The Mar-a-Lago Raid: What Was It Really About?
While the “Justice” Department tries to get away with redacting essentially the entire affidavit used to get the warrant to raid Mar-a-Lago, Judicial Watch is doing an end run to glean as much information as possible from the National Archives’ communications.
As you know, JW had already filed suit against the DOJ to get them to unseal the affidavit. On Wednesday, they also filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration, demanding “all communications and materials related to its referral to the Justice Department for former President Trump’s presidential records.”
They’re requesting “all related records of communication between any official or employee of NARA, and any official or employee of the Department of Justice, and any other branch, department, agency or office of the federal government.”
I assume that would include the Biden White House. But don’t hold your breath.
Obama Paved the Way to Mar-a-Lago
The White House has granted a DOJ request to permit them to have the FBI and intelligence community examine hundreds of classified documents that Trump turned over to NARA this spring. No doubt they could hardly contain their glee as they signed off on this.
When asked on Wednesday how much advance notice he’d had of the raid on Mar-A-Lago, Biden replied, “I didn’t have any advance notice. None. Zero. Not one single bit.” And you know that’s every bit as true as his repeated claim that he never talked business with son Hunter.
John Solomon at Just the News has pieced together how a 2009 executive order by President Obama to strip previous Presidents of executive privilege paved the way for the Mar-a-Lago raid. It’s quite chilling to see how Biden’s White House counsel leveraged that executive order and the events of January 6 to formally announce this in letters to, among others, subpoenaed witnesses Steve Bannon, Peter Navarro, and Gen. Mike Flynn.
For example, on February 28, White House Deputy Counsel Jonathan Su wrote to Peter Navarro, “In light of [the] unique and extraordinary nature of the matters under investigation, President Biden has determined that an assertion of executive privilege is not in the national interest, and therefore is not justified.” Just like that.
Obama’s executive order had negated one signed by President George W. Bush soon after 9/11 that declared a current President couldn’t overrule a former President’s claims to executive privilege over documents from their tenure if the two could not come to an agreement about it. Obama went back to the protocol put in place after Watergate, which gave the incumbent President final say over which documents from a previous President would be turned over to the National Archives. President Trump had the opportunity to change this while he was in office, and I’ll bet he wishes he had.
The Biden White House is the Ignition Point
So once the Biden White House waived Trump’s privilege, the FBI and “Justice” Department moved swiftly to go after him and, in a matter of months, raid his home, with “authority” to sweep up virtually every scrap of paper from his presidency. Trace it all back to Obama’s executive order.
As Solomon reports, the Supreme Court has not ruled definitively on this. Alan Dershowitz encourages Trump to challenge it. What President is ever going to seek advice and counsel, he asks, knowing that if he is defeated, the next President “can, just by saying I waive the privilege, get into every single conversation you ever had. I can’t believe a constitutional scholar would agree with that.”
Navarro’s legal team is fighting Biden’s waiver and says his administration should be forced to disclose its contacts with the Democrat-controlled Congress. The DOJ says it has no responsive documents. But who’s naive enough to believe that this wasn’t part of a coordinated political ploy?
“The Biden White House is at the ignition point of this investigation,” Solomon told FOX NEWS host Sean Hannity.
By the way, the Daily Beast has slammed Solomon’s reporting, accusing him of trying to “help” a former President. Here’s his response. Keep up your amazingly solid reporting, John Solomon.
Tea Party Patriots Take Action
Tea Party Patriots Action has filed a federal complaint against Magistrate Judge Reinhart, who approved the raid, demanding that he be removed from the case immediately. “Judge Reinhart acted unethically,” it says, “in approving the warrant to search President Trump’s residence…The entire episode…threatens the principle of ‘equal justice under law’ and the confidence of the American people in an unbiased judiciary.” They list seven “undisputed facts,” with evidence that:
1. Judge Reinhart has publicly denigrated Trump. (You’ve seen the tweets here.)
2. He recused himself from a lawsuit involving Trump and Hillary, citing a conflict of interest.
3. He showed a stunning lack of ethics in the Epstein issue.
4. He has deep ties to the Democrat Party, with financial contributions to Obama and Jeb Bush.
5. He should have recognized his own partisan leanings and recused himself when approached to rule on this case, but failed to do so.
6. He “does not meet the standards of ethical conduct and character necessary for the nonpartisan role of a judge.”
7. His action threatens the principle of “equal justice under law” and the confidence of Americans in an unbiased judiciary.
They go further, to say that for his role in searching a former President’s home, Reinhart should be disciplined and removed from the bench. We wish.
An Institutional Response to a Perceived Threat
Jeff Carlson has a must-read analysis on why the raid on Mar-a-Lago might really have taken place. He thinks it was likely over documents exposing what the intelligence community was doing to further the Russia Hoax.
The DOJ’s coordinated FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago, Carlson writes, was likely related to the potential unsealing and public presentation of this information — particularly in relation to Trump’s [RICO] suit against Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and former FBI officials such as former Director James Comey, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, former agent Peter Strzok, and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, and his amended RICO suit, which added more defendants.
The details he cites as reason for this theory have been presented in my newsletter, but when you have time, be sure and read this to see how he lays out the timeline and makes his case.
Trump’s actions, he says, and the documents he amassed over time, appear to have presented a very direct threat to the agencies that lie behind our government, prompting an institutional response that manifested itself in the FBI’s August 8 raid of Mar-a-Lago.
Mike Huckabee is the former governor of Arkansas and longtime conservative commentator on issues in culture and current events. A New York Times best-selling author, he hosts the weekly talk show Huckabee on TBN.
Originally published at MikeHuckabee.com. Reprinted with permission.