“I think that opinion was wrong. I think the government should appeal. It’s seriously flawed in many ways,” Barr told Fox on Tuesday.
It was the second time in just days that the former Attorney General has joined the conservative-favorite network to smack Trump in the controversy. And his remarks are the next critical step in this high-stakes legal process — the search for a third-party official to act as a “special master,” and the external oversight of the Justice Department’s decision on whether to appeal. has been added to the vortex of interest. Cannon’s ruling risks further delays in the investigation.
Barr’s candor has three main consequences. First, such comments by longtime political and legal conservatives are not only Cannon’s legal grounds, but also the fact that Monday’s ruling has given Trump several big wins to the presidency he has appointed her to. It adds credibility to the growing question of whether it was motivated by the loyalty of
Second, his comments would renew intrigues about his personal transformation. From, to one of the former president’s most ardent critics. It is debatable whether this is true or is simply true based on the facts.
Third, recent criticism of Mr. Barr’s former boss, including that he was wrong about having classified information on Mar-a-Lago, has drawn new broad ground from the former president and his supporters. Barr chuckles when he tells Fox that Trump’s definition of RINO (a Republican in name only) is someone who doesn’t believe the election was stolen. so i don’t mind.
The Justice Department’s Dilemma
Barr’s criticisms add to those of many legal experts regarding the quality and potential consequences of Cannon’s legal opinion.
After calling Trump’s demands for a “special master” a “red herring” last week, Barr claimed Tuesday that the groundwork for a lawsuit against Trump and those around him in Florida was already set.
“The government has very strong evidence of what it really needs to determine whether prosecution is appropriate. It’s been a while,” Burr told Fox.
“And there’s some evidence to suggest they were duped, and it doesn’t really have anything to do with the content of the documents. It’s the fact that the documents were there, the fact that they were classified.” , related to the fact that they were summoned and never delivered.”
Granting the special master’s request, a measure fiercely opposed by the Justice Department, is a grave and complicated issue for prosecutors. An investigation into the damage was allowed to continue.
The relatively mundane task of finding civil servants who can fill the role will be difficult. Because Trump’s characteristic emotional response to the filing of the lawsuit and its complexity suggests that agreement between the parties may be near impossible. Second, given the high sensitivity of some materials, the concerned party must obtain top security her clearance, further narrowing the pool of candidates. And officials must brave the tide of abuse that could be thrown at them by the former president, who branded FBI agents “vicious monsters” in the wake of Saturday night’s inflammatory campaign. must.
The Special Master’s role is complicated by the vague mandates given to him so far by Canon. It has not been.
At first glance, the former president has no established right to make such claims, especially over classified material outside the White House. But it’s an issue Trump himself may seek to challenge in court, as part of his frequent strategy to delay accountability.
The same issues weigh heavily on DOJ’s dilemma over whether to appeal Cannon’s decision. Many legal scholars say her reasoning that Trump, as former president, is at greater risk of reputational damage than ordinary Americans appears to be creating an entirely new category of citizenship under the law. It also provided the opportunity for defense attorneys in unrelated litigation to argue that, therefore, the defendant should have special mastery rights.
So while the DOJ may be obligated to appeal, such a move could push the Mar-a-Lago case into a lengthy series of court challenges that could take months. Yes, the investigation may be further delayed.
New York University law professor Ryan Goodman told CNN’s Erin Barnett Tuesday night that the Justice Department should at least urgently lift the injunction over the use of materials stolen from Trump’s home.
How Trump has politicized the judiciary
Her opinion on Monday appeared to at times echo conservative criticism of the Justice Department — including the question of whether Trump was reputationally tarnished by the probe. wrote that the “integrity of the orderly process” must be ensured.
But at the same time, the leftist idea that Cannon was nothing more than a hack and had to act to defend Trump’s political interests shows a slippery slope since Cannon was appointed by him. Most judges are appointed by the president, so they all face similar charges. If the judicial system continues to be politicized, it will be almost impossible under these circumstances for politicians to face true justice for what they see as lawlessness.
Of course, this politicization of the legal system has been perpetuated by Trump. Chief Justice John Roberts once issued a special statement reminding Trump during his presidency that there were no Trump Justices, no Obama Justices, no Bush Justices, no Clinton Justices, and instead an independent judicial system. announced. The statement released in 2018 followed one of the then-president’s frequent allegations that judges appointed by his predecessor were biased against him.
So if Cannon is unfairly slandered for what appears to be political bias, she is the victim of a trend that stems from the president who appointed her.