Mueller's investigation

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 7085
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5176

Post by RoadScholar » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:25 am

I was under the impression that States can charge the sitting President for crimes but cannot try or punish until he or she leaves office. Anyone know for sure?

:sterngard: ?


The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 26903
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5177

Post by Addie » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:52 am

CNN
Another white collar lawyer turns down Trump

(CNN)Another white collar lawyer has turned down the opportunity to represent President Donald Trump, citing an unidentified conflict, as the President struggles to add to the legal team representing him in the special counsel investigation.

People close to Trump contacted New York attorney Steven Molo, a former prosecutor who specializes in white collar defense and court room litigation, in recent weeks following the departure of attorney John Dowd from Trump's personal legal team.

Molo is only the latest attorney to receive an invitation to help Trump during special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into the 2016 campaign and any possible dealings with Russia. Other lawyers who declined to join Trump's team include former US Solicitor General Ted Olson; Emmet Flood, who's worked for multiple presidents; Robert Bennett, Bill Clinton's attorney in the Paula Jones litigation; and Bob Giuffra, of Sullivan & Cromwell.

Molo has a depth of courtroom experience, which could suggest the kind of skills Trump's legal team is seeking as it prepares to decide whether the President will be interviewed by Mueller. The approach to Molo followed the March announcement that attorneys Joseph di Genova and Victoria Toensing would not join the Trump team because of conflicts. ...

Despite his experience, Molo was an unusual choice. He went head to head with Trump in 2008 when the then-real estate developer sued Deutsche Bank to try to get out of paying $40 million of a construction loan Trump personally guaranteed.


¡Sterngard! come home.

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9248
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5178

Post by Mikedunford » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:54 am

RoadScholar wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:25 am
I was under the impression that States can charge the sitting President for crimes but cannot try or punish until he or she leaves office. Anyone know for sure?

:sterngard: ?
Never been attempted, as far as I know. So if go with "nobody knows for sure."


"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 4676
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5179

Post by Maybenaut » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:58 am

Mikedunford wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:54 am
RoadScholar wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:25 am
I was under the impression that States can charge the sitting President for crimes but cannot try or punish until he or she leaves office. Anyone know for sure?

:sterngard: ?
Never been attempted, as far as I know. So if go with "nobody knows for sure."
I agree that nobody knows for sure. I would add, that if they can charge him, they probably must charge him in order to toll the statute of limitations (if, indeed, the statute of limitations is tolled while he is the sitting president).



User avatar
Slim Cognito
Posts: 4983
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:37 am

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5180

Post by Slim Cognito » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:03 am

Addie wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:52 am
CNN
Another white collar lawyer turns down Trump

(CNN)Another white collar lawyer has turned down the opportunity to represent President Donald Trump, citing an unidentified conflict, as the President struggles to add to the legal team representing him in the special counsel investigation.

People close to Trump contacted New York attorney Steven Molo, a former prosecutor who specializes in white collar defense and court room litigation, in recent weeks following the departure of attorney John Dowd from Trump's personal legal team.

Molo is only the latest attorney to receive an invitation to help Trump during special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into the 2016 campaign and any possible dealings with Russia. Other lawyers who declined to join Trump's team include former US Solicitor General Ted Olson; Emmet Flood, who's worked for multiple presidents; Robert Bennett, Bill Clinton's attorney in the Paula Jones litigation; and Bob Giuffra, of Sullivan & Cromwell.

Molo has a depth of courtroom experience, which could suggest the kind of skills Trump's legal team is seeking as it prepares to decide whether the President will be interviewed by Mueller. The approach to Molo followed the March announcement that attorneys Joseph di Genova and Victoria Toensing would not join the Trump team because of conflicts. ...

Despite his experience, Molo was an unusual choice. He went head to head with Trump in 2008 when the then-real estate developer sued Deutsche Bank to try to get out of paying $40 million of a construction loan Trump personally guaranteed.
Could that be the unidentified conflict?


ImageImageImage x4

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 26903
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5181

Post by Addie » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:46 am

Bloomberg OpEd
Cohen Isn't the Biggest Catch from Trump World ...

Reporters will be in the courtroom, too. The media is excited about what might emerge from Cohen's legal travails, and for good reason. But it’s also worth remembering what Cohen actually did at the Trump Organization -- and not to assume that his evident downfall portends doom for Trump's presidency. ...

There are many more articles and broadcasts like this from just the past week alone. The problem is that Cohen may not know many of those things. There was a lawyer at the Trump Organization who did have to sign off on almost every significant deal -- and that guy wasn't Cohen. His name was Jason Greenblatt.

Greenblatt specialized in real-estate law at a major New York firm before signing on with the Trump Organization in 1997. He soon became Trump's true in-house counsel and the company's executive vice president. Everything that mattered in the Trump Organization, every sizable deal or sensitive transaction, required Greenblatt's signature, not Cohen's. Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization's chief financial officer, has played a similar role when it comes to the company's finances.

At the end of 2016, Greenblatt left the Trump Organization after the president made him a special representative for international negotiations. Weisselberg still helps Trump's sons manage the business while Trump is in the Oval Office. Now that special counsel Robert Mueller has subpoenaed the Trump Organization for business records, his investigators may get around to interviewing Greenblatt and Weisselberg, who almost certainly have more expansive information on the president's business activities than Cohen does. ...

Cohen certainly remains a vulnerability for Trump, especially in the context of Mueller's investigation of quid pro quos between the Trump team and the Kremlin. But Cohen still isn't the biggest catch from within the Trump Organization, and Trump's international deals may wind up being less threatening, legally, than some of his domestic transactions. All of which means that the investigation may require far more time to progress and reveal itself than the media and other observers think -- even if recent events make it feel like the end is near.
Adding:
Fortune: Who Is Jason Greenblatt? The Trump Lawyer No One Is Mentioning But You Should Know


¡Sterngard! come home.

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 2533
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5182

Post by Dan1100 » Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm

Maybenaut wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:58 am
Mikedunford wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:54 am
RoadScholar wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:25 am
I was under the impression that States can charge the sitting President for crimes but cannot try or punish until he or she leaves office. Anyone know for sure?

:sterngard: ?
Never been attempted, as far as I know. So if go with "nobody knows for sure."
I agree that nobody knows for sure. I would add, that if they can charge him, they probably must charge him in order to toll the statute of limitations (if, indeed, the statute of limitations is tolled while he is the sitting president).
I think if it really came down to it, there would be some kind of balancing test based on what the charge is.

If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.


"I asked Osama bin Laden and he very strongly said that he had nothing to do with crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. I don't see any reason it would be Al-Qaeda."

-George W. Bush

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 15758
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5183

Post by Suranis » Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:11 pm

Addie wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:52 am
Despite his experience, Molo was an unusual choice. He went head to head with Trump in 2008 when the then-real estate developer sued Deutsche Bank to try to get out of paying $40 million of a construction loan Trump personally guaranteed.

Wow. they have scraped the bottom enough that they are going for lawyers that the Donald has a grudge against. He must be really desperate. Or more likely they since he might not have any idea whtry went for him. But regardless if it is someone else they must have gone though the list of "good" lawyers and drawn a blank.


"The devil...the prowde spirite...cannot endure to be mocked.” - Thomas Moore

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 4676
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5184

Post by Maybenaut » Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:16 pm

Overheard years ago at my husband’s former workplace:

“It’s hard to find a decent lawyer in DC. The Cochran Firm sucked up all the good ones.”



User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5185

Post by Northland10 » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:14 pm

Dan1100 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm
If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.
Even if there was a video of Trump committing the act, with his own narration, his supporters would not believe it and call it fake news (or, an alternative, applaud him for killing women because, women).


North-land: of the family 10
UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

Jerry Mander
Posts: 891
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:06 pm

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5186

Post by Jerry Mander » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:41 pm

Northland10 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:14 pm
Dan1100 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm
If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.
Even if there was a video of Trump committing the act, with his own narration, his supporters would not believe it and call it fake news (or, an alternative, applaud him for killing women because, women).
Fox and OAN would be certain to find a way to connect this event to Hillary Clinton. And perhaps George Soros.



User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2598
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5187

Post by maydijo » Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:16 pm

Northland10 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:14 pm
Dan1100 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm
If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.
Even if there was a video of Trump committing the act, with his own narration, his supporters would not believe it and call it fake news (or, an alternative, applaud him for killing women because, women).
"There are good people on both sides"



User avatar
Turtle
Posts: 2497
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:27 pm
Occupation: SPACE FORCE COMMANDER

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5188

Post by Turtle » Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:46 am

Dan1100 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm
Maybenaut wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:58 am
Mikedunford wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:54 am


Never been attempted, as far as I know. So if go with "nobody knows for sure."
I agree that nobody knows for sure. I would add, that if they can charge him, they probably must charge him in order to toll the statute of limitations (if, indeed, the statute of limitations is tolled while he is the sitting president).
I think if it really came down to it, there would be some kind of balancing test based on what the charge is.

If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.
Could the Secret Service refuse to hand him over?



User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 6958
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 2 dogs, 1 cat, and 1 horse

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5189

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:52 am

Turtle wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:46 am
Dan1100 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm
Maybenaut wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:58 am


I agree that nobody knows for sure. I would add, that if they can charge him, they probably must charge him in order to toll the statute of limitations (if, indeed, the statute of limitations is tolled while he is the sitting president).
I think if it really came down to it, there would be some kind of balancing test based on what the charge is.

If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.
Could the Secret Service refuse to hand him over?
The real question is WOULD they.

Imagine, if you will, a world in which you are a bodyguard of a temper tantrum throwing, cursing, threatening world leader. You work at least 18 hours a day in full view of this man. You see all of his depravity (except the pee tape). He has committed a murder in your presence. Would you hand him over to local law enforcement?


"The people must know before they can act, and there is no educator to compare with the press." - Ida B. Wells-Barnett, journalist, newspaper editor, suffragist, feminist and founder with others of NAACP.

User avatar
Sugar Magnolia
Posts: 9339
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5190

Post by Sugar Magnolia » Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:29 am

Turtle wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:46 am
Dan1100 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm
Maybenaut wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:58 am


I agree that nobody knows for sure. I would add, that if they can charge him, they probably must charge him in order to toll the statute of limitations (if, indeed, the statute of limitations is tolled while he is the sitting president).
I think if it really came down to it, there would be some kind of balancing test based on what the charge is.

If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.
Could the Secret Service refuse to hand him over?
Pretty sure they swore to uphold the law, not the president. If the arrest is legally ordered, I have no doubt they'd hand him over.



Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 1394
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am
Occupation: Retired, unemployed, never a lawyer

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5191

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:41 am

Off Topic
Sheriff Joe did not try to arrest Obama when the President was in Maricopa County despite all the evidence the Klown Posse had created. :rotflmao:
Edit: To make that remark off-topic.



User avatar
Turtle
Posts: 2497
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:27 pm
Occupation: SPACE FORCE COMMANDER

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5192

Post by Turtle » Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:31 am

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:52 am
Turtle wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:46 am
Dan1100 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:46 pm


I think if it really came down to it, there would be some kind of balancing test based on what the charge is.

If, for a sadly not that unthinkable example, Trump was found over a dead prostitute killed by an obviously 3 wood shaped blunt object, covered in her blood, with a bloody 3 wood in his hand, then I can't imagine that local authorities wouldn't take him into custody, hold him with out bond as a flight risk, charge him and arraign him. Under that circumstance, I can't imagine that a Federal Court would order the charge dismissed or that Trump be released so that he could flee prosecution while they wait for Congress to impeach him.
Could the Secret Service refuse to hand him over?
The real question is WOULD they.

Imagine, if you will, a world in which you are a bodyguard of a temper tantrum throwing, cursing, threatening world leader. You work at least 18 hours a day in full view of this man. You see all of his depravity (except the pee tape). He has committed a murder in your presence. Would you hand him over to local law enforcement?
I'm not so sure they would give him up on the spot without action by the Cabinet and/or a federal judge. Possibly the VP would have to be sworn in first as acting POTUS. If the locals were there and tried to take custody of a sitting POTUS, the Secret Service still have to protect his life. Someone draws their weapon, they're not going to just let them. They would presumably try to get him to the motorcade where they have armor and automatic weapons, and then to the plane where they have even more.

The only thing I can think of that is even remotely similar to a situation like this is when the coroner in TX was refusing to release the body of JFK while the Secret Service and others in the entourage were literally rolling the casket onto the plane.



TexasFilly
Posts: 17879
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5193

Post by TexasFilly » Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:22 pm

President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign paid more than $66,000 to the law firm representing Trump’s former bodyguard Keith Schiller in the Russia investigation, new campaign spending filings show.

Stuart Sears of the law firm Schertler & Onorato law firm represents Schiller, who spoke to the House Intelligence Committee in November of last year. The Trump campaign paid Schertler & Onorato $66,459.12 in January 2018 for “legal consulting.”

The Trump campaign helps pay for the legal fees incurred by several Trump allies and family members, including Donald Trump Jr. and Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime personal attorney who is now under criminal investigation.

Campaigns are allowed to pay for campaign staffers’ legal fees if the issue relates to their time on the campaign. Schiller told the House Intelligence Committee about Trump’s time in Moscow in 2013, though he may also have faced questions about his time on the Trump campaign, as NBC News noted.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ ... legal-fees


I love the poorly educated!!!

I believe Anita Hill!

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 7623
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5194

Post by Orlylicious » Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:42 pm

Looks like Eric has been reading Stern :P









The letter:





User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6095
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5195

Post by June bug » Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:13 pm

:splat: Ninja'd by Orlylicious!


:thumbs: to :sterngard: anyway!



NMgirl
Posts: 3721
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5196

Post by NMgirl » Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:36 pm

Orlylicious wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:42 pm
Looks like Eric has been reading Stern :P
You have filled me with dismay. Wednesday's :geezerette: is full of woe. All this time I have been assuming that all members of the trump Crime Syndicate who receive a pardon from the Criminal-in-Chief could then be charged by states, chiefly by Schneiderman in NY. Now this double jeopardy snake raises it's ugly as shit head.

What about this scenario, IAALs: The Feds, knowing pardons are in the offing, go after Cohen, Ivanka, Jr. Don, et alia, fairly narrowly. Can Schneiderman and other state attorneys general then indict the trump Crime Syndicate members for sufficiently different crimes so that there can be no outcry that double jeopardy applies :?: How broad is the double jeopardy standard in NY :?: It's broad enough, apparently, that Schneiderman would like the so-called "loop hole" closed. :cantlook:


Stern: Come back. My posts are becoming sloppy and ill-thought out.

User avatar
Ben-Prime
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 5:05 pm
Location: South Florida
Occupation: Wizard (according to my CEO)

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5197

Post by Ben-Prime » Thu Apr 19, 2018 7:11 am

NMgirl wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:36 pm
Orlylicious wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:42 pm
Looks like Eric has been reading Stern :P
You have filled me with dismay. Wednesday's :geezerette: is full of woe. All this time I have been assuming that all members of the trump Crime Syndicate who receive a pardon from the Criminal-in-Chief could then be charged by states, chiefly by Schneiderman in NY. Now this double jeopardy snake raises it's ugly as shit head.

What about this scenario, IAALs: The Feds, knowing pardons are in the offing, go after Cohen, Ivanka, Jr. Don, et alia, fairly narrowly. Can Schneiderman and other state attorneys general then indict the trump Crime Syndicate members for sufficiently different crimes so that there can be no outcry that double jeopardy applies :?: How broad is the double jeopardy standard in NY :?: It's broad enough, apparently, that Schneiderman would like the so-called "loop hole" closed. :cantlook:
Reading the NY CPL in plain English, it *looks* as though tax evasion, enterprise corruption, racketeering, and similar crimes are NOT protected. Since very much IANAL, I could be misreading it, though. It could also be I've got the wrong section of the law.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/criminal-p ... 40-20.html

Is that the right law? Does it say what I think it says? Or am I missing something here?

Also, wondering when jeopardy kicks in -- if Trump pardons someone *before* they are indicted (because he jumps the gun in panic, say) -- then has initial jeopardy even taken place for there to be double jeopardy?


"With Major Lawrence, mercy is a passion. With me, it is merely good manners. You may judge which motive is the more reliable." - Sir Alec Guinness, as Prince Feisal, Lawrence of Arabia

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 7623
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5198

Post by Orlylicious » Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:06 am

Here's some good news for the Trump Train: :lol: Big Sam Clovis is not bitter.

Sam Clovis 'not bitter' about losing USDA scientist job
Apr. 14, 2018 at 12:33PM

URBANDALE — Sam Clovis says he harbors no ill will after his nomination to a federal agriculture department job was withdrawn after his name surfaced in the special counsel’s investigation into possible Russian meddling in the 2016 election. “I’m not bitter about that. I’m not resentful,” Clovis said last Wednesday while speaking to Westside Conservatives Club, a suburban Des Moines group. The public remarks are believed to be Clovis’ first in Iowa since the dust-up over his nomination late last year.

Clovis, a prominent member of President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, was nominated for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s chief scientist job. Just as Senate Republicans were preparing to hold a hearing on Clovis’ nomination, his name surfaced in the Russia investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller.

That investigation revealed that Clovis, a former conservative radio host, economics professor and U.S. Senate candidate from northwest Iowa, had communicated with George Papadopoulos, a former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser. Papadopoulos has since pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his attempts to connect the campaign with Russian officials in 2016.

As part of the investigation, Clovis testified before a grand jury.On Nov. 2, shortly after the news of his involvement became known, Clovis withdrew his name from consideration for the chief scientist post. Clovis said he feels partisan politics caused him to lose that appointment.
http://www.thegazette.com/subject/news/ ... b-20180414


Yeah Sam, it wasn't at all because you AREN'T A SCIENTIST.



User avatar
fierceredpanda
Posts: 944
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 3:04 pm
Location: BAR Headquarters - Turn left past the picture of King George III

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5199

Post by fierceredpanda » Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:07 am

Aren't Victoria Toensing and Joe DiGenova representing Clovis?


"There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple; the smaller the mess, the easier it is for me to clean up." -Michael Clayton

User avatar
fierceredpanda
Posts: 944
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 3:04 pm
Location: BAR Headquarters - Turn left past the picture of King George III

Re: Mueller's investigation of Trump

#5200

Post by fierceredpanda » Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:11 am

Ben-Prime wrote:
Thu Apr 19, 2018 7:11 am
Also, wondering when jeopardy kicks in -- if Trump pardons someone *before* they are indicted (because he jumps the gun in panic, say) -- then has initial jeopardy even taken place for there to be double jeopardy?
Aside from the Richard Nixon/Gerald Ford situation, which is sui generis, generally you have to at least have been charged with a crime for a pardon to be issued. Otherwise, there would be nothing to stop POTUS from literally granting blanket someone carte blanche to break the law. "I hereby pardon you for all offenses you have committed, are now committing, or may commit in the future. Dixi."


"There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple; the smaller the mess, the easier it is for me to clean up." -Michael Clayton

Post Reply

Return to “Trump Administration”