The Department of Justice will speak through its court filings and its work. Just now, the Justice Department has filed a motion in the Southern District of Florida to unseal a search warrant and property receipt relating to a court approved search that the FBI conducted earlier this week. 

That search was a premises located in Florida, belonging to the former president. The department did not make any public statements on the day of the search. The former president publicly confirmed the search that evening, as is his right. 

Copies of both the warrant and the FBI property receipt were provided on the day of the search to the former president’s counsel, who was on site during the search. 

The search warrant was authorized by a federal court upon the required finding of probable cause. The property receipt is a document that federal law requires law enforcement agents to leave with the property owner. 

The Department filed the motion to make public the warrant and receipt in light of the former president’s public confirmation of the search, the surrounding circumstances, and the substantial public interest in this matter.

Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy. Upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly without fear or favor. Under my watch, that is precisely what the Justice Department is doing. 

All Americans are entitled to the even-handed application of the law, the due process of law, and to the presumption of innocence. Much of our work is, by necessity, conducted out of the public eye. We do that to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans and to protect the integrity of our investigations. 

Federal law, longstanding department rules, and our ethical obligations prevent me from providing further details as to the basis of the search at this time. There are however, certain points I want you to know. 

First, I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter. Second, the department does not take such a decision lightly – where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search and, to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken. 

Third, let me address recent unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the FBI and Justice Department agents and prosecutors. I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. Men and women of the FBI and the Justice Department are dedicated, patriotic public servants. Every day, they protect the American people from violent crime, terrorism and other threats to their safety while safeguarding our civil rights. 

They do so at great personal sacrifice and risk to themselves. I am honored to work alongside them. This is all I can say right now. More information will be made available in the appropriate way and at the appropriate time.

Donald Trump‘s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida was raided by the FBI on Monday night, the former president revealed in a furious and lengthy statement.

The unannounced search was related to White House documents sought by the National Archives, his son Eric Trump told Fox News later that night.

Federal agents ‘ransacked’ his father’s office, he said, and in his own statement the former president accused them of breaking into his safe.

But Trump’s issues with the National Archives reportedly began before he even left office. 

Politico reported in 2018 that aides were forced to follow the then-president around to tape back documents that he had shredded – a habit the Republican was known for during his prior life heading the Trump Organization – in fear of running afoul of record-keeping laws.

And late last year, Trump attempted to slow the release of presidential documents from the National Archives to the House select committee investigating the January 6 attack.

It’s not clear what specifically is being investigated, but it’s worth noting there are laws on the books against tampering and destruction of classified presidential records. 

Below is a timeline piecing together reports of the former president’s legal battle with the Capitol riot committee over his documents, which appeared to run parallel to the National Archives’ own efforts to recover classified pages from Trump.

The New York Times reported on Tuesday afternoon that the two are not related. 

Trump sues January 6 committee to block National Archives records

In October 2021, the former president launched a lawsuit against the Democrat-led House panel and the National Archives to block the release of White House records linked to last year’s Capitol riot.

Trump’s lawyers called the probe a ‘fishing expedition’ in a 26-page lawsuit filed in mid-October.

The attorneys had also requested that the National Archives send Trump’s team any documents that could be relevant for review.

Trump lost the case along with two subsequent appeals later that year.

Supreme Court shuts down Trump’s bid to block documents, National Archives says it will turn them over 

The January 6 committee revealed on January 19 that it had begun receiving documents from the National Archives that Trump ‘had hoped to keep hidden.’

It happened the same day as the Supreme Court rejecting Trump’s last-ditch request to shield his records. 

Nine justices voted against the former president, including three who he appointed to the bench.

Only Clarence Thomas, whose wife Ginni is now being investigated by the committee over her efforts to push Trump’s election fraud claims, voted in Trump’s favor.

In addition to his own documents, the tranche also included records belonging to White House legal counsel, ex-adviser Stephen Miller and ex-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, The Guardian reported.

National Archives reveals some Trump records were ‘torn up’

The record-keeping body confirmed to the Washington Post on January 31 that the documents it handed to the January 6 committee ‘included paper records that had been torn up by former President Trump.’

At this point the National Archives had reportedly handed more than 700 pages to the committee.

Not all of them had been taped back together at the time of the committee’s receipt. 

‘These were turned over to the National Archives at the end of the Trump Administration, along with a number of torn-up records that had not been reconstructed by the White House,’ the Archives reportedly said.

Trump’s 15 boxes of sensitive White House documents

The next month, the National Archives revealed that Trump had taken 15 boxes full of White House records to his Mar-a-Lago retreat after leaving Washington, DC the year before.

Officials from the Archives and the Records Administration had to retrieve the boxes this past January.

It was first reported by the Washington Post on February 7. 

Items that were improperly taken and had to be retrieved included what Trump called ‘love letters’ exchanged with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. 

A letter from then-outgoing President Barack Obama to Trump when he first took office was also among the trove.

National Archives asks Justice Department to probe Trump record-keeping

Two days after it was revealed that Trump took 15 boxes of White House documents to Mar-a-Lago, the National Archives stepped up its enforcement by asking the Justice Department to probe the ex-president’s handling of the sensitive pages.

The Archives asked President Joe Biden’s DOJ to investigate whether Trump violated the Presidential Records Act, a source told CNN on February 9.

The Washington Post reported the next day that some of the files in the 15 boxes the Archives had retrieved were marked as ‘top secret’ – spurring security concerns.

At the time, Trump’s spokesman Taylor Budowich said the records retrieving process was ‘normal and routine’ but was being ‘weaponized by anonymous, politically motivated government sources to peddle Fake News.’

Report details months-long effort to retrieve Trump documents

While the controversy between the former president and government record-keepers only gained steam earlier this year, a February 13 CNN report reveals that the National Archives knew as early as May 2021 that documents had been missing.

National Archives counsel Gary Stern reportedly first contacted an official in the White House who had been named the point-person for records-keeping matters.

Stern apparently reached out to one of Trump’s other lawyers after his efforts to get the records appeared to be slow-walked.

At the time of the February report, one person told CNN the matter had ‘not been fully resolved’ and the National Archives was still seeking more documents from Trump.

‘Former President Trump’s representatives have informed NARA that they are continuing to search for additional Presidential records that belong to the National Archives,’ the Archives said in a statement.

Classified documents were among the 15 boxes Trump took, National Archives says

A week later, the National Archives confirmed an earlier Washington Post report that top secret documents were among the trove that Trump took to Mar-a-Lago with him.

The body said in a statement published on February 18 that it was ‘in communication’ with the DOJ on Trump-retrieved documents that were ‘marked as classified national security information.’

 In response to letters from the House Oversight Committee seeking more information on the matter, the Archives revealed the sensitive nature of the documents and added that social media and other online records from White House aides had not been properly stored.

The body said Trump aides had been warned about the matter previously.

DOJ summons grand jury in National Archives probe and grills Trump staffers

After months of silence, the Justice Department was revealed in May to be investigating whether Trump or others mishandled classified White House documents.

The DOJ convened a grand jury in the probe, the New York Times reported on May 12.

Prosecutors had subpoenaed the relevant documents from the National Archives, and CNN revealed they questioned Trump aides in April and May of this year.

Merrick Garland’s top officials sit down with Trump lawyers in Mar-a-Lago

Four top DOJ officials traveled to Mar-a-Lago in early June to speak with the former president’s attorneys about the documents, it was reported the day after the FBI raid.

In revealing the visit CNN noted how ‘rare’ in nature it was. 

The DOJ’s counterintelligence and export control section chief Jay Bratt was reportedly among the group who sat down with Trump’s lawyers.

Trump’s team had also shown the government officials where Trump were storing documents.

Investigators reportedly observed that some of the files there were marked as classified.

At one point the former president himself reportedly stopped in to say hello and ‘make small talk’ before leaving again.

Trump staffers padlock documents room in Mar-a-Lago

Days after the investigators’ visit, they reportedly sent a letter to Trump’s staff asking them to secure the room where they observed the documents being stored.

Aides padlocked the area, according to CNN.

Feds raid Mar-a-Lago on Monday morning

It was reported that the FBI’s operation at Mar-a-Lago occurred in the early hours of Monday morning.

The ex-president had been at Trump Tower in New York City at the time. His son Eric Trump told Fox he informed his father of the raid.

CNN reported that federal agents’ activity was exclusively kept to the portions of the club where Trump’s office and residence are.

The former president claimed he was a victim of political persecution in a statement that revealed the unannounced search to the public.

‘These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents,’ Trump said through his Save America PAC.

‘I stood up to America ‘s bureaucratic corruption, I restored power to the people, and truly delivered for our Country, like we have never seen before. The establishment hated it. Now, as they watch my endorsed candidates win big victories, and see my dominance in all polls, they are trying to stop me, and the Republican Party, once more. The lawlessness, political persecution, and Witch Hunt must be exposed and stopped.’

Donald Trump has put out yet another statement about the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago.

“Number one, it was all declassified. Number two, they didn’t need to ‘seize’ anything”, it begins, in apparent reference to reports that classified and top secret documents were found among his possessions.

The statement continues:

They could have had it anytime they wanted without playing politics and breaking into Mar-a-Lago. It was in secured storage, with an additional lock put on as per their request. They could have had it anytime they wanted—and that includes LONG ago. ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS ASK. The bigger problem is, what are they going to do with the 33 million pages of documents, many of which are classified, that President Obama took to Chicago?

Yesterday, top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer asked voters to keep his party in control of the upper chamber of Congress next year, and in return, they’ll pass bills to lower costs for elder and child care.

Those were priorities of party leaders and president Joe Biden, but they couldn’t find the support in Congress to enact them. Today, a House Democrat made a similar, although perhaps more controversial, plea. According to Bloomberg News, Richard Neal, the Democratic chairman of the House Ways and Means committee, would resurrect the party’s attempts to raise taxes on businesses and individuals:

The National Republican Congressional Committee quickly pounced on his comments:

Slate writer Jordan Weissman highlighted the opposition such proposals might get from other Democrats, such as Arizona senator Kyrsten Sinema, who resisted several tax proposals over the past year. He tweeted the well-known moment when she nixed raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour with a thumbs down.

Back in the House of Representatives, Democrats are likely hours away from passing the Inflation Reduction Act, which would be a major win for the Biden administration.

They have a slim but workable majority in the chamber, and their members are believed to be ready to approve the bill. That doesn’t mean Republicans aren’t objecting vociferously to it. Indeed, rightwing congresswoman Lauren Boebert of Colorado got her microphone turned off as she railed against the legislation, which is intended to lower health care costs and help cut into America’s carbon emissions:

Federal investigators found sensitive government documents in Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club during their search there earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal reports, including some marked top secret.

The article based on the search warrant obtained by the FBI and a list of property seized appears to confirm that the former president possessed documents in his private residence that normally require special handling and a formal government process before they can be declassified.

The FBI took about 20 boxes of items during the search on Monday, according to the Journal, including documents that were marked as top secret, secret and classified. They also found information about the “President of France” and Trump’s grant of clemency for Roger Stone, one of his allies.

Attorney general Merrick Garland said yesterday the justice department would move to release the documents allowing the search, which Trump’s attorneys must respond to by 3pm eastern time today. Trump has said he does not plan to object to the department’s motion.

Washington awaits more details on the FBI’s search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club, while Democrats in the House of Representatives are on the verge of passing Joe Biden’s landmark climate change and healthcare plan. Meanwhile, author Salman Rushdie was attacked in upstate New York, and his condition at this time is unknown.

Here is a rundown of what has happened so far today:

• House Republicans showed no signs of backing down in their support of Trump, holding a press conference where they accused the Biden administration of politicizing the FBI.

• Democratic House speaker Nancy Pelosi meanwhile accused Republicans of “instigating assaults on law enforcement”.

• China’s president Xi Jinping is considering a face-to-face visit with Biden amid soaring tensions over Taiwan, The Wall Street Journal reports.

• Biden is potentially considering an early announcement of his 2024 re-election campaign to build on recent positive developments in his presidency, Reuters reports. Meanwhile, there are more signs that his approval rating is on the upswing.

China’s president Xi Jinping is making plans to potentially meet with Joe Biden in November, in what would be the first face-to-face encounter between the leaders since Biden took office last year, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Tensions between the United States and China have risen since House speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan earlier this month, sparking the ire of Beijing, which considers the island a breakaway province.

While Biden has traveled regularly since taking office, Xi has not left China since January 2020 after the country adopted some of the strictest measures of any major economy to stop the spread of Covid-19. According to the Journal, his meeting with Biden could take either in Bangkok, Thailand or the Indonesian island of Bali, likely on the sidelines of one of two major summits being held in those locations. The White House declined to comment, according to the report, but an official said the two leaders did discuss an in-person meeting during a recent phone call.

Author Salman Rushdie has been attacked at an event in upstate New York, the Associated Press reports. Rushdie has been the subject of death threats from Iran since the 1980s.

The Guardian has started a live blog covering the attack, which you can read below.

Further evidence that things are looking up for Democrats: Joe Biden’s approval rating is above 40 percent for the first time since early June, per RealClearPolitics’ polling average:

Democratic House speaker Nancy Pelosi condemned attacks by Donald Trump and other Republicans on the FBI following their search this week of the former president’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida.

Speaking at a press conference before she was to preside over the House’s vote on her party’s landmark climate legislation, Pelosi reacted to the Thursday attack on an FBI office in Cincinnati, Ohio by a man who may have been present at the January 6 insurrection.

“You would think there would be an adult in the Republican room that would say just calm down, see what the facts are and let’s go for that instead of again instigating assaults on law enforcement,” Pelosi said.

Donald Trump is known to be mulling whether to announce another campaign for president at an early date, potentially before the November midterm election. Now, Reuters reports that Joe Biden’s advisers are also pushing him to make an early announcement that he’ll stand for office again in 2024.

According to the report, the rationale is that an earlier-than-usual announcement would allow Biden to build on what his advisers see as an increasingly favorable electoral landscape, with voters revolting against the supreme court overturning Roe v. Wade and Democrats in Congress having passed several notable pieces of legislation in recent weeks.

It would also quell speculation that Biden, whose approval ratings have plunged over the past year, won’t stand for re-election. A Biden announcement would however most likely come after the midterms, while Trump, in contrast, is weighing whether announcing his own bid before voters even go to the polls.

Here’s more from Reuters:

People involved in planning the president’s campaign told Reuters that an early announcement would be a smart step for Biden, sending a signal to political donors, potential rivals inside and outside the party, as well as the general public that Biden is no lame duck and that Democrats are unified behind his agenda, personality and leadership.

“The Republican campaign for president begins after the midterms and the president needs to make the announcement during the same time to satisfy concerns within the party,” one top Democratic official said.

The move also would outfit a vast and much-better-funded campaign operation designed to sell Biden’s agenda to the country than the White House alone could muster as their efforts to sell their legislative accomplishments over two years wilted under red-hot inflation and bitter partisanship.

Biden is having meetings with his political advisers, a source familiar with the president’s thinking said, and in those meetings he keeps stressing that the attention right now needs to be on the midterms, rather than the timing of any presidential campaign.

“There is no planned date or timeframe. As the president has said before, he fully expects to run for reelection,” that source said.

The White House and the Democratic National Committee declined to comment.

The Inflation Reduction Act is the Biden administration’s marquee plan to lower health care costs and fight climate change, but as Michael Sainato reports, it won’t tackle the high price of insulin in the United States – thanks to Republicans:

During the Covid-19 pandemic, Erin Connelly had to ration insulin while transitioning to a different health insurance plan. When Connelly heard the Biden administration was planning to cap the price of the life-saving drug, she was delighted. She was soon to be disappointed.

The prices of insulin has soared in the US in recent decades and is more than eight times higher in the US than in 32 comparable, high-income nations, according to a Rand Corporation study.

With an average list price of $98.70 per unit in the US, compared with $7.52 in the UK, US insulin sales account for nearly half the pharmaceutical industry’s insulin revenue, though the US makes up only about 15% of the global market.

Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee have just offered some of the party’s first comments since last night’s report that Trump may have kept documents with details of nuclear weapons at Mar-a-Lago.

From the sounds of it, The Washington Post’s story hasn’t changed their view of the former president.

“President Donald Trump is Joe Biden’s most likeliest his political opponent in 2024 and this is less than 100 days from critical midterm elections. The FBI raid of President Trump is a complete abuse and overreach of its authority,” Elise Stefanik, the number-three House Republican, said at a press conference.

She and other lawmakers invoked old controversies such as the Hillary Clinton email scandal and Trump’s firing of FBI chief James Comey, as well as more recent matters such as Hunter Biden’s business dealings, to make the case that the bureau has a credibility issue.

“The American people are smart, and they have had enough. It is unfortunately why there is a fundamental lack of trust in these agencies, and the American people deserve answers,” Stefanik said. “A House Republican majority will leave no stone unturned when it comes to transparency and accountability into the brazen politicization of Joe Biden’s DOJ and FBI targeting their political opponents.”

As to the report regarding documents on nuclear weapons being found at Mar-a-Lago, Mike Turner, the top Republican on the House intelligence committee, called on attorney general Merrick Garland to make public the rationale for the raid.

“I’m asking the same questions you are and if there are rational answers for it, then he needs to come to this committee, disclose what the classified information is, disclose what the national security threat is, so that we know,” Turner said.

“Release the documents now!”

That’s the closing line of Donald Trump’s statement released last night, in which he said his lawyers won’t oppose the justice department’s move to unseal the warrant and property receipt allowing the FBI to search of Mar-a-Lago earlier this week.

That would appear to clear the way for it to be made public via the courts, but bear in mind that Trump could just release the documents himself. Attorney general Merrick Garland said yesterday copies of both were left with his attorney by the federal agents who came to Mar-a-Lago.

Here’s the full statement:

Not only will I not oppose the release of documents related to the unAmerican, unwarranted, and unnecessary raid and break-in of my home in Palm Beach, Florida, Mar-a-Lago, I am going a step further by ENCOURAGING the immediate release of those documents, even though they have been drawn up by radical left Democrats and possible future political opponents, who have a strong and powerful vested interest in attacking me, much as they have done for the last 6 years. My poll numbers are the strongest they have ever been, fundraising by the Republican Party is breaking all records, and midterm elections are fast approaching. This unprecedented political weaponization of law enforcement is inappropriate and highly unethical. The world is watching as our Country is being brought to a new low, not only on our border, crime, economy, energy, national security, and so much more, but also with respect to our sacred elections!

Release the documents now!

In another Trump-related affair, The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports on the latest development in the furor surrounding the Secret Service’s deletion of text messages around the time of the January 6 insurrection.

Top career officials at the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) office of the inspector general (OIG) tried to alert Congress in April that Secret Service texts from the time of the January 6 Capitol attack had been erased, but their efforts were nixed by its leadership, documents show.

The officials inside the inspector general’s office – the chief watchdog for the Secret Service – prepared a memo that detailed how the Secret Service was resisting the oversight body’s review into January 6, and delayed informing it about the lost texts.

But after the memo was emailed to the DHS inspector general Joseph Cuffari’s chief of staff, its contents were never seen again, and the disclosure about the erased text messages was never included in Cuffari’s semi-annual report to Congress about oversight work.

Oliver Milman

In an exclusive interview with The Guardian’s Oliver Milman, former vice president Al Gore explains the historic nature of Democrats’ plan to fight climate change:
America’s passing of its first ever climate legislation will prove a pivotal moment in history that will help bring to an end the era of fossil fuels, according to Al Gore, the former US vice-president.

Joe Biden is poised to sign a huge $370bn package of clean energy spending, overcoming decades of American political rancor and inaction on the climate crisis. Gore said he was now sure the fossil fuel industry and its political backers will not be able to reverse the shift to a decarbonized world, even if Republicans are able to wrest back control of Congress or the White House.

“In crossing this threshold we have changed history and will never go backwards,” Gore told the Guardian in an interview. “I’m extremely optimistic that this will be a critical turning point in our struggle to confront the climate crisis.”

The Washington Post broke the story last night that documents pertaining to nuclear weapons were among those the FBI investigators looked for at Mar-a-Lago.

Investigators arrived at the property on Monday after months of investigation into whether the former president unlawfully took papers from the White House, which he departed in January 2021. According to the Post, among the documents the FBI found were signals intelligence, which are intercepted phone or email communications that are among the most sensitive type of classified material.

The Post had few other details about the Mar-a-Lago search, but we may find out more this afternoon. Lawyer for the former president have until 3 pm eastern time today to tell a court whether he objects to unsealing the warrant allowing the search, which Trump said last night he would not do. It’s unclear when the document would then be released, but it may offer more insight into what the FBI expected to find at his Florida club.

Good morning, US politics blog readers. Today, the House of Representatives is expected to approve Democrats’ plan to fight the climate crisis and lower healthcare costs, handing Joe Biden’s administration a historic victory. They do this as the actions of a certain former White House occupant hang over lawmakers, namely Donald Trump. It turns out that federal investigators were looking for documents pertaining to nuclear weapons when they searched his Mar-a-Lago residence earlier this week, the Washington Post reported yesterday.

Here’s a rundown of what to expect today:

• Trump said he would not oppose the justice department’s effort to release the warrant and property inventory from the Mar-a-Lago search, though it’s unclear when the documents would actually be made public.

• The House will convene at 9am ET to consider the Inflation Reduction Act, and is expected to cast its final votes at around 3.30pm.

• Mike Turner, the top Republican on the House intelligence committee, holds a press conference at 9:30 am eastern time, providing a glimpse into how the GOP views the latest developments around the former president.

• John Fetterman, the Democratic nominee for Pennsylvania’s open Senate seat, will return to the campaign trail for the first time since suffering a stroke.

In the intensifying legal battle over the search, Trump has until 3 p.m. ET on Friday to officially signal whether he will contest Garland’s move.

In a statement on his Truth Social network late Thursday, the former President said he would not oppose the release of documents related to the “unAmerican, unwarranted and unnecessary raid and break-in” of his home. He did not say exactly which documents he would be ready to see released. And the FBI search was not a break-in; it was legally authorized by a warrant approved by a judge who would have had to have found probable cause that a crime had been committed.

Garland’s gambit was a neat one.

Search warrants are generally kept under seal to protect the reputation of the person they apply to. But Trump himself broke news of the search, thereby shattering his own expectations of privacy, in order to orchestrate a political firestorm to discredit the investigation. And if Trump fought to keep the document sealed, he would look even more like he has something to hide.

“This is a pro move,” Phil Mudd, a former FBI and CIA official, said of Garland’s actions on “The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.”

“This is not the movement of a pawn. This is a movement of something between a rook and a queen.”

If Trump decided to contest the unsealing of the warrant — a step that could neutralize GOP claims that the ex-President is a target of political victimization — his lawyers would have to explain why in court. The judge in the case, who has received death threats and abuse on social media from Trump supporters, could still decide to support the Justice Department’s motion, even if the former President wants to keep the information secret.

“This is what it looks like when you see the rule of law fighting back against Trump’s lies,” Nick Akerman, a former assistant US attorney for the Southern District of New York, told CNN’s Erin Burnett.

“I think it is extremely unlikely that Donald Trump is going to prevail here.”

Garland’s play is a clear attempt to push back on the fury from Republican officials over the unprecedented search warrant at the former President’s home. Lawmakers, media pundits and Trump supporters have unleashed unhinged claims that the US is now nothing more than a police state, with a Gestapo-like secret police, and has descended into tyranny.

In deciding to come before the cameras at the Justice Department, Garland did not just call Trump’s bluff and bow to pressure from Republican leaders who have demanded to know the justification for the search. He sought to protect his department and the judicial process as he insisted every step in the probe was taken with deliberation. His short appearance, in which he did not take questions, was scripted to rebut specific criticisms and the out-of-control conspiracy theories on the right.

“Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy,” Garland said.

“Upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly, without fear or favor,” he said, implying that not even ex-presidents are shielded if there are suspicions that they have committed a crime. Garland also spoke out forcibly in defense of the FBI and Justice Department rank-and-file, calling them “dedicated, patriotic public servants,” as Trump’s lackeys portray the bureau as a politicized arm of Democratic chicanery.

The attorney general’s remarks, a dramatic Washington moment, were a sign of the extraordinary sensitivity and significance of the investigation into the former President. Generally, the FBI says little about ongoing probes unless someone is charged — a step that, if it happens, seems some ways away in this case.

An unsealed search warrant will not comprehensively establish whether the department’s move against Trump was justified or was an overreach. But Garland’s initiative does suggest firm confidence in any case the bureau is building against Trump. It also shows that the department, right from the top, stands behind the decision to press ahead with a search — in the obvious knowledge that it would trigger an extraordinary and vehement backlash from Trump.

The idea that the entire affair is just some politically motivated plot hatched by legal hacks — the essential Trump case against it — is much harder to believe after Garland’s appearance.

Trump’s decision

Trump’s lawyers have not yet responded to the DOJ’s motion.

The former President appears to have three options. He could release the search warrant and inventory of items that the FBI removed from his resort; he could accede to the department’s request that it is opened by the court; or he could oppose the release of the warrant to the public.

In a logical universe, the latter option would seem unlikely since the ex-President busted his own privacy by breaking news of the FBI search in a politicized screed on Monday night. And the Justice Department is essentially arguing in its filing to the court that the public’s interest in knowing what really led to the search is now greater than Trump’s interest in keeping the details under wraps. The public interest is arguably even greater in light of the Post’s reporting about nuclear documentation.

“For him to come back now and say, ‘I don’t want this’ would be very odd and bizarre,” said Jared Carter, a professor at Vermont Law School.

But Trump doesn’t play by normal rules. Given his lifelong record of exhausting every legal option to thwart accountability and the incapacity of judicial and political institutions to constrain him, a counter-intuitive legal strategy cannot be ruled out.

Whether the ex-President follows through with his pledge not to oppose the release of documents in the case is likely to become clearer on Friday.

Republicans shift the goalposts

The reporting about the FBI seeking nuclear documentation at Mar-a-Lago raises new questions for Republicans who have been attacking the bureau and the Justice Department over the search without any apparent knowledge of what it was about. In perhaps a telling sign of how Thursday night’s developments have scrambled the messaging of Trump’s usual defenders, the conservative House Freedom Caucus scuttled a planned news conference on the Mar-a-Lago search hours after the Post report on the nuclear documents was released.

Garland’s move earlier Thursday should have defused demands from Republicans for him to speak publicly about the search and to publish the warrant. But as soon as the attorney general stopped talking, key Republicans demanded more.

“What I am looking for is the predicate for the search,” Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said in a statement.

“Was the information provided to the judge sufficient and necessary to authorize a raid on the former president’s home within ninety days of the midterm election? I am urging, actually insisting, the DOJ and the FBI lay their cards on the table as to why this course of action was necessary,” the South Carolina Trump ally added.

While Garland asked for the unsealing of the search warrant, which could come with an inventory of documents taken from Trump’s residence, he did not ask for the unsealing of affidavits meant to show probable cause that a crime had been committed in support of the warrant application. So Graham made his appeal in the knowledge that he is asking for a step that would infringe longstanding Justice Department guidelines — and could undermine any criminal case that the FBI may eventually level against the former President.

Trump himself responded to Garland’s on-camera appearance with one of his characteristic “Witch Hunt” posts on his Truth Social media network.

It is impossible to verify statements from an ex-President who lied as a matter of course while in office. But several of Trump’s previous claims that he was suddenly targeted in a “raid” and a “siege” by FBI agents out of the blue were undermined by Thursday’s developments. CNN’s Evan Perez, Gabby Orr and Pamela Brown, for instance, reported that federal investigators served an earlier grand jury subpoena and took away documents from Mar-a-Lago in June. This seems to indicate that Monday’s search was a last resort and supports Garland’s contention that the FBI took steps to ensure the search caused as little disruption as possible.

But the attorney general is also trying a strategy that has perpetually failed with Trump — wielding facts and legal norms to shatter his wall of lies and falsehoods.

Some Trump allies have already floated another conspiracy theory — that the FBI planted documents in the ex-President’s residence.

Nearly two years after Trump lost the last election, the nation faces yet another exhausting challenge to the rule of law from the twice-impeached ex-President.

Facts and truth are once again the first casualties.

This story has been updated with additional developments.

• Send any friend a story

  As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.

• Send any friend a story

  As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.

By Glenn Thrush, Maggie Haberman and Ben Protess