By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist |
August 9, 2022 at 10:03 a.m. EDT
Not much is known about the FBI’s search of Donald Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago on Monday. But one thing has been made clear enough: The Justice Department has no qualms about criminally investigating the defeated former president.
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates
The Post reported, “Former president Donald Trump said Monday that the FBI had raided his Mar-a-Lago Club and searched his safe — activity related to an investigation into the potential mishandling of classified documents, according to two people familiar with the probe.” It might be that Trump’s retention of documents now is considered to pose a serious national security threat. The raid might also be related to other potential crimes. It all depends on what the documents show.
In any event, a search warrant requires two things: probable cause and a judge to sign off on it. In other words, a judge needs to determine there is probable cause a crime has been committed and that the raid will turn up evidence of that crime. While it is always possible the crime at issue might have been committed by someone other than Trump, prosecutors say this is rarely the case. After all, if the documents are not about a person’s own wrongdoing, the FBI would simply ask that person to produce the documents or a grand jury would subpoena them.
And that brings us to the next point: Since Trump’s attorneys are reportedly in discussion with the Justice Department regarding the Jan. 6 investigation, the department’s attorneys must have determined a simple request to Trump or his attorneys might have resulted in destruction of evidence. Again, this concern would strongly suggest the subject of the raid is Trump and that the documents are of great importance.
Certainly, this is no ordinary warrant. In executing a warrant on a former president, approval from the deputy attorney general, if not the attorney general himself, would have been required. Remember that Attorney General Merrick Garland recently affirmed his predecessor’s policy requiring the “attorney general to sign off on investigations involving presidential candidates and their staff.” That policy is in place specifically so that no FBI agent or U.S. attorney goes off half-cocked and pursues a candidate or would-be candidate.
Garland’s well-known caution and determination to play by the book suggest he would not authorize a move this dramatic unless there is a very good reason to seek the evidence. And that’s why I find it hard to believe this has nothing whatsoever to do with the Jan. 6 investigation. Garland surely would not take such a momentous step if he were not looking at a serious crime.
The warrant’s execution should dispel any doubt that Garland is shying away from a Trump investigation and, if the facts and law indicate, prosecution. In addition, the over-the-top reaction from Trump and the chorus of Republicans expressing horror that a warrant should be served on a former president underscore how anxious Trump must be and how quickly he puts the call out to his docile party members for reinforcement. (They don’t all spontaneously put out similar messaging without prompting.) It also highlights how utterly incapable the GOP is to get off the Trump train. (Really, Republicans are willing to nominate someone for whom there is probable cause to believe he is implicated in a crime?)
Trump and his cronies might be surprised that the rule of law actually applies to former presidents. Trump never seemed to grasp the concept that the law restrains him in any fashion. For the more sober-minded Republicans, the search warrant should be yet another sign that this will not end well for the former president and his underlings.
Columnist |
August 9, 2022 at 10:03 a.m. EDT
Not much is known about the FBI’s search of Donald Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago on Monday. But one thing has been made clear enough: The Justice Department has no qualms about criminally investigating the defeated former president.
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates
The Post reported, “Former president Donald Trump said Monday that the FBI had raided his Mar-a-Lago Club and searched his safe — activity related to an investigation into the potential mishandling of classified documents, according to two people familiar with the probe.” It might be that Trump’s retention of documents now is considered to pose a serious national security threat. The raid might also be related to other potential crimes. It all depends on what the documents show.
In any event, a search warrant requires two things: probable cause and a judge to sign off on it. In other words, a judge needs to determine there is probable cause a crime has been committed and that the raid will turn up evidence of that crime. While it is always possible the crime at issue might have been committed by someone other than Trump, prosecutors say this is rarely the case. After all, if the documents are not about a person’s own wrongdoing, the FBI would simply ask that person to produce the documents or a grand jury would subpoena them.
And that brings us to the next point: Since Trump’s attorneys are reportedly in discussion with the Justice Department regarding the Jan. 6 investigation, the department’s attorneys must have determined a simple request to Trump or his attorneys might have resulted in destruction of evidence. Again, this concern would strongly suggest the subject of the raid is Trump and that the documents are of great importance.
Certainly, this is no ordinary warrant. In executing a warrant on a former president, approval from the deputy attorney general, if not the attorney general himself, would have been required. Remember that Attorney General Merrick Garland recently affirmed his predecessor’s policy requiring the “attorney general to sign off on investigations involving presidential candidates and their staff.” That policy is in place specifically so that no FBI agent or U.S. attorney goes off half-cocked and pursues a candidate or would-be candidate.
Garland’s well-known caution and determination to play by the book suggest he would not authorize a move this dramatic unless there is a very good reason to seek the evidence. And that’s why I find it hard to believe this has nothing whatsoever to do with the Jan. 6 investigation. Garland surely would not take such a momentous step if he were not looking at a serious crime.
The warrant’s execution should dispel any doubt that Garland is shying away from a Trump investigation and, if the facts and law indicate, prosecution. In addition, the over-the-top reaction from Trump and the chorus of Republicans expressing horror that a warrant should be served on a former president underscore how anxious Trump must be and how quickly he puts the call out to his docile party members for reinforcement. (They don’t all spontaneously put out similar messaging without prompting.) It also highlights how utterly incapable the GOP is to get off the Trump train. (Really, Republicans are willing to nominate someone for whom there is probable cause to believe he is implicated in a crime?)
Trump and his cronies might be surprised that the rule of law actually applies to former presidents. Trump never seemed to grasp the concept that the law restrains him in any fashion. For the more sober-minded Republicans, the search warrant should be yet another sign that this will not end well for the former president and his underlings.
