The New York prosecutor investigating Trump is being demanded by the House GOP
The House January 6 Subpoena: Trump, the White House, and the ‘Circumstellar War’
The House January 6 committee voted to subpoena him after laying bare his depraved efforts to overthrow the 2020 election and his dereliction of duty as his mob invaded the US Capitol.
A mic drop moment to cap the final hearing before the fall elections and a warning that Trump owes the nation an apology for a day of infamy in January 2021, was the dramatic effort the committee made to get Trump to testify.
The developments that could hurt Trump most were not on stage. The distance still left to run for efforts to account for the presidency that constantly test the rule of law and the fact that the ex President has not been charged with a crime show the extraordinary legal thicket surrounding him.
While Trump has repeatedly confounded predictions of his demise, there feels that he is going into an ever-deeper legal hole.
The Supreme Court sent word that it doesn’t want to be involved in Trump’s bid to derail the Justice Department investigation into classified material at Mar-a-Lago.
The court rejected his emergency request to intervene, which could have caused the case to be delayed. No dissents were noted, including from conservative justices Trump elevated to the bench and whom he often seems to believe owe him a debt of loyalty.
For all the political drama that surrounds the continuing revelations over one of the darkest days in modern American history on January 6, it’s the showdown over classified documents that appears to represent the ex-President’s most clear cut and immediate threat of true criminal exposure.
More news broke indicating that the ex- President could be in serious legal trouble if another Justice Department investigation is not stopped before January 6. The DOJ has the power to draw up indictments, which is different from the House version.
One witness could be asked to reappear, there are signs. And sources told CNN that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who has been under fierce attack from Trump’s GOP allies, was also taking a moment to regroup amid the furor. Bragg’s team is considering whether or not to call back Cohen, who once worked for Trump, to challenge the testimony of the attorney who appeared before a grand jury for Trump’s legal team.
Brown reported on Wednesday that an employee of Trump told the FBI that he was told by the ex-president to move boxes from a basement storage room at his club to comply with a subpoena. The staffer in the FBI footage was moving the boxes.
It’s troubling because it could suggest a pattern of deception which plays into a possible obstruction of justice charge. On the initial search warrant before the FBI showed up at Trump’s home in August, the bureau told a judge there could be “evidence of obstruction” at the resort.
Even though there were troubling questions raised about Trump at Mar-a-Lago, the defense lawyer who was in his second impeachment said that it was not a case of obstruction of justice.
He said if President Trump or someone acting on his behalf knew that they didn’t have a right to have the documents in their possession they would disobey the subpoena, hide the documents or keep them.
The New York Attorney General asked a state court to block the Trump Organization from moving assets and continuing to perpetrate what she has alleged is a decades-long fraud.
“There is every reason to believe that the Defendants will continue to engage in similar fraudulent conduct right up to trial unless checked by order of this Court,” James wrote in an application for a preliminary injunction linked to her $250 million suit against Trump, his three eldest children and his firm.
Trump has branded the James probe as a stunt and denied wrongdoing. The Justice Department hasn’t charged the former President, nor anyone else in its investigation over the Capitol insurrection. The House select committee cannot bring criminal charges, although it is discussing whether to send criminal referrals to the Justice Department. Trump has also blasted the DOJ’s investigation into classified documents unearthed during the FBI search of his residence at Mar-a-Lago as a witch hunt and political persecution.
There are other probes that are connected to Trump. There is also the matter of yet another investigation in Georgia over attempts by the former President and his allies to overturn the election in a crucial 2020 swing state.
Analyzing the Unselect Committee: Trump’s Tweet about the subpoena from the House of Representatives to the 2016 Midterms
As always, Trump came out fighting on Thursday, one of those days when the seriousness of a crisis he is facing can often be gauged by the vehemence of the rhetoric he uses to respond.
First Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich mocked the unanimous 9-0 vote in the select committee to subpoena the former President for documents and testimony.
“Pres Trump will not be intimidate(d) by their meritless rhetoric or un-American actions. America First leadership and solutions will be restored, as a result of Trump-endorsing candidates sweeping the Midterms.
The former President stirred a reaction from his supporters with another post on his Truth social network that did not respond to the accusations against him.
“Why didn’t the Unselect Committee ask me to testify months ago? Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting? Because the Committee is a total ‘BUST,’” Trump wrote.
It is unlikely that he would fight the subpoena, even if there is some chance that he might be able to get a prime time spot in a live hearing.
pro-Trump Republicans claim that the subpoena is a cover up to implicate Trump that has not permitted cross-examination of witnesses. The committee would have to seek a contempt of Congress referral from the full House if it wanted to enforce a subpoena. It took such a step with Steve Bannon, who was found guilty on two counts of contempt of Congress and will face a sentencing hearing soon.
But any effort to follow a similar path if Trump refuses to testify could take months and involve protracted legal battles. It’s unclear whether the Justice Department would consider this a good investment, especially given the advanced state of its own January 6 probe. The committee will be swept into history, with Republicans expected to take over the majority in the House following the elections.
The vote to target the ex- President as a theatrical flourish in a series of slickly produced hearings that often resembled a TV courtroom drama is something many will see as a result of the slim chance that Trump will comply with a congressional subpoena.
But the committee’s Republican vice chair, Rep. Liz Cheney, said the investigation was no longer just about what happened on January 6, but about the future.
“With every effort to excuse or justify the conduct of the former President, we chip away at the foundation of our Republic,” said the Wyoming lawmaker, who won’t be returning to Congress after losing her primary this summer to a Trump-backed challenger.
Editor’s Note: Jennifer Rodgers is a former federal prosecutor, adjunct professor of clinical law at New York University School of Law, lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School and a CNN legal analyst. The opinions are hers, not those of anyone else. CNN has more opinion.
The Bragg/Pomerantz Affair: An Ex-President and a Criminal Case for the Economic Crimes of Mark Pomerantz
The gist of Pomerantz’s claim is that he had assembled a strong criminal case against Trump, but Bragg lacked enthusiasm, and possibly the courage, to bring it. Bragg, for his part, has said that the case was not ready in early 2022 but that the investigation is still ongoing.
In February 2021, Mark Pomerantz, a very experienced former federal prosecutor, joined former Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance’s office and led the criminal investigations into former President Donald Trump’s financial dealings.
Before Vance retired at the end of 2021, the Manhattan DA’s office indicted two Trump Organization companies, along with its Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg, on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records. A jury found the two companies guilty on all counts. Weisselberg, who struck a plea deal with the prosecutors, was sentenced in January to five months in jail.
Legal experts say that Pomerantz may have violated his duty of confidentiality, his obligations under the legal ethics code, and even the confidentiality rules of the grand jury, by making statements about the investigation. All of my actions with regard to the Trump investigation are consistent with my legal and ethical obligations, said Psycherantz in a statement.
The possible theory of a case against Trump is also causing some concerns to onlookers outside the bubble of the grand jury and DA’s office. The ex-president could be charged with a misdemeanor over allegedly improper classification in business records of a payment to Daniels, although hush money payments themselves aren’t illegal. If it’s proven that Trump tried to cover up the payment in order to commit another crime, then the charges could rise to a felony. Trump denied that he knew about the payment.
A lot of ink is spilled about the Bragg/Pomerantz affair. I will not repeat all of the details, but I can see that Bragg has a better argument than Pomerantz about his legal theories. The truth is that so many things about charging Trump would be unprecedented and therefore subject to legal uncertainty; under these circumstances, making sure the evidence is strong and the legal theory is solid before proceeding with charges is eminently reasonable.
The theoretical prospect of an ex-president and a candidate being charged in a criminal case, had been made more realistic because of Trump’s prediction that he could be arrested this week. And it signaled America is headed for an even more politically divisive ordeal that will test his influence over the GOP.
A property developer and former commander-in-chief faces a number of investigations after attempting to overturn the 2020 election and over his handling of classified documents after leaving office. His most immediate exposure could be in the case over the alleged payment to Stormy Daniels.
There was no official notification that Donald Trump will be charged by the Manhattan District Attorney. But a grand jury process appears to be in its final stages and Trump’s legal team has been preparing for the possibility of an indictment, sources have told CNN.
The case is about whether or not Trump did something to violate the law by covering up the $130,000 payment made by his former lawyer to Daniels. The episode could potentially represent an infringement of campaign finance law. Trump denied having an affair with Daniels and said he did not do anything wrong.
How the Ex-President Pretended to Demonstrate Democracy and Take Our Nation Back During the Decay of January 6, 2021
But the ex-president launched a characteristic effort to discredit attempts to call him to account, trying to intimidate prosecutors, mobilize his grassroots supporters and pressure top GOP officials to rally to his side. Every American has a constitutional right to political self-expression, but the ex-president’s call this weekend for his loyalists – “Protest, take our nation back” – struck an ominous tone since he showed on January 6, 2021, that he was willing to incite violence to further his interests.
If Trump were to be indicted for a mere lowball, there would be consequences, according to Trump lawyer Alina Habba. It is going to cause a lot of trouble, Paula. I mean, it’s just a very scary time in our country,” Habba said. She also said that no one wants anyone to get hurt and that Trump supporters should be peaceful.
The strategy of House Republicans is familiar. Trump has long launched fierce and preemptive attacks on institutions, in government or the law, that seek to hold him to account as he’s tried to blur clarity about his conduct or culpability and ignite a political storm that taints their conclusions in advance.
Trump’s effort to politicize the case and to distract from the allegations against him has already worked as his top allies in Republican House leadership attack Bragg.
Kevin McCarthy said it was the weakest case he had heard. The California Republican, who has instructed GOP-led committees to investigate whether the Manhattan DA used federal funds to probe the hush money payment, said at a news conference that he had already spoken to Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan – who is investigating “the weaponization” of the government against political opponents – about looking into that question.
McCarthy told reporters he did not think people should protest about an indictment, breaking with the former president. He added, “We want calmness out there. There was no harm or violence to anything else.
Further underscoring Trump’s firm hold on the GOP base, his social media post prompted several of his Republican critics to line up beside him. It just feels like a politically charged prosecution here, that’s what former Vice President Mike Pence told ABC News. I feel like it isn’t what the American people want to see.
The Bragg investigation is building a lot of sympathy for the former president according to Republican Gov. Chris Sununu in an interview with Jake Tapper on CNN. Some people he had coffee with, including a few who were not big Trump supporters, said they felt like he was being attacked.
Since Trump predicted last week that he would be arrested this week, there has been more evidence that an indictment is imminent. But the possible charges in this yearslong and somewhat obscure case could center on business violations or infringements of campaign finance law. All of which raises the question of whether it’s truly in the national interest to cross the Rubicon of charging a former president in a case that may be hard to explain to the public, lacks profound constitutional implications and may not be a slam dunk at trial.
— There is also the issue of whether the political division and trauma of putting Trump on trial would be in the wider national interest — at least in a fairly constrained case that seems to hold fewer lasting constitutional implications than those connected to the January 6 investigations. History may not look kindly on any failed prosecution.
Even as the nation faces a new White House campaign, it’s worth asking if the Daniels case is relevant given the fact that it dates back to an election that is more than six years old. In an interview with Jake Tapper on CNN, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly said that nobody in the nation should be above the law. I would hope that they have a strong case, because this is something that has never been done before. There are risks involved.
Kelly’s comment emphasized how Trump, nearly eight years after he burst onto the scene with an upstart presidential campaign, is again shattering convention about the role of presidents and ex-presidents in national life. He may be moving to the center in the most heated way of the national debate.
The Indictment of Bragg: Protecting the First Amendment and Preserving the Status of the House Judiciary Integral to the 2024 Presidential Election
The House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, R- Ohio, House Oversight Committee Chair Jim Comer, R- Ky., and House Administration Committee Chair Bryan Steil, R- Wisc. sent Bragg a letter demanding documents and testimony related to his investigation.
The three chairmen called a possible indictment an abuse of prosecutorial authority and one that federal authorities didn’t pursue, and said it was based on a novel legal theory.
They argued that if Bragg does indict Trump, Bragg’s actions “will erode confidence in the evenhanded application of justice and unalterably interfere in the course of the 2024 presidential election.”
They said they expect him to appear as soon possible before Congress but did not set a date for a hearing. They gave Bragg a deadline of Thursday to respond to them to set up a possible appearance.
The former president is dominating the discussion at the House Republicans’ yearly retreat, which is taking place in Florida.
At a press conference, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy answered several questions about Trump, but less about defending him than about Bragg’s tenure and legal approach.
“One of the reasons we won races in New York is based upon this DA of not protecting the citizens of New York, and now he’s spending his time on this,” McCarthy said. “And the statute of limitations are gone.” He added about an indictment: “This will not hold up in court, if this is what he wants to do.”
Bounds on the case for an attorney-in-regime prosecuting the U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio Gimenez
As House Republicans sought to showcase their legislative agenda in the majority, questions about Trump continued to be front and center — a dynamic they struggled with during his time in the White House.
The first question at the press conference was about Bragg’s probe. Gimenez told reporters that it ” smells like it’s political.” He was the same lawmaker who has used the refrain before.
In fact, the House GOP appears to be using the exact same tactic they accuse the Biden administration, Bragg and any other investigators on Trump’s trail of employing – weaponizing the powers of government to advance a partisan political end.
There are doubts about a prosecution assembled by Bragg and whether there are any charges relating to business or electoral law violations, to fuel questions from legal experts about the case possibly not being legit. This is a matter of great importance given the possibility of a case against a former president.
Trump’s calls for protests, meanwhile, have authorities on edge in New York, where security cameras and barricades have been erected, and in Washington amid painful flashbacks to his incitement of violence to further his personal and political ends on January 6, 2021.
Trump lashing out at DeSantis, who has yet to declare a campaign, is cranking up the GOP presidential race to its most intense level yet just as the former president’s legal problems also seem to be exploding. Ron is the best public relations person in the country by far and even though he is an average Governor, he is ranked number one by everyone. “But it is all a Mirage, just look at the facts and figures, they don’t lie—And we don’t want Ron as our President!”
He said that he thinks justice is not being equal to others in the history of where we are. “And the tough part is with a local DA playing in presidential politics, if that starts right there, don’t you think it’ll happen across the country?”
The New York High Court Case Against Michael Cohen in the U.S. Senate Investigation of the 2020 Biden Electoral Campaign: News on the case against the FBI
Republicans’ accusation that the FBI, the Justice Department and other government agencies are weaponizing the government appears to be a mirror of the use of government power to advance political ends.
Republicans, as well as everyone else, don’t know what the evidence against Trump is other than the fact that Michael Cohen was sent to jail for tax fraud and he is considered a pivotal witness in the current matter.
— In a third Trump legal entanglement, Fani Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, said in January that charging decisions were imminent in an investigation into the ex-president’s attempt to overturn President Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in the critical swing state. CNN reported on Monday that the office might make a decision this spring. In a Hail Mary move, Trump’s lawyers have tried to get a court to throw out the special grand jury’s final report.
I have a big question in the New York case. CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero told Wolf Blitzer on the “Situation Room” on Monday. The facts in this case are old, almost seven years later. I have a big question with regards to New York, what has changed in the recent past or so that has gotten it to this point?
This is a legal narrative that may convince a jury, but it may also be a tricky sell in the wider fight for public opinion of a highly political case.
After Michael Cohen testified in front of the courthouse, some experts questioned whether his testimony could influence a grand jury vote on a possible indictment.
The idea that a case would be made solely on Cohen’s word, without considerable corroborating evidence, seems unlikely. The rest of the country doesn’t understand much about this grave matter.
Trump’s handling of classified documents is an ill-odd ill omen for the United States, as investigated by the Justice Department
That is not, however, quelling the storm that has accompanied Trump’s return to political center stage, which could reach hurricane strength in the days ahead.
Norm Eisen, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and CNN legal analyst, said the piercing of this bedrock legal protection was highly unusual and an ill omen for Trump, since Corcoran’s testimony could be used to suggest he committed a crime. The handling of classified documents could involve obstruction of justice. “It considerably worsens what was probably Trump’s most federal legal peril,” Eisen told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on “The Situation Room” on Wednesday.
Cohen, who made the payment to Daniels, is seen by some analysts as a weak link in any trial since his credibility could be undermined by his own conviction for lying to Congress. CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams explained that Bragg would have to test the question of Cohen’s trustworthiness now before a grand jury or at trial. He said the decision was very much in their interests. “This kind of thing happens all the time, as prosecutors decide whether and how to bring cases.”
The ex-president and his lieutenants are being investigated by the Justice Department over attempts to steal the 2020 election and the US Capitol insurrection. Smith has subpoenaed the former Vice President Mike Pence, who helped save democracy on January 6, 2021, in order to testify. Smith is investigating Trump’s handling of classified documents.
Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/23/politics/trump-legal-drama-analysis/index.html
Trump’s alleged hush payments to an adult film actress: a response to the Manhattan district attorney’s letter asking Bragg to intervene in local law enforcement investigations
“The governor can’t afford to be marginalized from the get go,” one DeSantis adviser told CNN’s Steve Contorno amid Trump’s attacks on the governor. It was time to push back.
All of this underscores the fact that more than two years after Trump left office, the nation is nowhere near working through the enormous political and legal trauma of his term. The events of recent days may be an indication of what’s to come.
The office of the District Attorney in Manhattan accused House Republicans of launching an unprecedent inquiry into a pending local prosecution while justifying the investigation into President Donald Trump’s alleged hush payments to an adult film actress.
She added that, “regardless, the proper forum for such a challenge is the Courts of New York, which are equipped to consider and review such objections.”
She wanted the committees to meet with Bragg and discuss whether the House has a legitimate legislative purpose for what it is looking for and if those records can be turned over without hurting New York’s interests.
Jordan told CNN “we’re reviewing the letter” when asked for his response to the letter from the general counsel of the Manhattan DA. Jordan repeated his answer when asked if he would subpoena Bragg.
The Judiciary committee is taking the lead on this, and the Manhattan district attorney office did not respond to the request from Congress.
Dubeck’s five-page response to the Republicans’ demands – which included testimony from Bragg as well as documents and communications related to the investigation – cited case law and legal arguments for why the GOP requests amounted to an “unlawful incursion into New York’s sovereignty.”
She said that the Constitution’s 10th Amendment limited the federal government’s authority over local law enforcement and argued that Congress specially is not an executive branch entity with law enforcement powers.
She explained that the House Republicans were looking for information about a pending criminal investigation which is confidential, and thus, she argued, complying with the request would interfere with law enforcement.
Dubeck also scoffed at the Republicans’ claims that they needed testimony from Bragg and the requested documents as part of a congressional review of federal public safety funds.
The Letter doesn’t suggest any way in which the District Attorney’s testimony about his prosecutorial decisions or the documents and communications of former Assistant District Attorneys on a pending criminal investigation would shed light on that review.
She explained that they are preparing a letter and sending it to congress so they can understand how the office has used federal funds.
The General Counsel for the District Attorney of New York County sent a letter on Thursday saying that the office won’t allow a Congressional investigation to impede the police power of New York.
