Tag: Trump abuse of power

Another case Trump meddled in. Another unorthodox intervention from Barr.

Washington Post logoOn Thursday, Attorney General William P. Barr urged President Trump not to tweet about ongoing criminal matters, saying it makes it “impossible for me to do my job.”

On Friday, we got two separate reminders of just how many cases Trump has weighed in on. And one of them showed just how fruitful his efforts appear to have been.

The Washington Post confirmed that Barr has tasked a outside prosecutors with scrutinizing the case against Michael Flynn as well as other sensitive national security and public corruption cases. Trump has repeatedly decried the Justice Department’s actions regarding Flynn, who is awaiting sentencing. He has even doubted that Flynn lied, despite his pleading guilty to doing so. Continue reading.

Why Bill Barr couldn’t answer a simple question from Kamala Harris

AlterNet logoBy Tuesday night, after the four prosecutors who were involved with the Roger Stone case resigned, NBC News reported that William Barr had basically taken control of Justice Department matters that are of personal interest to Trump. As I suggested previously, that flushes the standard of an independent attorney general down the drain.

While Trump celebrated that fact on Twitter, Barr knows that when the president does things like that, it undermines his ability to carry out what Trump wants him to do—which is basically to protect the chief executive and punish his enemies. That is why Barr agreed to an interview with ABC News, where he criticized the president for those tweets and suggested that he won’t be bullied.

But this whole question of Barr’s independence as attorney general has been an issue since before he was even nominated for the job. As a reminder, back in 2017, Peter Baker contacted 10 former attorneys general to ask them how they would respond to pressure from a president to open an investigation on a political rival. The only one who responded was William Barr. Continue reading.

Trump Tweet Extorts Gov. Cuomo Over Tax Probe

When Walter Shaub resigned in protest from President Donald Trump’s administration in July 2017, he had been heading the Office of Government Ethics (OGE). Shaub is still voicing his concerns about Trump’s administration, and this week, he spoke out about a Trump tweet that has been drawing criticism for seemingly linking the possible end of travel restrictions affecting New York State to Trump-related investigations there.

Trump, on Thursday, tweeted, “I’m seeing Governor Cuomo today at The White House. He must understand that National Security far exceeds politics. New York must stop all of its unnecessary lawsuits & harassment, start cleaning itself up, and lowering taxes.”

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

I’m seeing Governor Cuomo today at The White House. He must understand that National Security far exceeds politics. New York must stop all of its unnecessary lawsuits & harrassment, start cleaning itself up, and lowering taxes. Build relationships, but don’t bring Fredo!

157K

Twitter Ads info and privacy
73.8K people are talking about this

After Shaub saw that tweet, he compared it to the “quid pro quo” that House Democrats accused Trump of during his impeachment trial: military aid to Ukraine in exchange for an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. Continue reading.

Authoritarians Are Always Gangsters

Authoritarian governments almost always operate in a style that resembles organized crime outfits. Despite their ostentatious populism, such regimes exist to enrich thuggish rulers and enable corruption in high places. The Trump administration is a perfect example.

But in order to maintain an aura of legitimacy, especially in a country with democratic norms and traditions, authoritarian bosses constantly proclaim their devotion to justice, their determination to right wrongs, and their adherence to law and order. So even as President Donald Trump and his attorney general, Bill Barr, pervert the legal system to cover up official crimes and protect presidential cronies, they are creating a narrative of justification for those acts.

From the very beginning of the Russia investigation, Trump has aimed to derail investigations of appointees and associates who might implicate him in criminal activity. He urged James Comey, then the FBI director, to bury the investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s unlawful conduct. Then he fired Comey, and later he repeatedly tried to get rid of special counsel Robert Mueller. The Mueller Report describes in appalling detail a dozen attempts by Trump to kill the investigation. Continue reading.

U.S. Attorney Timothy Shea’s role in Roger Stone sentencing storm remains in question

Washington Post logoLess than two weeks on the job, the interim U.S. attorney for Washington, Timothy J. Shea, has stepped into the middle of a political firestorm.

Taking over an office that is overseeing high-profile cases involving President Trump’s friends, self-declared enemies and former advisers — including Roger Stone, former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe and former national security adviser Michael Flynn — Shea has played a central role in the crisis over whether the White House has interfered with the independence of the Justice Department’s prosecutions.

Questions about Shea’s role broke open this week in a controversy surrounding the sentencing recommendation for Stone, one of Trump’s longtime friends. Continue reading.

Barr back on the hot seat

The Hill logoAttorney General William Barr is back under the microscope as he moves in new directions with cases involving President Trump’s close allies and political foes.

The latest developments — reexamining the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn and deciding against criminal charges for former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe — came just a day after the attorney general said Trump should not publicly insert himself into Justice Department affairs.

Less than 24 hours after Barr’s stunning ABC News interview, in which he called on Trump to stop tweeting about the department and its employees, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it would not bring charges against McCabe, once a target of frequent attacks by Trump. Continue reading.

Trump-Barr divide worsens as the president bucks a request to stop tweeting, and the Justice Dept. declines to charge ex-FBI official McCabe

Washington Post logoThe Justice Department on Friday revealed that it would not charge former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe, a longtime target of President Trump’s wrath, exacerbating the angry divide between Trump, his attorney general and federal law enforcement officials.

The development came just a day after Attorney General William P. Barr made a televised entreaty to Trump to stop tweeting about criminal cases — and just hours after Trump defied that request.

While three White House officials said Barr, one of Trump’s most loyal and effective Cabinet secretaries, was in no immediate danger of being fired, the attorney general’s relationship with the president is facing its gravest threat yet. Inside and outside the Justice Department, officials watched warily — some questioning whether Barr was truly at odds with Trump, others heartened by what seemed to be Barr defending the institution’s historical independence and all wondering what comes next. Continue reading.

NOTE:  This is one interpretation of the interaction between President Trump and AG Barr that assumes there is no ongoing collusion between these two people.  However, their earlier behavior and comments don’t necessarily support that conclusion.

Roger Stone asks for new trial

The Hill logoAttorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, a day after saying they were looking into potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump associate of lying to Congress and witness tampering.

The request also comes after President Trump accused the juror of harboring “significant bias” following reports that her social media activity contained posts that were critical of Trump.

“Now it looks like the fore person in the jury, in the Roger Stone case, had significant bias. Add that to everything else, and this is not looking good for the “Justice” Department. @foxandfriends @FoxNews,” Trump tweeted Thursday. Continue reading.

How Deep Does Barr’s Intervention Go?

Attorney General William Barr’s shocking intervention to help Roger Stone is a blatant abuse of power. It confirms that Barr sees his job as protecting Trump’s political interests rather than enforcing the law. By overturning the prosecutor’s sentencing recommendations, Barr is abandoning longstanding norms to insert himself into a range of cases that implicate Trump and his cronies. His behavior also raises important questions about whether—or how—the attorney general has intervened to protect Trump on a host of other politically sensitive matters.

  • Mueller’s criminal referrals: Appendix D of the Mueller report lists 14 referrals for “potential criminal activity that was outside the scope of the Special Counsel’s jurisdiction.” All except two—Mueller’s referral of Michael Cohen for the Stormy Daniels hush-money scheme and former White House Counsel Greg Craig for alleged violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act—were redacted for “Harm to Ongoing Matters.” (Cohen pleaded guilty to the relevant charges; Craig was found not guilty.) In addition, documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act Requests appear to show that the Department of Justice (DOJ) closed seven applications for court orders related to Mueller’s investigation on April 1, 2019, just 10 days after Mueller filed his report and more than two weeks before the report became public; it is unclear whether these are related to Mueller’s criminal referrals.
    • Were the cases that the DOJ closed on April 1 related to the criminal referrals?
    • Was Barr involved in the closing of those cases? If so, why?
    • What were the nature of the redacted referrals, and what are their current statuses?
    • Has Barr had any involvement with the redacted criminal referrals?
  • Erik Prince referral: After Mueller’s report was published in April 2019, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) made a criminal referral to the DOJ for Prince, alleging that the former Trump adviser lied to Congress about his contacts with Russian officials on behalf of the Trump transition team. More than 10 months later, on the day before the Senate voted in Trump’s impeachment trial, the DOJ finally confirmed that it was investigating Schiff’s referral. On February 11, the same day Barr reportedly intervened to reduce Stone’s sentencing recommendations, The Wall Street Journal reportedthat the DOJ is “in the late stages of deciding whether to charge” Prince for the contacts as well as potentially illegal arms trading.
    • Why did it take more than 10 months for the DOJ to respond to Schiff’s referral?
    • What role, if any, has Barr played in deciding whether to charge Prince? Continue reading.

Well, impeachment didn’t work – how else can Congress keep President Trump in check?

Donald Trump’s removal of impeachment witness Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman from the White House and intervention in his friend Roger Stone’s sentencing have prompted concern that the president’s acquittal in his recent impeachment trial may embolden him to further expand executive power while avoiding accountability.

But the conclusion of the trial in the Senate should by no means end congressional oversight of the executive branch.

As a legal scholar and political scientist, I know that a healthy, stable democracy depends on people knowing what their government is doing so they can hold elected officials accountable through elections. Our constitutional system ensures transparency and accountability by authorizing legislative branch oversight of the executive.  Continue reading.