A Spring of Leaks

Judge Aileen Cannon knew the Justice Department’s recent history of bad behavior related to all things Donald Trump would repeat itself. How right she was.

Judge Aileen Cannon was right.

In her controversial order authorizing the appointment of a neutral third-party to review the classification status of documents seized during the FBI’s pillage of Mar-A-Lago last summer, Cannon cited as a main concern the Justice Department’s chronic habit of leaking to the news media. Leaks hinting at what FBI investigators allegedly found, including perhaps nuclear secrets, were reported by reliable media apparatchiks just a few days after the FBI’s unprecedented raid of a former president’s home.

Clearly aware that federal prosecutors already were collaborating with the media to spin the raid as legitimate amid a public outcry, Cannon granted Trump’s request for a special master to “ensur[e] the integrity of an orderly process amidst swirling allegations of bias and media leaks,” she wrote in her September 5 ruling. A proper investigation, she continued, “does not demand unquestioning trust in the determinations of the Department of Justice.”

Cannon, a Trump-appointed district court judge in Florida, at one point confronted prosecutors about the illicit leaks. “Government’s counsel stated that he had no knowledge of any leaks stemming from his team but candidly acknowledged the unfortunate existence of leaks to the press.”

A pile-on ensued against Cannon; the Justice Department appealed her order and prevailed in the appellate court. But Cannon foresaw exactly what has unfolded in the press over the past seven months. And as Trump prepares to fight his very first indictment handed down by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, leaks are springing up all over the corporate media to bolster the appearance of Trump’s criminality.

A lengthy piece in the Washington Post over the weekend gave a detailed account of the obstruction side of the classified documents investigation now led by Jack Smith, the special prosecutor appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland last year to give the false impression of investigative impartiality. If the Post’s reporting is accurate, the obstruction inquiry seems as weak as the original case; recall of the 13,000 items of evidence stolen by FBI agents during the lengthy raid, the government later claimed only about 100 papers contained classified markings.

“The additional evidence comes as investigators have used emails and text messages from a former Trump aide to help understand key moments last year, said the people, who like others interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing criminal investigation,” Post reporters Devlin Barrett, Josh Dawsey, and Perry Stein wrote.

The reporters specifically named Molly Michael, a former White House assistant who followed Trump to Florida after his term ended, as the aide whose communications are under scrutiny. Investigators also have “witness statements, security camera footage, and other documentary evidence” that purportedly proves Trump was involved in inspecting boxes of materials after receiving a subpoena last May to produce more classified records, the Post further disclosed.

It is highly unlikely those specifics were leaked to the Post by Team Trump—particularly since the carefully timed leak worked in the government’s favor.

The usual suspects quickly surmised that this really must be the end for Trump. Disgraced former FBI agent Peter Strzok concluded on Twitter that Trump’s actions based on the Post report “Feels obstruction-y.” Disgraced former Justice Department prosecutor Andrew Weissmann insisted the obstruction case “could be a rock crusher game over,” perhaps the thousandth time Weissmann made such an unrealized prediction. (Weissmann, by the way, was an outspoken critic of...

Read More HERE