That Was Quick

Let's take a look at the timeline of Passportgate. At 10:22 AM yesterday morning (all times EDT), Trump first posted, “Wow! In the raid by the FBI of Mar-a-Lago, they stole my three Passports (one expired), along with everything else” on Truth Social. This was greeted with immediate skepticism:

It remains unclear why Trump only spoke out about this a week after the search of his property in the US state of Florida.

At 12:45 PM Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich posted on Twitter reiterating Trump's claim.

At 3:55 PM. NBC News anchor Norah O'Donnell posted that "according to a DOJ official," the FBI was NOT in possession of Trump's passports.

However, at 4:34 PM, Budowich replied to O'Donnell with a screenshot of a message from the FBI's Jay Bratt confirming that the FBI had the passports and would return them. Bratt, by the way, is head of the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section of the DOJ’s National Security Division; he also signed the DOJ's opposition to the motion to unseal the affadavit for the Mar-a-Lago search warrant.

It is unclear why the DOJ only spoke out about this six hours after Trump's original post at 10:22 AM, having first assured Norah O'Donnell at 3:55 that they didn't have the passports. Took a full six hours to get up to Bratt, the big suit on the case, though he claims in the message that he's traveling. Who, by the way, was the "DOJ offical" who told her they didn't have the passports? Deep Throat A? Deep Throat B? Deep Throat 52? This is truly hinky.

Let me suggest what's been going on behind the scenes here. Anti-Trumpers and never-Trumpers have been asking the same thing:

It took Trump a week to notice that the passports were missing, or at least a week to go public with it.

What a dummy! Somebody in the FBI stole his passports, and it took him a week to figure it out! Boy, we sure are lucky he's no longer in the oval office, huh? My view continues to be that the man is mortal, but he's nevertheless smart. Recall that there was a dispute on August 8 at the start of the raid, when the FBI demanded the Mar-a-Lago staff turn off the surveillance cameras, but they refused, and the cameras kept rolling. This means there had to have been hours and hours of surveillance film for the Trump team to review, and that's just what they've been doing. (I would also venture to say that those cameras are top of the line, not grainy stuff like you see from a McDonald's heist.)

And as a few observers have suggested, people keep their passports in their home safe, as we can be pretty sure Trump does. Do you think there might even have been a security camera aimed right at the Mar-a-Lago office safe? I certainly wouldn't rule it out. I would also think that since Eric Trump announced right after the raid that the FBI had gone into the safe only to find nothing (or presumably nothing but a few passports), he must already have seen that footage, although he hadn't been on site. Took a whole week for Trump to learn about the passports. Yeah, right.

In other words, they went public with the missing passports only when they were good and ready. They'd had the film for a week. I would also guess their legal team is now at least a cut above Sidney Powell of "release the kraken" fame. My surmise is that the real dummies were in the FBI, who were totally blindsided by Trump's accusation they'd stolen his passports, which in fact they had, and it took them six hours to get their story as straight as they could get it. Not only that, but Trump has tapes of the whole search, every room from several angles I'm sure, and his lawyers have been watching those tapes for the past week. Somehow Bratt, the big suit, just figured this out.

So as of this morning, they've changed their tune:

The Justice Department informed Trump's team Monday that agents gathered the former president's passports and are obligated to return them, and that officials are also reviewing seized materials that may be covered by various privileges, multiple sources told Just the News.

DOJ has designated a process for separating materials that could be covered by executive privilege or attorney client privilege and hopes to return such memos to Trump within a couple of weeks, the sources said.

"Occasionally a warrant collection can grab things outside the scope authorized by the court and the department is now following a procedure we would for any person affected this way," one official said Monday night.

Er, which "official" was this? Deep Throat F? Look for this story to change by the day, if not the hour; we can be sure they're suddenly realizing they have to cover themselves in a hurry. What other footage does Trump have? Here's an ominous sign from the Wall Street Journal, apparently citing Deep Throats J and P:

Attorney General Merrick Garland deliberated for weeks over whether to approve the application for a warrant to search former President Donald Trump’s Florida home, people familiar with the matter said, a sign of his cautious approach that will be tested over the coming months.

The decision had been the subject of weeks of meetings between senior Justice Department and FBI officials, the people said. The warrant allowed agents last Monday to seize classified information and other presidential material from Mar-a-Lago.

This further overrides the backgrounder from last week from Deep Throats A and B that Garland didn't even approve the raid, which Garland himself rendered inoperative on Thursday by claiming that in fact he had. Now the story is that he "deliberated for weeks", adding to the impression that this whole thing was carefully staged, which Deep Throats A and B said last week, and even meticulously planned, which we might reasonably assume now. So who planned to seize the passports?

I would go so far as to guess that the weeks of meetings were the result of pressure from higher up in the organization. In a completely unrelated story,

President Joe Biden is planning to extend his vacation this week after ending his time on Kiawah Island, South Carolina.

According to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) data Cited By The Associated Press, Biden plans to be in Wilmington, Delaware from Tuesday to Friday after leaving Kiawah Island.

. . . He has not answered any questions from reporters since the FBI’s controversial raid on former President Donald Trump.

This is starting to unravel a lot faster than Watergate, if you ask me.

The State Of Play

It seems to me that the visuals from the big guy's family vacay to Kiawah Island are an indication of where his handlers expected things to be: First Crackhead Hunter was along with his wife and the kid in what looks to be an utterly contrived tableau of family harmony. The real situation is reflected in reports last month that Hunter has called his stepmom a “vindictive moron” and “entitled [redacted]”, while his wife Melissa appears to be a jetsetting do-gooder who likely spends little time with either the kid or the crackhead dad.

Can you imagine what the real atmosphere in that dysfunctional pseudo-family must be like? What are they paying Melissa to stick around? Hunter's broke, and her meter's running. Where does that money come from? Nevertheless, the visuals say the big agenda for Brandon's handlers last week was to rehabilitate Hunter in the runup to 2024. By then, the grand jury investigation will have gone away, and the First Crackhead will be the picture of filial probity. Every indication has been that this was a fantasy; right now nobody gives a flip about Hunter or the laptop, but that's always subject to change.

The reason Hunter has faded from the picture is his dad, but his dad is important only as he relates to Trump. Never Trumper Maryland Gov Larry Hogan said yesterday,

This week, it was actually a win for Donald Trump. It seemed to motivate his base, people rushing to his defense, people feeling as if he had been picked on and martyred, but I don’t think we have seen the end of the story yet.

Hogan may be indulging in wishful thinking if he expects the pendulum to swing back against Trump. Let's revisit the Deep Throats' leak last week to Newsweek:

The officials, who have direct knowledge of the FBI's deliberations and were granted anonymity in order to discuss sensitive matters, said the raid of Donald Trump's Florida residence was deliberately timed to occur when the former president was away.

In other words, everyone was supposed to be going goopy over little Beau's channeling of John-John Kennedy while the FBI did its dirty work on the QT, but that didn't work out.

"What a spectacular backfire," says [Deep Throat B].

"I know that there is much speculation out there that this is political persecution, but it is really the best and the worst of the bureaucracy in action," the official says. "They wanted to punctuate the fact that this was a routine law enforcement action, stripped of any political overtones, and yet [they] got exactly the opposite."

Merrick Garland was caught completely on the wrong foot. Opinion over the weekend centered on his need belatedly to come out and say he'd approved the raid, even though the officials who had "direct knowledge of the FBI's deliberations" had said he hadn't. Presumably this was because the handlers assumed nobody'd pay attention, huh? As Michael Goodwin put it in the New York Post,

Whether he volunteered or was pushed into authorizing the unprecedented FBI raid on the home of former President Donald Trump, he was woefully unprepared for the entirely predictable fallout.

It should not have been a surprise to him that about half the country believes the raid was motivated by politics. Or that Trump’s support, which had been slipping, instantly started rising among Republicans and some independents.

Earlier, Goodwin wrote,

Whatever the FBI was looking for in its raid of Donald Trump’s home, it better be big. Really, really big, and important enough to justify this radical and unprecedented action against a former president.

If this were a murder case, even a smoking gun wouldn’t be enough. There would also need to be a corpse.

Because if Democrats didn’t find enough evidence to send Trump to jail, they’ve probably handed him a return trip to the Oval Office.

Actually, I think Goodwin is a little mild here; there are going to be presidential repercussions before 2024. There are too many unanswered questions:

• What was the FBI actually looking for? That had to be specified to get the warrant.
• So we need to see the affadavit that supported the warrant, which wasn't unsealed last Friday.
• If the National Archives wanted more material from the Mar-a-Lago storage room, why didn't they continue their negotiations without the need for an FBI raid?
• If the FBI was concerned that important classified materials were in the storage room, why did they wait so long to raid it?
• Why did the FBI under James Comey give Hillary Clinton a complete pass on mishandling classified material, but now they're raiding Trump for the same thing?
• By the way, what's the status of Hunter's grand jury case?

Right now, the White House and the Justice Department are doing all they can to make no further comment, but these are questions that won't go away. The longer they take to give credible answers, or indeed if they instead tell untruths, the greater the likelihood that there will be resignations at progressively higher levels. My guess is that the most likely minimum consequence will be that Brandon is forced to announce he won't run in 2024 "for reasons of health", but things may well not stop there.

What Were The Watergate Burglars Looking For?

I was always fascinated by everything connected to the Watergate scandal, and I eagerly read books about it for decades afterward. One, Silent Coup by Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin (1991), raised a question nobody else I'm aware of ever bothered to ask: what were the Watergate burglars looking for? The book itself was wildly speculative and flat-out wrong in several areas, but the question it posed is still intriguing. According to Wikipedia,

Colodny and Gettlin contend that former White House counsel John Dean orchestrated the 1972 Watergate burglary. His motive was argued to have been to protect his future wife Maureen Biner by removing information linking her to a call-girl ring that worked for the DNC.

A big problem is that they go on to argue that Alexander Haig was Deep Throat, when former FBI deputy director Mark Felt outed himself as Deep Throat in 2005, and beyond that,

In 1992 John and Maureen Dean sued Nixon "plumber" G. Gordon Liddy for libel, after Liddy sought to support the core claims in Silent Coup. Liddy's testimony was the first time he spoke publicly in detail about the Watergate break-in, as he had refused to cooperate with investigators during the Watergate scandal.

A series of lawsuits stemming from the case were eventually settled. Regardless of the truth or falsity of the original claim, the key question remains unanswered, why the burglars went in to start with. Oddly, this question is beginning to come up over the Mar-a-Lago raid. As of Wednesday,

According to a report from The Washington Post, citing information leaked to them by the government (which says a lot on its own), the boxes taken were full of what would mostly be considered personal effects and mundane presidential records. . . . There were rumors many months ago that this is all that the National Archives was after. Not really important things related to national security or some such, which even still wouldn’t justify the raid, but scribblings on napkins and letters from heads of state. If this report is correct, that’s what the FBI carried out an unprecedented raid on a president for.

But by Friday, the story had evolved, just as what once had been a water buffalo evolved into a whale. According to the same Washington Post:

Classified documents relating to nuclear weapons were among the items FBI agents sought in a search of former president Donald Trump’s Florida residence on Monday, according to people familiar with the investigation. Experts in classified information said the unusual search underscores deep concern among government officials about the types of information they thought could be located at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club and potentially in danger of falling into the wrong hands.

So at least some people are starting off asking the right questions, but the answers keep wiggling away. As of yesterday,

[I]t just makes no sense that the government was so super-concerned about Trump having classified documents that they waited 18 months to go get them. Instead, it sure looks like the floundering January 6th committee has found nothing (as I’ve said many times) and is now using the DOJ to try to fish for more “evidence” of an organized coup.

Well, it's early days, but the puzzling thing is that the Watergate burglars were basically a bunch of marginal guys who'd been tested and found wanting in professional espionage and law enforcement and had been enlisted by overzealous lower-level Nixonistas in a comic-opera spy operation basically because they were available. On the other hand, the whole Mar-a-Lago episode seems to have been executed by experienced, full-time law enforcement and national security professionals who'd spent years rising within the world's premier law enforcement organization.

Only to come up with the same result. Or so it would seem. Anyhow, it's early days.

Nobody Noticed

Poor Dr Fauci. He's overstayed his 15 minutes of fame by a considerable margin, but now, even if he's booed, nobody notices. Not only that, but on Thursday,

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the nation should move away from restrictive measures such as quarantines and social distancing and focus on reducing severe disease from Covid-19.

In new guidelines released Thursday, the agency no longer recommends staying at least 6 feet away from other people to reduce the risk of exposure -- a shift from guidance that had been in place since the early days of the pandemic.

These developments come on the heels of the LA County health department deciding that, on second thought, we should just never mind about a renewed indoor masking mandate, even though the link to the CDC announcement says this actually isn't the CDC's position: "It also continues to recommend that people wear masks indoors in about half the country." That would actually include LA, as a matter of fact. The problem is that nobody cares any more. Indeed, a couple of weeks ago, the LA County health department disabled comments on its social media sites:

The statement from LA Public Health claims their decision to block the department’s over 350,000 social media followers was made because of “threats, bullying, or harassment on public platforms.” Note that older comments from the LACDH are still up on social media, and the overwhelming number of comments may mock or deride, or question, but mostly they’re not threatening.

Well, the public, even in deep-blue LA, is done with COVID. After two and a half years, the scary expanding red circles based on the Imperial College London hoax have lost their effect. The moral panic is over.

But all of a sudden, something has replaced it, and I think this is especially interesting, because this looks like an actual replacement, not just one additional item on a list worthy of public attention. I mentioned Watergate yesterday, but I missed the fact that the media has been trying to gin up a new Watergate since the 2016 election with the Russian pee tapes, the Ukraine phone call, Stormy Daniels, Impeachments 1.0 and 2.0, and the January 6 committee, and not one of those has caught on: Biden's standing in the polls is no better than Trump's at his worst, and two years after his defeat, Trump continues to be the favorite for 2024 notwithstanding everything, the Mar-a-Lago raid included.

So silly me, I asked yesterday why nobody's brought up Watergate without realizing that Watergate has been the subtext of everything for six years, except Trump was supposed to be the Nixon but nobody was buying it. And not buying it through two impeachments, congressional investigations, and rinky-dinky scandal piled on rinky-dinky scandal. At this point, the get-Trump agenda has the public yawning about as much as they yawned at Dr Ferrer threatening the return of indoor masks. That stuff is over. Liz Cheney is a bore; her landslide loss in next Tuesday's primary is a foregone conclusion.

Indeed, let's face it, all the never-Trumpers at this point are bores, has-beens, and never-wases. David French? Bill Kristol? George Conway? Why, on the other hand, is Trump still fascinating?

There are no coincidences, though. The Mar-a-Lago raid is delicious in a way that Stormy Daniels and Ukraine phone calls never were. I think that's because all the get-Trump pseudo-issues were phony from the start, and the public knew it. They couldn't catch on in the way Watergate itself did. Even if you grant that Watergate was a story that was primed and managed by anti-Nixon national media, there was enough genuine mystery there that the public bought papers, listened to the broadcasts, watched the hearings, bought book after book, and saw the movie.

Mar-a-Lago looks from the start like it's going to do this in a way that the January 6, Ukraine phone call, or Stormy Daniels blah-blah never did. I can tell this, because the interest in Watergate started the morning the burglary hit the news. I remember that. It started then, and it never stopped. I have the same sense of things now. As one commentator put it,

One thing is certain. This has become way too big a story for anyone to just drop it now. There are going to be more leaks from both sides until it does make sense.

But let's also keep in mind that the COVID moral panic was about Trump, not a virus, just as the 1980s satanic day care panic was about the family, not satanism. The public has at least dropped the virus and is now working its way through Trump. I wonder, in fact, if the Depp-Heard trial was just a warmup for the real show.

Yeah, We're Settling Into A Watergate Pattern

What intrigues me is how little anyone is bringing Watergate up at all in the Mar-a-Lago contoversy. It occurred to me just yesterday how much Watergate added to our daily vocabulary, from the suffix -gate to characterize any scandal (like Irangate, Travelgate, Troopergate and Whitewatergate) to expressions like "stonewalling", "modified limited hangout", "deep throat", "[expletive deleted]", "what did he know and when did he know it", and more.

I'm sure part of it is this only got into motion 50 years ago as we speak, and most of the first-hand participants are long departed, while even reporters and commentators who might have covered it early in their careers are retired. Nor does it help that something like Mar-a-Lagogate doesn't trip off the tongue. On the other hand, I lived through it as a full adult while my intellectual faculties were still being formed in graduate school, and in fact as I followed it closely, it fed my already contrarian nature.

So I'm starting to see real parallels even if they don't seem to be occurring to anyone else. The big one today is how quickly spokespeople (often "anonymous sources") present a quasi-official version only to have new surprises explode it in a matter of days or hours. Take the pronouncement in Newsweek from Deep Throat A or Deep Throat B, whichever it was, that Attorney General Garland did not approve the raid, which Garland himself refuted in yesterday's press conference. I went back to the Newsweek piece only to find they'd already scrubbed that part of it:

6:30 p.m.: A quote about Garland's role was deleted after the attorney general himself addressed the issue.

So much for credibility.

This brings up a second parallel, how much the media is shaping the story in its coverage. The difference is that in the 1970s, there were three networks and the big-city papers that could project a unified line that was anti-Nixon. Now the legacy successors to those outlets are pro-Biden and anti-Trump, while the new conservative press is divided into pro-Trump and never-Trump -- but the range of opinion and the Overton window are at least somewhat wider.

As of this morning, here's the range of reaction to Attorney General Garland's press conference. At Slate:

This puts the onus on Trump and his lawyers—who for the past three days have unleashed fury against the FBI and gone so far as to suggest the bureau was “planting” evidence—to object in court to unsealing the documents in order to keep them secret. This immediately flips the script away from the saturation of “what is the DOJ hiding” media coverage of the past few days and raises the obvious question: If Trump objects to unsealing these documents, what is he hiding?

But Trump immediately responded,

“Not only will I not oppose the release of documents related to the unAmerican, unwarranted, and unnecessary raid and break-in of my home in Palm Beach, Florida, Mar-a-Lago, I am going a step further by ENCOURAGING the immediate release of those documents,” Trump wrote on social media Friday night.

Just as in Watergate, versions are put out, but they collapse within hours. It's hard to avoid thinking the Justice Department's ostentatious show of consideration to Trump, offering him the chance to object to releasing the documents, was a desperate move that might justify slow-walking the process, but it looks as though Trump feels he has nothing to lose by letting things out.

Actually, I think this points to a little-mentioned question that arises from Eric Trump's account of the raid: his version on Sean Hannity's show was that the FBI opened a safe in search of stolen documents only to find it empty. Why would this be important?

One potential explanation is in a comment on a right-wing discussion site, that the Trump organization knew it had a mole and used the same strategy it had used to expose a mole in the White House: plant false information to see who passes it on. Thus someone tells the mole there are secret documents in the safe, the mole enthusiastically relays this to the FBI, the FBI goes in balls-to-the-wall only to be embarrassed. Whether or not this was the specific strategy, it's starting to look like the outcome of the raid will only make the administration look inept.

In fact, it looks like Attorney General Garland and the Justice Department have a dilemma. Several news organizations, as well as Judicial Watch, had already filed motions to unseal the warrant and supporting documents on Tuesday, and I would imagine that the Justice Department recognized that these would almost certainly be successful. Thus Garland's announcement that Justice would also file such a motion (although apparently asking for a more limited unsealing) is superfluous, but potentially also a move to slow-walk or limit that process.

This continues to convince me that making the basis for the warrant public can only damage the administration, while Trump has nothing to lose from it and everything to gain. On the other hand, the establishment media is using whatever interval remains between now and the unsealing of the documents to stir up suspicion that Trump is still a spy:

Classified documents relating to nuclear weapons were among the items FBI agents sought in a search of former president Donald Trump’s Florida residence on Monday, according to people familiar with the investigation.

. . . The people who described some of the material that agents were seeking spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. They did not offer additional details about what type of information the agents were seeking, including whether it involved weapons belonging to the United States or some other nation. Nor did they say if such documents were recovered as part of the search.

Sounds like we've gone beyond Deep Throats A and B to a whole new choir of them. All this is going to do beyond the weekend will be to bolster Trump's credibility. Just unseal the documents, that'll prove their point if this stuff is true.

Mar-a-Lago: The Plot Doesn't Thicken, It Congeals

By the way, the Watergate burglary took place 50 years ago this past June. I was studying Milton's prose in graduate school at the time, and I never believed anyone could get hooked on The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates. How wrong I was. Now I'm starting to get a real sense of deja vu.

Sorting through this morning's news and commentary, I think there are three important items. The first, and likely most consequential, is Judicial Watch's motion to unseal the Mar-a-Lago search warrant:

The public has an urgent and substantial interest in understanding the predicate for the execution of the unprecedented search warrant of the private residence of a former president and likely future political opponent. . . . [N]o official explanation or information has been released about the search. As of the filing of this motion, the public record consists solely of speculation and inuendo. In short, the historical presumption of access to warrant materials vastly outweighs any interest the government may have in keeping the materials under seal.

. . . Given the political context, and the highly unusual action of executing a search warrant at the residence of a former President and likely future political opponent, it is essential that the public understands as soon as possible the basis for the government’s action. Any government interest in securing the identities of witnesses and confidential sources, if any, may be addressed by appropriate redactions from the search warrant affidavit.

Judge Rinehart has given the Justice Department until close of business Monday to reply.

The second item from yesterday is a Newsweek story that relies on two anonymous Deep State sources:

FBI decision-makers in Washington and Miami thought that denying the former president a photo opportunity or a platform from which to grandstand (or to attempt to thwart the raid) would lower the profile of the event, says one of the sources, a senior Justice Department official who is a 30-year veteran of the FBI.

The effort to keep the raid low-key failed: instead, it prompted a furious response from GOP leaders and Trump supporters. "What a spectacular backfire," says the Justice official.

"I know that there is much speculation out there that this is political persecution, but it is really the best and the worst of the bureaucracy in action," the official says. "They wanted to punctuate the fact that this was a routine law enforcement action, stripped of any political overtones, and yet [they] got exactly the opposite."

Even if the story is woven from the self-serving accounts of two different Deep Throats, it's remarkably self-contradictory. The tone is basically, "Heh-heh, what did you expect from a bunch of bureaucrats? Don't make too much of it!" but it suddenly pivots to firestorms:

"They were seeking to avoid any media circus," says the second source, a senior intelligence official who was briefed on the investigation and the operation. "So even though everything made sense bureaucratically and the FBI feared that the documents might be destroyed, they also created the very firestorm they sought to avoid, in ignoring the fallout."

Throughout the account, it's worthwhile to keep in mind that the two sources are speaking to a sympathetic outlet, and they're doing what they think they must to further their own personal interests and the interests of their agencies. The Mar-a-Lago search warrant, plus all the supporting material, continues to be under seal until the courts rule otherwise. According to Trump's lawyers, they were eventually allowed to glimpse the warrant, but were not given a copy. It sounds to me as though the Newsweek Deep Throats, on the other hand, have a pretty good idea of what's in it but are doing what they can to spin things:

According to the Justice Department source, the [National] Archives [believed] that the former White House was stonewalling and continued to possess unauthorized material. Earlier this year, they asked the Justice Department to investigate.

In late April, the source says, a federal grand jury began deliberating whether there was a violation of the Presidential Records Act or whether President Trump unlawfully possessed national security information. Through the grand jury process, the National Archives provided federal prosecutors with copies of the documents received from former President Trump in January 2022. The grand jury concluded that there had been a violation of the law, according to the Justice Department source.

In the past week, the prosecutor in the case and local Assistant U.S. Attorney went to Florida magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart in West Palm Beach to seek approval for the search of Donald Trump's private residence. The affidavit to obtain the search warrant, the intelligence source says, contained abundant and persuasive detail that Trump continued to possess the relevant records in violation of federal law, and that investigators had sufficient information to prove that those records were located at Mar-a-Lago—including the detail that they were contained in a specific safe in a specific room.

But again, all that abundant and persuasive detail is under seal. Trust us! But the next item suggests there's reason to doubt this quasi-official spin. It's a story at Just the News, Questions grow about Trump raid after revelation of grand jury subpoena, extensive cooperation

Two months before his Florida home was raided by the FBI, former President Donald Trump secretly received a grand jury subpoena for classified documents belonging to the National Archives, and voluntarily cooperated by turning over responsive evidence, surrendering security surveillance footage and allowing federal agents and a senior Justice Department lawyer to tour his private storage locker, according to a half dozen people familiar with the incident.

. . . The subpoena requested any remaining documents Trump possessed with any classification markings, even if they involved photos of foreign leaders, correspondence or mementos from his presidency.

. . . [T]he president's lawyers complied and allowed the search by the FBI before the entourage left cordially. Five days later, DOJ officials sent a letter to Trump's lawyers asking them to secure the storage locker with more than the lock they had seen. The Secret Service installed a more robust security lock to comply.

. . . The disclosure Wednesday to Just the News raised immediate new questions in legal and congressional circles about the necessity for the subsequent raid, including whether the judge who approved the warrant new [sic] of the earlier cooperation.

“The more we learn, the more confusing this gets,” George Washington University Law professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News program Hannity. “….Did they relay this history to the magistrate? That, according to these sources, that the president had cooperated.

”I mean, the idea that he was subject to a subpoena, complied with a subpoena, didn't challenge it, voluntarily showed the storage room to the agents, followed their advice, secured it to meet their demands. All of that is hardly a basis for saying now we need to send in 40 FBI agents on a on a raid,” he added. “I mean, if the subpoena worked the first time, then presumably a second subpoena would work the second time if there were remaining documents.”

So at the moment we're looking at two starkly conflicting narratives, one from anonymous sources within the Deep State that Trump was stonewalling attempts to identify and retrieve important classified documents that he'd removed from the White House without authority, the other that these were routine and largely personal materials that had been hastily packed into boxes willy-nilly by the Government Services Administration in the process of moving the former president out -- and given his understanding of the circumstances, Trump and his attorneys had been fully cooperating with efforts to sort through these items.

If the Trump version is true, there would have been no reason for a search warrant. The idea that secrecy would be needed to keep Trump from destroying evidence is absurd: Trump wasn't living at Mar-a-Lago, as he was in Bedminster, NJ for the summer, which the Deep State sources say the gvernment knew -- their intent was to do the raid quietly with Trump out of the way. Indeed, if the evidence would be scattered among 15 boxes of random mementos, in a locked facility covered by surveillance video, it's hard to imagine a scenario where a secret frenzied last-minute document shred could even be possible.

I don't think this can be a simple bureaucratic snafu any more than Watergate was a third-rate burglary attempt. But as with Watergate, the tidbits will keep coming.

So, Did The Big Guy Order The Raid?

The official White House position on the Mar-a-Lago raid is this:

“What I can tell you definitively and for sure, he was not aware of this,” Jean-Pierre said of Biden. “Nobody at the White House was. Nobody was given a heads up and we did not know about what happened yesterday.”

Members of the public who haven't just fallen off the turnip truck will nevertheless say it depends on what the meaning of "definitively and for sure" is, and indeed, those who follow true crime will add that the more redundancies people pile onto their denials, the greater the likelihood that they're false. Others have certainly said that if the above is in fact true, it's proof that someone else is running the show -- but of course, neither assertion necessarily contradicts the other.

It's time to update my estimate of what's going on in the First Fuddy-Duddy's head. My view all along has been that his problem isn't medical, and a medical diagnosis from a distance is meaningless in any case. At the same time, I was an English major, have lived my whole life without a course in psychology, and I am not a mental health professional. Even if I were, the same applies to any such diagnosis made from a distance. Nevertheless, there are plenty of evaluative tools available, even for use from a distance, that can shed insight into character without wandering into quasi-diagnostic jargon.

Let's start with one of the most traditional, the concept refined by St Thomas Aquinas of the seven deadly sins, pride, anger, lust, envy, gluttony, avarice, and sloth. As far as I can see, just about the only one of which the big guy appears to be innocent is gluttony; he's pretty skinny, and his only weakness in that department seems to be ice cream cones.

On the other hand, pride, which might also translate into a lack of insight or self-awareness, has pretty clearly got to be close to the top of the list. The guy is one of the shallowest people in public life. Pride would also be reflected in a sense of entitlement, in particular the expectation that his entourage of yes-men and enablers will always clean up after his bumbling misspeaks and explain his lacunae of judgment. It's possible, as I've sometimes speculated, that alcohol could be feeding this, but like Speaker Pelosi, Biden claims not to drink. But then, his staff claims on his behalf that he knew nothing of the raid. None of these denials rings tue.

Anyhow, if he isn't drinking, the side effects of prescription drugs might also account for the haze, or simple habit borne of laziness or sloth. Clear expression in speech or writing takes a certain level of discipline, and indeed self-awareness. The need to proofread and edit one's own writing is a habit that comes from self-awareness, as is the need for prudence, clarity, and reserve in speech. I doubt if he ever acquired either, and neither was ever required of him.

Certainly sloth is a clear factor in his wish to escape from the White House at every opportunity.

I think, though, that we're getting closer to the issue of the raid when we get to anger and envy. At least some observers have pointed out that pretty much throughout his presidency to date, Trump has beaten Biden in prospective 2024 matchups. If we assume Biden has no situational awareness, this wouldn't be a factor, but my guess is that the laziness and entitlement that drive his public persona are masquerading as senility. Under the fuddy-duddy mask is an angry, petty, and vindictive guy.

I think we can also bring the Aristotelian virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude into play. All of these contribute to what more recent analysis of character would characterize as impulse control. At this point I'm starting to see parallels to Nixon's character flaws that led to the Watergate scandal -- people who knew him during that period indicate that when he grew tired, he would drink too much, which led to cascading bouts of anger and vindictiveness.

Thus in Nixon's case we had the Saturday Night Massacre of October 1973, which led directly to the Watergate committee and his resignation less than a year later under the threat of impeachment. I think the Saturday Night Massacre and the Mar-a-Lago raid, which have at this point both been characterized as overreaches, have similar roots in simmering anger, and in Biden's case jealousy of Trump, who even as a lower-key figure in the period of more than a year afer leaving office remains a formidable electoral threat.

The overriding question for both Nixon and Biden is whether their weaknesses in character led to self-destructive errors in judgment. My estimate in Biden's case is that while Nixon was likely not specifically aware of the initial Watergate burglary and didn't order it (although lower level staff like Colson did), Biden probably initiated, approved, and ordered the Mar-a-Lago raid or something essentially like it. That will make it a potentially much more serious matter.