Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the new California law that the state Attorney General is pledging to enforce against employers who are cooperating with federal immigration authorities. There are ample grounds for either businesses or the federal government or both to bring a legal action. The arguments of California in Arizona v. United States — and the holding in that case — could prove damaging to the position of the state.
The watchdog group Common Cause on filed a complaint on Monday with the Federal Election Commission and the Justice Department alleging that Donald Trump violated federal law with his secret payment of $130,000 to a porn star known as Stormy Daniels. Daniels gave a long interview to In Touch magazine detailing a yearlong affair with Trump but later accepted the money and signed a statement denying such a sexual relationship. Common Cause argues that the payment was “an unreported in-kind contribution to Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., and an unreported expenditure by the committee — because the funds were paid for the purpose of influencing the 2016 president general election — in violation of the campaign finance reporting requirements.”
The personal lawyer of President Donald Trump, Michael Cohen, reportedly threatened to sue a tabloid magazine if it published an interview with the former adult film star Stormy Daniels in 2011. Daniels told In Touch that she had an affair with Trump that started shortly after Melania Trump gave birth to her son Barron. The threat appeared to work and the story never ran. During the presidential campaign, Cohen used a fake name and shell company to give $130,000 to the porn star to deny any sexual relationship. The publication sets up an interesting legal question of whether Trump will sue as threatened and how this might play out under the standard set out in New York Times v. Sullivan. You have a porn star who does have two clearly opposing statements on the affairs as the main source for the article. However, a lawsuit would present risks that few lawyers would consider worth taking in a legal action.
There remains an intense debate over the legal and ethical implications of former FBI Director James Comey removing FBI memos and leaking the information to the press. Despite serious allegations of unethical conduct, Comey has been chosen to teach a course on “ethical leadership” at William and Mary in the Fall.
Continue reading “Comey To Teach Course On “Ethical Leadership””
One of the elements to the recent tax bill that drew considerable opposition was the move to a neutral tax system that no longer allowed for the writing off of state taxes. However, there is a valid argument for such an approach since many citizens in low tax states do not benefit to the same degree. Indeed, those taxpayers have complained that they are effectively subsidizing taxpayers in states like New York and California even though they often make considerably less. I have come to support the approach for a different reason. It forces local politicians to bear the true costs of tax hikes since they can no longer dismiss objections by saying that their increases will simply be recovered as a deduction on federal taxes. Now, however, California legislators have pushed legislation to force businesses to give back half of their federal tax savings.
Continue reading “California Moves To Force Businesses To Give Half Of Tax Cut To The State”
As the proud owner of a goldendoodle (Luna), I could not resist posting this story about two hero labradoodles named Adam and Eva. While St. Bernards get all of the rescue press, these two canine superheroes just saved an elderly woman from freezing to death in Michigan.
Continue reading “Meet Adam and Eva: America’s New Canine Heroes”
Below is an expanded version of my column that ran in USA Today on the approaching expiration of the statute of limitations for prosecuting former National Intelligence Director James Clapper for perjury. This is a city that protects its own and Clapper is the Beltway equivalent of a made man. People like Clapper do not get prosecuted. We do not call them criminal; just complicated.
Here is the column:
Judge Jack Robison appears to be channeling a higher authority recently in Comal County, Texas. Robison interrupted jurors during deliberations to inform the panel that God told him to acquit Gloria Romero-Perez of trafficking a teenage girl for sex. It appears that divine judgment did not track well with the jury, which proceeded to find Perez guilty as charged.
President Trump‘s personal lawyer Michael Cohen is under fire this week after The Wall Street Journal reported that Cohen used what appear to be shell companies and fake names to pay a porn star called Stormy Daniels $130,000 as part of a nondisclosure agreement. Daniels states in a prior but unpublished interview that she had an affair with Trump that began shortly after Trump married Melania Trump and had their son Baron. She said that the affair lasted roughly a year and the money was paid during the campaign around the time of the release of the disturbing Access Hollywood tape. Cohen has previously denied any affair and insisted that both Daniels (whose real name is Stephanie Clifford) and Trump deny any sexual relationship. The new information has led some to question Cohen’s veracity and the role of an attorney in maintaining such a denial if the representation is untrue. I am less confident that a clear ethical line was crossed by Cohen simply because he used such companies or has maintained the denial of any relationship.
I have previously written about the endless calls for impeachment from Democratic members for everything from Trump criticizing NFL players to comments made about protesters. The Framers saw the great abuses caused not only by tyranny of nobility, but tyranny of the majority. They sought to insulate our government from the transient impulses of politics. The danger has been repeatedly shown by members who see virtually any act or comment by Donald Trump as a case for impeachment. The latest such example comes from Texas Representative Al Green, who declared that Trump’s alleged reference to “shithole countries” is sufficient grounds for impeachment. The last time I checked, pottymouth was not included in Article II with “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Steve Bannon is now under subpoena by both House investigators and the Special Counsel after he refused to answer questions before Congress. Following a problematic pattern of current and former Administration figures, Bannon reportedly did not invoke executive privilege (which must be asserted by the White House) but refused to answer questions about his work on the transition team and White House. There is no basis for such a broad assertion of executive privilege and, unless Bannon changes course, he could be looking at contempt sanctions down the road. Despite his refusal to cooperate with the committee, he has reached a deal to speak with the Special Counsel investigators outside of a grand jury.
Update: The White House is now asserting that there were prior discussions with the Committee and the Committee violated the agreement on scope. Notably however the agreement was to discuss only matters from the campaign and not the transition or White House periods. That would be an astonishingly limited scope for the Committee staff to agree to given the material events after the campaign, including the time periods covered by statements made by Bannon in the Wolff book.
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the recent major indictment handed down in the Uranium One scandal. As I have stated in the media, the indictment does not alter my skepticism over the likelihood of any criminal charges against Clinton. However, it does reaffirm lingering questions over the many millions of dollars pocketed by the Clintons personally or given to their Foundation I think that there is little question about this money being given with the hopes of influencing the Clintons, and particularly Hillary Clinton. The only question is whether it succeeded. For that, we would need an independent and full investigation.
UPDATED: This column was updated to more clearly distinguish the two contracts involved in the Russian transport of uranium (in the Lambert indictment) and the purchase of U.S. uranium holdings (in the Uranium One purchase). The indictment concerns a contract to transport uranium with a subsidiary of Rosatom. This is the same agency at the heart of the Rosatom/Uranium One scandal but the contract occurred years before the purchase of Uranium One.
It appears that muggles in Canada are finally lifting the criminal sanction against all of the witches and wizards who have been hiding in Canadian counterparts to the Leaky Cauldron and Diagon Alley. Our neighbors are moving to rescind Section 365 of Canada’s criminal code, which made it crime to pretend to practice witchcraft, sorcery and fortune telling. Soon the streets of Canadian cities will be full of muggles and magicfolk alike.
Continue reading “Muggles Move To Lift Criminal Sanctions Against Witches and Wizards In Canada”
I have previously discussed my opposition to sugary drink bans or prohibitive taxation schemes in Chicago and New York. While Cook County reluctantly yielded to public opinion and court decisions recently, Seattle has gone forward with a ridiculous tax of 1.75 cents per ounce on sugary drinks. This paternalistic law is designed to make such drinks economically undrinkable or at least unpalatable for citizens who do not share the views of the majority on beverages and health. The result is that a large box of 35 bottles of Gatorade at Costco with a list price of $15.99 is now taxed at $10.34. So almost $10.50 of the $26.50 price is taxes.
Continue reading “Seattle Sugary Drink Tax Take Effect: $10.34 Tax On $15.99 Purchase”
We have previously discussed the crackdown at Harvard on single gender clubs and associations (even groups off campus). Last year, Harvard established penalties for students who refuse to yield to the rule against belonging to single-gender organizations, including barring students from serving on campus leadership positions. This includes Greek organizations. Now, women are objecting that they are being penalized and denied their “right to choose.” Notably, however, the protesting sororities did not question the barring of males but rather having such rules apply to women.Continue reading “Harvard Sororities Defy Ban On Single-Gender Groups”