Exclusive: 'Trump Employee 5,' who unknowingly helped move classified documents, speaks out

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CNN Politics

Updated 4:05 PM EDT, Mon March 11, 2024


CNN — A longtime Mar-a-Lago employee who is a central witness in the investigation into former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents is now speaking publicly because he believes that voters should hear the truth about his former boss and the case before the November election.

Brian Butler, who is referenced as “Trump Employee 5” in the classified documents indictment brought by special counsel Jack Smith, told CNN in an exclusive interview that he doesn’t believe the criminal case against Trump is a “witch hunt,” as the former president has claimed.

Butler gave testimony to federal investigators that informed crucial portions of last year’s criminal obstruction charges against Trump and his two co-defendants, Walt Nauta, a personal aide to Trump, and Carlos De Oliveira, a property manager at Mar-a-Lago who had been Butler’s closest friend until recently.

Butler, who was employed at Mar-a-Lago for 20 years, has spoken repeatedly with investigators, paying for his own attorney and breaking with the orbit around Trump that he knows so well – setting him apart from his former colleagues and friends as his former boss has been named in multiple federal investigations. Butler told CNN how he unknowingly helped Nauta deliver boxes of classified information from Mar-a-Lago to the former president’s plane in June 2022 – the same day that Trump and his attorney were meeting with the Justice Department at Mar-a-Lago about the classified documents.


Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/11/politics/trump-employee-5-classified-documents-mar-a-lago/index.html

[moniss]

1. Having a prosecution witness

giving media interviews before the trial is not a good idea. Regardless of whether we as the public learn anything pretrial.

[Raven123]

2. I agree

Part of me wonders if he just figured Cannon will toss the case, so what the heck

[modrepub]

4. Sorry, But What Trial?

There's still a reasonable chance the trial gets put on hold until after the election or worse, thrown out before the election. This may be the only opportunity to put this case back in the spotlight.

As a side bet, I think tfg's underlings will get longer jail sentences than he does. That's a reflection on how well I think the US justice system operates these days.

[underpants]

6. speaking publicly because he believes that voters should hear the truth about his former boss and the case before...

speaking publicly because he believes that voters should hear the truth about his former boss and the case before the November election.

Exactly. He knows this won’t be aired pre election if he doesn’t do it.

[moniss]

23. Defendant lawyers in cases

use pretrial public statements for impeachment of a witness all the time. If you seriously don't believe that a trial will eventually take place then fine. My statement is about a trial whenever it happens in any kind of case in any state or Federal court for any defendant known to mankind for any charge known to mankind.

The defense lawyers who have represented this defendant thus far have clearly demonstrated going after any possible public statements/activities/relationships in order to claim bias etc. and file motion after motion delaying the process. Are we really seeing anything from this witness through this interview that was unknown or suspected? Not that I see. Loading boxes in the plane was something reported long ago with pictures provided for example.

So now the defense gets to run around screaming allegations that Smith is behind having the witness out there doing interviews and claiming it supports their claims of bias. persecution and politically motivated prosecution. All to the waiting arms of "I Lean" Cannon who can use this by itself or in combination with anything else to form the fig leaf for her to try to cover herself for a decision for dismissal. That dismissal would most certainly be with prejudice and Smith would then have to rely upon the 11th Circuit to overturn and remand back. It is not certain whether they would remand back to Cannon or whether Smith could withdraw the indictments and refile hoping to get a different judge etc.

[V850i]

12. Boeing whistle blower?

Seems like getting someone in the media an interview is not a bad idea. Perhaps premised on not releasing it until a certain time or upon death?

[moniss]

24. I'm talking about from a perspective of conducting a case.

It appears to me that the witness isn't saying anything we didn't know already. But as I've said in additional comments it gives the defense lawyers ammo to claim Smith is responsible for putting the witness out there and then filing to dismiss and "I Lean" can cobble this fact of an interview to any other straws to grasp at to use as a fig leaf to cover for her decision to dismiss.

It is basic practice in legal cases to tell your witnesses to STFU and don't be yapping about what you know etc. Why on earth give this pack of jackal lawyers, who have a demonstrated M.O. of going after any public statements ever made, actions etc. of any witness/judge/prosecutor/court personnel/family members, any more fuel for their phony fire?

Go ahead and keep playing into their hands by providing them with things actually happening, like this, in order for them to scream that it's proof of "political prosecution" and trying to "ruin him before the election". We who follow things closely know those claims are ridiculous but people who don't follow too closely until a month or so before the Election largely just pay attention to what is making the loudest noise in ads and TV interviews. An ad for this crook can almost write itself now with claims that "Biden and Smith" are trying to take away "innocent until proven guilty" and claiming this witness was "put out there" to do just that. So then they get to make their case in 60 seconds or less and now our side is going to spend hours of air time batting it down instead of spending those hours of air time talking about achievements and goals for the future. Why do that to yourself if you don't have to?

If the argument is that this info from this witness needed to be heard prior to the election because people are afraid "I Lean" will toss the case/delay it in the coming couple of months then fine. Wait until that happens and then go if you must. Most of the country pays no attention to the election until after the conventions anyway and those are months down the road. But go ahead everybody. Put the witness out there way ahead of time so that this crook gets a maximum amount of time to swing it about screaming it is proof of persecution.

It is poor practice legally for a prosecution to have their witnesses giving media interviews pretrial and it is poor practice from a communications/political campaign perspective also. The prospects of holding him legally accountable are not strengthened by this the and the chances are very great that this can be used in a big way in ads to claim this as proof that he is being politically prosecuted/denied presumption of innocence. The likelihood of having to now spend a greater portion of time knocking down those ridiculous claims is also far higher than if this interview did not take place now. There is a finite amount of time between now and the election for messages, ads, interviews etc. It is crazy to think that it is a positive to spend a greater portion than need be knocking down claims using ammo given by people from "our side". You want to maximize the time for presenting the positive and minimize the time for having to respond to attacks. Obvious baseless attacks fall away quickly but those that seem to have foundation are much more time consuming and take away more of a candidate's control of the time and narrative.

We need to think strategically and not just about the immediate gratification of having some "inside info" from a witness to bolster what we already really know.

[JoseBalow]

3. Loaded boxes on his plane?

Where did those boxes go?

[dweller]

8. Probably to a golf course

Where a month later were buried in Ivana’s grave …
🤔



✌🏻

[TexasBushwhacker]

9. Why did her casket require 10 pallbearers

instead of the usual 6?

[dweller]

10. How many

boxes were there ?




✌🏻

[flashman13]

17. Ordinarily I wouldn't touch story of Ivana's coffin with a 10 foot pole.

It's utterly ridiculous. Sounds like a bad B grade movie.

Oh! Wait! Trump is involved.

I'm going on a limb here. At least a 70% chance of being the true story.

[jaxexpat]

27. ....or, how many bodies?

[niyad]

16. Do not forget that she was cremated.

[Marcuse]

19. Ashes can be really heavy.

[3catwoman3]

30. Several on-line sources state that cremated remains...

…typically weigh 4-8 pounds, or 3.5% of the original body weight.

The ashes of my parents were contained in simple boxes that were about the size of a Maxwell House coffee can.

That big heavy casket is interesting.

[OMGWTF]

18. Ten STRUGGLING pallbearers to lift the cremated remains of an old woman? Oh, sure.

Two of Shitler's goons were seen leaving Ivana's apartment the day she *fell* down the stairs which conveniently got him and his spawn out of depositions because, so sad, so sad.

Then the Saudis have their fake golf tournament one week later in the same site where Ivana is buried in a temporary-looking grave that has not been maintained. And then, Jerod gets $2B from the Saudis. So many dots to connect. Trump makes Al Capone look like a Boy Scout.

[colorado_ufo]

25. And she had been immediately CREMATED. A small woman. A small urn of ashes in what was a heavy as a lead-lined coffin.

Maybe lead-lined to prohibit x-rays? Waterproof to protect documents or media?

[TexasBushwhacker]

26. Normally the cremation urn is buried in a small vault

not a full size casket requiring 10 pallbearers. It seems weird to go all conspiracy theory on it, but we're talking about Trump.

[soldierant]

38. Particularly sinc I understand

that she was cremated.

[JoseBalow]

13. I genuinely curious why his other properties weren't searched

[soldierant]

39. In order to get a warrant, they would need what's called "Probable cause."

It's not as high a bar as "more likely than not" nor "beyond a reasonable doubt" but it is a bar. Because of the "does he or doesn't he" jockeying around Mar-a Lago and the attorney's statement coming from there, they had probable cause for Mar-a-Lago, but they didn't for other properties. I do think that considering the discrepancy in the weight of Ivana's coffin they might be able now to get one for Bedminster, but I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not certain. In any case, if they can convict him on what they do have (which ought to be a certainty but may not be) and if Tish James's seizures include Bedminster, I don't think it would be hard to get permission from her.

[LudwigPastorius]

15. co: Vladimir Putin

Cash On Delivery Only

[underpants]

5. Premeditation, intent, cover up, AND conspiracy- right?

[jaxexpat]

28. When I was a farmer, years ago, I raised some cattle and a few hogs as well.

I like cattle okay, but I prefer hogs. They're usually smarter and a lot more entertaining. Their body language speaks for them but they're virtually incapable of expressing themselves by facial expression.

It just occurred to me that for a while now I've sensed something about the look in Trump's eyes that was oddly familiar, I just figured out the source of that familiarity. Trump's eyes, "window to the soul" say the poets, have that same flat-faced, inanimate visage I've seen on hogs in their habitual and self-absorbed circling of their feeder. In fact, the only difference I can see is that hogs are not so pretentious or overtly sadistic.

[underpants]

32. 👍

[viva la]

7. So many Trump loyalists have been ruined by him--

Indictment, ruin, trial, even jail.
And even if they haven't been indicted, they live in fear of it, and might need to pay for attorneys because they have to testify.
They lose their jobs and their coworkers ...

And for what, for this scoundrel and scammer who doesn't give a damn about them.

Look at Weisselberg, who has spent way too many of his final months in RIKERS!

[Warpy]

11. Everybody has known from the beginning

that Loose Cannon was going to try to sweep all this under the rug. She's stalled, obfuscated, posponed, and done nearly everything she can to avoid doing her job.

Now she's sending up signal flags that she's going to dismiss the whole thing just because she thinks she can.

While I hope this will remove her from the bench, it probably won't.

[bluestarone]

14. You see, that's what gets me

Any way to actually prove if this no good judge was planned? Most of us here believe that it was BULLSHIT that she was assigned to his case. If possible to investigate this, it SHOULD!!!

[republianmushroom]

20. Don't believe there will be a trail before Nov. election, myself. To politial.

Thanks to the foot dragging by the DOJ.
37 months and counting

[70sEraVet]

21. So, are these boxes of documents MIA?

Loading documents FROM Maralago onto Trump's plane? And what about the closet that Trump had the lock changed, and because FBI had no key, they didn't search it? How many docs were in THERE?
Do we have ANY National secrets anymore??

[usonian]

22. Perhaps witnesses are figuring that the trial will be delayed "indefinitely"

What would you do?

• Start talking because you could be in danger for participating in a trial that won’t happen?
• Just let the facts out because they won’t at the trial that will never happen?
• Get some publicity so people will know you and recognize you when someone drives by and tries to abduct you?

• Raise so much hell that the circuit court puts an end to this mockery of justice with a judge partial to the defendant?

Ideas?

[Novara]

29. I suspect he sees what is happening and thinks the truth won't get out before the election

He split ways with the whole cabal some time ago. He knows what happened, he knows all the obstruction the orange motherfucker did.

And he knows the truth won't see the light of day, not before the election, perhaps not ever. HE's trying to do America a service.


And why the hell weren't the other properties searched? They know some of the material has never been returned.

[BumRushDaShow]

31. "And why the hell weren't the other properties searched?"

That's because they clearly had enough just based on that one location, under NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, to convict.

However now that we have gone through over 1.5 years of Loose Cannon nonsense, imagine multiplying that type of potential roadblocking with the delays, times "x" other locations (Bedminister, Sterling, VA, etc).

There are 3 "classified documents" cases involving military/former military, that are ongoing unrelated to this, and you see how "open and shut" they are, WHEN one doesn't have the resources to obfuscate, file frivolous motions, and have a judge you appointed handling a case.

[Novara]

33. There's never "clearly enough evidence" with high level prosecutions, so they decide to simply stop looking

The more evidence they can pile on, the stronger case they have. All prosecutors will tell you that.

Would they have neglected to search a drug dealer's additional properties if they thought more evidence to build an even stronger case was there? Absolutely not. They'd turn over everything. Build an air tight case.

It was political and Garland is in charge. It should have been reason enough to get more search warrants just because they knew there were still outstanding documents. I mean, they didn't evaporate, right? They've got to be somewhere. The case would have been even stronger had they searched and found hidden documents in other properties. Hoo boy, would it have been stronger.

They didn't search because he made such a fucking melodrama out of the first search (no, it wasn't a raid; it was a search warrant, and they had advance notice). Garland was afraid of appearing political, so he backed off after that.


Can someone tell Garland that these CRIMES are political, so there's no way to avoid politics here?

[BumRushDaShow]

35. What they do in that case is have "superceding indictments"

The point being to get the most egregious/obvious charges in to start the prosecution clock, and then they can successively add to it as necessary.

Let me address the rest -

The more evidence they can pile on, the stronger case they have. All prosecutors will tell you that.

Would they have neglected to search a drug dealer's additional properties if they thought more evidence to build an even stronger case was there? Absolutely not. They'd turn over everything. Build an air tight case.

For the Mar-a-Lago issue, they already have an "air tight case". The "problem" is a defendant who has marshaled more resources than a typical defendant, to fight the charges.

It was political and Garland is in charge. It should have been reason enough to get more search warrants just because they knew there were still outstanding documents. I mean, they didn't evaporate, right? They've got to be somewhere. The case would have been even stronger had they searched and found hidden documents in other properties. Hoo boy, would it have been stronger.

I think there is a complete misunderstanding here on how the federal government operates and it has propagated throughout DU to make a total mess out of what has and is happening.

DOJ doesn't unilaterally do things like this.

The NORMAL process here is that at the end of a President's term, NARA - the "National Archives and Records Administration" begins working with the outgoing administration, to recover documents related to the Presidential Records Act (and anything else that BELONGS TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT - whether they are artistic busts, pictures, classified documents, gifts from foreign governments, letters to organizations/nations, etc.).

So NARA started doing that with 45, literally a month or so after the 2020 election (sometime in December 2020). It is part of NARA's normal Standard Operating Procedure.

The problem is that 45 and his staff and lawyers hemmed and hawed and delayed.

This was posted Mon Oct 3, 2022, 06:06 PM - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142976820

National Archives alerted lawyers for Trump about missing letters with North Korean leader

Source: CNN Politics

CNN — The National Archives alerted lawyers for former President Donald Trump in May 2021 that Trump’s letters with North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un – and two dozen boxes of records – were missing, according to new correspondence the Archives released on Monday. Gary Stern, general counsel for the National Archives and Records Administration, wrote to former Trump White House lawyers Patrick Philbin, Mike Purpura and Scott Gast on May 6, 2021, alerting them that the letters Trump had exchanged with Kim and the letter he received from his predecessor, President Barack Obama, were missing, according to the correspondence released Monday in response to dozens of Freedom of Information Act requests.

In the email, Stern asked for the lawyers’ help to ensure the Archives received all presidential records as required under law. “It is also our understanding that roughly two dozen boxes of original Presidential records were kept in the Residence of the White House over the course of President Trump’s last year in office and have not been transferred to NARA, despite a determination by Pat Cipollone in the final days of the Administration that they need to be,” Stern wrote. “I had also raised this concern with Scott during the final weeks.”

CNN previously reported that the Archives had been working throughout 2021 to get presidential records from Trump. The correspondence released Monday provides additional detail showing how the Archives engaged with Trump’s team for months before he handed over 15 boxes of materials in January that had been housed at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort. In the May 2021 letter to Trump’s representatives that was released publicly on Monday, Stern wrote there were “certain paper/textual records we cannot account for,” citing Trump’s letters with Kim and from Obama.

“For example, the original correspondence between President Trump and North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un were not transferred to us; it is our understanding that in January 2021, just prior to the end of the Administration, the originals were put in a binder for the President, but were never returned to the Office of Records Management for transfer to NARA,” he wrote. Stern added that the Obama letter was also missing, noting that the Archives’ presidential libraries of other presidents maintain copies of similar letters. “It is necessary that this one be provided to us as well,” he wrote.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/03/politics/national-archives-mar-a-lago-records-trump-kim-jong-un/index.html

This timeline has been posted on DU.

So throughout 2021, NARA requested, over and over, each request with increasing levity, to retrieve items that they were to be caretakers of.

When NARA exhausted THEIR internal processes - and THIS IS NORMAL AND HOW EVERY REGULATORY AGENCY OPERATES - THEN NARA contacted DOJ (as the infamous "criminal referral" ) because DOJ can do CRIMINAL court filings like "searches", "seizures", "injunctions", etc.

NOTE THE DATE OF THE BELOW -

National Archives asks Justice Dept. to investigate Trump’s handling of White House records

The request came amid revelations that officials recovered 15 boxes of materials from the former president’s Mar-a-Lago residence that weren’t handed back to the government as they should have been


By Matt Zapotosky, Jacqueline Alemany, Ashley Parker and Josh Dawsey
Updated February 9, 2022 at 4:05 p.m. EST|Published February 9, 2022 at 3:05 p.m. EST


The National Archives and Records Administration has asked the Justice Department to examine Donald Trump’s handling of White House records, sparking discussions among federal law enforcement officials about whether they should investigate the former president for a possible crime, according to two people familiar with the matter.

(snip)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/09/trump-archives-justice-department/

They didn't search because he made such a fucking melodrama out of the first search (no, it wasn't a raid; it was a search warrant, and they had advance notice). Garland was afraid of appearing political, so he backed off after that.

The ones calling it a "raid" were the media.

Can someone tell Garland that these CRIMES are political, so there's no way to avoid politics here?

I remember back when DU trashed Eric Holder relentlessly for almost 8 years for not immediately arresting Shrub, Darth, and the rest of their cabal.

DOJ has 115,000 employees and many agencies that are part of the Department including ATF, Bureau of Prisons, U.S. Marshals, FBI, DEA, etc. They aren't just the 45-fighting institution.

(sorry to fuss at you )

[samnsara]

34. so sad for him. Ive lost friends and family over trump as well...

[muriel_volestrangler]

36. Is this the first public claim that Trump flew boxes away from Mar-a-Lago?

I remember a lot of DUers (and on similar sites) were saying "I bet he did remove boxes, to one of his other properties like Bedminster", but I couldn't remember it being a public claim (or a known fact). And I can't remember the contents being found, or searched for, elsewhere. Is this confirmation of something already in public knowledge, or of DUers' suspicions?

[BumRushDaShow]

37. Apparently it was an almost innocuous line in the indictment

and lots of OPs around the June 2023 time frame including this - https://democraticunderground.com/100218007367

TPM had theses screenshots from the indictment in their article - https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/the-mystery-of-the-bedminster-documents





I suppose the speculation part is whether those boxes were mainly "personal items" or whether some had classified docs in them and due to the audio release of 45 and a couple of writers discussing a book, where he was purportedly "waving around" a "classified document" - and this was May 2021 after he left office - there has been a suggestion that some classified docs may have been there.

So apparently this "#5" guy may have been one of the "and others" referenced in the indictment with Nauta, who loaded up a plane.

ETA - there was also a long-form NYT article at the time that had some info -

The Attention Was All on Mar-a-Lago. Some of the Action Was at Bedminster.


By Alan Feuer, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan
June 27, 2023


(snip)

Mar-a-Lago grabbed headlines last August after federal agents descended on the compound and hauled away a trove of more than 100 classified documents, and the pictures of boxes of presidential records piled there — including in a bathroom — helped explain why prosecutors chose to indict him this month. But Bedminster, where Mr. Trump spends his summers, has turned out also to have been a focus of investigators, a flashpoint in the conflict between prosecutors and Mr. Trump’s lawyers, and the scene of a central episode in Mr. Trump’s indictment: a meeting in which he was recorded showing off what he described as a “highly confidential” plan to attack Iran.

(snip)

At one point in the early fall of last year, investigators went so far as to discuss executing a search warrant at Bedminster, according to two people briefed on the matter. Investigators were concerned that more documents were stashed at the club and the only way to account for them was to search the property. But one of the people said the Justice Department lacked probable cause to obtain a warrant from a judge. The discussions about the warrant took place around the time that Jay Bratt, the top counterintelligence official at the Justice Department, told Mr. Trump’s legal team that prosecutors believed Mr. Trump still had more classified materials in his possession.

(snip)

Minutes before the hearing in front of Judge Howell, Mr. Parlatore alerted her and the government that a team of professionals with military training had searched Bedminster for classified materials just days earlier. They were supervised by another one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers at the time, James Trusty. But the Justice Department, according to court papers described by people familiar with them, was not impressed. Prosecutors complained that the search had been limited to certain areas of Bedminster and was not accompanied by a sworn statement detailing which parts of the club had been examined.

In the end, Judge Howell decided in favor of the government, ordering Mr. Trump’s lawyers to provide a sworn statement about which parts of Bedminster had been searched. She also told the lawyers to make a “custodian of records” for Mr. Trump’s presidential office available to testify about the search in front of a grand jury.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/27/us/politics/trump-investigation-bedminster.html