Trump Administration Refuses to Turn Over Mar-A-Lago Records

After saying it would release a list of visitors to the “Winter White House,” the administration broke its promise.

AP Photo/Lynne Sladky

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

A watchdog group is threatening to renew a legal fight against the Trump administration following the White House’s decision Friday to withhold the names of thousands of people who have visited the president’s exclusive Florida club since January.

Back in July, after Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington first filed a lawsuit to obtain the Mar-A-Lago records, the administration seemed surprisingly agreeable, voluntarily promising to release something by September 8. That deadline was pushed back at the last minute, but at noon on Friday, the administration turned over its list of visitors: There were just 22 names, all of them members of the Japanese prime minister’s entourage. CREW and other ethics experts immediately cried foul.

At issue is the fact that the US Secret Service keeps careful track of everyone who enters the Mar-A-Lago club, dubbed the “Winter White House” by the administration. Trump has stayed there dozens of nights since he took office, holding court in the public areas, greeting members (who pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in initiation and membership fees), and crashing weddings in the rented-out ballroom. The Secret Service keeps a similar set of records for visitors to the actual White House—a set of names that the Obama administration released regularly, but which the Trump administration so far has not. In January, watchdogs filed a Freedom of Information request for the Secret Service records, and then in April, CREW filed a subsequent lawsuit demanding that the Secret Service respond to the FOIA the way the Obama administration had. In July, the administration agreed that it would, at least, release any records that were “responsive” to CREW’s request.

After the agreement was made, the federal judge in the case issued an order requiring the release. 

Under FOIA, some records are exempt from being made public. In this case, it turns out, the administration’s opinion is that all the records are exempt from disclosure except for the names of the Japanese prime minister’s entourage. Despite the fact that other foreign leaders—as well as thousands of club members, guests, and event attendees—visited the club, no other names were released today.

The list of the 22 names that were released can be read here

CREW executive director Noah Bookbinder on Friday called the administration’s earlier promise misleading and said the release was an intentional insult to transparency efforts.

“The government seriously misrepresented their intentions to both us and the court,” Bookbinder said in a statement. “This was spitting in the eye of transparency. We will be fighting this in court.”

CREW will challenge the decision to release only 22 names in further litigation, the group said in a tweet.

In the first few weeks of Trump’s presidency, Mar-A-Lago became the scene of a string of surreal moments—official business usually restricted to the secure environs of the White House was carried out casually in front of wealthy and less-than-discrete club members in public dining rooms and on patios. The most powerful man in the world wandered through well-timed wedding receptions. Club members bragged about their proximity to the nuclear football. The moments shocked security experts and infuriated transparency advocates who pointed out that this extraordinary access to the president was restricted to those who could pony up the $200,000 initiation fee (increased in the wake of Trump’s election in what would appear to be his own company’s naked effort to capitalize on his campaign victory).

Typically, the American president lives in a carefully guarded bubble. His opportunities to mingle freely are minimal, and access is severely limited. While presidents have always taken vacations, they have largely stayed away from the public eye—photos posted by Mar-A-Lago members and guests of Trump’s visits to the club were unprecedented and showed the president literally being mobbed by groups of people who surrounded him, chatting and posing for pictures. And while presidents have also regularly attended closed-door political functions with donors and supporters, those events have never occurred with the frequency of Trump’s Mar-A-Lago visits last winter and spring, nor in such close proximity to sensitive moments, such as Trump’s consultation with the Japanese prime minister over news of a North Korean missile test. 

And the ethical quandaries aren’t just limited to Mar-A-Lago—a renovated mansion that has luxurious grounds but no golf course. In CREW’s lawsuit, similar White House logs were sought, as well as logs for visitors to Trump Tower in New York City. So far, only the (extremely limited) Mar-A-Lago records have emerged. A recent investigation by USA Today showed that 50 executives who have companies with federal contracts and 21 lobbyists are members of at least one of Trump’s three private golf clubs that he has visited most often since becoming president—and two-thirds of them have played golf on days that Trump was there.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate