At his Thursday press conference Attorney General Garland added very little to what we already knew about the FBI and the Trump raid
AG Garland should be treading very carefully: John Yoo
Former Justice Thomas law clerk John Yoo and Former assistant US attorney Andy McCarthy weigh in on the latest from the FBI raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate on 'Your World.'
Attorney General MerricGarlandk proved Thursday that he is better at starting a fire than at putting one out. Earlier this week, the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) executed a warrant, in search of evidence of a crime, of a former president’s home.
This in itself was without precedent in all of American history. Presidents who have risked impeachment or close, such as Andrew Jackson, Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton, never suffered such a search. In fact, DOJ prosecutors have never indicted a former president with a federal crime. That the former president is Donald J. Trump only multiplied the inevitable controversy.
While DOJ remained silent, consistent with Department policy not to comment on ongoing investigations, Trump loudly attacked the FBI for violating his constitutional rights, failing to apply the law equally, and persecuting him for political purposes.
At Thursday’s press conference, Garland did nothing to address the serious questions surrounding the search. While he admitted to authorizing the search, he correctly observed that a federal court had approved the constitutionality of the warrant and that federal rules prevent him from disclosing anything more.
He announced that DOJ would ask the Florida federal court to unseal the warrant and the inventory of things seized, though he left out the critical affidavit used to justify the need for a search warrant. In other words, Garland added virtually nothing to what is already known.
This stance will frustrate the media and the public, though it is consistent with federal rules that make many search warrant materials secret out of concern for the privacy of the target (who in this case should want all information public), to protect confidential sources, and to keep secret the course of the investigation. This is all standard practice — if the target were a normal target.
Under the Constitution and federal rules, a court cannot issue a search warrant unless probable cause exists that evidence will be found of a crime.
(In this case, they didn't have any evidence so they issued the warrant so the FBI could go look for evidence so that Trump CAN be charged with a crime.)
NOT HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK !!
NOT HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK !!
No comments:
Post a Comment