Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the ongoing jury deliberations over the alleged crimes of Senator Robert Menendez (D, N.J.). An alternate juror has said that she would have voted to acquit. It is a surprising result given the significant gifts showered on Menendez. The best witness against Menendez might have been Menendez himself.
Here is the column:
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the allegations against Hillary Clinton and her campaign. Yesterday, the controversy surrounding the Russian dossier deepened after it was disclosed that the co-founder of Fusion GPS (the company hired by the Clinton campaign to do the dossier) met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya before she met with Donald Trump Jr. Indeed, she met with the Fusion officials shortly before and shortly after she met with Trump Jr. in Trump Tower. Just hours before on June 9, 2016, Fusion co-founder and ex-Wall Street Journal reporter Glenn Simpson was with Veselnitskaya in a Manhattan federal courtroom. Simpson and Fusion GPS were hired by BakerHostetler, which represented Russian firm Prevezon through Veselnitskaya.
Here is the column:
Ok, maybe counsel over shot the jury a bit in the trial of Senator Robert Menendez. The Senator is facing allegations of bribes from Florida eye doctor Salomon Melgen ranging from luxury vacations to luxury flights to campaign contributions. After presenting a fairly complex case of gifts, influence peddling, and nuanced criminal standards, a question can back from the jury. The juror asked the judge “what is a senator?”
Continue reading “Menendez Case Goes To Jury . . . Jurors Sends Out Question “What Is A Senator?””
Yesterday, we discussed the potentially precarious ethical position of Hillary Clinton’s campaign lawyer Marc Elias, who allegedly denied media reports that the Clinton campaign had any connection to the controversial Russian Dossier. After the Washington Post ran an extensive story on how the Clinton Campaign and Democratic National Committee hired controversial research firm Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Donald Trump in Russia in the “Russian Dossier” matter. Reporters at the New York Times have accused Elias of lying in past categorical denials of any connection to Clinton or the DNC. The reports indicate that not only did the Clinton team fund the opposition research but that Elias may have been the person handling much of the arrangements. Now Elias’ position has worsened after a report out of Congress that he was present in an interview when campaign chairman John Podesta denied any campaign role in the funding or acquisition of the dossier.
Below is my column in the Washington Post on the movement to remove President Donald Trump through Section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Richard Painter, the chief White House ethics lawyer under George W. Bush recently declared the “answer” to Trump suggestion of a Democrat and Russian collusion in the election is “Amendment 25.” Previously, Painter wrote a piece with clinical psychologist Leanne Watt, Ph.D. where they discussed the “downward mental health spiral” of Trump. They identified the illness as “extreme narcissism or self-centeredness” as well as “an extreme anti-social tendency, an inability to understand how other people feel.” That, Painter suggests, is enough for the first removal of a president under the 25th Amendment in the history of the country. If so, half of the presidents could have been removed for their “self-centeredness” and “anti-social tendencies.” I strongly disagree with such interpretations.
Here is the column:
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on third round of litigation over the immigration orders issued by President Donald Trump. On Friday, in Honolulu, U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson converted the earlier temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction. With the two decisions in Hawaii and Maryland, the appeals should move on an expedited basis back to the Supreme Court (which is expected to dismiss the second immigration case from the second round of litigation this week). Like T3, EO3 could be named “Redemption” as the Administration gears up for what is likely (and hopefully) the final round in this series.
Here is the column:
Continue reading ““REDEMPTION”: EO3 AND THE TRAVEL BAN 3.0 SEQUEL”
Senator Robert Menendez and his close friend Salomon Melgen, a Florida eye doctor, are heading to a jury decision after U.S. District Judge William Walls ruled that the indictment against them for public corruption would stand. Menendez not only stands in considerable jeopardy for his highly questionable relationship with Melgen but his conviction could flip the seat in the Senate since Governor Chris Christie would appoint his successor. ( A new governor will be elected for January).
There are now eighteen states and the District of Columbia lined up to challenge the executive order by President Donald Trump to rescind the Obama order giving insurance companies billions in subsidies . . . without an appropriation of Congress. As explained below, this challenge advances a rather curious claim that Trump cannot rescind an earlier order found to be flagrantly unconstitutional by a federal court. In most high-profile litigation cases, counsel spends considerable time exploring whether a challenge will allow a bad case to make bad law on appeal. That would seem the most likely outcome here but much of the litigation by Democratic Attorneys General have been driven more by political than legal calculations. Voters now expect every act of Trump to be challenged and no Democratic AG wants to be the only one to sit out a challenge to an unpopular order. The result is a type of perpetual litigation machine where bad precedent is being cranked out because it is viewed as good politics.
Here is the column:
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the proposals for new gun control measures in the wake of the Las Vegas massacre. As I discuss below, there are some obvious possible measures that could pass constitutional muster like banning bump stocks (which allow semi-automatic weapons to perform more like automatic weapons) and conversion kits. However, these proposals would not have prevented the massacre. There are many “work arounds” for semi-automatic weapons and Paddock would have likely passed any enhanced background checks. Nevertheless, GOP members have expressed interest in some additional gun control measures.
Here is the column:
Scott Fitzgerald once said “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.” If so, Republican Rep. Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania is a certifiable genius. However, in this case, Murphy’s two opposing views have cost him his seat in Congress. Murphy, who has run on a pro-life platform in securing eight terms in Congress, has struggled to explain emails where he asked his mistress to get an abortion. He has now announced his retirement from Congress to “take personal time.” The story is credited to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
I just returned from a terrific event at Christopher Newport University on Constitution Day — a debate with Professor John Yoo. While we were delighted by the large number of students who appeared to listen to the debate, we discussed the recent poll on the lack of knowledge of citizens. A recent poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) found that, in a survey of over 1,000 citizens, only a quarter were able to name all three branches of the federal government. We just discussed the poll showing that four out of ten Americans cannot name a single right under the first amendment. Once again, these polls leave us with the troubling prospect of a woefully uneducated public on their own government.
While the world did not end as announced on Saturday (which has proven an incredible inconvenience for those of us having to teach next week), the Trump travel ban did end on Sunday. When the Supreme Court lifted a significant part of the injunctions imposed on the bans by lower courts, there was a surprising footnote in the short order that I discussed at the time. The Court indicated that the Trump Administration had not asked for an expedited hearing before October. That set the travel ban up for what I described as “planned obsolescence” to expire shortly before the scheduled oral argument.
For years, we have been discussing how airlines have repeatedly misled Congress and the public about baggage fees, which were always an avenue to bilk customers of billions. Now a new report confirms again that this is not about fuel costs or falling revenues. The airlines are continuing to cut space for passengers, add charges for simple comforts, and raising baggage fees as they hit record profits. The U.S. airlines alone pulled in a record $1.2 billion in bag fees and another $737.5 million in reservation change fees in just the second quarter of 2017.
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) has become an icon for the left in her unrelenting calls for impeachment of President Donald Trump and tapping into the blind rage across the country. That appeal to the base however took a worrisome turn this week as Waters rallied supporters around the assurance that impeachment is anything they want to say it is. As I stated recently to the Rolling Stones, this view was made popular by Gerald Ford and has been uniformly condemned by constitutional experts. Waters is dismissing the constitutional obligation to find “high crimes and misdemeanors” in assuring supporters that they can simply get rid of Trump on a muscle vote. Political convenience has long been the enemy of constitutional principle, but this effort is highly dangerous for our country as a whole. We are living in an age of rage and Waters’ approach would create an channel to direct that lethal rage into the heart of our political system.
Continue reading “Maxine Waters: “Impeachment Is . . . Whatever The Congress Says It Is””
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the allegations raised by the White House over the alleged misconduct of former FBI Director James Comey. It is clear that Comey violated FBI rules and regulations — offenses that would have likely cost any of his subordinates their jobs at the Bureau when he was director. However, there remains a virtual news blackout on the obvious violations and their implications.
Here is the column.