Mark Levin responds to DOJ saying that Trump doesn’t need a Special Master

We told you last week that Trump had filed to have a special master to oversee his privileged file that the DOJ took in their raid of his Mar-a-Lago home.

I suggested at the time that he should have filed for this immediately after the raid and, sure enough, the DOJ says they’ve already completed their review of his records and there’s no need for a special master at this point:

Via Wapo:

The “filter team” used by the Justice Department to sort through the documents and weed out any material that should not be reviewed by criminal investigators has completed its review, the brief filed by Justice Department prosecutors says. The filing came in response to a ruling Saturday by U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon to hold a hearing this week on Trump’s motion seeking the appointment of a special master.

The new government filing says prosecutors will provide more information later this week. But in the meantime, it notes that even before the judge’s weekend ruling, the filter team “identified a limited set of materials that potentially contain attorney-client privileged information, completed its review of those materials, and is in the process of following the procedures” of the search warrant to handle any privilege disputes.

Despite the late date of requesting a special master, Mark Levin suggests one should still be appointed to review how the DOJ handled those materials and viewed them:

The whole raid was ridiculous, but it is even more so that the DOJ violated Trump’s right to attorney-client privileged material. The DOJ should have been the one to seek a special master considering the sensitivity of the raid, but they were too busy looking for ways to prosecute Trump.

I hope the judge still appoints one so the work of the DOJ can be reviewed, as Levin suggests. We’ll let you know whatever happens…


Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.