What is the distinction between a raid and a search?
Former Republican Iowa state Sen. Kent Sorenson had his home “searched” by FBI agents little more than two weeks ago, according to his lawyer, likely due to his ties to (and alleged payments from) Michelle Bachmann’s 2012 presidential campaign.
Sorenson is being targeted by the FBI not only because of the Bachmann 2012 presidential campaign, however, but for the Ron Paul 2012 campaign, as well. Both have come under the microscope for allegedly proffering secret payments to the conservative, Christian, Tea Party member who was recently forced to resign from the Iowa Senate due to questionable ethics.
Sorenson had been Bachmann’s Iowa campaign chairman until he promptly switched over to the Ron Paul Revolution in the twilight of the Iowa Republican caucuses. Sorenson’s Des Moines attorney Ted Sporer said,
It was a very thorough federal criminal search warrant. It’s pretty obvious they are looking for communications with a presidential campaign, or third parties working for a presidential campaign.
Sporer went on to say,
It’s hard to unravel. I don’t know if it’s a series of related investigations, or if it’s one big investigation, or multiple unrelated investigations. My gut instinct is it’s one investigation.
Sorenson’s attorney also went on to say of the raid, however,
I wouldn’t call it a raid.? It wasn’t unanticipated… It’s our intention to cooperate at all stages. Obviously, we don’t think Mr. Sorenson was involved in any wrongdoing.
Obviously. But what is the distinction Sporer points the public toward? What is the meaning of distinguishing the event as a “search” rather than a “raid”?
The search seemed to focus on numerous communications between Sorenson and several campaign operatives. FBI agents took computers and other relevant digital materials connected to Sorenson’s work with both the Bachmann and Paul campaigns, including his children’s computers, as well as notebooks and diaries in an investigation that took some seven hours. When asked, the FBI sidestepped questions about the raid, referring inquiries to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Iowa, instead. However, both the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Justice Department in Washington are keeping their lips pursed and their tongues mum regarding the, um… “visit” shall we call it?
The distinction between a “search” and a “raid” is an engineering of public conceptualization regarding the subject matter of the FBI storming in and ransacking Sorenson’s home. It is a framing for how the public should think about Sorenson’s questioned innocence and integrity. A “search” implies protocol, cooperation, innocence–plausible deniability; whereas a “raid” implies guilt, obstruction, and a culmination of events in a less than favorable light. “Raids” are for drug dealers and terrorists. State senators are “searched”.
Sporer’s deflection of the term “raid” simply because the forceful arrival of the FBI was “expected” (hence a “search” rather than a “raid”), is a calculated orchestration aimed toward absolving Sorenson of all wrongdoing. And hey, that’s what lawyers do, right or wrong, but does expecting the heat to come down after committing a crime really constitute that shift from “raid” to “search”? Granted, the charges against Sorenson are only allegations at the moment. However, just because one expects the authorities to show up at some point after one commits a crime does not mean that one is not being raided and merely searched. Searches can be scheduled; raids just show up.
But Sporer’s language is too soft to know the distinction there. Did the FBI schedule a time to come by and search the home with a warrant, or did they just show up in numbers and force demanding entrance to the house? Sorenson’s wife taking their home-schooled children away and out of the house during the search suggests it was a bit more unexpected than they would have liked. They expected heat, but didn’t know when it would arrive. That’s a raid, folks, pure and simple. The only difference is that they are only (at the moment) after evidence, rather than Sorenson, himself. The raid did not end with him in cuffs as so many of them can and do, but then again, we’re talking about a former state senator here. Guilty or innocent, they receive different treatment than the rest of us. Better treatment. Loftier treatment.
Earlier this year a special investigator for the Iowa Senate Ethics Committee found “probable cause” that Sorenson broke the law and accepted money for presidential campaign work, including $7,500 a month from Bachmann’s PAC and an uncashed check for $25,000 from a Ron Paul operative working on the Paul campaign.
Initially, Bachmann accused the dubious senator of jumping ship for the highest bidder, but quickly shut down when asked whether Sorenson had been paid by her own campaign, as well. Bachmann’s projection onto the Paul campaign speaks for itself. Sorenson, of course, denies being paid by either campaign.
The payments in question are now under the scrutiny of the FBI, the Federal Election Commission (FEC), and the House Ethics Committee. Bachmann also announced she would not seek another term last spring.
Circumstantially at the very least, it all looks quite grim for Republicans as they approach the election year. Just remember that the guilty will use any tools necessary to convince you of their innocence. Politicians will use money, influence, stature, and words, free, simple words to orchestrate their freedom and enterprise at all times, but especially when they are under the knife, and they live under the knife. They know what they’re doing and they know how to play it. So long as we keep our wits about us, though, let us hope we can see through the veneer and recognize not only the difference between a “search” and a “raid”, but also become more fully aware of the constructs and apparatuses that help those in power continually, subtly, pull the wool over our eyes.
FBI Takes Computers From Former State Sen. Kent Sorenson’s Home
Edited and published by CB.
