Editorial: Trump’s paradise lost? American justice comes to Mar-a-Lago

It all seemed so shocking, to hear Republicans exclaim. Unless, of course, you’ve been paying attention, or, in the case of Trump, you’ve been under ongoing investigation from the Department of Justice.

The incident set off the usual partisan pyrotechnics. Gov. Greg Abbott did his part for the party, calling it “next-level Nixonian” and saying the search was a politically motivated abuse of power. It was an interesting comparison, given that the raid took place on the very anniversary of President Nixon’s resignation speech amid the Watergate scandal and that Nixon’s desire to destroy White House tapes and other materials prompted the 1978 law that protects presidential records and established government ownership.

We assume in their busy schedules, these stunned politicians must have missed some of the crucial steps preceding this.

Allow us to recap:

What Trump called an “unannounced raid” had to have been approved by the very FBI director, Christopher Wray, whom Trump himself appointed. The search was the execution of a search warrant that had to have been approved by a federal magistrate judge based on evidence of a possible crime. That evidence, Ian Millhiser notes for Vox, would not only have to meet the probable cause minimum, but because of its politically sensitive nature, would have to meet the DOJ’s own “rules and norms” that “counsel extraordinary caution.”

And, much to the chagrin of some Democrats, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland is nothing if not extraordinarily cautious.

So far it seems the raid was connected to boxes of documents, property of the federal government and the American people, that somehow found their way to Mar-a-Lago after Trump’s departure from office instead of at the archives where they are legally required to reside. The National Archives and Records Administration, the bastion of diligent documentation, has been following up on the issue of mishandled documents for months and already found more than a dozen such boxes at the property earlier this year.

But there’s reason to believe the search might have been looking to uncover more than some stray and even potentially classified paperwork. The DOJ’s investigation expanded recently to include Trump’s efforts to overthrow the 2020 election, according to reporting from the Washington Post.

If anyone needs a recap of that, we recommend checking out the January 6 hearings from the House Oversight Committee. If the natural progression of a federal investigation into stolen property is “Nixonian,” what about a president who denounces the result of a free and fair democratic election, knowing there is no evidence of fraud? Or one who tries to harass state officials into overturning the results? One who then eggs on his armed supporters and sits by watching TV, all but crunching on popcorn, as they attack the Capitol despite the urgent pleading of advisers, family members and almost everyone around him? What about the scene that unfolded there, with officers slipping in blood and vomit trying to defend the halls of democracy? What presidential controversy can you liken that to?

None. Because, like many disturbing events during Trump’s tenure, it was unprecedented. So why should anyone be stunned by Monday’s unprecedented search?

If it raised eyebrows at all, let it be because Garland, the well-regarded former jurist who leads the Justice Department, has followed agency policy, remaining tight-lipped about the investigation and preventing leaks. Of course, Trump’s outrage also reflects his own regard for rules in that he has little use for them and seems to think they don’t apply to him. And perhaps he believed — not entirely without reason — that the justice system would cut a wealthy, powerful man such as himself a break. He was cooperating, after all, as he whined in his Monday statement.

“If they can do it to a former President, imagine what they can do to you,” the House Judiciary Committee Republicans tweeted Monday.

That’s just the thing. American justice depends on that very principle — that no one is above the law. There are plenty of cases where this principle is not met. Monday’s raid — at which one of Trump’s lawyers was present, according to Politico — doesn’t appear to be one of them.

It represents the most serious and public pursuit of potential charges against a former president. And considering the preponderance of evidence here, shouldn’t it be?