On April 8, 2022, the FBI executed a search warrant on former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence. With merely 91 days until the midterm elections, it is incumbent on Attorney General Garland to provide the country with immediate answers. Every day spent in a season of speculation adds to the growing claims that the search was politically motivated. As a lawyer, former federal prosecutor, and current member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have questions:
1. Did Attorney General Merrick Garland personally sign off on this action?
2. Why break into the safe at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home rather than seize it, take it into custody, and seek a warrant to open it?
TRUMP TARGETED BY BIDEN ADMINISTRATION, AND THEY CAN DO IT TO YOU, TOO
3. Why execute a search warrant rather than seek the items through an informal process such as a subpoena?
4. If this is genuinely about presidential records, why would the former President — who was in charge of declassifying documents — be subject to prosecution for retaining custody of the same documents? It's important to note that classification authority belongs to the president of the United States — NOT to bureaucrats at the National Archives.
FBI'S RAID OF TRUMP'S MAR-A-LAGO HOME WON'T HELP DEMOCRATS IN 2024
5. If this is the product of the growing political weaponization of federal law enforcement agencies, shouldn't all Americans be outraged by the Democrats' plan to hire an additional 87,000 federal agents?
6. How is this aggressive action defensible in light of the FBI's and DOJ's treatment of Hillary Clinton, who was never subjected to such an invasive intrusion of privacy, even though she mishandled classified material and destroyed evidence?
CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINION NEWSLETTER
7. Why should we assume that the federal bureaucracy isn't targeting Republicans when the FBI and DOJ have taken no action regarding flagrant violations of the law by pro-abortion extremists threatening Supreme Court justices at their homes?
8. Did FBI Director Christopher Wray intentionally wait to carry out the raid until after his oversight hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee last week? I asked him whether he was concerned with warrantless "backdoor searches" under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He seemed unperturbed.
I sure hope those at the FBI have dotted their i's and crossed their t's. If there’s something we don't know, something that will clarify the reasons for the raid, then the FBI needs to articulate that justification soon as possible. If there isn't, we've got problems at the FBI.
Federal agents have never searched a former president's private residence. There has been a lot of talk in the political ether of "crossing the Rubicon." No doubt, this sets a dangerous precedent. One that could lead to political weaponization of the federal bureaucracy, the likes of which were once limited to banana republics such as Venezuela.
This unprecedented raid demands an unprecedented explanation. Otherwise, I fear they may be no way to put Pandora back in her box.
