OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
President Joe Biden and the Democrats have been preaching since 2016 that Americans need to respect their valued institutions, but that appears to only be true if those institutions do what they want.
The president was involved in a virtual fundraiser on Tuesday for Rep Lisa Blunt Rochester, who is a representative in the president’s home state of Delaware, when he said that the Supreme Court is “more of an advocacy group these days,” after its decision to end Roe V Wade, The Independent reported.
“I view this off-year election as one of the most important elections that I’ve been engaged in because a lot can change because the institutions have changed,” he said. “The Supreme Court is more of an advocacy group these days than it is… evenhanded about it.”
The court became more conservative when former President Donald Trump was able to add three justices, but that does not always work in favor of Republicans or the former president.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday rejected an emergency request from former President Donald Trump to intervene in the dispute over classified documents seized from his Mar-a-Lago in August.
“The former president was seeking an order to return about 100 documents with classification markings to a review process a “special master” is conducting of more than 10,000 documents the FBI took during the Aug. 8 search of Trump’s home,” Politico reported.
“But no member of the court publicly signaled a willingness to grant emergency relief for Trump. The court also offered no explanation or rationale for declining Trump’s request, which would have allowed his attorneys the ability to review the most sensitive records the FBI obtained during their ongoing probe,” the outlet added.
Last week, an FBI supervisory special agent has filed a revised document in federal court altering the number of documents that the bureau seized from former President Donald Trump during an unprecedented raid on his home in Palm Beach, Fla., in August.
“The additional review and recount resulted in some minor revisions to the Detailed Property Inventory,” noted the agent, whose name was redacted. “I and FBI personnel working under my direction conducted an additional review and recount of the Seized materials in order to make this declaration.”
According to The Epoch Times, the supervisory agent’s filing acknowledged that the bureau actually obtained 63 more documents or photos than previously revealed:
The revised inventory was submitted to the federal court in southern Florida on orders from U.S. District Judge Raymond Dearie, a Reagan appointee who was inserted into the case as a special master, or an independent third party to handle disputes and other matters.
Dearie ordered a government official “with sufficient knowledge of the matter” to submit a declaration or affidavit stating whether the detailed property inventory released on Sept. 2 “represents the full and accurate extent of the property seized from” Trump’s home in August when FBI agents executed a search warrant there.
The supervisory agent noted in the filing that he or she leads a squad of FBI agents and intelligence analysts conducting investigations into the potential mishandling of classified or national security information.
Previously, the FBI claimed that agents removed 33 boxes of information and documents from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
On Thursday, a federal judge handed Trump a victory in his ongoing legal battle with the Biden Justice Department over documents seized by the FBI.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed by the former president, struck down a ruling by Special Master Raymond Dearing which said that Trump must provide any “final” objections or arguments regarding the seized documents from the unprecedented raid, Fox News reported.
The outlet notes further:
Last week, Dearie asked the Trump team that by no later than Sept. 30 to provide a declaration of the affidavit that includes a list of any specific items in the property inventory that they assert were not seized from the premises; a list of items that were seized but to which the description of the contents or the location of the item was incorrect; and a list and description of any item that Trump’s legal team asserts was seized but is not listed in the property receipt.
“This submission shall be plaintiff’s final opportunity to raise any factual dispute as to the completeness and accuracy of the Detailed property inventory,” Dearie wrote in his instructions last week.
But Cannon, who agreed to a Trump request for a special master and appointed Dearie, reviewed the order and determined that there “shall be no separate requirement” for the former president “at this stage, prior to the review of the Seized Materials, to lodge ex ante final objections to the accuracy of Defendant’s Inventory, its descriptions, or its contents,” according to Fox News.
“The Court’s Appointment Order did not contemplate that obligation; Defendant since has complied with the requirement to attest to its now-revised inventory and the parties and the Special Master are situated to proceed forward with the process pending exchange of the actual materials,” Cannon noted further in her order.
“Should any additional matters surface during the Special Master’s review process that require reconsideration of the inventory or the need to object to its contents, the parties shall make those matters known to the Special Master for appropriate resolution and recommendation to this Court,” she noted further.