Category: Politics

GoFundMe: McCabe launches Online Drive For Donations For A Legal Defense

screen-shot-2018-03-29-at-9-15-07-pm.pngFormer FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe has launched an online fundraiser on GoFundMe to raise $150,000 to cover the legal costs for McCabe.  Money has poured in with adjustment of the “goal” upward to $250,000.  It has now surpassed that goal.  What is interesting is that McCabe is moving to tap into the contributions before the public learns what caused career Justice officials to seek the unprecedented termination of the former acting FBI Director.

Continue reading “GoFundMe: McCabe launches Online Drive For Donations For A Legal Defense”

Beware The “Lawyer Acquaintance”: How Fifty-Six Words May Have Just Sunk Trump and Cohen In The Daniels Litigation

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_cropped790px-A_Streetcar_Named_Desire_(1951)President Donald Trump’s struggle with the Stormy Daniels scandal has become Washington’s version of A Streetcar Named Desire . . . without the gritty charm. Rather than shutdown this litigation over a sordid alleged affair, the President has been left looking like Stanley Kowalski declaring to Blanche DuBois that he has “a lawyer acquaintance” who can “study these out.” For Trump, that “lawyer acquaintance” was Michael Cohen, a fix it lawyer who has become infamous for threatening women connected with Trump with financial and legal ruin. Until, that is, former porn star Stormy Daniels (the Blanche DeBois of this drama) called his bluff. Now, Trump’s fix it man has a fix it man, David Schwartz, who proclaimed that he also has “studied things out” and has threatening both Daniels and her lawyer with ruin. The problem is that Schwartz may have just cratered the case for both his client, Cohen, and Cohen’s client, Trump. Schwartz has finally declared that Trump was never aware of the agreement negotiated for him by Cohen. That could spell serious trouble not only for Cohen but also Trump. Instead of a final scene screaming “Stella!,” it may be “Schwartz!” that is heard throughout Foggy Bottom.

Continue reading “Beware The “Lawyer Acquaintance”: How Fifty-Six Words May Have Just Sunk Trump and Cohen In The Daniels Litigation”

Federal Court Permits Emoluments Challenge To Move Forward

1600_executive_branchA federal judge issued a surprising decision that allowed part of an emoluments challenge to proceed toward trial.  The opinion has been widely misreported, but still represents a rare win for those arguing that President Donald Trump is accepting prohibited payments from foreign governments at the various Trump properties.  However, the decision is only on the threshold standing question and did not address the merits of the constitutional claim.  Moreover, United States District Judge Peter Messitte dramatically narrowed the action to only claims related to the Trump Hotel in Washington, D.C.  These is considerable debate over the meaning of the Constitution’s “emoluments” clause.  There are clearly good-faith arguments that such payments fall within the meaning of the language, but I remain highly skeptical.  Even with the much reduced action, I think Messitte is wrong and that the action should have been dismissed in its entirety.  Previous actions have been dismissed.

Continue reading “Federal Court Permits Emoluments Challenge To Move Forward”

Mount Holyoke Women’s College Orders Professors Not To Call Students “Women”

downloadWe have previously discussed the national trend in colleges and universities to require faculty to use an increasing number of different pronouns for students. Faculty questioning such alternative pronouns have been subject to discipline or condemnation. There is even a move in states like California to criminalize the failure to use alternative pronouns.  Now, the women’s college Mount Holyoke has ordered faculty to avoid calling its students “women” since some students may identify as non-genders or different genders.

Continue reading “Mount Holyoke Women’s College Orders Professors Not To Call Students “Women””

In the Wake Of Stormy Daniels: Trump Must Face A Credible Threat From An Incredible Character

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_croppedBelow is my column in The Hill Newspaper on the potential legal fallout from the Stormy Daniels interview on CBS 60 Minutes.  Notably, yesterday the White House again expressly denied not just the “allegations” but specifically the allegation that President Donald Trump had a sexual tryst with the porn star.  That direct denial is precisely what I have warned against in this and other columns.  While the Daniels matter is not currently on the table with the Special Counsel, the worsening situation only reinforces why I believe Trump should close the deal on a sit down on the four prior subject matters lead out by Robert Mueller.  Notably, my repeatedly stated view that Trump should sever any ties with his radioactive personal counsel Michael Cohen does not appear likely since Trump just arranged a dinner with Cohen at Mar-a-Lago.  

Here is the column:

Continue reading “In the Wake Of Stormy Daniels: Trump Must Face A Credible Threat From An Incredible Character”

Democratic Attorneys General To Challenge Addition of Citizenship Question On U.S. Census

Continue reading “Democratic Attorneys General To Challenge Addition of Citizenship Question On U.S. Census”

North Carolina Middle School Suspends 13-Year-Old Boy For Drawing Stick Figure With Gun

Screen Shot 2018-03-27 at 8.20.24 PM We have yet another ridiculous example of school officials applying “zero tolerance” policies against a kid for an innocent page of doodling.  A 13-year-old boy in the seventh grade drew a stick figure holding a gun and another holding two knives and was promptly suspended from Roseboro-Salemburg Middle School.

Continue reading “North Carolina Middle School Suspends 13-Year-Old Boy For Drawing Stick Figure With Gun”

Report: Trump Met With Michael Cohen Night Before Stormy Daniels Interview

440px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Donald_TrumpI recently wrote a column that argued that President Donald Trump would be wise to accept the offer (and reported parameters) for a sit down with Special Counsel Bob Mueller. In addition, I argued for another obvious and long overdue action: severing any and all ties with his personal counsel Michael Cohen.  Cohen’s reckless and ham-handed lawyering has seriously undermined Trump’s position and he could very well find his bar license in jeopardy due to his prior actions.  Despite Cohen’s radioactive reputation and worsening legal position, Trump decided that the night before the 60 Minutes interview with Stormy Daniels was a good time to have dinner with Cohen at Mar-O-Lago.  It was a baffling decision when any competent lawyer would be insulating Trump from Cohen.

Continue reading “Report: Trump Met With Michael Cohen Night Before Stormy Daniels Interview”

Turkish President Erdogan Calls For Anti-War Students “Terrorists” In Latest Crackdown On Free Speech

Continue reading “Turkish President Erdogan Calls For Anti-War Students “Terrorists” In Latest Crackdown On Free Speech”

Mr. President, Take The Mueller Deal

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the reported proposal that President Donald Trump sit down with Special Counsel Robert Mueller to address four specific areas of inquiry.  Those areas just happen to be the ones where Trump has the strongest and most obvious defenses.  If the deal is that this would be a one-time sit down (and any later issues would be addressed in written interrogatories), it is a deal that would be hard to pass up. It is not without considerable risks of course, particularly for any false statement allegations. However, if the President were ready to be properly prepped and listens to counsel, he could thread this needle.  It would also avoid a fight over a subpoena.  While the law on the question is hardly settled, Mueller could win such a court fight and force Trump into an interview.  Both the political and constitutional costs of such a fight should be avoided.

Here is the column:

Continue reading “Mr. President, Take The Mueller Deal”

Study Criticizes Engineering Programs For Focusing On Math and Science Rather Than Political Concerns

One_of_Diamonds_Mathematical_instruments_1702We recently discussed how University of Illinois math professor Rochelle Gutierrez triggered a national controversy over her work “Building Support for Scholarly Practices in Mathematics Methods” in which she criticized math classes as a “tool of whiteness.”  Then we discussed CUNY Professor Laurie Rubel’s publishing of a peer-reviewed article in the  Journal of Mathematics Education arguing that the concepts of meritocracy and “color-blindness” are ideological precepts that work against minorities.  Now four professors denouncing the “hegemony of meritocratic ideology” and the “masculine culture” in engineering courses as hostile to women. University of California (Irvine) Professor Carroll Serron’s March 1 study insists that merit-based advancement in engineering is harming women and fails to consider political factors in recognizing engineers.  The professors criticize the focus on “empirical science, technical thinking, merit, and individualism” as the cause for the isolation of female engineers.

Continue reading “Study Criticizes Engineering Programs For Focusing On Math and Science Rather Than Political Concerns”

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.

Continue reading “White House: diGenova and Toensing Will Not Represent Trump”

With The Departure Of John Dowd, Trump’s Legal Team And Strategy Could Be In Flux

160px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Donald_Trump_(cropped)Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the changes to the Trump legal team, including the departure of John Dowd who was the lead counsel in dealing with the Special Counsel investigation.  While it is still not clear what role Joe diGenova will play, there is concern that Trump is considering a more combative approach.  Adding more lawyers does not necessarily translate to strengthening a case. Indeed, if you add lawyers used to being lead counsels, the result can be confusion and conflicts in getting them to work together. What Trump needs is greater control and continuity as he enters the most risky stage of the Special Counsel investigation.

Here is the column:

Continue reading “With The Departure Of John Dowd, Trump’s Legal Team And Strategy Could Be In Flux”

“Confused and Distracted”: McCabe Uses Flynn Defense Against False Statement Allegation

McCabeFormer FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe penned an op-ed for The Washington Post to contest the allegation of his “lack of candor” with federal investigators.  I have been writing (here and here and here) on the contrast between the treatment of McCabe and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.  McCabe has been erroneously portrayed as “losing his pension” but has not been charged.  Flynn was charged and accepted a plea deal under 18 U.S.C. 1001 for making a false statement to investigators.  Now McCabe is raising virtually the same defense that did not work for Flynn: that there was a lot going on and he was “confused and distracted.”

Continue reading ““Confused and Distracted”: McCabe Uses Flynn Defense Against False Statement Allegation”

Bad Cases (and Bad Lawyers) Can Make For Bad Law

Below is my column in USA Today on the recent ruling against President Donald Trump in a civil lawsuit where his counsel sought dismissal on constitutional grounds.  It was a weak argument that made bad precedent for the Office of the President.  With yet another change in his legal team, Trump needs to focus on continuity among his legal team.  More lawyers does not necessarily translate to a stronger case. Indeed, it can undermine a case when lawyers are advancing conflicting or reckless arguments.

Here is the column:

Continue reading “Bad Cases (and Bad Lawyers) Can Make For Bad Law”