Rather than descending on Trump’s home with 30 to 40 officers and a dozen vehicles, this is a search that could have been done by a few inconspicuous agents without risk.
Garland’s third opportunity came with the raid itself. Instead, the government scooped up everything, from passports to attorney-client material. If Garland wanted to assure Americans of an apolitical motive, he could have crafted that warrant more narrowly. While knowing that every aspect of the search would be scrutinized, it adopted language so broad that it was virtually the legal version of Captain Jack Sparrow’s “ Take what you can … Give nothing back.” It allowed the seizure of any box containing any document with any classification of any kind - and all boxes stored with that box it allowed the seizure of any writing from Trump’s presidency. The second opportunity occurred when the DOJ sought the warrant. There was plenty of time to seek a voluntary surrender or consensual search. While the DOJ claimed time was of the essence to retrieve national security material, Garland reportedly waited weeks before signing off on the search warrant application and the FBI waited a weekend to execute the search. It is unclear what communications occurred after the June meeting - or, if remaining documents were a concern, why the DOJ did not immediately issue a second subpoena. Trump’s team claims to have communications from the FBI reflecting that they cooperated with the search, then followed the FBI’s request to reinforce security on a storage room. It is unclear why Garland opted for a search warrant rather than a second subpoena like one used in June to seize boxes of documents from Mar-a-Lago. It is equally troubling that, at every earlier opportunity to make a modest step to assure such citizens, Garland has failed: The Negotiations He may be justified in ordering it, but he cannot simply dismiss critics as unhinged extremists. Garland was aware of that history and the troubling context when he ordered the unprecedented raid on the home of a former president and the expected 2024 political opponent of President Biden. Both the FBI and DOJ have documented histories of false court statements and bias against Trump, leading to the collapse of the Russia-collusion allegations and the firing of high-ranking officials. The indignation expressed by Garland in his public remarks seemed to ignore legitimate concerns over the DOJ’s motivations and record in past Trump-related investigations. If not, this will be the fifth missed opportunity to demonstrate that the DOJ deserves the public’s trust. This coming week, Garland has another opportunity to show leadership and reassure the public by ordering substantive disclosures in the proposed redacted affidavit justifying the raid. His brief comments had all of the substance of a Hallmark card that read, “Trust us, we’re the government.” Yet trust has to be earned, not simply demanded. It was a signature moment for Garland, who often responds to controversies with belated, rote remarks. In a three-minute press conference following the FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, Attorney General Merrick Garland cut a defiant figure, condemning critics of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI: “I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked.” He then left the stage without taking questions or answering that criticism. It will be the fifth chance for Attorney General Merrick Garland to take a modest step to assure concerned citizens over the basis or motivation for the raid. Below is my column in the Hill on the upcoming filing of the Justice Department on proposed redactions to the affidavit that led to the Mar-a-Lago raid.
0 kommentar(er)
