By Andrew Goudsward, Jana Winter and Brad Heath
WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) – The U.S. Justice Department under President Donald Trump has repeatedly targeted his perceived enemies, such as Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, in ways that have eroded longstanding barriers between politics and policing.
Before it targeted Powell, who announced this week he was under criminal investigation, Trump’s administration presided over prosecutions of two officials who led investigations into him, and has pursued probes of nine Democratic lawmakers, two officials-turned-critics from his first administration, a top Democratic fundraising group, a billionaire liberal donor, a Fed governor Trump is seeking to fire and a former CIA director who criticized Trump.
Criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James were brought days after Trump publicly called for the DOJ to act against them.
Though Trump in March called himself the nation’s “top law enforcement officer,” it has not always been clear whether he ordered particular investigations or if officials simply acceded to his wishes. Trump told NBC News he was not involved in the decision to investigate Powell, who he had criticized repeatedly for moving too slowly to lower interest rates. The probe centers on Powell’s statements to Congress about the Fed’s building renovation project.
No law prohibits Trump from involving himself in law enforcement so directly. But for decades, officials from both parties have sought to keep presidents from directing who should face criminal investigations and to apply the law evenhandedly.
‘VERY RADICAL CHANGE’
“It’s a very radical change from the approach and outlook that emphasized above all else fair play and evenhanded administration of justice,” said Donald Ayer, who was the department’s second-in-command under Republican President George H.W. Bush.
Two people familiar with the administration’s efforts, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss deliberations publicly, told Reuters that Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, has conveyed to top Justice Department officials the president’s wishes on possible investigations.
A department official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, said it was “completely false” that Miller had communicated such requests. The Justice Department did not provide comment for this story.
A White House official, also speaking anonymously, disputed Miller’s involvement, and said Trump was “restoring integrity to our justice system and holding criminals accountable.”
Trump’s approach is a significant departure for an institution that has, for decades, professed not to let politics or grievances steer its decisions about who to investigate or prosecute.
Such efforts have met with little success, at least in court. One federal judge threw out cases against Comey and James, both of whom supervised investigations of Trump. Two grand juries refused to re-indict James when prosecutors asked them to. And a different federal judge blocked another Trump appointee from leading a second probe of James.
Trump’s approach is a departure even from his first term, when the department’s highest-profile investigation centered on Trump and allegations that his campaign conspired with Russian efforts to sway the 2016 election in his favor. The probe led to charges against several of Trump’s top aides, but did not find coordination with Russia.
During Trump’s first presidency, he would occasionally suggest to top officials that they pursue investigations of some of his critics, said a person familiar with those conversations. “It was always a suggestion, not an order, and we didn’t do it,” the person said.
‘THEY’RE DOING THINGS DIFFERENTLY ‘
Trump has left little doubt about the extent to which he has pushed the government to bring politically charged cases against other adversaries.
Last year, federal prosecutors in Virginia obtained indictments of Comey and James after Trump named them in a social media post addressed to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and complained that “nothing was being done” to charge them. Before that, Trump signed executive orders explicitly directing federal investigations of two officials who turned into critics in his first term, and of left-wing groups he labeled as domestic terrorists.
That level of political direction has been uncommon since the Watergate scandal that felled President Richard Nixon in the 1970s.
“I don’t think there’s much denying that they’re doing things differently,” said Greg Brower, a former U.S. Attorney for Nevada under Republican President George W. Bush and Democratic President Barack Obama. “The DOJ seems to be taking its investigative and prosecutorial leads from the White House in certain cases.”
Even if the White House can legally be involved in criminal investigations, the law does not allow prosecutions for improper purposes, such as personal spite, according to legal experts.
“The president is subject to the same constitutional protections that apply to everyone else,” said Peter Keisler, who served as acting attorney general under President George W. Bush.
Federal law enforcement has at times become entangled in politics in recent U.S. history, notably in 2016 when the FBI investigated both major presidential candidates and announced it had reopened a probe into Democrat Hillary Clinton days before the vote.
But returning to office with loyalists and former personal lawyers at the DOJ’s helm, Trump has succeeded in getting investigations of his adversaries.
In November, facing pressure over his past relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Trump called for an investigation into Democrats with ties to him. Within hours, Bondi announced that the head of the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s Office would fulfill the request.
(Editing by Rod Nickel)
Comments