Constitutional Law, Criminal law, Politics, Society

White House: diGenova and Toensing Will Not Represent Trump

1600_executive_branchThe White House announced today that President Trump will not hire Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing as counsel due to conflicts of interest.  The announcement of diGenova’s selection led to a chorus of objections from his being a “television lawyer” to a conspiracy theorists.  I recently wrote a column that noted that diGenova was the former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and considered one of the most experienced lawyers in the city.  However, there was reportedly opposition in the White House including reportedly from John Dowd who resigned around the same time.  Dowd has not spoken publicly to confirm or deny that reported position.

Jay Sekulow (who reportedly favored diGenova’s addition to the team) announced on Sunday morning that “The president is disappointed that conflicts prevent Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing from joining the president’s special counsel legal team. However, those conflicts do not prevent them from assisting the president in other legal matters. The president looks forward to working with them.”

The only conflict that has been reported involves Toensing who is representing Mark Corallo, the former spokesman for Mr. Trump’s legal team in 2017.  There are reports that Corallo may have given statements inimical to the position of aides like Hope Hicks on obstruction allegations.

Trump in the meantime is tweeting from Florida and denied that he was having trouble enlisting new legal talent. He denounced such stories as a “Fake News narrative.”  He stated “Fame & fortune will never be turned down by a lawyer, though some are conflicted.”  He assured his followers that “many lawyers and top law firms want to represent me in the Russia case” and that reports of flux on his team were a “Fake News narrative.”

 

The decision not to hire diGenova and Toensing leaves the team one person short but there remains ample legal staffing.  The question remains whether the departure of Dowd reflects a change in strategy and whether the President will agree to sit down with Mueller. I recently wrote a column that, if Mueller is willing to confine the questions to the four categories and make this a one-time sitdown, it may be the best deal in an otherwise bad situation.

 

106 thoughts on “White House: diGenova and Toensing Will Not Represent Trump”

  1. Pingback: White House: diGenova and Toensing Will Not Represent Trump — JONATHAN TURLEY – CGFCF Peace and conflict resolution education

  2. Politico- another incumbent Republican in the House cites Trump as the reason he is opting out of running for reelection.

    1. That’s almost 40 Republican incumbents who won’t be running for re election. After Conor Lamb took one of the reddest districts in Pennsylvania the writing is on the wall, and Trump is killing the Republican Party.

      Have a great day!

      1. The Republican brand got more tarnished by the party’s impeachment of Pennsylvania judges who found against anti-democracy gerrymandering.
        The SCOTUS majority plans to help the Republicans by siding with the 17 out of 19 amicus briefs linked to the Kochtopus in the Janus case.

  3. That REJECT in the White House, cannot give anyone the time of day, without LYING about it. Everyone, he opens his Orange mouth, lies come falling out. Such a sick imbecile.!!!
    Joe DeGenova and Victoria Toensing, had someone praying for them. What a lucky break.!

    1. Trump lies as if he believes it’s part of his job description. Add to that his ignorance and depravity and you have the worst President in US history, not excluding Buchanan and Harding.

      Cordially, Bill

  4. The professor asserts, “… I recently wrote a column that, if Mueller is willing to confine the questions to the four categories and make this a one-time sitdown, it may be the best deal in an otherwise bad situation. …”

    Justice on the Supreme Court, Robert H. Jackson stated, “Any lawyer worth his salt”, today we would say his or her, “will tell the suspect”, his client, “in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances.”
    Watts v. Indiana, 338 U.S. 49, 59.

    Here, Mueller is the “cop” and prosecutor.

    President Trump is, perhaps, the last client who should speak to the “cop” or prosecutor.

    Once again I find the professor espousing verbiage of a criminal defense lawyer who cannot find the courthouse with a road map or g.p.s.
    dennis hanna

    1. Your point is that Trump is no more than a run of the mill defendant… the nation has nothing to gain from a process that acknowledges, there is much at stake when the allegations are against a sitting President?

      Pres. Ford held a different opinion.

Comments are closed.