Discussion on former donald trump. The Justice System right . Vice president and the Heritage Foundation institute for nutritional government. [applause] welcome to the Heritage Foundation. We are here today to discuss timely and important topic especially for those deeply about didnt law and criminal justice. Its a fact that many have come to believe some federal and state prosecutors are operating a rigged system of justice hurting conservatives in general on former President Donald Trump in particular. Emirate activities including operation hurricane that built into the schedule pollution and junk campaign in 2015 the contrast Hillary Clinton classified documents case was handled and ongoing abuses of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act determined the biden case and failure to arrest people protesting that homes to the u. S. Supreme court and failure to arrest anyonefa vandalizing centers and prolife protesters and concerned parents forcing Objectives School board meetings andct for whos right . Is the Justice System rigged . What can and should be done about it . I invite them to the stage. First, colon, executive director and attorney and group on Public Policy and the and continues to advise white house and members of congress is in utah. His chief counsel will terrorism of the Senate Judiciary committee will hear from a colleague who at heritage. He began the court james in the d. C. Circuit and just as told in the Supreme Court. It is the suggestion of the u. S. Department of transportation during the Trump Administration and served as acting deputy secretary of transportation in a brief time acting secretary. During the george w. Bush Administration SpeechPrincipal Deputy and acting assistant attorney general of the department ofor justice where he advised officials on a wide range of stage three constitutional questions. Currently will hear from the vice dean is president and general counsel of america first, nonprks to promote rule of law. Prior to joining, he served as counselor to the attorney general and senior counselor to the secretary of department of Homeland Security and as general counsel to the Senate Judiciary committee. Please join me in welcoming our panelists. [applause] thank you, i am disappointed you didnt wear your fancy but im proud unless i was in court or testifying in congress after ii left d. C. , i am honored and o be herepeople are me all time, what do you think about the Trump Indictment . It would be tempting to jump into the evidence and validity of the evidence, sufficient of the evidence and due here many lawyers and they would say this is the evidence that outline. If we get in the discussion of evidence, something terrible happens. You legitimized the prosecution first and foremost, the grantors or prosecutors statement of allegation. Though a backup and approach each case to look at the merits of bringing the case. When i was to his attorney i received a call from a sitting member of Congress Asking me to investigate a potential opponent or candidate for congress. He knew imagine that phone call . Wanted me to investigate mortgage funds and they were certain an individual committed mortgage product and i should do something about it. Underline was suspicious because political pot, or something so comfortable about it and ironically the first box i had was a attorney general is the stories of him addressing people who declined to bring a cake and i think its more difficult to decline a case than it is to pursue one because of the ease of which i can secure an indictment so i kindly informed members of congress the phone call was inappropriate and if he had information he should convey to the fbi. Sure enough the fbi came in and said we might have a case so i went through it. I thought it was the worst manipulation of the facts i have ever seen and i declined to bring the case. Maybe thats why i didnt last. [laughter] i think back on that and im well aware and right Career Potential for department of justice to be used as a weapon against a political opponent yet i never believed at the heart of maine justice there would be decisionmaking so centered on the evidence that they were not backing up to look at whether or not these were justified prosecution and as i look at this and talk to my colleagues on the left, i am astounded how buried they are, as is held the department of justice should be utilized . Each one of these cases there is a Justice Department on the left right that would refuse to bring the case and its not that long ago. Not because of affinity for donald trump of the rule of and the power of the prosecutor and need for discretion and inverted need to define persecution in a position no longer from the publics view of fairness and equity when applying the law to factors person when her political ramifications. Thank you for the y introduction. In response to the question for the panel is the Justice System rigged . I would say no, i would not say its great. Theres always a risk and potential power can be used for powers and purposes or pious reasons and when that happens theres always the potential the American People that unfold will confidence in the system and suspect the system is rigged in a way thats unfair, perhaps politically biased against ercertain movements, certain political theories or decisions and that is corrosive to our republic, how are entire attitude and i think in recent years we have seen abuses of Investigatory Power that has that corrosive effect and they can take the form of prosecutors across the country refusing to prosecute certain crime for political objectives were based on ar political view or philosophical view divorced from legal objectives they had in mind when the enacted criminal codes and 58 and one of those. In his case alvin bragg ran for election in new york without a doubt that he would go after chantal. Similarly attorney general in new york isy elected made a promise to bring down donald trump and run him out of office and political rates was something of a bidding war among those who to get to the next level and found to take down donald trump. The indictments against former President Trump politically motivated at least in large part. At least three of the four indictments probably would not have been brought if you are not a candidate for president of the United States so that suggests two people seeing it from the outside quickly motivated i think the fourth indictment, the more a logo and document case perhaps would have been brought trump or not running for president. However, we can get into further discussion but because he is a candidate for president , in fact, the eating candidate, i think prudent approach are prosecutor in this case jack smith special counsel would have been not to bring that case as an indictment i think probably the better result would be for special counsel include the investigation with a report to the attorney general describing in full detail the conduct he believed was that conduct by the former president in terms of trying to withhold documents and obstruct efforts to get them back and again, we could go into further detail but these indictments are not isolated, the American People have been watching rising concern, great concern about conservatives in washington about the abuses of the fbi. John mentioned in his intro we now have great detail about the abuses that occurred in the cross fire became in 2016 and has detailed in johns terms report, the official report usually detailed in the inspector generals report december 2019, we see a Leadership Team at the fbi and Justice Department focused intently going after one president ial campaign 2016 giving preferential treatment to the other president ial candidate giving the Clinton Campaign defensive briefing on the same issue or influence from russia while going after the drunk campaign in part using evidence generated or connected to Political Opposition Research of the Clinton Campaign and without fully setting and understanding questions about support for the material submitted to the Surveillance Court on the campaign. An extraordinary extraordinary set of treatment of two campaigns in the middle of president ial campaign and most powerful Law Enforcement agency in the country and the twitter files in the u. S. Government monitoring the constitutionally protected speech of americans where it may disagree with the policy positions on issues like covid policy, Election Integrity issues. More recently support for the war in ukraine working with Tech Companies and outside groups suppress, downgrade each of americans. Hard to imagine something more breaking in terms of undermining america. America has been involved continues to be involved. We seen recent reports investigating domestic terrorism using political positions of america, and supporting donald trump, that may be a checkbox factor site for an assessment monitor your activity. No National Security justification at all. We have also seen the fbi targeting parents for speaking up at School Board Meetings again, domestic terrorists and other activities so i think there is rising recognition that there is fundamental need to reform the fbi. Here at heritage we have written a paper that came out in july called how to fix the fbi for proposals and detail but i guess i will close by saying fiscal recent i would say that history of abuses and evidently politically motivated use of powerful investigatory prosecutorial authorities by the government at can have no good outcome for the American People and the reason traditionally in this country we have had strong tradition and policy of literature use of enforcement prosecutorial enforcement and a reluctance by Law Enforcement agencies and prosecutors to open up investigations during Political Campaign season and turkic candidates in the history of an former president and so i think we need to return to those considered judgments and credential policy president or we risk driving off a cliff in which case the American People may lose all confidence in the Justice System and that would be a terrible outcome. Hello, everybody. Thank you, john for having me. I am the least qualified person to be here and also the furthest to the right. This is very hard discussion because for all already articulated we have evidence of a woman is department Justice System and we couldnt fit the evidence in these indictments of donald trump. About this with me because i want you will to understand what rent was familiar with, its what they look at and consider as they evaluate Different Things. In the justice manual theres a section titled principles of federal prosecution and it talks about these factors the department is supposed to consider before bringing charges, when bringing charges about all kinds of Different Things and when you look at the factors they are directed to analyze and identify and compare it what we see with these charges, i think you can see a dichotomy so for example, non terminal alternatives to prosecution, this is a section were supposed to consider so the federal interest which is what i would contest but assuming you do for the psaki of argument, alternate prosecution is a factor youre supposed to consider when you bring charges. The situation here is our are adequate alternatives even if you assume the validity of the facts, a federal interest, there is impeachment and donald trump wentes through impeachment and s acquitted in the senate so we are in a situation where we try to relitigate issues that political opponents werent successful when they tried to impeach the president. I want to read another section which is why i brought this paper, initiating and declining charges. Impermissible consideration. In determining whether to convince our recommend prosecution or take other action against a person, the attorney for the government may not be influenced by a persons race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, Sexual Orientation or Political Association activities or leaves. You go on and read the things talking about other considerations for the dissections is in addition, federal prosecutors may never make a decision regarding prosecution or select the timing of investigative steps or criminal charges for the purpose of affecting any election or the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party. Im sorry, if you look at the timing of these indictments and what they are trying to do with the trial and how they schedule things, the department of justices filing his own policy flagrantly, Merrick Garland and they would look at this and say mr. Hamilton, the guns clearly says is not forcible, that might be other considerations at play but the American People, outside of washington d. C. If we transport this room and we go to Savannah Georgia or anywhere across the countryny and sit don and tell the American People these are the charges we are bringing against you as president of the United States, he would be shocked on a bipartisan basis how everybody sees through what they are doing. But sees the prosecution. In washingtonle d. C. It very muh is the case. The georgetown party, everyone talks about all the juicy the allocation and indictment . Did you see Nuclear Secrets . Everybody knows its being done for political purposes, each of the indictment we can talk about it in new york but the reason you have these principles and why the department outlines them writingep for every federal prosecutor to consider is consideration of perception of the American People, the Justice System. Who is going to be targeted for prosecution . Subject too investigation and why . If we get to a place in this country as to where you think because of the way you believe and the things you do in the political him and particular activity you can be prosecuted, investigated by the fbi, we are in a dangerous place because its not just about donald trump, the perfect example of what is prosecution and we all see it but its the perception the entire country, if you are a person who has a conservative leave, you see the memo on school board it is not there and it is destabilizing. People dont sit back and think about that. Merrick garland and you think about bringing these, you have to consider stability of the country, not a small factor, something you have to think about because when the governed lose trust in their federal government, it can lead to bad and Dangerous Things and we dont need to be there as a country. Each of these indictments will we see against donald trump are legal because of many reasons but i want to highlight maralago in particular because one of the things, a lot of folks need to take a step back and about, how you hear a lot of arguments on social media and commentators, under the president ial act, i agree with that interpretation, that is the case. Force because where is the power in the constitution to tell the president of the United States which papers are his friends arent so somewhere in the constitution if you buy the argument that its even constitutional, where the constitution is a say we get to decide which papers is and which ones are not . Thats what it does and i think for that reason the application of the records act says donald trump didnt have authorized records so he can be prosecuted with handling them, its unconstitutional, you cant do it the way it works. The political remedy is either impeachment or the election. Against the president of the United States or deciding which papers records are his, he took when he was president of the United States with him, because his decision, his choice. Congress doesnt make that decision for him so that reason especially, i think that case has a lot of problems. There are other statutory issues in the other case as well but it is for highlighting and goes to show when youre the prosecutor, jack spent analyzing available potential charges trying to way what to do or not to do, all of these things would be considerations for prosecution even assuming you have the best possible case ever i dont think they do but these are factors that you are going to a little in the federal government is a dangerous place to be. You missed the half that shows and make your points incredibly well, the part of the manual it takes what kind of charges to bring when you do have evidence. When you look at those in the context of what they are doing with donal