By Rajan Laad(American Thinker)
After a series of attempts by the Department of Justice to keep the affidavit used in the FBI’s August raid on Mar-a-Lago sealed from the public eyes, the document was finally released on Friday afternoon just before the 12:00 p.m. ET deadline set by federal Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart.
The affidavit was supposed to provide the reasoning for the Mar-a-Lago raid.
As expected the affidavit was heavily redacted.
The following is the gist of the exposed contents of the document:
“A preliminary review of the 15 boxes indicated that they contained newspapers, magazines, printed news articles, photos, miscellaneous printouts, notes, presidential correspondence, personal and post-presidential records, and ‘a lot of classified records.’”
“The FBI’s investigation has established that documents bearing classification markings, which appear to contain National Defense Information (NDI), were among the materials contained in the FIFTEEN BOXES and were stored at the PREMISES in an unauthorized location.”
“There is probable cause to believe that additional documents that contain classified NDI or that are Presidential records subject to record retention requirements currently remain at the PREMISES. There is also probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found at the PREMISES.”
Ironically, the DOJ redacted its reasoning for redacting nearly the entire search warrant affidavit. The only justification not redacted is “agent safety.”
The DOJ claims the decision was made to protect the witnesses.
So what was the purpose of this redaction?
Barack Obama once said that the only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are the people with something to hide.
If the FBI has ironclad reasons for the raid, they would have released the entire document with only the names of the agents redacted.
The purpose of this redaction is to allow the cloud of doubt and suspicion to prevail to furnish a narrative.
This narrative began the day President Trump won the 2016 elections by defeating Hillary Clinton.
First, it was baselessly claimed that Trump had won by colluding with the Russians. There were once again no details provided. The accusers couldn’t say if any votes were altered. They couldn’t reveal the specifics of how Trump colluded with the Russians. It was merely a sinister disinformation campaign based on innuendo and insinuations. The media that functions as mouthpieces for the Democrats led the charge on this abominable hoax that the Russians had ‘meddled in the 2016’ elections, the implication being Trump was an illegitimate president.
The cacophonous campaign caused the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller. For the next 22 months, at a cost of $40 million, Mueller, whose team comprised of Trump haters carried out an investigation.
The goal in this probe wasn’t to investigate the truth, it was to persecute a political adversary, criminalize political opposition, and push a narrative.
Throughout the ‘investigation,’ the FBI and Justice Department leaked “bombshells” to the media. The media then claimed that the “walls are closing in” and Trump would be removed.
In the end, no evidence of collusion was discovered. Mueller’s team purposefully worded their report to keep the inferences ambiguous. It enabled the Democrats to continue to make bogus claims about collusion, extending the ordeal through much of Trump’s presidency.
When the Trump-Russia collusion narrative began to fade away, they concocted the Ukraine call narrative that Trump was soliciting foreign electoral intervention in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
Read The rest of this article at American Thinker(LINK)
