SOUNDED LIKE SOMETHING FROM THE
JUBILEE.
I HAVE NO IDEA.
YOU HANDLED IT WELL.
LET’S GO TO JONATHAN TURLEY, THE
G.W. LAW PROFESSOR.
THERE’S A REVOLT GOING ON OVER
OVERLY LENIENT PROSECUTORS.
WHERE IS THIS GOING?
>> IT’S AN EXTRAORDINARY THING.
THE COURT SAID YOU’RE ACTING
LIKE A KING.
THAT’S WHAT AN UNCHECKED
SOVEREIGN IS.
THAT’S NOT YOUR JOB.
YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO ENFORCE THE
LAW.
IT’S INCREDIBLE.
THINK ABOUT THIS MOMENT.
YOU HAD A UNION OF PROSECUTORS
GOING TO COURT AND SEEING THE
DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR TELLING
THEM TO DO SOMETHING UNLAWFUL
AND THE COURT AGREEING.
IT’S AN INCREDIBLE INDICTMENT OF
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY HIMSELF.
THE COURT DOES SAY, BY THE WAY,
THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW
BUT DOESN’T MEAN THAT YOU HAVE
TO AGGRESSIVELY OR PASSIONATELY
DO SO.
SO YOU CAN CITE THE THREE
STRIKES LAW, BUT YOU DON’T
NECESSARILY HAVE TO SUPPORT IT.
ULTIMATELY SAID THE JUDGE COULD
DISREGARD THE LAW.
THAT MAY NOT GO WELL WITH SOME
LEGISLATORS THAT BELIEVED THAT
THEY WERE FOLLOWING A PUBLIC
OUTCRY TO IMPOSE LONGER
SENTENCES.
>> Neil: JONATHAN, THE ONE THING
THAT STUCK OUT TO ME WAS THE
APPEALS COURT SAYING WE CAN
CONCLUDE THE VOTERS AND THE
LEGISLATURE CREATED A DUTY THAT
REQUIRES PROSECUTORS TO COMPLETE
FELONY CONVICTIONS TO
ALTERNATIVE
ALTERNATIVE.
IF YOU HAVE A DISTRICT ATTORNEY,
LET’S SAY NOT ONLY IN L.A. BUT
ELSEWHERE BECAUSE HAS POPPED UP
IN NEW YORK CITY WHERE THERE’S A
SENTIMENT THAT IT’S LIKE A
TURNSTILE.
YOU’RE TAKEN IN BY POLICE AND
LET GO, YOU’RE GOING TOO FAR.
YOU HAVE FLEXIBLE THE TO
DETERMINE HOW YOU ACT, BUT
ANOTHER THING TO PUT PEOPLE IN
DANGER.
WHERE IS THIS GOING?
>> WELL, NEIL, WE’VE SEEN AN
INTEREST ISSING TREND RECENTLY
WITH A LOT OF THE FUNDING BY
GEORGE SOROS AND OTHER GROUPS TO
PUSH FAR LEFT PROSECUTORS.
THIS IS NOT AN OFFICE THAT IS
ATTRACTED THOSE TYPES OF
CAMPAIGNS.
BUT THEY WERE ENORMOUSLY
SUCCESSFUL.
GEORGE SOROS AND OTHERS GOT THEM
IN POSITION PEOPLE LIKE GASCON
AND OTHERS.
BUT THEY HAVE NOT GONE OVER WELL
WITH THE PUBLIC AFTER THEY SAID
THEY WOULD DO WHAT THEY’RE DO.
THEY’RE FAIRLY HOSTILE.
THEY HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND THE PUBLIC
IS REACTING BECAUSE WE’RE
OBVIOUSLY SEEING INCREASING IN
CRIME, PEOPLE ARE NOT FEELING
SAFE.
NOW YOU HAVE A COURT THAT IS
FORCED TO TELL THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY, YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE
LAW.
AND THESE PROSECUTORS ARE RIGHT.
WHAT YOU’RE ASKING OF THEM TO DO
IS UNETHICAL.
THEY TOOK AND OATH NOT JUST TO
ENFORCE THE LAW BUT TO DO SO IN
LETTER AND SPIRIT.
>> Neil: JONATHAN, WHILE I HAVE
YOU, PETER NAVARRO IS STILL IN
THIS FEDERAL COURTROOM IN
WASHINGTON.
HE WAS INDICTED ON CONTEMPT OF
CONGRESS CHARGES FOR RENEWING TO
TESTIFY BEFORE THE JANUARY 6
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE.
FOR ALL WE KNOW, THIS COULD DRAG
ON AWHILE.
HE’S BEEN VERY BLUNT IN THERE
AND HE DOESN’T THINK IT IS FAIR
NOR HIS ARREST AT AN AIRPORT
LAST NIGHT.
WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THIS?
YOU KNOW, THERE’S OTHERS THAT
HAVE BEEN SIMILARLY FINGERED BY
THIS COMMITTEE FOR REFUSING TO
TESTIFY AHEAD OF THESE OPENING
TRIALS OR MOMENTS SLATED FOR AS
EARLY AS NEXT WEEK.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> THE TIMING IS VERY
INTERESTING.
WE’RE ABOUT TO SEE THE START OF
THESE HAIRINGS.
THE DEMOCRATS ARE PUTTING A
GREAT DEAL OF INVESTMENT IN TO
THIS.
THEY WANT TO FRAME THIS QUESTION
FOR THE MID-TERM ELECTIONS AND
GET THROUGH THIS BEFORE THE
HOUSE COULD CHANGE CONTROL IN
TERMS OF PARTIES.
BUT NAVARRO TOOK AN ILL
CONSIDERED COURSE HERE.
HE DID NOT COOPERATE AT ALL.
THAT’S USUALLY NOT GOOD.
IT’S BETTER TO COOPERATE TO SOME
EXTEND INCLUDING SHOWING UP EVEN
IF YOU INVOKE THE PRIVILEGE TO
MAKE MATTERS WORSE FOR PETER
NAVARRO, HE PUBLISHED A BOOK AND
TALKED ABOUT THE UNDERLYING
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE SUBPOENA.
SO YOU HAVE THAT DISCONNECT OF
CLAIMING PRIVILEGE WHERE YOU
WON’T GIVE THE SAME INFORMATION
TO CONGRESS.
HE WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH BETTER
SERVED TO GO TO CONGRESS AND AT
LEAST COOPERATE TO THE EXTENT
THAT HE’S ALREADY SPOKEN
PUBLICLY.
SO THE CHANCES NOR DEFENSE HERE
ARE RATHER DIM.
I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY THE
BEST BET FOR THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DID
NOT ALLOW FOR A VOLUNTARY
SURRENDER.
YOU DON’T HAVE A RIGHT TO
VOLUNTARY SURRENDER.
THIS IS NOT A FLIGHT RISK.
HE WAS IN COURT CHALLENGING THE
SUBPOENA.
I DON’T KNOW WHY THE BIDEN
ADMINISTRATION OR THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT HERE WANTED TO DO AN
IN-PERSON ARREST AND HAUL HIM
OFF.
>> Neil: IT WAS A LITTLE
DRAMATIC.
LET’S GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON
CONGRESS CHANGES HANDS AFTER THE
MID TERMS.
REPUBLICANS TAKE OVER THE HOUSE
AND THE SENATE.
ALL OF THIS GOES AWAY, RIGHT?
THE INVESTIGATION, THE JANUARY
6 -- ALL OF THAT GOES AWAY,
RIGHT?
DOES THAT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT
CHARGES AGAINST INDIVIDUAL
FORMER TRUMP ADMINISTRATION
OFFICIALS GO AWAY?
>> YEAH, THIS IS WHERE IT GETS A
BIT WICKED.
LET’S SAY IT SWITCHES CONTROL.
THE REPUBLICANS EFFECTIVELY DO A
RETROACTIVE RECISION AND SAY WE
DON’T BELIEVE THAT HE WAS IN
CONTEMPT.
WE DON’T BELIEVE THIS COMMITTEE
WAS PROPERLY COMPOSED.
TELLS THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
THAT.
DOES THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAVE
TO COMPLY WITH THAT?
I’M NOT SO SURE.
THIS IS A COMPLETED ACT AND THE
VOTE OF CONTEMPT WAS COMPLETED
BY THE EARLIER CONGRESS.
MOST PEOPLE WOULD SAY THAT IF
THE CURRENT CONGRESS DOESN’T
FEEL IT’S THE VICTIM OF
CONTEMPT, THAT THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL SHOULD YIELD TO IT.
HE DOESN’T HAVE TO YIELD TO IT.
WE COULD HAVE A VERY WEIRD
SITUATION WHERE CONGRESS NO
LONGER FEELS THAT ITS A VICTIM
AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IS
STILL PROSECUTING VICTIMIZATION.
>> Neil: JONATHAN TURLEY, THANKS