Established legal procedures and protections should never be compromised in the name of some misguided and disingenuous notion of “transparency.”
No. The release of the affidavit used to obtain the Mar-a-Lago search warrant should not be released. That would violate every principle that our legal system is bound to follow in protecting evidence, protecting witnesses and, yes, protecting the rights of the accused.
So why would we deviate from those standards this time? Because of the sensational and politically-charged nature of the case? Simply because it involves a former president of the United States? We should not deviate. And standing firm in following our own rules of the road when the asphalt gets hot should rightly be considered a CONSERVATIVE principle.
Cultists who are demanding public disclosure of the affidavit are not seeking justice or fairness. They are merely trying to mine “leaks” of facts they can then distort to portray Trump as the “victim” of “political persecution.” Trump has been treated fairly under the law, and the search was conducted completely by the book.
Texas Republican Congressman Dan Crenshaw was appallingly dishonest in his appearances on Sunday morning’s news shows. Crenshaw maintained that there were other means short of a search available to regain government possession of these government documents. Crenshaw essentially said, “All they had to do was ask,” to get the documents back. The government did ask. Repeatedly. For more than a year. Nothing short of legally obtaining a warrant and legally conducting a search was going to recover those documents.
Everybody is going to find out what this is all about in the properly established sequence—probable cause of crimes, investigation, indictment, trial and verdict.
Keep in mind that Judge Reinhart has signed off on the factual validity of the affidavit and the need for conducting the search.
A crime was committed. Those documents were mishandled. There is incontrovertible physical evidence. Now we are trying to establish the level, severity and impact of that crime.
Judge Reinhardt is a reasonable and prudent adjudicator. He has pledged to review a redacted version of the affidavit to determine if there is information that can be safely and legally released. But he also has indicated that required levels of redaction would likely result only in a piece of paper with nothing on it other than black marker streaks. That’s not “transparency.” That’s a circus.
Dr. Anthony Fauci will leave his government positions in December after almost four decades of service. He has displayed remarkable grace and equanimity. Fortunately for America, the 81-year-old Dr. Fauci says he is not retiring and will “continue to advance science and public health.
