Below is my column in Fox.com on the controversy involving Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., and his pulling the fire alarm during the voting on the stopgap budget measure.
Here is the column: Continue reading “No, The Bowman Controversy Does Not Warrant Expulsion”
Below is my column in The Hill on moving forward with the Biden impeachment inquiry. The column discusses four possible impeachment articles that could be brought by the House and what the House would need to prove.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Four Biden Impeachment Articles and What the House Will Need to Prove”
Below is my column in The Messenger on my response to Steve Bannon and others who were upset that I testified this week that, while there is ample evidence to launch the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of President Joe Biden, I do not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment. That is the purpose of the inquiry in establishing a full record for such articles of impeachment. By withholding judgment and building a record, the Republicans are restoring a regular order to this constitutional process.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “The Proper Way to Impeach: Why Steve Bannon was Right for the Wrong Reason”
Below is my column in the Daily Beast responding to the attack launched by Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) during my testimony in the first hearing of the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of President Joseph Biden. Krishnamoorthi falsely suggested that I represented and supported Tom Green, a polygamist who was convicted of child rape. While I attempted to explain that that was untrue, Krishnamoorthi would not allow me to finish and then quickly left the hearing room. I never represented Green, I condemned Green in those columns, and said that he was justifiably prosecuted. The columns dealt with my opposition to “morality legislation.” I was representing The Sister Wives family both during a criminal investigation and my later challenge to the underlying law. I continue to oppose such laws that have been used against a wide range of religious and social groups, including LGBT individuals. I never thought that a liberal Democrat would attack me for such pro bono representation in support of civil liberties. Continue reading “The Green Scare and the New McCarthyism: A Response to Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi”
Below is my column in USA Today on what the Menendez indictment might say about the Hunter Biden investigation. From the luxury cars to massive amounts of money to even their choice of counsel, the two scandals have striking similarities.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “Tale of Two Scandals: The Striking Similarities in the Menendez and Biden Cases”
Below is my column on the Menendez indictment and the curious “Mattress Defense” put forward by the senator. For most people, it seems like a defense that is unlikely to win over a jury, but that may not be the purpose. Menendez may be trying to replicate his “win” six years ago by securing not an acquittal but a hung jury.
Here is the column: Continue reading “The Mattress Defense: How Robert Menendez May Be Putting his Money on a Hung Jury . . .Again”
Below is my column in The Hill on the indictment of Senator Robert Menendez for bribery, again. As predicted in this column, his colleagues are now expressing disgust at his corruption. However, make no mistake about it, Menendez is not being abandoned due to his corrupt inclination but his conspicuous consumption.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Robert Menendez Broke the ‘Goldilocks Rule’ of Corruption”
Below is my column in The Hill on the impeachment inquiry and one striking pattern among the alleged crimes facing Hunter Biden: they all served to conceal the influence peddling efforts to sell access or influence to his father. The investigation and charging of Hunter Biden has, thus far, been strikingly surgical in avoiding this pattern of concealment.
New York Times columnist (and my former classmate at The University of Chicago) David Brooks said this week that the corruption scandal “merits an inquiry. It does not merit … an impeachment inquiry.” While I understand the distinction, I do not understand the basis for it in this situation. There are a variety of alleged crimes related to this corruption that may involve the President. There are also allegations like abuse of office that have been cited in past impeachments. We do not know if those connections exist but, if they do, they would clearly constitute impeachable offenses. Moreover, it is unlikely that we will get those answers without an impeachment inquiry. An impeachment inquiry does not inevitably lead to impeachment, but it does tend to lead to answers on whether impeachable conduct has occurred.
Here is the column: Continue reading “How The Surgical Charging of Hunter Biden Ignores a Pattern of Concealment”
Below is a longer version of my column in the New York Post on the gag order motion docketed Friday night in Washington, D.C. by Special Counsel Jack Smith. While described by Smith as “narrowly tailored,” even a cursory consideration of the broad scope and vague terms belies such a claim. It would sharply limit the ability of former President Donald Trump to publicly discuss the evidence and allegations in a case that is now at the center of the presidential campaign.
Here is the column:
Below is my column in The Messenger on the reason why an impeachment inquiry is warranted. I do not believe that a case for impeachment has been made, but there is clearly a need for an investigation into a growing array of allegations facing the President in this corruption scandal.
I also reject the notion that, because a conviction is unlikely in the Democratic-controlled Senate, the House should not go down this road. I rejected the same argument made by some Republicans during the Trump impeachment. The House has a separate constitutional duty in the investigation of potential impeachable offenses and to pass articles of impeachment if those allegations are found to be valid. My objection to the Trump impeachments were first and foremost the failure to fully investigate the underlying allegations and to create a full record to support the articles of impeachment. The Senate has its own constitutional function under the Constitution that it can either choose to fulfill or to ignore. A House impeachment holds both constitutional and historical significance separate from any conviction. That does not mean that grounds for impeachment will be found in this inquiry. While the President deserves a presumption of innocence in this process, the public deserves answers to these questions.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Five Facts That Compel the Biden Impeachment Inquiry”
Below is my column in the Hill on release of the final report of the Special Purpose Grand Jury in Georgia. The recommendation for sweeping indictments involving 39 people, including current and former senators, only magnifies fears over political prosecutions. For many of us, the inclusion of figures like the senators reflects a rogue grand jury. However, Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) insisted that Sen. Lindsey Graham was “lucky” not to be indicted. According to Schiff, Graham calling Georgia officials about the counting or discarding of votes was enough to justify a criminal charge. Presumably, since Graham could be indicted with Trump, Schiff would also consider him eligible to be barred from ever running again for office under the 14th Amendment, as discussed below. It is the “why not” approach to criminal and constitutional law.
Here is my column:
Continue reading “The “Why Not” Culture: Why the Georgia Final Report Should Worry Us All”
To paraphrase Hamlet, there is “something rotten” in the state of Delaware. Filings in the Delaware Supreme Court this week were made public in the litigation involving Mac Isaac, the owner of the computer repair shop where Hunter Biden abandoned his now infamous laptop. Miranda Devine at the New York Post has a detailed story on the new evidence. It appears that Hunter Biden is terribly embarrassed by a laptop that may not be his and pictures that may not show him. I previously wrote how his countersuit against Isaac would go forward on this bizarre basis in claiming privacy harm. Well, Hunter’s performance has proven positively Shakespearean as he tries to maintain these conflicted legal and factual claims. Continue reading “Hunter Plays Hamlet on the Delaware: New Filings in the Laptop Litigation Take a Shakespearean Twist”
Below is my column in the New York Post in response to the attack this week by Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe. I am honestly saddened by the ad hominem attacks that have become common place with many academics like Tribe. There was a time when legal disagreements could be passionate but not personal. The use of personal insults and vulgar trash talking were avoided in our profession. Now even law deans have called Supreme Court justices “hacks” to the delight of their followers. I have always said that there are good-faith arguments on both sides of the 14th Amendment theory despite my strong disagreement with the theory. The public would benefit from that debate based on precedent rather than personalities.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “Ragefully Wrong: A Response to Professor Laurence Tribe”
Below is my column in The Messenger on the new ranking of colleges and universities on the protection of free speech on campuses. There are few surprises on the list with many of the most elite universities filling out the bottom of ranking as the most hostile to free expression. Harvard now holds the ignoble distinction of being the most anti-free speech university in the country. For full disclosure, George Washington University (where I teach) was again ranked “below average” on free speech, coming in at 185 out of 248.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “Crimson Tide: A New Study Shows the Continued Decline of Free Speech on Campuses”
Below is my column in USA Today on adoption of some Democrats of arguments and rationales once used against the left to silence or jail them. Pundits and politicians are becoming the very thing that they have long condemned in this age of rage. It is realization of Nietzsche’s monster theory.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Fighting Monsters: How Democrats are Adopting Rationales Once Used Against the Left to Silence orJail Critics”