Expert Dismisses Argument to Seal Affidavit From Trump Raid

John Ratcliffe, former President Donald Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, rejects Justice Department arguments for not releasing the affidavit that led to the FBI’s unprecedented raid on Trump’s home last week.

While he did not completely concur with his former boss’ call for a “completely unredacted” release, he eschewed the DOJ belief that it should be wholly sealed.

The former spy chief admitted there could be national security details or sources for the investigation that the DOJ reasonably would not want revealed. His concern, he emphasized, was on the sending out the FBI on an “overbroad” warrant.

Ratcliffe said some would term it a “fishing expedition.” Without necessary information, he said he would call it a “hunting license.”

Interviewed by Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, Ratcliffe called the argument “garbage” that says it couldn’t be redacted and still show probable cause. He said clearly that some information could be protected while revealing what prompted the FBI to raid the former president’s home.

This counters the DOJ’s stand that if the document were redacted enough to protect what’s needed that it would be meaningless. This, the filing claimed, would not serve any public interest.

Of course, neither does imposing such secrecy on a high-profile raid of a former president’s personal home.

The DOJ says that the releases of other paperwork such as the cover sheets of the search warrant application, the motion to seal and the sealing order are not objectionable.

A federal judge has decided to hear the two sides on Thursday concerning the release of the affidavit. This came despite the Justice Department’s filing of a 13-page argument that unsealing it would “jeopardize the integrity of this national security investigation.”

Prosecutors claim the affidavit contains sensitive information about witnesses in the case who are key to its investigation. The DOJ also argued that the investigation concerns top secret and highly classified materials.

The Justice Department knew that by carrying out such an action as it did at Trump’s private residence last week, it would have to be able to back it up to a skeptical public. If it could not do so, it should have stuck to more normal legal channels.