MAR-A-LAGO, FLORIDA—On May 21, former President Donald J. Trump, filed a motion for relief relating to the Mar-a-Lago raid, and unlawful “Piercing,” of attorney-client privilege. The FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago was authorized by President Joe Biden. Court records indicate the President’s order included “Use of deadly force if necessary.”

In his motion, filed by Trump attorneys, Todd Blanche and Christopher M. Kise, claimed a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the U.S. government.

Documentation confirms that this was not a basic search and seizure for classified documents. The FBI agents reportedly exceeded a typical search warrant. This was a raid.

Agents searched the kitchen, the gym, former First Lady Melania, Trump’s son, Barron, and former President Trump’s suites, and more. 

The motion included documentation of FBI email indicating that the FBI authorities did not find it necessary to raid the home of a former sitting President.
According to the then Assistant Director in Charge of the Washington Field Office, Steven D’Antuono, “dealing with cases like this, the best scenario would have been consent, for the FBI, for former President Trump, and for the country.”

On February 10, 2023, the FBI conducted a five-hour-long search of former Vice President Mike Pence’s residence. One classified document was found, and Pence had reportedly consented to the search.

In February 2024, the initial report from Special Counsel Robert K. Hur was suppressed and rewritten.

The new document without the opinion of Special Counsel Hur was dated February 5, 2024, regarding the Special Counsel on the Investigation into unauthorized removal, retention, and disclosure of classified documents at the Delaware home and the Penn Biden Center in Washington D.C. 

Canyon News reported the quote from Special Counsel Hur before it was taken down from all mainstream and social media sources.

“We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter. (1) We would reach the same conclusion even if the Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president. (2) Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen.

These materials included (1) marked classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, and (2) notebooks containing Mr. Biden’s handwritten entries about issues of national security and foreign policy implicating sensitive intelligence sources and methods. FBI agents recovered these materials from the garage, offices, and basement den in Mr. Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware home.

We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.

Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt.

It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him, by then a former President well into his eighties, of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.

We conclude the evidence is not sufficient to convict, and we decline to recommend prosecution of Mr. Biden for his retention of the classified Afghanistan documents.”

To read the entire documentation made available by the DOJ is to understand that Joe Biden will not be made to stand trial for deliberately keeping classified documents of war projects he had a personal stake in during his eight years as Vice President.