The US Department of Justice ignited political gunpowder Monday with a simple search. It was at the home of former President Donald Trump in Mar-A-Lago, Florida. “Nothing like this has ever happened to a president of the United States,” Trump wrote in a statement, which historically savvy US media experts agreed with.
The flaming rhetoric of Trump’s statement publicizing the judicial action — “political persecution, witch hunt” — was immediately adopted by many of his party members. Republican leader in the United States House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, wrote on Twitter: “I’ve seen enough. The Justice Department has reached an intolerable degree of politicization.” Trump linked the search to his political ambitions. He has been toying with the suggestion for months that he wants to run for a third time in the presidential elections in 2024. A criminal investigation, let alone a conviction, would hang like a dark cloud over the election campaign. “Because they see the candidates I support win big, because they see how much I dominate the polls, they try to stop me.”
Justice Minister Merrick Garland is the target of all that outrage. Speaking to TV channel MSNBC, former chief prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg said it was inconceivable that the FBI would conduct such a startling search without the secretary’s prior approval. Garland was nominated for the Supreme Court by then-President Obama in 2016, but Republicans refused to nominate him at the time.
Various studies
Until recently, Garland was portrayed by progressive Americans as too indecisive when it comes to prosecuting Trump. However, in recent weeks there have been reports of various criminal investigations into the former president – that too is without historical precedent.
TV channel CNN reported Trump lawyers are in talks with the Justice Department. It would concern the investigation into the storming of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. At the time, White House leaders would have been subpoenaed by Justice to testify. Georgia is under criminal investigation into Trump’s unsuccessful attempt to turn the election results in his favor.
It is not possible to say with certainty which judicial investigation Monday’s search is related to. It is common ground that the FBI must have convinced a judge that the search could provide evidence of criminal offences. Otherwise, the judge would not have signed a search warrant.
Sources with knowledge of the judicial investigation told several media that the federal police were looking for confidential state documents. Trump is said to have taken it to his own home after he had to leave the White House on January 20, 2021 as the election loser. Under the Presidential Records Act, a outgoing president must turn over documents from his term to the National Archives .
Earlier this year, the archive seized 15 boxes of documents from the White House at Trump’s home under threat of legal action. It also included confidential documents. Fox News reported Monday night that the FBI carried another 15 boxes from Trump’s home that day.
Unnecessary and inappropriate
Trump wrote in his statement that he has always cooperated with “the relevant government agencies” in the various investigations pending against him. “This unannounced raid on my home was unnecessary and inappropriate.” The fact that the transfer of the possibly illegally taken documents could not easily be arranged by means of a court order seems to indicate that this comment about cooperation is incorrect. Trump has previously tried with all his might to prevent the parliamentary committee investigating events on and around January 6 from getting hold of documents from the White House during that period. The Supreme Court, also in the predominantly conservative composition with three judges appointed by Trump, ruled against the former president. This search may mean that the judiciary has no confidence in the degree of cooperation from Trump.
According to American media, the secret service who is still protecting the former president, but has been informed of the action in advance by the FBI. Trump used the word in his statement raid for the search, “raid,” and “siege” by “a large group of FBI agents.” “They even looked in my safe.”
Even if the current search was again ordered by the archives, the seized material may also prove relevant in other investigations. According to former public prosecutor Rosenberg, the judiciary is free to use evidence that she finds during a search in any criminal prosecution.
The irony of the situation did not escape the American media. During his 2016 election campaign, Trump made his rival Hillary Clinton suspicious because the FBI was investigating her use of a private server on which she had stored mails containing confidential state documents. At Trump’s election rallies, his supporters chanted ‘Lock it up‘ — and they still do whenever Clinton’s name is mentioned. Although several investigations determined that the private server did indeed contain confidential state information, the Justice Department declined criminal charges because it could find no convincing evidence that Clinton had done this “systematically and willfully.”
Trump himself also referred to Clinton and her private server in his statement. “She was allowed to destroy and wash away 33,000 emails with acid AFTER Congress claimed them. Nothing has been done to hold her accountable. She also took antique furniture and other items from the White House.”