DOJ decisions could sink Trump efforts to avoid Capitol riot ...

He did this via decisions involving former Trump acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala.Both Department of Justice decisions undermine claims of “executive privilege” that Trump is sure to assert if he is called before the House committee.Both Department of Justice decisions undermine claims of “executive privilege” that Trump is sure to assert if he is called before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Garland managed to extract himself deftly from his position between a rock and a hard case, as it were.Like Brooks, Trump has also asserted that he was acting within the scope of his employment when he spoke at the pre-insurrection rally.The fact that Garland distinguished between these superficially similar fact patterns underscores the principle central to the attorney general’s stewardship: The rule of law governs, not politics.Which brings us to the three main implications of Garland’s decisions.First, the noncertification of Brooks’ Westfall Act defense likely spells big trouble for a Trump assertion of that defense in Swalwell’s suit.