particular case. joyce vance, if you ve been able to read through this document as andrew just pointed out, they are very specific. there are redactions but it is very clear what they are concerned about and it is a premature release by people involved in the case who could be the former president. we don t know that yet. it could be attorneys or other people in his inner circle. confidantes. so one thing that s for certain is that there is nothing good that happens for the former president upon the release of this document. he will be reduced i suspect to arguing that the redactions indicate that doj is still hiding material that would prove his innocence or whatever it is that he is going to say. but the specificity with which doj identifies concerns then redacting examples in the case of witnesses to protect those witnesses from dangerous
there are going to look through this as i am, because i think they have access to the same document, it is basically saying basically the procedural background of how the case proceeded, how they got to this point. and then it is explaining the argument, the redacted materials must remain under seal as the court has found protecting the integrity and secrecy of an ongoing criminal investigation is a well recognized, compelling governmental interest. it goes through all the reasons. it says the government has carefully reviewed the affidavit and has identified five categories of information that must remain under seal in order to protect the safety of multiple civilian witnesses, whose information was scheduled throughout the affidavit and contributed to the finding of probable cause as well as the integrity of the ongoing investigation. so this is what the doj submitted to the court to justify the redactions. in the attached chart the government has identified each category that applie
counsel about that. i think they underscored their interest and transparency but this is also a kind of checkmate move by merrick garland both here and in the earlier documents this week that bill barr memos about the ukraine investigation. attorney general garland has done everything right. he has not leaked. he has not provided any of this information. he is now under court orders both with respect to barr and with respect to mar-a-lago to reveal some information. that information that s coming out is as all the panelists have discussed so far looking really bad for donald trump. we ll see when we see what the affidavit says but i suspect the case is going to get even stronger and much more difficult for donald trump even in the public s eye. i ve got the first nine pages of an, the affidavit in support of an amation under rule 4 application under rule 41-a for the warrant to search and seize so i think you ll all be
0 from the company that powers more businesses than anyone else. call and start saving today. comcast business. powering possibilities. and good day. this is andrea mitchell reports in washington. the affidavit the justice department used to win approval for the fbi s search of mar-a-lago is being released at any moment by order of the justice department approving it by the federal judge magistrate on the case. much of it is likely to be redacted to conceal critical information about sources and methods the government used to persuade the judge there was probable cause for him to of potential crimes to justify the search of the former president s home. the judge ordered the unusual release of the affidavit in part to de bunk the explosion of conspiracy theories about the search. the escalating threats against the fbi and other law enforcement officials. all of this sharpening the country s political divide as president biden escalates his attacks on what he is now criticizing as, q
coming up with what that tv is. and, you know, you speak to a lot of people who work in television on this programme and everybody who works in tv and probably who listens to this will know that those opportunities don t come around very often. so you couldn t have done that at the bbc? the bbc weren t offering you something like that? it wasn t a case of me going to bbc and saying this and channel 5 have said this. what have you got? i never did that. i ve been really open and honest with the bbc in the whole time i ve been there, really. and i just felt that there are opportunities at channel 5 that maybe i wouldn t have got at the bbc. and i think it s also a really interesting time in the industry generally, and channel 5 is a fascinating place to be at the minute. i think they make some great programmes. i think there s not many commissioning. most of their commissions recently have been brilliant shows and who doesn t want to get the chance to work where anneka rice works? that