New Record Reveals Shocking Twist In Trump’s Classified Docs Case


The federal government’s allegation that  President Donald Trump mishandled classified documents has suddenly become even more exposed to criticism that it was orchestrated by political opponents who dramatized the situation in order to raid Mar-a-Lago.

A steady stream of revelations in the case has continued since Florida U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon began ordering redacted documents to be unsealed last week. Investigative reporter Julie Kelly has now unearthed correspondence from a lawyer with the National Archives (NARA) to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland claiming Trump may have destroyed sensitive documents, an allegation that has appeared nowhere in the case against him. Furthermore, Kelly found connections between the NARA lawyer and former President Barack Obama.

“As I have stated before, it appears that DOJ, NARA, and WH counsel first attempted to concoct a records destruction case against Trump,” Kelly wrote on X Tuesday evening. She posted a letter by NARA archivist David Ferriero to Garland seeking his support for a full investigation into the disappearance of records from the White House. He adds that there is “no explicit provision” in the Presidential Records Act outlining how he should proceed in such a circumstance.

“I am, therefore, exercising my discretion to follow the process established for me under the Federal Records Act (FRA), which authorizes me to ‘request the Attorney General to initiate’ an action ‘for the recovery of records unlawfully removed and for other redress provided by law,’” Ferriero wrote in the undated letter.

One day earlier, Kelly revealed visitor logs from the White House showing that Ferriero met with President Joe Biden’s counsel Dana Remus in September of 2021 during the early stages of the investigation. Remus, a political appointee who is listed as Deputy Counsel according to her LinkedIn profile, previously worked at the Department of Justice and later worked at the Obama Foundation where she served as counsel to former First Lady Michelle Obama, according to Kelly. Remus’ 2018 wedding was even officiated by the former president.

Before a September 2nd, 2021 meeting with Garland, NARA general counsel Gary Stern forwarded the letter from Ferriero falsely suggesting Trump had destroyed records. Stern was present for the meeting though was not completely on board, according to other documents; at one point he told Deputy White House Counsel Jonathan Su that it was “atypical” to progress in the investigation without providing a Trump representative with notes about how the Republican leader’s White House compiled documents for NARA in the final days of the administration.

Roughly a month later, Remus sends a letter from the White House to Ferriero at NARA denying Trump’s claims of executive privilege to retain any documents in his possession. “After I consult with the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice, President Biden has determined that an assertion of executive privilege is not in the best interests of the United States, and therefore is not justified as to any of the Documents,” she wrote on October 8th, 2021.

Kelly notes that Ferriero was previously on record calling January 6th, 2021 “the worst day of my life,” another item of evidence suggesting bias against Trump was palpable among actors in the investigation. President Trump has excoriated special counsel Jack Smith, who has maintained that his charges against Trump were brought independently. However, other documents ordered unsealed mention that Garland upgraded the classified documents probe to a “full investigation.”

The former president faced 40 felony charges in the case, the most serious carrying up to 20 years in prison if found guilty. Further action on the case is stayed while the U.S. Supreme Court considers Trump’s claims of immunity. A hearing last week appeared to indicate that a majority of justices are inclined to grant Trump at least some immunity from criminal charges, a decision which would send further deliberation back to a lower court. Any delay would add months to the timeline for Smith’s case and would be all but certain to push an outcome past the November election.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button