Briefly Noted: Turley Re SBF Arrest
Law prof Jonathan Turley is on fire today. To start with he had the obvious reaction to the SBF arrest and charges:
Here are a few excerpts from Turley’s post. There doesn’t appear to be much of a mystery to this move:
The arrest of Sam Bankman-Fried yesterday was sudden and unexpected in light of Bankman-Fried’s plan to testify before Congress. As a criminal defense attorney, my reaction to the arrest last night remains unchanged: this is the first time that I can recall where prosecutors moved aggressively to stop a defendant from making self-incriminating statements. His testimony would have been entirely admissible and likely devastating at trial.
I previously wrote how Bankman-Fried was doing harm to his case by speaking in the media and to Congress. So why would the Justice Department move to stop the self-inflicted damage? You have a major target who was about to voluntarily testify for hours.
That is ordinarily a dream for prosecutors, but the Justice Department moved quickly to prevent that from happening. At that stage, Bankman-Fried was not charged or in custody. He was not protected by Miranda or other constitutional rules from self-incriminating statements.
Indeed, some of us had already warned that he was causing himself considerable damage in making such statements. This was a defendant with a large legal team facing possible criminal charges who seemed eager to speak about his actions and motivations. Most prosecutors would sit back, make popcorn, and watch this unfold.
The curious move led many to question whether the Biden Administration was eager to prevent questions on Bankman-Fried’s political contributions and associations. He was the second highest donor to Democratic causes in the last election cycle. His mother, a law professor at Stanford also heads a major Democratic campaign fund.
…, the charges are likely to make some Democratic figures uncomfortable as this matter enters the criminal process.
... This is the first time that I can recall where the prosecutors, rather than defense counsel, moved effectively to muzzle a defendant.
...
Notably, the eight counts include violating campaign finance laws, a charge that could prove embarrassing for some powerful political interests.
….
... It was a target-rich environment for Congress — and a potential bonanza for prosecutors.
…
Absolutely transparent move at shutting him up, to protect his "friends" on the Hill.
Sure is tiring how globalists use the government to protect themselves from the crimes they commit.