Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH) has highlighted several unusual aspects of the raid conducted at President Trump’s residence in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, as well as the events surrounding the questionable indictment.
Rep. Jordan specifically drew attention to the Department’s decision not to indict former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her handling of classified information and the similar lack of indictment against Biden for his mishandling of classified materials.
“The indictment creates, at the minimum, a serious appearance of a double standard and a miscarriage of justice—an impression that is only strengthened by allegations that a Biden Justice Department lawyer “inappropriately sought to pressure” a Trump-affiliated lawyer with the prospect of a judgeship,” Rep. Jordan wrote in a letter to Attorney General Garland.
“Additional information recently obtained by the Committee about the Department’s execution of a search warrant on President Trump’s residence only reinforces our grave concerns that your reported actions are nothing more than a politically motivated prosecution,” Rep. Jordan added.
During the Judiciary Committee interview held on June 7, 2023, just days before the federal indictment of Trump, former Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office (WFO), Steven D’Antuono, provided testimony that raised concerns about the manner in which the unprecedented raid on the Mar-a-Lago residence was conducted.
As a veteran FBI official, D’Antuono expressed frustration with the Department’s handling of the raid, highlighting several irregularities in the investigation against Trump. These included the unexpected decision to assign the WFO instead of the Miami Field Office to carry out the search, the absence of a U.S. Attorney’s Office in the case, a rushed push for the FBI to execute the search warrant without prior consent, and an unexplained attempt to exclude Trump’s attorney from the search process.
During the transcribed interview, Mr. D’Antuono expressed his disagreement with the Justice Department’s approach to the raid and provided a comprehensive account of several irregularities surrounding the Department’s actions in the investigation of President Trump.
1. The Miami Field Office did not conduct the search. Mr. D’Antuono testified that FBI headquarters made the decision to assign the execution of the search warrant to the Washington Field Office (WFO) despite the location of the search occurring in the territory of the FBI’s Miami Field Office. Mr. D’Antuono stated that he had “absolutely no idea” why this decision was made and questioned why the Miami Field Office was not taking the lead on this matter. Mr. D’Antuono stated that the FBI “learned a lot of stuff from [the] Crossfire Hurricane” investigation—notably “that the [FBI] Headquarters does not work the investigation, it is supposed to be the field offices working the investigations.” Mr. D’Antuono indicated that his “concern is that [the] DOJ was not following the same principles . . . .” In fact, as recently as May 2023, in response to the report of Special Counsel Durham, the FBI asserted that “investigations should be run out of the Field” and not from Washington, D.C.
2. The Department did not assign a U.S. Attorney’s Office to the matter. According to Mr. D’Antuono, it was unusual to not have a U.S. Attorney assigned to an investigative matter, especially a matter of this magnitude. He explained that he “didn’t understand why there wasn’t a US Attorney assigned” and “raised this concern a lot with” Department officials because this was out of the ordinary. Mr. D’Antuono indicated that he “never got a good answer” and was told that the National Security Division would be handling this matter—with Jay Bratt, who leads the Department’s counterintelligence division, as “the lead prosecutor on the case.” Mr. Bratt is the same Department lawyer who allegedly improperly pressured a lawyer representing an employee of President Trump. Mr. D’Antuono again noted his concern regarding lessons learned from Crossfire Hurricane, that the Justice Department was not following the principle that “Headquarters does not work the investigation . . . .”
3. The FBI did not first seek consent to effectuate the search. Mr. D’Antuono recounted a meeting between FBI and Department officials during which the Department assertively pushed for the FBI to promptly execute the search warrant. Based upon his over-20-year tenure at the FBI, Mr. D’Antuono testified that he believed that the FBI, prior to resorting to a search warrant, should have sought consent to search the premises. He testified that this outcome would have been “the best thing for all parties” involved—“[f]or the FBI, for former President Trump, and for the country . . . .” Mr. D’Antuono indicated a belief that either you or Director Christopher Wray made the decision to seek a search warrant, despite opposition from the line agents working this case in the WFO. Following that meeting, Mr. D’Antuono described how Justice Department counterintelligence official George Toscas—who also reportedly worked on the “Crossfire Hurricane and Clinton email investigations”—told him that FBI agents were ready to execute the warrant. Mr. D’Antuono pushed back on the Department for trying to unilaterally allocate FBI resources.
4. The FBI refused to wait for President Trump’s attorney to be present before executing the search. Mr. D’Antuono testified that the FBI sought to exclude President Trump’s attorney from the search, a move with which Mr. D’Antuono disagreed. Mr. D’Antuono believed that the FBI should have worked with the attorney to get consent to search the residence prior to seeking a warrant for the search. Mr. D’Antuono believes that “there was a good likelihood that [they] could have gotten consent…”
The Judiciary Committee has made a series of requests, demanding documents related to the FBI’s raid on Trump’s home, which were previously denied by the Department. Rep. Jordan and his committee have reiterated their request for the DOJ to provide all documents concerning meetings between FBI and Justice Department officials leading up to the raid, as well as any communications related to the execution of the search warrant.
The committee has set a deadline for the DOJ to respond to their request by 5:00 p.m. on June 16, 2023.
As per Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on the Judiciary is tasked with supervising the operations of the DOJ and the FBI. Currently, there has been no official response from Attorney General Garland’s office regarding the requests made by the committee.
