Conservative radio and television host Mark Levin took some time on Wednesday to fire off a blazing commentary in which he shredded the FBI over the Justice Department filing featuring a very controversial photograph of classified documents, noting that the agents who participated in the raid on Mar-a-Lago might themselves be guilty of violating the Espionage Act. See? This is why folks like Levin are so important. Commentators like him point this stuff out and then, like magic, things start to happen. Let’s hope that is the case here.
According to a report from TheBlaze, the search warrant that was used to raid Trump’s Florida home last month has revealed that the former president is under investigation for potential violations of the Espionage Act. It’s likely those investigating Trump for allegedly holding onto highly classified documents at his home, are using the excuse that the files could pose a danger to our national security.
Excuse me, G-men. I have a question. If Trump holding on to classified documents somehow poses a threat to our national security, wouldn’t that mean that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is also guilty of Espionage Act violations for her emails? Honestly, if it is that big of a deal, why isn’t she being investigated and threatened with raids by the FBI?
Attorneys for the government went on to include a picture of the classified documents strewn about the floor of an office in Trump’s home in a DOJ court filing. The issue here is no one is really sure where these documents originated. Is this the way they were found when the FBI raided the house, which is what the picture seems to suggest? Or was this picture taken in a part of Trump’s property where they weren’t photographed and then staged to look like an evidentiary photo? So many questions…
“According to Levin, who is an attorney, staging the sensitive documents for a photo to be eventually released to the public via a court filing is a ‘grossly negligent use of classified documents’ that should itself be prosecuted under the Espionage Act,” TheBlaze reported.
“It seems to me an argument should be made that spreading highly classified documents on the floor, with the covers of the documents noting that the documents are indeed classified and taking a photograph even of the covers purely for gratuitous public use (i.e., for no reasonable or legal purpose), is a grossly negligent use of classified documents and the FBI should be held accountable under the Espionage Act,” Levin stated in a post on Twitter.
2. and taking a photograph even of the covers purely for gratuitous public use (i.e., for no reasonable or legal purpose), is a grossly negligent use of classified documents and the FBI should be held accountable under the Espionage Act:
— Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) September 1, 2022
Here’s more from the report:
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
So the argument goes, the documents were strategically photographed and the picture released to drive the public narrative in a certain direction.
Constitutional attorney Johnathan Turley came out and said he thinks the photo was “clearly intended for public consumption.”
“It is curious that the DOJ would release this particular picture which suggests classified material laying around on the floor. The point is to state a fact that hardly needs an optical confirmation: the possession of documents with classified cover sheets,” Turley stated. “The government could simply affirmatively state the fact of the covered pages and would not likely be challenged on that point without the inclusion of this one photo.”
Turley then went on to add, “For critics, the photo may appear another effort (with prior leaks) to help frame the public optics and discussion. Clearly the court did not need the visual aid of a picture of documents with covers. It seems clearly intended for public consumption.”