I see I must have made some kind of mistake when I posted this last night because the post is gone with no explanation. So I will edit it and try again. Because it is imperative we beat down the lie that the Mar a Lago search was s0me kind of politically motivated action on the part of President Biden. Which this letter proves it was not.

President Biden and the White House's involvement amounted to the DOJ asking them if they could do a review of the classified material fond in the 15 boxes Trump returned and the White House saying yes. But deferred all other decisions on allowing the FBI and intelligence community to review what classified material was found to the National Archives.


And pay attention to the time lines noted in this letter because the National Archives attempts to make Trump return presidential records actually started back in early 2021. And this letter was written months after Trump did return 15 boxes of records and the National Archives found more than 700 pages of classified documents including TS/SCI and Special Access documents that are never supposed to leave government secure facilities.

And what this letter is actually referring to is Trump saying he was invoking executive privilege over all these classified documents and the National Archives could not even turn them over to the FBI and intelligence communities so they could review them to access the risk and damage to national security these documents getting our of secure facilities represents. And the National Archives rejecting that claim so the FBI and intelligence community could assess the risks to national security.





May 10, 2022


By Email
Dear Mr. Corcoran:
I write in response to your letters of April 29, 2022, and May 1, 2022, requesting that the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) further delay the disclosure to the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the records that were the subject of our April 12, 2022
notification to an authorized representative of former President Trump.
As you are no doubt aware, NARA had ongoing communications with the former President’s
representatives throughout 2021 about what appeared to be missing Presidential records, which
resulted in the transfer of 15 boxes of records to NARA in January 2022. In its initial review of
materials within those boxes, NARA identified items marked as classified national security
information, up to the level of Top Secret and including Sensitive Compartmented Information
and Special Access Program materials. NARA informed the Department of Justice about that
discovery, which prompted the Department to ask the President to request that NARA provide
the FBI with access to the boxes at issue so that the FBI and others in the Intelligence
Community could examine them. On April 11, 2022, the White House Counsel’s
Office—affirming a request from the Department of Justice supported by an FBI letterhead
memorandum—formally transmitted a request that NARA provide the FBI access to the 15
boxes for its review within seven days, with the possibility that the FBI might request copies of
specific documents following its review of the boxes.

Although the Presidential Records Act (PRA) generally restricts access to Presidential records in
NARA’s custody for several years after the conclusion of a President’s tenure in office, the
statute further provides that, “subject to any rights, defenses, or privileges which the United
States or any agency or person may invoke,” such records “shall be made available . . . to an
incumbent President if such records contain information that is needed for the conduct of current
business of the incumbent President’s office and that is not otherwise available.” 44 U.S.C. §

2205(2)(B). Those conditions are satisfied here. As the Department of Justice’s National Security
Division explained to you on April 29, 2022:
There are important national security interests in the FBI and others in the Intelligence
Community getting access to these materials. According to NARA, among the materials
in the boxes are over 100 documents with classification markings, comprising more than
700 pages. Some include the highest levels of classification, including Special Access
Program (SAP) materials. Access to the materials is not only necessary for purposes of
our ongoing criminal investigation, but the Executive Branch must also conduct an
assessment of the potential damage resulting from the apparent manner in which these
materials were stored and transported and take any necessary remedial steps.
Accordingly, we are seeking immediate access to these materials so as to facilitate the
necessary assessments that need to be conducted within the Executive Branch.
We advised you in writing on April 12 that, “in light of the urgency of this request,” we planned
to “provid[e] access to the FBI next week,” i.e., the week of April 18. See Exec. Order No.
13,489, § 2(b), 74 Fed. Reg. 4,669 (Jan. 21, 2009) (providing a 30-day default before disclosure
but authorizing the Archivist to specify “a shorter period of time” if “required under the
circumstances”); accord 36 C.F.R. § 1270.44(g) (“The Archivist may adjust any time period or
deadline under this subpart, as appropriate, to accommodate records requested under this
section.”). In response to a request from another representative of the former President, the
White House Counsel’s Office acquiesced in an extension of the production date to April 29, and
so advised NARA. In accord with that agreement, we had not yet provided the FBI with access
to the records when we received your letter on April 29, and we have continued to refrain from
providing such access to date.

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.
Notwithstanding the urgency conveyed by the Department of Justice and the reasonable
extension afforded to the former President, your April 29 letter asks for additional time for you to
review the materials in the boxes “in order to ascertain whether any specific document is subject
to privilege,” and then to consult with the former President “so that he may personally make any
decision to assert a claim of constitutionally based privilege.” Your April 29 letter further states
that in the event we do not afford you further time to review the records before NARA discloses
them in response to the request, we should consider your letter to be “a protective assertion of
executive privilege made by counsel for the former President.”

The Counsel to the President has informed me that, in light of the particular circumstances
presented here, President Biden defers to my determination, in consultation with the Assistant
Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, regarding whether or not I should uphold the
former President’s purported “protective assertion of executive privilege.” See 36 C.F.R. §
1270.44(f)(3). Accordingly, I have consulted with the Assistant Attorney General for the Office
of Legal Counsel to inform my “determination as to whether to honor the former President’s
claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim of
privilege.” Exec. Order No. 13,489, § 4(a).

The Assistant Attorney General has advised me that there is no precedent for an assertion of
executive privilege by a former President against an incumbent President to prevent the latter
from obtaining from NARA Presidential records belonging to the Federal Government where
“such records contain information that is needed for the conduct of current business of the
incumbent President’s office and that is not otherwise available.” 44 U.S.C. § 2205(2)(B).



To the contrary, the Supreme Court’s decision in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433
U.S. 425 (1977), strongly suggests that a former President may not successfully assert executive
privilege “against the very Executive Branch in whose name the privilege is invoked.” Id. at
447-48. In Nixon v. GSA, the Court rejected former President Nixon’s argument that a statute
requiring that Presidential records from his term in office be maintained in the custody of, and
screened by, NARA’s predecessor agency—a “very limited intrusion by personnel in the
Executive Branch sensitive to executive concerns”—would “impermissibly interfere with candid
communication of views by Presidential advisers.” Id. at 451; see also id. at 455 (rejecting the
claim). The Court specifically noted that an “incumbent President should not be dependent on
happenstance or the whim of a prior President when he seeks access to records of past decisions
that define or channel current governmental obligations.” Id. at 452; see also id. at 441-46
(emphasizing, in the course of rejecting a separation-of-powers challenge to a provision of a
federal statute governing the disposition of former President Nixon’s tape recordings, papers, and
other historical materials “within the Executive Branch,” where the “employees of that branch
[would] have access to the materials only ‘for lawful Government use,’” that “[t]he Executive
Branch remains in full control of the Presidential materials, and the Act facially is designed to
ensure that the materials can be released only when release is not barred by some applicable
privilege inherent in that branch”; and concluding that “nothing contained in the Act renders it
unduly disruptive of the Executive Branch”).

It is not necessary that I decide whether there might be any circumstances in which a former
President could successfully assert a claim of executive privilege to prevent an Executive Branch
agency from having access to Presidential records for the performance of valid executive
functions. The question in this case is not a close one. The Executive Branch here is seeking
access to records belonging to, and in the custody of, the Federal Government itself, not only in
order to investigate whether those records were handled in an unlawful manner but also, as the
National Security Division explained, to “conduct an assessment of the potential damage
resulting from the apparent manner in which these materials were stored and transported and take
any necessary remedial steps.” These reviews will be conducted by current government
personnel who, like the archival officials in Nixon v. GSA, are “sensitive to executive concerns.”
Id. at 451. And on the other side of the balance, there is no reason to believe such reviews could
“adversely affect the ability of future Presidents to obtain the candid advice necessary for
effective decisionmaking.” Id. at 450. To the contrary: Ensuring that classified information is
appropriately protected, and taking any necessary remedial action if it was not, are steps essential
to preserving the ability of future Presidents to “receive the full and frank submissions of facts
and opinions upon which effective discharge of [their] duties depends.” Id. at 449.
Because an assertion of executive privilege against the incumbent President under these
circumstances would not be viable, it follows that there is no basis for the former President to
make a “protective assertion of executive privilege,” which the Assistant Attorney General

informs me has never been made outside the context of a congressional demand for information
from the Executive Branch. Even assuming for the sake of argument that a former President may
under some circumstances make such a “protective assertion of executive privilege” to preclude
the Archivist from complying with a disclosure otherwise prescribed by 44 U.S.C. § 2205(2),
there is no predicate for such a “protective” assertion here, where there is no realistic basis that
the requested delay would result in a viable assertion of executive privilege against the
incumbent President that would prevent disclosure of records for the purposes of the reviews
described above. Accordingly, the only end that would be served by upholding the “protective”
assertion here would be to delay those very important reviews.


I have therefore decided not to honor the former President’s “protective” claim of privilege. See
Exec. Order No. 13,489, § 4(a); see also 36 C.F.R. 1270.44(f)(3) (providing that unless the
incumbent President “uphold” the claim asserted by the former President, “the Archivist
discloses the Presidential record”). For the same reasons, I have concluded that there is no reason
to grant your request for a further delay before the FBI and others in the Intelligence Community
begin their reviews. Accordingly, NARA will provide the FBI access to the records in question ,
as requested by the incumbent President, beginning as early as Thursday, May 12, 2022.
Please note that, in accordance with the PRA, 44 U.S.C. § 2205(3), the former President’s
designated representatives can review the records, subject to obtaining the appropriate level of
security clearance. Please contact my General Counsel, Gary M. Stern, if you would like to
discuss the details of such a review, such as you proposed in your letter of May 5, 2022,
particularly with respect to any unclassified materials.
Sincerely,

DEBRA STEIDEL WALL
Acting Archivist of the United States

 

If it wasn't political
Why did they grab trump's passports?
Why weren't they listed on the inventory?
Why did they force the Trump representatives who were present to stay outside in violation of every normal search warrant protocol?
Why did they even get a warrant knowing about JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. v. NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION, No. 1:2010cv01834 - Document 13 (D.D.C. 2012)
Why all the slanted and spun leaks?

You can try and sell the world that this isn't political.
Fail.

 

Because that case is irritating to anything involving Trump. Clinton did not take any classified information, nor anything else deemed to be a presidential record. Spin all you want, these cases have nothing to do with each other.

 

Well now you're way over your pay grade there, anon.
Read the decision.
Or have someone read it to you.
It says, once the President calls it a "personal record" it is a personal record. And that includes any record marked at any level of top secret, with the single exception of nuclear secrets.
See there?
Shooter doesn't say that, the District court in DC said it.
In 2012.
About Clinton's tapes.
That Judicial Watch wanted.
Now, ain't that a hoot?

Oh, and by the way, those tapes that were at issue in the court decision? On them Clinton talked about firing and replacing cabinet level people, and phone conversations with world leaders, and all manner of what you and I would call "government business". Doesn't matter. If the president says it's personal its personal and the national archives has shit to say about it.

Twirl and spin and stamp your foot some more.
Watching you and stumbler go all apoplectic is a hoot.

 

I would ask you to show this passage, but I know you won't... So, meh!

Either way, Judicial Watch lost their case.

The national archives labeled those tapes as personal property. Trump never even asked the national archives. He just took those files.

But hey! You keep stamping and shouting... If won't change a thing.

I am curious, if it does turn out that he took nuclear secrets, will you call for his prosecution? My guess is no, you'll keep right on defending him.

 

You and I may disagree on many "interpretations," but I refuse to allow you to muddy the water regarding factual history. From your favorite fact check organization: https://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/clintons-handling-of-classified-information/

----- -----
Clinton repeatedly claimed that she did not send or receive any information that was marked classified in her personal emails. That’s false. FBI Director James Comey said more than 2,000 emails contained classified information and some of them “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information.”

----- ------
Classified Information
Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, has denied mishandling classified information ever since the New York Times on March 2, 2015, disclosed that Clinton “exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state.” At a March 10 press conference, Clinton addressed her unusual email arrangement. Her office at the time said that on Dec. 5, 2014, it gave the State Department 30,490 printed copies of work-related emails. Clinton said none of them contained classified information.

Clinton, March 10, 2015: I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.

On the same day, her office released a Q&A that said a “separate, closed email system was used by the State Department for the sole purpose of handling classified communications which was designed to prevent such information from being transmitted anywhere other than within that system.”

But about four months later, the inspectors general of the State Department and the Intelligence Community reviewed 40 of Clinton’s emails and found that four did contain classified information, referring the case to the FBI for what they called an investigation into the “potential compromise of classified information.” The inspectors general said the four emails “did not contain classification markings.”

After the inspectors general reported its findings, Clinton and her campaign amended their public statements to say that she did not send or receive information that was marked classified. But that has turned out to be false, too.

----- -----

 

Former FBI official Peter Strzok slaps down Trump's defenses in Mar-a-Lago case

Niko Mann
August 24, 2022



Donald Trump at the Elysee Palace. (Frederic Legrand - COMEO / Shutterstock.com)


Former FBI Counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok attacked Donald Trump's comments regarding the former president's hoarding of classified documents. Strzok appeared on MSNBC with Nicolle Wallace on Wednesday after news broke about the government's year-long quest to obtain access to the documents taken by Trump to his Florida resort.

According to The Washington Post, Trump spent months resisting the government's request to return classified documents — including ignoring a grand jury subpoena — before the FBI conducted the raid on his Palm Beach residence on Aug. 8. Authorities reportedly removed more than 700 pages of documents.

Trump claimed that his executive privilege still applied, despite him no longer being the President of the United States. He also claimed that he had a standing order to declassify documents. Trump also claimed that many documents were taken by mistake due to frenzied packing at the White House.

Wallace asked Strzok about the national security implications involved with classified documents being taken and moved around Mar-a-Lago.

IN OTHER NEWS: Joe Biden shuts down Peter Doocy for shouting question about FBI at student loan event

"Well, Nicolle, there are huge national security implications to what the material — what happened to it and how it was handled," he replied. "I mean everything from the moment it was boxed up, the questions of who was boxing it up, what moving company was used and then certainly when it landed at Mar-a-Lago, all the different things about who might have had access to the room."

He continued by speculating who may have had access to the classified documents. "There's some indication that a variety of people were coming and going into the room, but who else might of had access to that outside the of time that CCTV footage was available? Did other guests have access? Did an electrician have access? Did a cleaning staff person have access?"

Strzok, who was fired after his anti-Trump text messages were revealed, also cited the lack of a visitor log at Mar-a-Lago as a national security issue. "All of these questions and particularly in light of the fact that there's some reporting that there doesn't seem to be a visitor log at Mar-a-Lago lays out a very real question about who — particularly if you're a Russian intelligence agent or a Chinese intelligence officer trying to recruit somebody in and around at Mar-a-Lago, certainly a place like a former president's residence is of extraordinary intelligence collection interest."

He went on to question if Trump still had classified documents in his possession and speculated that Trump may have wanted to keep the documents because he wanted to show them off because he thought they were "neat" and said he had the mentality of a 7-year-old kid. Strzok also said Trump may have wanted to keep the documents for future business dealings.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-mar-a-lago-raid-2657935757/

 

Peter Strozck needs to shut the fuck up.
A disgrace of a fbi agent.

 

If any one can recognize anything illegal it's Strzok... He and his mistress are a bigger disgrace than Hover in drag!!

 

But of course, if this really becomes an issue, the right will demand to see a visitor log for Biden's home in Delaware. @shootersa has already made it clear that he expects there to be a history of who visited Biden in his home. He seems to think that Hunter is taking advantage of that for some stupid reason! Seems he's concerned about Hunter getting the nuclear codes.

 

National Archives demanded return of classified documents after Cipollone acknowledged Trump shouldn't have them: report

Matthew Chapman
August 24, 2022



Official White House photo by Shealah Craighead.


On Wednesday, The Washington Post reported that the National Archives first demanded the return of classified documents from former President Donald Trump in an email in early 2021 — prompted, in part, by an acknowledgement from former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone that Trump didn't have a right to take them.

"'It is also our understanding that roughly two dozen boxes of original presidential records were kept in the Residence of the White House over the course of President Trump’s last year in office and have not been transferred to NARA, despite a determination by Pat Cipollone in the final days of the administration that they need to be,' wrote Gary Stern, the agency’s chief counsel, in an email to Trump lawyers in May 2021, according to a copy reviewed by The Washington Post," Josh Dawsey and Jacqueline Alemany wrote. "Cipollone was the former White House counsel designated by Trump as one of his representatives to the Archives."

"The previously unreported email — sent about 100 days after the former president left office with the subject line 'Need for Assistance re Presidential Records' — shows just how early Archives officials realized that many documents were missing from the Trump White House," said the report. "It also illustrates the myriad efforts Archives officials made to have the documents returned over an 18-month period, culminating with an FBI raid earlier this month at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida."

According to previous reports, the missing documents included highly classified information, with the FBI even searching for nuclear weapons secrets among the records recovered at Mar-a-Lago.

IN OTHER NEWS: DOJ releases 9-page memo explaining why Trump wasn’t prosecuted for obstruction: report

"Stern, the chief counsel at the Archives, does not say in the email how he determined that the boxes were in Trump’s possession," said the report. "He wrote that he also had consulted another Trump lawyer during the final days of Trump’s presidency — without any luck. 'I had also raised this concern with Scott in the final weeks,' Stern writes in the email, referring to Trump lawyer Scott Gast, who is also copied on the email," said the report. "In the email, Stern again asks for the documents from Trump’s residence to be returned."

Trump has filed a lawsuit to try to block the Justice Department from reviewing any of the documents the FBI seized, although legal experts broadly believe the move is nothing more than a stall tactic.


https://www.rawstory.com/national-archives-trump/

 

Trump Jr......lol!



Thinskin

 

The efforts to make Trump hand over presidential records and classified material to the National Archives actually started before Trump even left the White House. Trump is a mentally ill hoarder who filled his White House residence with literally boxes full of presidential records top secret classified documents. And both his advisors and the White House Counsel told Trump all those records and classified material had to be turned over to the National Archives. In fact White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and the National Archives were communicating about it and Cipollone said the records Trump was hoarding did not belong to him. But Trump refused to turn those presidential records and and classified material over to the National Archives and instead took somewhere between 25 and 30 boxes with him when he left the White House and took them down to Mar a Lago. That started a battle to make Trump turn all those records over to the National Archives beginning in February 2021 that finally resulted in the FBI getting a search warrant on August 8, 2022 to retrieve some of the most highly classified material the government has including TS/SCI and Special Access Program. And during all that time up until the search of Mar a Lago both the National Archives and DOJ were treating Trump with kid gloves trying everything they could think of to get Trump to comply. They gave him multiple opportunities to just quietly give all the records back. But Trump not only constantly defied all those attempts he was also constantly lying about the documents he was refusing to hand over and tried to hide. Until the FBI had no choice but to go into Mar a Lago and seize those records and classified material to end the threat to naitonal security.


Trump held on tightly to 'sensitive secrets' and information about US intelligence-gathering at Mar-a-Lago, sources tell WaPo

Trump held on tightly to 'sensitive secrets' and information about US intelligence-gathering at Mar-a-Lago, sources tell WaPo
Erin Snodgrass
Tue, August 23, 2022 at 8:01 PM



Former President Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Hilton Anatole on August 06, 2022 in Dallas, Texas.Brandon Bell/Getty Images

• 
  Donald Trump kept highly-sensitive information at Mar-a-Lago, according to The Washington Post.
  
  
• He resisted efforts from the federal government to retrieve and review the material, per The Post.
  
• Agents who interviewed people in Trump's orbit were told he was a pack rat, according to The Post.
  

Former President Donald Trump rejected multiple attempts by the federal government to retrieve classified documents from his personal possession — some of which included top secret information about US intelligence-gathering methods, according to The Washington Post.

Two people familiar with the unprecedented FBI raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort earlier this month told the outlet that agents during the search retrieved material that is "among the most sensitive secrets we hold."


After months of Trump's reported refusal to cooperate, the FBI on August 8 seized 26 boxes of documents from Trump's South Florida residence, including 11 sets marked as "classified" — one of which had the highest security level of "top secret."

The outlet reported that Trump spent weeks earlier this year trying to prevent the FBI from reviewing classified material that was included in boxes of presidential records he begrudgingly returned to the National Archives in January.

National Archives officials discovered that among the handwritten notes and memos included in the boxes were records with obvious classified markings, prompting the FBI's involvement in the scandal that months later led federal law enforcement agents to Mar-a-Lago, according to the newspaper.

Agents who interviewed people in Trump's inner circle were told that the former president was a pack rat who personally oversaw his collection of White House records, even prior to his departure from DC, according to The Post.

A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

The Post's Tuesday report, which is based on court filings, correspondence, and memories of people familiar with the investigation, follows a bombshell Monday New York Times report, which alleged that the government thus far has retrieved more than 300 classified documents from Trump since he left office.

Read the original article on Business Insider



https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-held-tightly-sensitive-secrets-020142221.html

 

At least we're getting the facts instead of obvious leaks by intel officials...

 

Whatever it takes.

 

tRump admits to taking the documents but in his screwed up logic he thinks he it was his right to do it........and he was keeping them safe from potentially being destroyed or lost at the White House.



https://www.businessinsider.com/tru...e-records-are-for-presidential-library-2022-8

 

You've been around here a long time @69magpie. Can you imagine the fury from the right if President Obama had done what Trump did? They would be screaming for his execution. This is the worst national security breach I have seen in my lifetime and instead of caring about that all they do is make up excuses for Trump and contend he is above all laws, the Constitution, and even national security.

 

And yet again stumbler starts with facts not in evidence. Then he expands it to whataboutism and finishes with a rant on the patriotism of his enemies.

Which is where Shooter throws up in his mouth a bit. The fellow who calls America a "shithole country" and a "banana republic" has no business offering up spew about anyone's patriotism.

 

‘It changes my view’: Bill Barr now thinks DOJ is ‘taking a hard look’ at Trump

 

RAWSTORY is going to be all but worthless when it comes to analyzing what the affidavit actually reveals so I will have to look for other sources. But here's the affidavit for anyone who wants to see what was not redacted. With most observers surprised the DOJ released so much.


Read the redacted FBI affidavit that resulted in Mar-a-Lago search warrant

Raw Story
August 26, 2022



Donald Trump / Gage Skidmore.


A heavily redacted version of the affidavit that justified the FBI raid on former president Donald Trump's Florida residence has been released to the public.

A federal judge ordered that the affidavit, whose unredacted version likely explains in detail what the Justice Department is investigating in relation to Trump and possibly reveals sources, must be unsealed by noon Friday.

But those details could remain hidden, as Judge Bruce Reinhart accepted Justice Department arguments that there was a "compelling" need to mask significant portions of the document.

On Monday, Reinhart had ordered at least partial disclosure of the document, saying it served the public interest in the case, as it involves the unprecedented search of the home of a former president.

IN OTHER NEWS: Trump seeks dismissal of civil suit filed by Capitol Police officer as his legal problems mount

Justice authorities had argued against unsealing the document, saying it would require redactions "so extensive as to render the remaining unsealed text devoid of meaningful content."

FBI agents raided Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida on August 8, seizing boxes containing a large amount of highly classified documents that Trump had not returned to the government despite multiple requests and a subpoena to do so.

The warrant for the raid cited three criminal statutes, including one falling under the Espionage Act, which makes it a crime to illegally obtain or retain national security information, and another on obstruction of a federal investigation.

Trump, who is weighing another White House run in 2024, has vehemently denounced the FBI raid.

READ: Explosive report claims a phony Rothschild heiress infiltrated Mar-a-Lago and Trump’s inner circle

"The Radical Left Democrat prosecutors are illegally trying to circumvent, for purely political gain, the Presidential Records Act, under which I have done absolutely nothing wrong," Trump said on social media Thursday.

"They illegally raided my home, and took things that should not have been taken," he said.

Read the document below or at this link.




Affidavit by RawStory




With additional reporting by AFP

https://www.rawstory.com/fbi-affidavit-mar-a-lago/