Attorney General Merrick Garland Denies Political Motivation in Trump Cases

Attorney General Merrick Garland has refuted claims that the timing of two federal cases against former President Donald Trump was intended to influence the 2024 presidential election. In an interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Garland emphasized that the Department of Justice follows established practices, and its prosecutors are nonpartisan.

Garland clarified that the Justice Department generally refrains from taking significant actions or filing charges within a month or so of an election to avoid potential political influence. However, he emphasized that the cases against Trump do not fall within that timeframe. Garland stated, “Prosecutors, special counsel, they follow the facts and the law where they lead.”

When asked if the timing of the cases was aimed at affecting Trump’s chances for reelection, Garland firmly denied any such intentions. He underscored that Justice Department prosecutors remain nonpartisan and are not swayed by partisan considerations.

The interview touched upon topics previously addressed during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on September 20. Garland reiterated his independence from the White House and Congress, emphasizing that he represents the American people.

Garland also addressed allegations of interference in investigations related to Trump and Hunter Biden. He clarified that he had not been involved with special counsel Jack Smith regarding the Trump cases or special counsel David Weiss concerning the Hunter Biden case. Garland pointed out that Weiss was appointed U.S. attorney for Delaware by Trump and initiated the investigation into Hunter Biden during the Trump administration. During his confirmation hearing, Garland pledged not to interfere with Weiss’s inquiry.

The Attorney General discussed the Justice Department’s policy of refraining from commenting on pending cases. He explained that this practice is designed to protect the privacy and civil liberties of individuals under investigation and to safeguard witnesses from intimidation. Garland emphasized that investigations may take various directions before reaching a decision to charge or not charge. Publicly revealing the details of ongoing investigations could potentially alter witness testimony and hinder the process.