Bolton Raid: Legitimate Investigation or Political Retribution?

There certainly does seem to be a pattern that these raids seem to be done rather selectively, and Bolton has certainly been no friend of Trump in these regards. So there had better be a VERY good reason for the raids here, or heads should roll.

Along the same lines, I'd expect that if there is NOT a very good reason for the raids, there will be leakers who make that clear. One thing that is clear is that Bolton does not appear to be intimidated, as he just spoke very clearly about what he feels are the deficiencies in Trump's foreign policy.

Seems to me that Judge Lamberth's decision from 2020 gives pretty good reason.

Can be found here. In my view, what happened is that after Bolton got preliminary approval in April 2020, the White House intervened to slow walk the approval process to prevent it from reaching markets before the 2020 election. Bolton may have thought he'd complied, and then been blindsided by the revocation right as he was ready to start selling the book.

Lamberth's logic is strange as well, because due to computer typesetting, there were really very few people who could have seen his work outside the publishing process, let alone understand its significance. Plus, the case doesn't at all indicate what materials Bolton would have had in his home over five years later.

I'm seeing this here about the possibility that Bolton emailed classified documents to his wife and daughter just prior to being fired/resigning in 2019, but that doesn't work, either, because (again) all that had been out there for six years--the computers/phones that received this email are long gone (I do storage reliability for a living), and waiting six years on known allegations tells the world that DOJ didn't think it was that important.

Never mind that the Trump administration didn't go after someone who had hundreds of such documents on her unsecured private server.

Also of interest is that nobody bothered to look at Bolton's security clearance until--without any review--Trump revoked it this January. To me, that's another statement "The evidence really isn't that strong.".

Don't get me wrong; I don't think it's appropriate for clearance holders to handle classified information on their email, or keep it in their homes without a need to have it. But that habit seems to be endemic in DC, and you've got to figure out how to handle that more consistently. 7am raid after canceling someone's security clearance without a review? That stinks of political hamhandedness, a hallmark of the Trump administration.

It’s pretty smelly.

Someone famously said, "Elections have consequences."

...but various initiatives in government like civil service protections are intended to prevent the government from implementing another Tammany Hall--a result that seems disturbingly close to what Trump is doing. Especially troubling is the apparent fact that just as it became known that Bolton was a target of Iranian operatives, Trump revoked his security detail.

Regarding the revocation of his clearance, remember that getting one takes months--it is quite involved by design. I've actually been interviewed by an FBI agent on behalf of someone seeking such a clearance. So the historic pattern is that clearances are only revoked upon clear cause, because the services of those people might be needed in the future, even if they're not being used now.

(same basic thing for the Fed director fired by Trump for a minor paperwork violation on a mortgage....really, Donald?)

There is a need to "drain the swamp", yes, but that needs to be linked to actual offenses committed, not just being politically opposed to the President. Again, we don't want Tammany Hall on the Potomac.

>>(same basic thing for the Fed director fired by Trump for a minor paperwork violation on a mortgage….really, Donald?)<<

It does feel a bit like political retribution. Although would perhaps a $400-500 million fine be better punishment for this than firing?

Someone is going to have to explain to me why lying/making a mistake on a mortgage application is qualitatively different from lying/making a mistake on a building evaluation for a loan.

Those who are screaming “no one is above the law” should be careful throwing their stones when their houses are clearly also glass… Even if the returning stone seems like political retribution, the point being made is still true.

The question I've got is whether there was a lie at all. If I get a mortgage here in MN, noting primary residence, then get a house and mortgage in DC or VA when I take a federal job, noting primary residence, both affidavits are truthful.

And the crazy one is Trump going after Schiff when the statute of limitations has expired. OK, Trump's endured that one, too, but the cure to weaponizing of the law is not to continue doing so, but to stop.

Same basic thing with the building loan. Any sane judge who had ever owned a property would have taken the prosecutor aside and explained that sometimes the county appraisals and the private appraisals differ, and that's OK, and not worth a lawsuit.

Sad to say, it does not seem that we're getting too far away from the hypothesis of weaponization of the law.

>>the cure to weaponizing of the law is not to continue doing so, but to stop.<<

Technically, that’s true, but I think it’s idealistic when one or both sides think weaponization is simply “justice” or simply another tool in the box.

Occasionally, given human nature, just like with the atom bomb in WWII, or bunker busters at Fordow, a little bit of “you put one of ours in the hospital, we put one of yours in the morgue” is necessary to bring things to a close. Remembering that we are talking about camps that are clearly not Christian, we need to understand that “turning the other cheek” is unlikely at best (and is often misapplied to boot).

waiting six years on known allegations tells the world that DOJ didn't think it was that important.

Well, come on. The central 4 years of that was the Biden regime.

This is where we're headed. Ds go after Rs and Rs go after Ds. No one believes anything.

And the same with the media.

What we need to do is refrain from ticky-tack stuff. Mortgage papers. (The Mara Lago suit against Trump was pure lawfare.) Going after Schiff for home loans is dumb. If you can't get him for treason for his part in the Russian "collusion" scandal, don't bother with loans.

>>If you can’t get him for treason for his part in the Russian “collusion” scandal, don’t bother with loans.<<

No doubt they should go after the big stuff. But remember how Al Capone was taken down with income tax evasion rather than murder and racketeering. Sometimes you need to charge what can be proven. If the party is guilty of the smaller crime and the larger one can’t be proven, it’s not “political persecution” to go for justice on a smaller charge. It’s “no one is above the law.”