Main: An aerial view of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Fla., on Aug. 31, 2022 (AP Photo/Steve Helber/File). Right inset: U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida).
Current and former FBI agents are seeking clarification from the judge who barred former special counsel Jack Smith from discussing his report on the Mar-a-Lago investigation involving President Donald Trump. The agents want to know whether they can testify without legal risk in the Justice Department’s “grand conspiracy” investigation in Florida.
The motion to intervene, first reported by Politico, said that federal agents and analysts “participated in the investigation and prosecution of” Trump and the 2022 search of Mar-a-Lago, which led to his indictment in the classified documents and conspiracy case.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the indictment after ruling that Smith had been unlawfully appointed as special counsel. In her decision, she characterized Smith as little more than a “private citizen.”
The Trump-appointed judge later moved to restrict access to Volume II of Smith’s report following the case’s dismissal. Cannon sharply criticized what she called Smith’s “brazen” decision to prepare the document in the first place.
Cannon permanently barred the Justice Department and then-Attorney General Pam Bondi, “or her successor(s),” from “releasing, sharing, or transmitting Volume II of the Final Report or any drafts of Volume II outside the Department of Justice.” Her order also prohibited the department from “otherwise releasing, distributing, conveying, or sharing with anyone outside the Department of Justice any information or conclusions in Volume II or in drafts thereof.” As a result, Smith faced significant limits on what he could publicly say about the classified documents case.
The former FBI agents, who do not want to risk being reprimanded by Cannon for violating her injunction, have now asked the court to explain how the order applies to them in the context of a grand jury subpoena.
CONTINUE READING: Who Was Leke Alder's First Wife? Exploring His Love Life and Children – NewsFinale
“Absent clarification, Clients cannot testify before the grand jury without risking violating terms of the Order. DOJ has reportedly taken the position that any disclosure of nonpublic information that may be contained in Volume Two would violate the Order, even if such disclosure was made in response to congressional inquiry, in response to requests made under the Freedom of Information Act, or during privileged communications with counsel,” the filing said.
The motion said attorneys sought an explanation of how the DOJ investigation intersects with Cannon’s order. According to the filing, the government replied that its “‘work does not disturb [the] Order,’” but offered no further explanation or factual and legal support for that position.
The FBI agents—“most” of whom “were unlawfully fired and are no longer federal employees”—said they are generally willing to testify voluntarily before the grand jury. Their concern, however, is that doing so could expose them to “possible punitive consequences.”
“The first two options bear possible punitive consequences, while the third creates unnecessary negative optics for innocent former federal civil servants who are said to be witnesses yet may be perceived as withholding information simply due to the need to protect themselves from being held in contempt,” the prospective intervenors said.
“Although most were unlawfully fired and are no longer federal employees, Clients are deeply respectful of all court orders and do not wish to violate them,” the motion stated.
The post ‘Unlawfully fired’ Mar-a-Lago FBI agents fear ‘possible punitive consequences’ unless Judge Cannon clears up her order first appeared on Law & Crime.