Most of us will never know the details, nor should we. To the extent the documents themselves or even just the supporting affidavit reveal what the government knows and suggest how that information was obtained, disclosure could cause significant harm. The DOJ is also constrained by the rules around criminal investigations, especially if a Grand Jury is involved.
We are way past the point where "optics" should guide what the DOJ does for fear of riling up Trump's supporters or contributing to erosion of faith in institutions. People like Ricky W. Shiffer, who attacked the FBI office in Cincinnati, won't be appeased or convinced no matter what.
I don't see how Hillary Clinton's email debacle — and I'll readily admit she made some horrible choices — can be rightfully compared to what Trump is alleged to have done, without considering the overall context of their records. Like her or hate her, Clinton was a public servant who wasn't accused of willfully providing sensitive national security information to our adversaries, not to mention the almost endless litany of harmful actions Trump took during his tenure.
I don’t expect we’ll know the details of the affidavit or precisely what documents were taken, or at least for quite some time. Then again our government tends to leak like sieve so who knows.
I do think optics are important, at least to an extent. Obviously in some cases things are just unable to be avoided. And some of the issues I mentioned go beyond optics and fall into ethics and maintaining the integrity of the investigation (ie a magistrate who previously refused himself on a Trump case and has publicly made negative comments). I’m not a lawyer but that seems like a Pandora’s box. And I think optics are especially important if you don’t want another January 6th on our hands.
To be clear the espionage act also included improper handling of government documents. AFAIK there is no public evidence Trump was planning on dealing in government secrets with foreign countries. Clinton was considered being charged under the espionage act. Would I put it past Trump to sell government secrets- sadly I wouldn’t be surprised. That’s what can happen when you elect a shady conman with zero moral compass and pathological narcissism. I also wouldn’t be surprised if this was setup by the Trump administration as a ploy concocted to falsely lure the FBI into a fruitless investigation to appear unfairly prosecuted and distract from numerous his other problems- in which case it seems like fraud/conspiracy/perjury charges would be in order.
Re: Hillary Politics aside (and to be clear I didn’t vote for either Trump or Clinton, they’re both swamp creatures), I do think there is a serious problem with running your own email server to conduct government business and then destroying evidence during an investigation. And let’s not forget the potential of foreign influence via the Clinton Foundation, which thankfully and rightfully Clinton eventually suspended donations from during her campaign. People love to take sides based on political tribalism and not but the reality is if you or I did that we’d probably have been prosecuted. If I did similar things with medical records at a minimum I’d be out of a job, fined into bankruptcy, and probably lose my license.
All that’s to say Trump didn’t commit crimes and should be prosecuted. The facts will have to bear that out. It’s kind of amazing how the media of both sides takes a couple morsels of knowledge and extrapolates into a giant speculative narrative. Color me skeptical being told “the walls are closing in for good” for the umteenth time only for nothing to come to fruition.
I have no idea if this will bring about the end of Trump. I have my doubts January 6th will either despite my belief his actions (and lack of actions) should be obvious disqualifications to any voter. Personally I think his efforts to over through the election result stands the best chance.
And I think you are right- as I have stated before in the eyes of Trumpsters he can do no wrong, or at least the ends justify the means. Even if one agrees with Trumps political platform, I cannot fathom why you’d want to elect someone with so much baggage who will inevitably be bogged down by it if elected.
