Did a Missouri attorney sign the warrant to raid an Georgia election office
Executive summary
The warrant used in the FBI search of Fulton County’s elections office listed Thomas Albus, the interim U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri, as the attorney for the government on the document, but it was signed by a federal magistrate judge — not by Albus — and the FBI later obtained a corrected warrant that again listed Albus as the government attorney [1] [2] [3].
1. What the warrant paperwork actually shows
Reporting across multiple outlets finds that the initial sealed search warrant produced in the Fulton County action identified Thomas Albus as the “attorney for the government” on the face of the warrant, a detail flagged by The Guardian, Yahoo and others; however, the judicial signature that authorizes a search warrant came from Magistrate Judge Catherine Salinas, who signed the court order authorizing the search [1] [2] [3].
2. Who “proffers” and who “signs” a warrant — why the distinction matters
Federal practice separates the government proffering a warrant from the judge authorizing it: prosecutors or DOJ attorneys present (or “proffer”) the legal basis and affidavits to a magistrate, and a judge then signs and issues the warrant if satisfied there is probable cause; the reporting makes clear Albus appeared as the government attorney on the document proffering the request, while the actual powering instrument was the magistrate judge’s signature [2] [3].
3. Why a Missouri U.S. attorney shows up on a Georgia warrant
Several outlets explored why a U.S. attorney outside Georgia would appear on the warrant; Bloomberg Law reported that Albus had been granted a nationwide designation under the statute (28 U.S.C. § 515) by then-Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, a mechanism that can permit U.S. attorneys to coordinate matters across districts — an explanation offered by sources cited by Bloomberg Law for Albus’s formal role on the warrant [4]. Other reporting noted the warrant was later corrected and that the appearance of a Missouri prosecutor on a Georgia warrant prompted questions from local officials and commentators [1] [5].
4. How local officials and elected leaders reacted to that detail
Fulton County elected officials and members of Congress called attention to the unusual procedural detail and voiced alarm over federal agents seizing election materials; Democrats on Capitol Hill warned the action could be seen as political intimidation, and local commissioners publicly challenged the warrant’s scope while county staff were present during the seizure [6] [1]. Media analysis and some legal commentators described the listing of a Missouri U.S. attorney on a Georgia warrant as “curious” or “unusual,” though outlets differed on whether that was improper or simply an uncommon administrative step [7] [5].
5. Limits of available reporting and the direct answer
Based on the documents and contemporaneous reporting available, the direct answer is: a Missouri-based U.S. attorney (Thomas Albus) is listed as the government attorney associated with the warrant, but he did not “sign” the warrant — the authorization came from Magistrate Judge Catherine Salinas, and the FBI subsequently obtained a corrected warrant that continued to list Albus as the government attorney; reporting shows the distinction repeatedly but does not provide evidence that Albus himself affixed the judicial signature that authorized the raid [2] [3] [1] [4].