How many documents have been recovered?

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 31, 2022

The best numbers we can offer at this point in time: During or after Donald Trump's presidency, a large number of documents marked as classified found their way to Mar-a-Lago.

During the course of the current year, a large number of such documents have been removed from Mar-a-Lago—first in January, then on June 3, then in the FBI search conducted on August 8.

By this time, how many such documents have been recovered? Also, how many of those documents were marked as "Top Secret?"

At the higher ends of our journalism, statistics can seem to be boring, and statistics can be very hard. 

For that reason, we're going to report the total number of such documents which have been recovered to date, according to official filings by the Justice Department.  Also, we're going to list the number of such documents which were marked "Top Secret."

One bit of confusion is already infesting the way some journalists are describing this matter. Below, we'll offer the dope on that too.

How many such documents have been recovered in all?

How many documents marked as classified have been recovered from Mar-a-Lago? Here are the best numbers available at the present time, according to this newly released DOJ document

Recovered in January: 184 such documents (DOJ document, page 7)

Recovered on June 3: 38 such documents (DOJ document, page 10)

Recovered on August 8: "Over one hundred unique documents" (DOJ document, page 12)

For whatever reason, the newly-released document isn't specific about the number of classified documents recovered on August 8. That said:

Given what we know at present, at least 323 documents with classified markings—and some unknown additional number—have been recovered to date.

How many documents marked Top Secret have been recovered?

How many documents marked Top Secret have been recovered from Mar-a-Lago? Here are the best numbers available at the present time:

Recovered in January: 25 such documents (DOJ document, page 7)

Recovered on June 3: 17 more such documents (DOJ document, page 10)

Recovered on August 8: The newly released DOJ document doesn't give a specific number. It merely says that some unstated number of such documents were recovered that day.

Earlier reporting said that five "sets" of such documents were recovered on August 8. Best estimate at present:

At least 44 such documents have been recovered, though the number may well be closer to 60. For whatever reason, the precise number still seems to be unknown.

A point of instant confusion: 

On page 12 of the newly-released DOJ document the Justice Department says this about the August 8 search:

During the August 8 search, investigators found "over one hundred unique documents with classified markings—that is, more than twice the amount produced on June 3, 2022, in response to the grand jury subpoena."

We've already seen some journalists report this presentation in ways which are misleading, confusing or jumbled. In fairness, it's hard to report such matters on the fly.

Here's what is and isn't said in the newly-released document:

On August 8, the FBI found more than twice as many documents as were handed over by Trump's lawyers on June 3. The FBI did not find more than twice as many documents as had been handed over in January and June combined.

A few last apparent points:

None of this means that there aren't additional classified documents somewhere at Mar-a-Lago. None of this means that additional classified documents aren't present at other of Donald Trump's residences.

Beyond that, is it possible that other classified documents have been given or sold to other parties? As far as we know, that has to be rated as possible. Also this:

Presumably, any of these documents could have been Xeroxed. 

The National Archives has recovered well over 300 documents with classified markings. At least 44 were marked Top Secret, though the number may well be substantially higher than that. 

Copies of those documents could of course exist. As far as we know, there's no way at the present time that any such thing can be known.


32 comments:

  1. “The National Archives has recovered well over 300 documents with classified markings.”

    Thanks.

    We knew this a week ago, as reported in the New York Times:

    “Trump Had More Than 300 Classified Documents at Mar-a-Lago”

    By Maggie Haberman, Jodi Kantor, Adam Goldman and Ben Protess
    Published Aug. 22, 2022
    Updated Aug. 23, 2022

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/22/us/politics/trump-mar-a-lago-documents.html

    ReplyDelete

  2. Oh dear. The wonders of bullshit knowledge.

    ...and joys of baseless fantasies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Vladamir Putin

      Delete
    2. They are moving in on you, my scummy non friend.....

      Delete
  3. "By this time, how many such documents have been recovered? Also, how many of those documents were marked as "Top Secret?"

    At the higher ends of our journalism, statistics can seem to be boring, and statistics can be very hard."

    Counting the number of things in a category, such as Top Secret documents at Mar a Lago, is not statistics. It is not hard and it is not boring, unless you don't care about the answer to a question, such as "how many Top Secret documents were at Mar a Lago?"

    Some questions are important and others are not. Breaking the documents illegally taken by Trump into categories such as "retrieved in January" or "retrieved on June 3" or "retrieved by the FBI" is a trivial act of categorization and counting, unless you have some reason for needing to know those numbers.

    Reporters select and include numbers in their articles for specific purposes, generally to talk about specific topics. That governs which numbers they use. Somerby cannot seem to understand that different reporters have used different numbers at different points in time, because they were talking about different aspects of Trump's document-stealing behavior in a complex situation involving multiple points in time and different kinds of documents, and different people trying to retrieve the materials.

    There isn't one correct number unless you narrow the questions down to one specific question, but reporters have been talking about different aspects of what Trump did. Because people care about what Trump did, not how many documents of a specific type were at Mar a Lago, people have been talking about different numbers, not just the one that Somerby seems obsessed with.

    To illustrate, there are 365 days in most years. If reporters were talking about different days, because they are talking about many different current events happening at different points in time, would those reporters who mentioned June 10th be "correct" while all the others were wrong? Or would any other the reporters be wrong for mentioning different days from each other? By Somerby's reasoning, they would all be having a lot of trouble with time, because measuring time is hard.

    Somerby is trying to manufacture confusion in order to call reporters bad at their jobs. If anyone here is stupid enough to be confused, they will have made Somerby's day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Somerby says: "None of this means that there aren't additional classified documents somewhere at Mar-a-Lago."

    Actually, if there are still classified documents at Mar a Lago, the FBI was deficient in its search.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Copies of those documents could of course exist. As far as we know, there's no way at the present time that any such thing can be known."

    There exists tamper-resistant paper that displays the words "Unauthorized Copy" when xeroxed. You can buy it on Amazon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. High end copiers retain images of everything they are used to copy. These can be reviewed and are used at some companies to make sure that copying privileges are not being abused.

      Copies of classified documents are done under controlled circumstances, logged, numbered, and also marked as classified. If someone just copies a document on a random xerox machine, it will be obvious the result is an unauthorized copy. A foreign spy won't care. Is that why Somerby is saying that "any such thing" cannot be known instead of "only the recipient" will know?

      Somerby appears to have no sense of how serious it is that the former president may be a spy who has committed treason. And there is no way to know for sure whether that is true, according to Somerby. So, shall we assume it is not true, when there are real world consequences if that is a wrong assumption?

      Delete
    2. Whatever Trump turns out to have done is always worse than what he is suspected of doing, so far.

      Delete
  6. "On August 8, the FBI found more than twice as many documents as were handed over by Trump's lawyers on June 3. The FBI did not find more than twice as many documents as had been handed over in January and June combined."

    In my opinion, this isn't any clearer than what was said. In fact, the second sentence makes the whole paragraph more confusing. And if you don't give the exact numbers, the comparisons are worthless in terms of information value. It would be better to say that on June 3, Trump held back twice as many documents than he turned over. He provided only a small portion of his total of documents in January when he was asked to return everything he had taken.

    The exact numbers of documents are less important at this point in the affidavit, where Trump's actions are the focus. When Trump goes to trial, exact numbers of documents in various categories, retrieved on different dates, will be part of the evidence against him. Until then, no one reading a news report needs to have an exact accounting. It is sufficient to understand that Trump broke the law in an egregious manner.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Does Somerby think that if the number of total documents is well over 200 instead of well over 300, it makes any difference at all in the seriousness of Trump's actions?

    If it makes no difference, why is Somerby fixated on such numbers as an indicator of journalistic skill vs malfeasance? These are not part of the substance of any report -- the facts of Trump's actions are what matter in such reports.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Somerby as a child:

    "You said we were going for ice cream at 5 pm and it is now 5:03! You are such a liar! I hate you, I hate you."

    ReplyDelete
  9. There are other important documents that were in Trump's possession but not highly classified, such as the love letter from Kim and the letter from Obama. Do these documents not matter because they aren't in Somerby's tally?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Whatever the number, which can be assumed to be zero of any importance, it won't be enough to vote for Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. …because of their calls for equality for black people.

      There you go 3:10, I finished the rest of your comment.
      You’re welcome.

      Delete
    2. Why, let's be fair: we feel that their endless bullshit "calls for equality for black people" and all the rest of their obnoxious virtue signaling is a huge turn-off as well.

      Delete
    3. Now that ivanka blew the whistle on the old man to the FBI, the odds of Trump getting to fuck her are lower than the unemployment rate.

      Delete
    4. Face it. More children have been harmed by Matt Gaetz, than by abortions.

      Delete
    5. To be fair the droning, teenage cries of RAYSISSST are indeed annoying conceptually, but also entirely ineffective because they no longer register with grown-ups.

      Delete
    6. If they don’t register, why do you guys keep complaining about them?

      Delete

  11. ...by the way: should we assume that The Commander's role in THE 1/6 INSURRECTION that was worse than the Civil War, Pearl Harbor, and Hiroshima combined is all forgotten now?

    Are pieces of paper with words printed on them the BOMBSHELL of the day? Is that right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doesn't matter. The Right loves Trump's bigotry with all of their heart.
      If you can't understand it, think about how much your Establishment bosses love tax breaks.

      Delete
    2. Nobody had to make Right-wing snowflakes throw a childish temper tantrum just because black peoples votes counted in the 2020 Presidential election. Unless you count the Voting rights Act of 1965 "somebody".

      Delete
    3. buT tHe PapErs hAd top SECREt tyPED in BiG REd LeTteRs!
      Democrats of all ages think like children.

      Delete
    4. Mao thinks Hiroshima was a disaster for the United States.

      Maybe he’s right.

      Delete
  12. Look at the kind of troll Somerby is attracting now. That should tell him all he needs to know about who likes his blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. =begin quote "Look at the kind of troll Somerby is attracting now. That should tell him all he needs to know about who likes his blog" quote end= Exactly, Anonymous @ 1846 hours. Even a broken clock is right once or twice a day. How is someone or somebot 100% negative 100% of the time? Also, they clearly hate equality, which is not some request everyone be redistribute wealth. We just ask that you don't shoot up a Buffalo grocery store or a school in Uvalde because lives of color don't matter and WHITE is a color too. Black lives don't matter, Blue lives matter... until it is time to Defund the FBI.

      Delete
    3. White is a neutral. So is black.

      Delete
    4. White is the absence of color.

      Delete
  13. Police said the victim was stabbed 137 times, but the doctors only counted 129 stab wounds, so maybe it isn't murder after all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exsqueeze us, dear dembot, but who's the victim?

      Delete