original affidavit and the less-redacted one, Mr. Patel said: “These side-by-side comparisons show me the DOJ had zero justification for releasing my name.”
Disclosure Despite Death Threat
Mr. Patel has stated that the DOJ’s release of his name “intentionally jeopardized” his safety. The disclosure came while the FBI was investigating a death threat against him.He and President Trump were the only people whose names the DOJ disclosed in the affidavit when it was first publicly released last year.
“This DOJ knew about that death threat and ongoing FBI investigation and left my name in for the world to see, but redacted all these details below,” Mr. Patel told The Epoch Times recently. “It’s violative of the law.” He also said it’s an example of the “two-tiered system of justice” that targets political enemies while allegedly giving preferential treatment to political allies.
The DOJ declined to respond to specific questions about these redactions and revelations in an Aug. 29 email to The Epoch Times.
‘Over-Redactions’ May Be Overreactions
However, some of the recently revealed statements in the affidavit fall outside those categories.One particularly puzzling example of a hidden-then-revealed statement: “It was [the former president’s] practice to store accumulated documents in boxes, and that continues to be his practice.” It is unclear why this statement needed to be redacted, as storing paper records in boxes is a common practice.
Mr. Levey, whose organization seeks to ensure that government leaders uphold constitutional principles, couldn’t think of a valid reason to justify withholding that statement.
“I think it’s commonplace to see such over-redactions,” he said. “That’s not to justify it, but that’s sort of how the process often works. ... It’s just very typical for the government to over-redact.”
Still, Mr. Levey pointed out that U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart reviewed the information that was withheld “and found it reasonable.”
The judge may have seen good reasons for keeping certain information under wraps, Mr. Levey said. “Or perhaps the judge is doing what judges often do ... being very deferential to the government,” he said.
Biden, Trump Probes Escalate Secrecy
Mr. Levey said he has noticed a trend.“There’s always been this reflexive desire for secrecy, and I think I’ve seen an increase in it,” he said. “But I wouldn’t want to say that I’ve seen a general pattern in the legal system. I think it’s ... more with these highly politicized recent cases.”
Everything released about the President Trump cases could serve as “ammunition for Republicans or for the media,” Mr. Levey said. Thus, the DOJ is being more cautious, Mr. Levey believes.
Meanwhile, the Trump cases are “part of a larger picture that ties in with the Biden investigation in the House.”
“You have to scratch and claw,” and file court actions “just to get any sort of openness from the Justice Department,” Mr. Levey said.
The same could be stated about other federal agencies.
The foundation says he sent emails under fake names—Robin Ware, Robert L. Peters, and JRB Ware—to “forward government information and discuss government business with his son, Hunter Biden, and others,” The Epoch Times reported.
Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, has publicly cited those email accounts and has sought unredacted email exchanges that President Biden exchanged with his son and business partners during his vice presidential tenure.
Mr. Comer and other Republicans have reported hitting resistance while probing the Bidens’ activities. President Biden has denied involvement in his son’s foreign business dealings. Republicans say they have unearthed information that seems to contradict those denials.
Mar-a-Lago Photo Revealed
Among eight search warrants used in the Florida case against President Trump, the one dated Aug. 5, 2022, remains the only one disclosed thus far.The less-redacted version of that search warrant affidavit, dated July 5 but not unsealed until July 25, includes passages describing where President Trump’s documents were kept.
“The door to the storage room was painted gold and had no other markings on it. The door to the storage room is located approximately mid-way up the wall and is reachable by several wooden stairs,” one unredacted statement says.
Another unmasked statement says: “There were also other boxes in the storage room with merchandise such as challenge coins, garment bags, memorabilia from Mar-a-Lago such as photograph frames, and other décor items.”
The less-redacted version reveals a photo showing stacks of white boxes in a storage room, along with this description of the picture and a reference to the former president of the united states as “FPOTUS.”
“The purpose of the photograph was to show FPOTUS the volume of boxes that remained in the storage room. The storage-photo, which appears below, captures approximately sixty-one of the FPOTUS boxes located in the storage room,” the warrant states.
It’s unclear why the photo and related statements were kept under wraps in the first place.
Judges Responsible for Openness
When the government withholds information that ought to be released, “pushback” can come from several sources, Mr. Levey said. News media have managed to shake loose some of the over-redacted information in the Mar-a-Lago case (pdf).Later, attorneys on the other side may also push for further disclosures.
But, Mr. Levey said, “most importantly,” judges are responsible for more critically reviewing federal officials’ requests to cloak information.
“The government is a somewhat intimidating authority,” he said, so that’s one reason judges may acquiesce to government demands for secrecy.
Another possible reason: “It takes a lot more work for a judge to push back than to defer,” Mr. Levey said.
But, he said, “It’s really up to the judge to police the government’s desire to have as much secrecy as possible.”
