Let's wait for the affidavit, besides, the GSA were the ones that packed up the boxes and sent them to Trump's residence. The boxes were locked up in the basement. Trump had been cooperating in February and June of this year. Do you really think that Trump had any idea what was in those multitude of boxes or perhaps you lefties would be thinking that he taped incriminating evidence related to J6 in Melania's Jovani gown?

According to the search warrant, it was signed and approved by the court on August 5, 2022 and any authorized law enforcement officer was commanded to execute the warrant on or before August 19, 2022. The search was actually carried out on August 11, 2022.
If this was such a National Security Risk, then:

1) Why did the Magistrate Judge give any law enforcement officer (the FBI) 14 days to execute the warrant?
2) Why did the FBI wait 6 days after the warrant was signed and approved to execute the warrant?
We need to see the affidavit to shed some light on these questions

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22131458-show_temp-1

Amendment IV, US Constitution
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrant shall issue,
but upon probable cause, supported by Oath of affirmation, and particularly describing
the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Probable cause: The officer should give reasonable information to support the possibility that the evidence of illegality will be found. Such information may come from the officer’ personal observations or that of an informant. If the warrant lacks accurate information as to what will be searched, the search is unlawful. See Groh v. Ramirez, 540 U.S. 551 (2004).

Particularity: The warrant should describe the place to be searched with particularity. The requirement that warrants shall particularly describe the things to be seized makes general searches under them impossible and prevents the seizure of one thing under a warrant describing another. As to what is to be taken, nothing is left to the discretion of the officer executing the warrant.” This requirement thus acts to limit the scope of the search, as the executing officers should be limited to looking in places where the described object could be expected to be found. The purpose of the particularity requirement extends beyond prevention of general searches; it also assures the person whose property is being searched of the lawful authority of the executing officer and of the limits of his power to search. It follows, therefore, that the warrant itself must describe with particularity the items to be seized, or that such itemization must appear in documents incorporated by reference in the warrant and actually shown to the person whose property is to be searched. United States v. Grubbs, 547 U.S. 90 (2006).

Required authorization: Signed by a “neutral and detached” magistrate or judge. See Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 (1971).
Bruce Reinhart is the federal judge who approved the warrant that allowed FBI agents to raid Trump's south Florida resort. A look at judge Reinhart's history as an attorney and magistrate judge is revealing.
Reinhart donated big bucks to Obama's campaign, and before taking the bench, Reinhart worked in private practice for 10 years after serving as an assistant U.S. attorney in South Florida from 1996 to 2008.

According to the Miami Herald, Reinhart abruptly left the U.S. attorney's office on Jan. 1, 2008. By the next day, he was representing key Epstein employees.

Importantly, Reinhart worked in the same U.S. attorney's office that was at the time prosecuting Epstein for sexual crimes against children. That office cut Epstein a sweetheart deal that allowed him to plead guilty to lesser state charges, and he essentially avoided serving any time in jail.

For his part, Reinhart denied that he ever represented Epstein himself. But he admitted to representing Epstein's employees, including his pilots, "his scheduler, Sarah Kellen; and Nadia Marcinkova, described by some victims as Epstein’s sex s***e," the Herald reported in 2018.

In 2011, Reinhart was named in the Crime Victims’ Rights Act lawsuit, which accused him of violating Justice Department policies by switching sides, implying that he leveraged inside information about Epstein’s investigation to curry favor with Epstein. Reinhart, in a sworn declaration attached to the CVRA case, denied the allegation, saying he did not participate in Epstein’s criminal case and “never learned any confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter.’’

Questions:

Why do the exact details of the warrant remain under government seal?
Does the warrant meet the legal and constitutional requirements for:
* probable cause (there is a difference between probable cause and suspicion),
* particularity of persons or property to be seized,
* and for authorization by a "neutral and detached" (impartial) magistrate?
Did the petitioners for the warrant have probable cause to determine there was incriminating evidence in Trump's private safe, or was it mere suspicion that prompted FBI agents to break into the safe?
Why are FBI agents indiscriminately seizing boxes, cartons, cases, documents, luggage, and other materials
without examining the contents to determine if they meet all the requirements for probable cause and particularity before removing them from Trump's private home?
What possible reason exists for FBI agents to rifle through Melania's closets and wardrobe? Was it probable cause or mere suspicion?

A blanket search warrant is a broad authorization from a judge that allows the police to search multiple areas for evidence without specifying exactly what they are looking for and seize everything found.
The Fourth Amendment provides that “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Accordingly, in Stanford v. Texas the Supreme Court asserted that this Constitutional requirement protects against “the use of general warrants as instruments of oppression. Therefore, blanket search warrants are unconstitutional, and all evidence obtained under the blanket warrant must be excluded from the trial of the defendant.

We have long known the DOJ and its LE arm, the FBI, are politically corrupted bureaucracies not bound by our Constitution or the Rule of Law.

The raid on Mara-a-Lago is nothing more than a continuation of the democrat socialist "Witch Hunt".
The b***hes are hell bent on removing Donald Trump and anything and anyone even remotely associated with him from the face of the earth, and that includes the Americans who support him.

Constitutional lawyer Alan Dershowitz has described the raid as "unconstitutional" and "absolutely outrageous."

First you don’t represent the entire right anymore than I have right to say I represent all lefties, I represent my thoughts based on what I read, hear, validate with viable sources and back up with facts from reliable sources. Do I have what you call TDS-absolutely. Do I appreciate your name calling-absolutely not. Am I going away, not at this time. Why am I an as you say TDS- a little history, I v**ed for Trump in 2016, felt US Govt needed change and a businessman could make that change happen. Within 2-1 1:2 years in office Trumps actions made me understand Trump better, I was able to see through his Cons, manipulation and demeaning of others, especially anyone that disagreed with him, whistleblowers, Vets, handicapped, minorities. His ego, poor listening sk**ls( of own staff, family) became evident. He is not being targeted, his bad actions generate investigation and accountability. Summary-Trumps actions drove me to be TDS. The diminishing number of Anti-TDS people in Republican Party and or his conviction for one or more crimes will be interesting to follow. Most of my opinions are supported by facts. One or two folks here also show facts the rest just challenge my factual statements with denial opinions but few supporting facts to counter and discuss. My post that showed Trump told most lies, documented fact(over 300 times more than any other President), indictments of staff( highest of any president by 10x); hand selected staff turnover(highest by far of any other Presidents) -Kayleigh McEnany recently quoted as saying that Trump did not do well vetting staff candidates, J6 stuff is data quotes from people under oath( mostly Republicans). Please show me your facts that counter the ones I just provided. I’m not trying to change people views as much as trying to have civil discussions and then form my opinions. Give you a recent one:Biden is giving USA aid funds to foreign countries :2016-$49B budget, 17-$47.9B, 18-$46.9B, 19-$48.18B, 20-$51B, 21-$41B, 22-$60.4. Have to look at it more it’s about 1% of total US budget. C***d, war in Ukraine and support of c*****e c****e initiatives seem to be major generator of increase’s-approved by Congress. Right will say it’s all right driven. I’m still cking. Large increase I wasn’t aware of. All started by someone stating Biden is giving away farm on US aid. Will do some more digging. This is factual data from Govt. Database. I may just ask Congressman or WH why and what’s being done to get back to $59B or less level.

Ok got it Trump is squeaky clean: most lies by any former President while in office, highest turnover of P**********l ( hand selected) staff, most indictments by over ten times of any P**********l staff, most open criminal investigations of any former President, first President not to timely concede e******n and allow for peaceful t******r of p***r. Its quite a trend of firsts. It’s not political, it’s not targeting, it’s Trump! Time will tell on prosecutions(many staff & capital protesters have been convicted). He’s like the Al Capone of DC. I’ve heard it said “You are the company you keep.” No deflecting to Hillary, Obama , Nixon, Biden they are not close, this is a record breaking track record that hopefully will never be beat.