Quote (thundercock @ Sep 5 2022 06:30pm)
I think the worst argument is that the DOJ shouldn't have access to some of the documents because of executive privilege. Executive privilege involves competing branches of government (i.e. balancing Congressional oversight with executive communications). Why would members of the executive branch be forbidden from seeing documents but a member of the judiciary can? It's extraordinarily absurd.
Members of the judiciary don't need to take an adversarial role which would jeopardize 4th and 5th amendment protections. Leaving up to prosecutors to regulate themselves goes about as well as self regulation does for any entity. As the judge pointed out, as long as theres a valid, perhaps legally untested, claim of privilege, then relief should occur at an injunctive stage so damage isn't irreparable before it can be argued in court.
Quote
Bill Barr doesn't believe that a special master is warranted because the FBI filter team already did it's job. I think there may have been some merit due to the sensitivity of the case if the request was made within 24 hours. Why didn't his attorneys file an injunction immediately?
I highly recommend the podcast "Advisory Opinions" which is a conservative podcast that discusses legal issues. You'd probably really enjoy it.
Bill Barr has a track record of being overly deferential to government agency against civil liberties. He's not some ACLU card carrying hippy. Just because he tried to restrain the DoJ from its excess didn't mean he distrusted them. And I find common ground with
on innately distrusting any three letter agency