June 12, 2023
by Joseph Fitsanakis
THE 49-PAGE GRAND JURY indictment, filed last week in Florida by the United States Department of Justice, contains 37 criminal charges against former president Donald Trump. The charges can be summarized into a two-fold accusation: Trump is alleged to have stolen more than 300 classified documents upon leaving the White House in January 2021. Moreover, he allegedly schemed with a group of advisors and aides in order to obstruct efforts by the government to retrieve the stolen documents. Both accusations are spelled out in stark detail in the pages of the indictment.
What remains unanswered, however, is the motive. Why did Trump allegedly take several hundred classified documents from the White House? Did he select specific documents to purloin? And, if so, why these specific documents? Lastly, why did the former president go to such pains to frustrate the government’s efforts to recover the documents? There has been intense public speculation about the answers to these questions. Yet the grand jury indictment does not appear to attempt to establish the possible motive behind the alleged crime. Nor
does it need to. Establishing a motive is not required in order to demonstrate the need for a trial, or indeed a conviction. Given the high stakes of this case, however, establishing a motive can provide much-needed clarity in the public sphere.
Accidental or Malicious?
It is important to clarify with precision what the grand jury indictment does not state: its pages do not contain any suggestion that Trump took possession of the classified documents in order to share them with specific individuals or entities, American or foreign. Nor does the indictment suggest that the former president intended to use the classified information in his possession for personal financial gain —for instance to promote his investment ventures at home or abroad, or to gain leverage and win over potential business partners.
So, why did Trump do it? As The New York Times explained on Sunday, the indictment does offer some hints of motives, if one reads between the lines. One possible explanation stems from Trump’s time in the White House, during which he learned to associate his access to classified information as a paramount perk that came with being president of the United States. It follows that, retaining access to classified information was a way for him to maintain control over the office of the presidency. That strong need intensified even more after January 2021, as Trump was clearly “not ready to let go of the perks of holding the highest office in the country”. Indeed, the indictment describes several examples that reveal the strong sense of ownership that the former president felt about the classified documents he kept at his private residence at Mar-a-Lago, as well as
his determination to keep them in close proximity to his office and sleeping quarters.
Tertiary Motives
A plausible tertiary motive for Trump’s alleged crimes is the leverage and status that access to secrets can bestow upon an individual. It is possible that Trump viewed the classified documents as the apogee of the long list of his material prizes and trophies —as an important physical legacy of the zenith of his career. That would also explain why he allegedly fought so determinedly to keep the documents in his possession, even after he was told in no uncertain terms by the government that they did not belong to him. Moreover, as The Times notes, the former president may view his classified document collection as a way to insure his legacy —for instance as a means of rebutting critics of his policies and decisions while he was in office, or even as potential “payback against perceived enemies”.
But these motives are probably less prominent in Trump’s mind. A strong and deeply held sense of ownership of government information, no matter their classification grade, is likely the driving motive behind the alleged crimes. As The Washington Post noted in an insightful article in 2022, aides to the former president said that he appeared sincere and genuine about his conviction that the classified documents “were his, not the government’s”. When he was advised otherwise by his own aides, he noticeably “gravitated toward lawyers and advisers who indulged his
more pugilistic desires”, according to the paper. His attitude was not a show. It was sincere. Moreover, there is no reason to believe that it has subsided since his indictment.
A Genuine Conviction of Ownership
Trump’s latest legal woes are rooted in his genuine belief that access to classified information is something he is owed —not simply because he served as president of the United States, but because, in his mind, he should still be in the Oval Office. These deeply entrenched beliefs are unlikely to be abandoned by the former president, regardless of the cost. More importantly, these same beliefs are passionately shared by millions of his supporters. The latter are sufficient in number to wreak havoc in the Republican Party and radically reshape American politics for years to come. If Trump avoids trial or a prison sentence, his support base will view such an outcome as a form of noble victory against the “deep state”. It is therefore likely to be energized, possibly like never before. Should Trump be jailed or seek political asylum abroad in order to evade incarceration, the American political landscape will undergo a major earthquake. Regardless of the outcome of this unprecedented saga, stormy waters seem to lie ahead.
► Author: Joseph Fitsanakis | Date: 12 June 2023 | Permalink
Ex-intelligence officials warn against building new casino near US spy agencies
January 27, 2025 by Joseph Fitsanakis 8 Comments
Part of the Washington metropolitan area, Tysons is adjacent to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Counterterrorism Center headquarters. It is also only a handful of miles from the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which is located in nearby Langley, Virginia. Several major government contractors have offices in Tysons, including BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, Palantir Technologies, and Deloitte.
A bipartisan group of local lawmakers, headed by State Senate Majority Leader Scott A. Surovell (D-Fairfax), have proposed a bill that seeks to examine the possibility of building a casino complex in Tysons. The casino would be part of a mixed-use development that would include upscale apartments, a luxury hotel, and a concert venue. Supporters of the bill argue that the proposed development would bring jobs to the area and would elevate the quality of life of Tysons residents.
But the proposed plan is being resisted by a group calling itself National Security Leaders for Fairfax. The newly formed group is reportedly led by Anne Gruner, former deputy director of the CIA’s Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control Center, and Sally Horn, who served as a senior director in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Last December, the group authored a letter [PDF] to local government officials, arguing that the existence of a casino in Tysons could potentially aid the machinations of foreign spies.
The letter decries “[t]he proximity of a Tysons casino to a significant population of government, military, and contract officials with access to highly secretive government intelligence, diplomatic, and defense information”. It cautions that, not only would a casino “attract organized crime —casinos always do— but also adversarial intelligence services looking to recruit those with such access whom they hope to blackmail”.
Gambling addiction has long been considered a vice that could endanger holders of security clearances, because it poses risks to their financial stability and personal integrity. Excessive gambling can lead to debt, which may make individuals vulnerable to coercion, bribery, or exploitation by adversaries seeking access to classified information. The behaviors associated with problem gambling —such as deception, secrecy, or desperation to recover losses— can potentially undermine the trustworthiness and reliability required for maintaining a security clearance.
But those who support the plan for the casino complex dismiss such claims. They argue that there are already several other casinos in the area and that building one more in Tysons would not alter the security dynamics. State Senator Surovell told The Washington Post, which reported about the proposed casino last week: “We already have a massive slots parlor 45 minutes west in West Virginia, [an] MGM [casino] right over the river [in Maryland] and sports gaming on every phone in the state”.
► Author: Joseph Fitsanakis | Date: 27 January 2025 | Permalink
Filed under Expert news and commentary on intelligence, espionage, spies and spying Tagged with Anne Gruner, Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, gambling, National Security Leaders for Fairfax, News, Sally Horn, Tysons (Virginia), United States