National Archives Document Reveals Extent Of Potential Trump Crimes

0
830

John Solomon, a right-wing journalist and Trump ally, revealed a letter this week dated May 10 of this year from the head of the National Archives, who shared a series of startling revelations — including that the record-keeping agency recovered over 700 pages of classified documents in 15 boxes reclaimed from Mar-a-Lago in January.

Special Access Program materials were among what the National Archives found in these boxes from January, as was sensitive compartmented information, the latter of which is government information meant only for storage and usage within a specific kind of secure government facility called a SCIF. Special Access Program materials, meanwhile, are subject to “safeguarding and access requirements” beyond those for documents at the same classification level, as a government definition explains. Rather than Trump proving entirely forthcoming, the letter shows negotiations between his team and the Archives took place throughout 2021, and even after classified and highly guarded materials were found, Trump’s team tried to essentially upend investigative efforts regarding the materials — despite stated Justice Department concerns about potential national security ramifications.

The letter revealed this week by Solomon concerns the decision-making process by the head of the Archives, Debra Steidel Wall, regarding whether to provide the materials obtained from Mar-a-Lago to Justice Department personnel for further investigation. Ultimately, President Joe Biden left the choice with Wall and the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel of whether to comply with a supposed claim of executive privilege from ex-President Trump’s corner over at least some of the recovered documents, and in the letter, Wall explains she decided against abiding by the unprecedented privilege claims. According to Wall’s retelling in her May letter, a late April missive from a representative for Trump asked for another extension before the Archives provided the recovered documents to the FBI, an extension that the Trump representative hoped would allow for an examination of the materials and the chance of specific privilege claims from Trump.

The Trump lawyer also claimed in the April 29 letter that the missive itself constituted a “protective assertion of executive privilege made by counsel for the former President.” Wall didn’t oblige. “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,”” she wrote, citing a particular piece of federal law.

“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 Archivist’s May letter adds. “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.”” The Justice Department’s National Security Division stated those concerns in a letter for Trump’s team. Wall noted that ensuring the proper handling of classified materials would actually help protect the future ability of presidents to freely receive input and information, since info would be protected with potential disclosure concerns abated.