Sign up for The Brief, our every day e-newsletter that retains readers on top of things on essentially the most important Texas information.
WASHINGTON — The FBI raid at U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar’s Laredo home made for a damning drama: a swarm of brokers descending upon his property with a warrant in hand, rising later with a computer and plastic bins and bags full of private belongings.
Those optics aren’t an afterthought for the U.S. Department of Justice. Nor is the timing — which in Cuellar’s case got here lower than two months earlier than the March 1 major election. That poor political timing has raised questions amongst authorized specialists about why the Justice Department, which needed to log out on such an investigation, didn’t authorize the raid both months earlier than this major or later within the spring to reduce affect on the election.
“In normal, the division has shied away from taking any overt investigative actions in opposition to political figures when an election is looming,” mentioned former Justice Department official Emily Pierce. Pierce and different former division officers instructed The Texas Tribune that the Justice Department is often delicate to the devastating energy of these photographs that may cloud a candidate’s popularity earlier than that individual can defend themselves within the authorized system.
The shadow of a prison investigation is hard for any elected official to navigate. But Cuellar additionally occurs to be within the combat for his political life in his South Texas Democratic major, the place he’s up for his tenth time period in Congress, and dealing with challengers Jessica Cisneros, an legal professional, and Tannya Benavides, an educator.
Cuellar hasn’t been charged with against the law, and he mentioned in a public assertion that he’s assured the investigation will clear him of wrongdoing. Furthermore, he’s burdened that he’s all in on the first race and intends to win reelection.
A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to remark for this story, as did Cuellar’s representatives.
Six former Justice Department staff interviewed by the Tribune mentioned the most typical motive for an investigation so near an election was concern of a seamless crime, like destruction of proof or a flight danger.
“The causes they could resolve to contravene that coverage embody an affordable concern that proof might be misplaced or destroyed, indications {that a} topic is likely to be attempting to depart the nation or the rest that may impair the long run of the investigation in the event that they don’t act in a well timed manner,” Pierce mentioned.
“Without figuring out the specifics of the case, it’s inconceivable to say whether or not they feared some prison intent to destroy proof or whether or not there was a extra benign motive they felt they needed to act rapidly,” she added.
To ensure, it’s doable the investigation could by no means yield costs.
“We mustn’t presume {that a} crime has occurred right here or that the federal government is satisfied {that a} crime has occurred,” Edward Loya Jr., a Dallas-based legal professional, mentioned in an e mail. Loya served within the division’s Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption instances throughout the nation.
“All we all know for certain is that the federal government is gathering data it must make an evaluation of the allegations with which it has been introduced,” he added.
John Bash, a protection legal professional who has labored on the Justice Department each in Washington and as a U.S. legal professional in Texas, mentioned the division operated below “a rule of thumb” wherein the Justice Department avoids indictments and overt investigative exercise like searches 60 to 90 days earlier than an election.
“None of that implies that sitting members of Congress are above the legislation, however there’s an curiosity in ensuring DOJ’s function isn’t political and … DOJ will not be perceived as being concerned in politics,” he mentioned.
There’s precedent for a way the Justice Department handles investigations into political figures and in addition the way it’s fumbled up to now.
Democrats stay deeply embittered with the FBI from 2016 and former director James Comey’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s dealing with of labeled data by manner of a non-public e mail server.
Comey took unprecedented actions as Clinton was operating for president, outlining in July 2016 how she and her employees had been “extraordinarily careless,” however not prison. Typically, the division doesn’t clarify why it chooses to not indict.
Then 11 days earlier than the election as voters had been already casting early voting ballots, Comey introduced he was reopening the investigation into Clinton based mostly on new proof recovered, solely to announce on the Sunday earlier than Election Day that the FBI’s advice to not prosecute stood.
Many Democrats — and pollsters — level to that second as important to Clinton’s loss.
Years later, former U.S. Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates testified earlier than the Senate Judiciary Committee in a 2020 listening to on the investigation into Russian interference within the 2016 election. She mentioned how her workplace took particular care to keep away from the looks of political interference in an election as her workplace investigated Trump marketing campaign official Paul Manafort. Manafort was later convicted of tax fraud, financial institution fraud and failure to reveal a overseas checking account. He was pardoned by President Donald Trump in late 2020, simply earlier than he left workplace.
Yates described giving orders to the FBI to make sure “they weren’t doing something publicly with respect to Mr. Manafort, regardless that he was not even with the marketing campaign at this level … as a result of that might be unfair to then-candidate Donald Trump.”
“We didn’t take any motion, whether or not it was a case involving an area sheriff or a governor or a senator,” Yates mentioned on the listening to. “We wouldn’t take any motion that would probably have an effect on the election. … It’s not simply to be truthful to that particular person, but in addition to make sure that the general public has confidence that this energy will not be getting used to affect an election.”
Notably, the FBI raid on Cuellar’s home comes throughout a Democratic administration.
“Given right now’s political local weather and Congressman Cuellar’s highly effective place in Congress, I might be shocked if the Attorney General’s workplace weren’t consulted,” Loya mentioned.
James Barragán and Patrick Svitek contributed to this report.
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/02/01/henry-cuellar-fbi-raid-election/
