That’s Laurence Tribe the plagiarist and Richard Painter the…heh haha,BAHAHAHHA “Ethics Lawyer for George W. Bush”?? How can you type that without lightning hitting your keyboard??
But seriously, I don’t trust any lawyer who can’t understand the simple concept of treason.
“in any matter within the jurisdiction” etc.
Those matters being the alleged collusion, the alleged but fairly well-verified election-meddling, and the (I think) nine investigations into same, even if the allegations prove to be false.
Agreed. Also seems possible there are state-level election or computer hacking crimes.
It depends on the scope of the pardon. It seems unlikely, for example, that there will be a pardon for financial crimes (and, in any event, the pardon would not provide immunity from state prosecution).
This is a really interesting question. Let’s assume we’re talking about federal court, since that’s the scope of the pardon power. Imagine a judge puts junior in contempt for refusing to testify. The President pardons him for that offense. Does that prevent the judge, or a different judge, from compelling him to testify again pursuant to a new subpoena or grand jury order? I’m not so sure it does. Maybe we’d just get a blanket pardon by Twitter every day.
Do not fret, this is not the dawning of a new age of scrupulousness and consequence free political behavior. If a Democrat should ever attempt it, you will see that Republicans with American flag lapel pins and red business ties and colorful 4th of July bunting underwear will spontaneously generate pretend outrage the likes of which BENGHAZI! himself could not fathom. Which will lead to actual punitive measures.
As for the President pardoning himself: The only way that the President could be prosecuted for a federal crime in the first place is via impeachment, and the pardon power explicitly does not extend to cases of impeachment. Alternately, he could be prosecuted for a state crime, but that’s also beyond the reach of a Presidential pardon (though he could ask nicely for the governor to do so).
No, that’s a question that is also subject to significant debate. It’s not at all well-settled.
Absolutely false. The impeachment process has nothing whatever to do with criminal law. There is no limit other than custom and political reality preventing a President from being prosecuted, and a President need not have been charged with any criminal activity to be impeached.
Again, because impeachment is a purely political process, not a criminal one.
Which specific “false statements” made specifically to whom are you referring?
Never mind. Because I didn’t notice that you are now moving the goal posts. My original statement was about “the meeting itself”, not about anything he may or may not have said about the meeting. Want to try again?
Go on. Lay out your case. Which provision of the statute was violated by which specific actions by DT Jr. Please note (from your owns cite) that much of that act has been overturned by the SCOTUS since 1941.
And for future reference, I won’t be responding to posts that consist of “here’s a law, go prove that DT Jr didn’t violate it”. Tell us specifically which provision of the statute was violated and which specific actions DT Jr took that violate that law. And be sure it is about “the meeting itself”, not something done outside the meeting.
He’s a presidential adviser and has security clearance. In order to get security clearance, he had to submit forms that required him to disclose any meeting with foreign representatives. He did not disclose his meetings with Natalia Veselnitskaya, who was representing the Russian government when he met with her.
Lying on your security clearance form is illegal.
Emphasis added. Are you required to disclose meetings with “foreign representatives” or “foreign officials”? And how do you know she was either one? And, how do you know that DT JR knew that she was either one?
Did you read the emails released by Donald Trump Jr.? Here’s an excerpt of what was sent to Trump Jr:
And after that, the meeting was set up. Are you seriously proposing with a straight face that Trump Jr. had no idea he was dealing with a representative of the Russian government? IT SAYS SO RIGHT IN THE EMAIL THAT TRUMP JR. READ!
Neither did I, actually, but it appears you’re right. To explain:
I said ‘espionage,’ focusing on that, and searched through this page and its subpages:
Extracts from Espionage Laws and Federal Statutes Applicable to Information and Personnel Security
That’s from a site of the USAF’s Air Education and Training Command.
While the meeting itself is an ancillary issue, it doesn’t change the fact that DJT Jr. appears to be in violation of that statute, several times over at least, at up to 5 years and a fine (I believe $10,000) per count. Of course, the fine is chicken feed, so I’d expect prosecutors would push for jail time, assuming Il Douche allowed it to get that far.
Of course, there is no precedent where information about the opponent’s criminal deeds were deemed to be a “thing of value” for the purposes of that law.
He isn’t and he hasn’t.
Current stance: “NOT ILLEGAL! NOT ILLEGAL”
Future stance: “This is a witch hunt. Donald Trump Jr. is hereby pardoned for any act he may be accused of by the evil media and the horrible investigators”
Apologists: "See! We told you he was innocent! This proves it!
Speaking from personal knowledge - contact with ANY foreign individual - with emphasis added for specific countries/nationalities. They don’t have to be a representative or an official.
Except, as I said, Donald Trump Jr. has no government position and did not apply for nor receive a security clearance.