I previously wrote about how the payments to both a former porn star and a former Playboy bunny could prove a greater threat to President Donald Trump than the still unsubstantiated collusion allegations that led to the appointment of the Special Counsel. Now, one of those woman is formally in court after Stormy Daniels (AKA Stephanie Clifford) filed an action against President Trump. I have previously criticized counsel for both Trump and Daniels for bizarre actions in this controversy and this lawsuit is no exception. The lawsuit introduces new facts including the allegation that President Trump’s lawyer used a fake name for the President, David Dennison, as part of this effort to pay what the complaint calls “hush money.” After differing accounts by Daniels, she has not only stated that she did have a year long affair (something Trump’s counsel has denied) but stated it in a court filing as opposed to a tabloid newspaper.
Continue reading “Stormy Daniels Sues Trump Over “Hush Money” Agreement”
We 
On Tuesday, March 6, at noon, I will have the pleasure of speaking as part of the screening of 
Below is my column in USA Today on the legislation proposed to combat Russian trolling and Internet campaigns. There is a serious threat to free speech in these measures, which mirror efforts from (ironically) countries like Russia and China. The serious threat is not a handful of Russians playing on our deep divisions, but rather the hacking operations and attempt to interfere with voting systems.
We have been discussing the rollback of free speech in France where writers and speakers are now routinely prosecuted for what would be protected political or religious speech in the United States, including the
With South Africa’s 
Saying that “I’ve known Bob Mueller for 20, 30 years”, former Attorney General Eric Holder said on national television that Trump will be charged with obstruction of justice. Holder does not indicate why he is so confident or the specific basis for an obstruction charge. I have previously stated that I do not see a credible obstruction charge on the available evidence.
Below is my column in the Washington Post on the question of whether a president can be indicted while in office. Many academics believe that there is an implied immunity from such indictments in Article II of the Constitution. I do not agree as explained in the column below. Once again, I have stated that I do not see compelling evidence of any prosecutable crimes against President Trump. However, if such evidence did arise and satisfied a grand jury, the Special Counsel could indict even before any impeachment.
Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on my view of the current evidence of collusion in the Russian investigation. I wrote the column to explain my skepticism over these oft-stated theories. President Donald Trump included my view in a quote in 
President Donald Trump is embroiled in another controversy this week after dismissing both gun rights and due process rights in a single sentence when he told a bipartisan group of members that the government should “Take the guns first, go through due process second.” Trump also said that he was 
I just