DOCSLIB.ORG

4047 Responsive

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
4047 Responsive Kupec, Kerri (OPA) From: Kupec, Kerri (OPA) Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 2:08 PM To: Moran, John {OAG) Subject: Transcript REPORTER: mr.attorneygeneral. we do not have th ereport in hand, so can youexplain the special counsel's articulated reasons for not reaching a decision on obstru ction ofjustice, and ifit had anyth ingto do with th edepartment's long­ standing guidance on not indicting a setting president? AG BARR: i would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel's own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination a-s to whether or not th ere was an obstructionoffense. i will say when we met with him, deputy attorneygeneral rosensteinand i met withhim along with ed o'callaghan, the principal associate deputy, on march 5 and asked about the opinion, and whether or not he was taking the positionthat he would have found acrime but for the existence of the olc opinion.he made it very clearseveral ti mes thatthatwas not his position. he was not saying but for the olc opinion, he would have found a crim e. he maoe it cl ear he hao not made the determination there was acrime. http://mms.tveyes.comllranscriptasp?PlayClip=FALSE&DTSearch=TRUE&OateTrme=04%2F 1B%2F2019+09%3A52% 3A52&market=m 1&StationlO;180 REPORTER: what did you disagree with himon?given th at. why-0 id youfeel the need to take itto the next step to conclude there was no crime, especially givendoj policy? AG BARR the prosecutorial fun ction on all ofour powers as prosecutors, includ ingth e power to convene grand jury's and th ecompulsory process involved, is for one purpose. it is determineo, yes or no, was alleged conduct criminalor not criminal? th at is our responsibility and that is whywe have the tools we have.we doni go through this process just to collect information and throw it out to the public.we collect this informationand use that compulsory process for the purpose of making that decision. because the special counsel did not make th at decision,we felt the department had to. that was a decision by me and the deputy attorneygeneral. Ke rri Kupec Direct or Office of Public Affairs U.S. Department of J u stice [email protected] (b) (6) Document ID: 0.7.24420.24818 Rabbitt, Brian (OAG) From: Rabbitt, Brian (OAG) Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 2:15 PM To: Moran, John (OAG); Kupec, Kerri (OPA) Subject: RE: OLC Issue (b) ( 5) From: Moran, John {OAG) <[email protected] .gov> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2:019 2:10 PM To: Kupec, Kerri {OPA) <[email protected] .gov> Cc: Rabbitt, Brian (OAG) <[email protected]> Subject: OLC Issue Kerri, To follow up on our discussion, (b) (5) - - Document ID: 0.7.24420.24826 (b) (5) Happy to follow up if helpful. John John S. Moran Deputy Chief ofStaff & Counselor to the Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice ~ {W) ~ :{C) [email protected] Document ID: 0.7.24420.24826 Gramley, Shannon (OAG) From: Gramley, Shannon (OAG) Sent: Friday, May 3, 2019 5:17 PM To: Rabbitt, Brian (OAG) Subject: 3/5 Meeting Notes Attachments: 3.5 Meeting 5.3.2019 5.16 SMG.docx Document ID: 0.7.24420.29841 3/5 Meeting 2:40 (b) (5) Document ID: 0.7.24420.29841-000001 Kupec, Kerri (OPA) From: Kupec, Kerri (OPA) Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2019 4:11 PM To: Boyd, Stephen E. {OLA); Rabbitt, Brian {OAG); Moran, John {OAG); Burnham, James {OAG} Subject: Fwd: Transcript: AG Barr Hearing atSenate Judiciary (5.1) Attachments: AG Barr Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing transcript.docx; ATT00001.htm Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Sutton, Sarah E. (OPA)" <[email protected]> Date: May 1, 2019 at 3:57:17 PM EDT To: "Kupec, Kerri (OPA)" <kkupec@)jmd.usdoj.gov> Cc: "Laco, Kelly {OPA)" <[email protected]> Subject: Transcript: AG Barr Hearing at Senate Judiciary (5.1) Attached if you need it! Sarah Sutton Department ofJustice Office ofPoblic Affaits (b) (6) Document ID: 0.7.24420.20401 – AGBarrSenateJudiciaryCommitteeHearing(CSPAN3) Sen.LindseyGrahamOp ening Statement http://mms.tveyes.com/transcript.asp?PlayClip=FALSE&DTSearch=TRUE&DateTime=05%2F 01%2F2019+10%3A04%3A57&market=m1&StationID=1115 SEN.LINDSEYGRAHAM:Thefirstorderofbusinessistotrytocooltheroomdown.Sowe'll seeifwecandothat.TheAttorneyGeneralwillbetestifyinghereinabitabouttheMueller Report.Iwanttothankhimforcomingtothecommitteeandgivingusanexplanationastothe actionshetookandwhyhetookthemregardingtheMueller report.Here’sthegoodnews. Here’sthe Mueller report.Youcanreaditforyourself.It’sabout400andsomethingp AGes.I can'tsayI’vereaditallbutI’vereadmostofit.There'sanunredactedversionoverinthe classifiedsectionoftheSenate,aroomwhereyoucangolookattheunredactedversion,andI didthatandIfounditnottochangeanythingintermsofanoutcome.ButabitabouttheMueller report.WhoisMueller?Forthosewhomaynotknow,Idon'tknowwhereyou'vebeen,butyou maywantknowthatBobMuellerhasareputationinthistownandthroughoutthecountryas beinganoutstandinglawyerandamanofthelaw,whowastheFBIDirector,whowasthe DeputyAttorneyGeneral,whowasinchargeoftheCriminalDivisionattheDepartmentof Justice,was a UnitedStatesMarineandhehasservedhiscountryin avarietyofcircumstances longandforthosewhotooktimetoreadthereport,Ithinkitwaswellwritten,verythorough. Letmetellyouwhatwentintothisreport.Therewere19lawyersemployed,approximately40 FBIAGents,intelanalysts,forensicaccountantsandotherstaff,2800subpoenasissued,500 witnessesinterviewed.500searchwarrantsexecuted,morethan230ordersforcommunication, recordssotherecordscouldbeobtained.13requeststoforeigngovernmentsforevidence,over $25millionspentovertwoyears. WemaynotAGreeonmuch,butIhopewecanAGreethathehadampleresources,tookalotof timeandtalkedtoalotofpeople.Andyoucanreadforyourselfwhathefound.TheAttorney Generalwilltellusabitaboutwhathisopinionofthereportis.Intermsofinteractingwiththe WhiteHouse,theWhiteHouseturnedovertoMr.Mueller1.4milliondocumentsandrecords, neverassertedexecutiveprivilegeonetime,over20WhiteHousestaffersincludingeightfrom theWhiteHousecounsel'sofficewereinterviewedvoluntarily.DonMcGahn,chiefcounselfor theWhiteHouse,wasinterviewedforover30hours.Everybodythattheywantedtotalktofrom theTrumpcampaignontheground,theywereabletotalkto.ThePresidentsubmittedhimselfto writtensototheAmericanpeople,Mr.Muellerwastherightguytodothisjob.Ialwaysbelieve thatAttorneyGeneralSessionswasconflictedoutbecausehewaspartofthecampaign.Hewas therightguywithampleresourcesandthecooperationheneededtofindoutwhathappenedwas given,inmyview.Butthereweretwocampaignsin2016andwe'lltalkaboutthesecondonein aminute. Sowhathavewelearnedfromthisreport?Afterallthistimeandallthismoney,Mr.Muellerand histeamconcludedtherewasnocollusion.Ididn'tknow,likemanyofyouhere,onthe Republicanside,weallAGreedthatMr.Muellershouldbeallowedtodohisjobwithout Document ID: 0.7.24420.20401-000001 interference.IjoinedwithsomecolleAGuesontheothersidetointRoducelegislationtoprotect theSpecialCounselthathecouldonlyberemovedforcause.Hewasneverremoved.Hewas allowedtodohisjob. Sonocollusion,nocoordination,noconspIRAcybetweentheTrumpcampaignandtheRussian governmentregardingthe2016election.Astoobstructionofjustice,Mr.MuellerleftittoMr. Barrtodecideaftertwoyearsandallthistime,hesaid,Mr.Barr,youdecide.Mr.Barrdid. ThereareabunchoflawyersonthiscommitteeandIwilltellyouthefollowing.Youhaveto havespecificintenttoobstructjustice.ThePresidentneverdidanythingtostopMuellerfrom doinghisjob.SoIguesstheorygoesnowokay,hedidn'tcolludewiththeRussiansandhedidn't specificallydoanythingtostopMueller,butattemptsobstructionofjusticeofacrimethatnever occurred.Iguessissortofthenewstandardaroundhere. We’ll seeifthatmakesanysense.To meitdoesn't. Therewasanothercampaign.ItwastheClintoncampaign.Whathavewelearnedfromthis report?TheRussiansinterferedinourelection.Socansomebipartisanshipcomeoutofthis?I hopeso.IintendtoworkwithmycolleAGuesontheothersidetointRoducethedeteractandto intRoducelegislationtodefendtheintegrityofthevotingsystem.SenatorDurbinandIhave legislationthatwoulddenyanyoneadmittanceintotheUnitedStatesavisaintheimmigration systemiftheywereinvolvedininterferinginanAmericanelection.WorkingwithSenators WhitehouseandBlumenthaltomakesureifyouhackintoastateelectionsystem,eventhough it'snottiedtotheinternet,that'sacrime.Iwouldliketodomoretohardenourinfrastructure becausetheRussiansdidit.Itwasn'tsome400poundguysittingonabedsomewhere. ItwastheRussians.Andthey'restilldoingit.ItcouldbetheChinese,itcouldbesomebodynext. Somytake-awayfromthisreportisthatwe'vegotalotofworktodotodefenddemocracy AGainsttheRussiansandotherbadactors.Ipromisethecommitteewewillgetonwiththat work,hopefullyinabipartisanfashion. Theothercampaign.TheothercampaignwasinvestigatednotbyMr.Mueller,bypeoplewithin theDepartmentofJustice.TheaccusationAGainstSecretaryClintonwasthatsheprivateserver upsomewhereinherhouseandclassifiedinformationwasonittoavoidthedisclosure requirementsandtransparencyrequirementsrequiredofbeingSecretaryofState.Sothatwas investigated.Whatdoyouknow?Weknowthatthepersoninchargeofinvestigatinghated Trump'sguts.Idon'tknowhowMr.MuellerfeltaboutTrump,butIdon'tthinkanybodyonour sidebelievesthathehadapersonalanimositytowardthePresidenttothepointthathecouldn't dohisjob. ThisiswhatStrzoksaidonFebruary12th,2016. He’s inchargeofthee-mailinvestigation:Oh he’s (Trump's)abysmal.Ikeephopingthecharadewillendandpeoplewilljustdumphim. February12th,2016:PAGeistheDepartmentofJusticelawyerassignedtothiscase. March3rd,2016:godTrumpisaloathsomehumanbeing.Strzok:godHillaryshouldwin. ComparethosetwopeopletoMueller. Document ID: 0.7.24420.20401-000001 http://mms.tveyes.com/transcript.asp?PlayClip=FALSE&DTSearch=TRUE&DateTime=05%2F 01%2F2019+10%3A13%3A53&market=m1&StationID=1115
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House Of
    1 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WASHINGTON, D.C. INTERVIEWOF: DON MCGAHN Friday,June 4,2021 Washington,D.C. The interviewin the above matter was held in Room2141, Rayburn House Office Building,commencingat 10:05 a.m. 2 Present: RepresentativesNadler, Jackson Lee,Johnson of Georgia, Raskin, Scanlon, Dean, Jordan, and Gaetz. Staff Present: Perry Apelbaum,Staff Directorand Chief Counsel; Aaron Hiller, Deputy Chief Counsel; Arya Hariharan,Chief Oversight Counsel; Sarah Istel,Oversight Counsel; PriyankaMara, ProfessionalStaff Member; Cierra Fontenot,Chief Clerk; Kayla Hamedi,Deputy PressSecretary; Will Emmons,ProfessionalStaff Member; Anthony Valdez, ProfessionalStaff Member; Steve Castor,Minority GeneralCounsel; James Lesinski, Minority Counsel; Betsy Ferguson,Minority Senior Counsel; Caroline Nabity, Minority Counsel; Michael Koren, Minority Senior ProfessionalStaff; Darius Namazi, Minority Research Assistant; and Isabela Belchior, Legislative Director for Representative Matt Gaetz. 3 Appearances: For DONMCGAHN: ALLISON MCGUIRE WILLIAM A. BURCK QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 1300 I Street NW Suite 900 Washington,D.C. 20005 For the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: ELIZABETH SHAPIRO, COUNSEL For the OFFICE OF THE FORMERPRESIDENT TRUMP: SCOTT GAST 4 Mr. Hiller. All right. We'll go on the record. Good morning. I'm Aaron Hiller,deputy chief counselfor the House Judiciary Committee,and I havethe honor of kickingthings off today. This is a transcribed interview of former White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn. Would the witness please state his name and formal position at the White House for the record? Mr. McGahn. I'mDonald McGahn. I was the counsel to the President. Mr. Hiller. Thank you, sir. Thank you for appearingheretoday. I will now ask everyone who is herein the roomto introducethemselves for the record.
    [Show full text]
  • Testimonial Immunity Before Congress of the Former Counsel to the President
    (Slip Opinion) Testimonial Immunity Before Congress of the Former Counsel to the President The immunity of the President’s immediate advisers from compelled congressional testimony on matters related to their official responsibilities has long been recognized and arises from the fundamental workings of the separation of powers. This immunity applies to former senior advisers such as the former White House Counsel. According- ly, the former Counsel is not legally required to appear and testify about matters relat- ed to his official duties as Counsel to the President. The President does not waive an adviser’s immunity from compelled congressional testimony by authorizing disclosure of any particular information. The disclosure’s impact on executive privilege does not ultimately bear on any underlying immunity from compelled testimony. Because Congress may not constitutionally compel the former Counsel to testify about his official duties, he may not be civilly or criminally penalized for following a presiden- tial directive not to appear. The same rationale applies equally to an exercise of inher- ent contempt powers against a senior aide who has complied with a presidential direc- tion that he not provide testimony to a congressional committee. May 20, 2019 MEMORANDUM FOR THE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT On April 22, 2019, the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives subpoenaed Donald F. McGahn II, the former Counsel to the President, to testify about matters described in the report of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III. You have asked whether Mr. McGahn is legally required to appear. We provide the same answer that the Department of Justice has repeat- edly provided for nearly five decades: Congress may not constitutionally compel the President’s senior advisers to testify about their official duties.
    [Show full text]
  • MEMORANDUM FROM: Victoria Bassetti, Fellow, Brennan Center for Justice TO: Interested Parties DATE: April 11, 2018 RE
    Brennan Center for Justice At New York University School of Law Washington, D.C. Office 1140 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 1150 Washington, D.C. 20036 Phone 202.249.7190 Fax 202.223.2683 MEMORANDUM FROM: Victoria Bassetti, Fellow, Brennan Center for Justice TO: Interested Parties DATE: April 11, 2018 RE: DOJ ORDER OF SUCCESSION If President Donald Trump wanted to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller he would have to get the Attorney General to do so. By law, only the Attorney General can fire Mueller. The President himself cannot do so. In the wake of Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ recusal from the matter, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has been the Acting Attorney General regarding Russian interference with the 2016 election and related matters. Rosenstein appointed Mueller as Special Counsel on May 17, 2017.1 He did so under his statutory authority to “specially appoint[]” an attorney to “conduct any kind of legal proceeding.” In addition, he indicated that Mueller would be bound by regulations governing Special Counsels. 2 Those regulations provide that only the Attorney General can only fire the Special Counsel for cause and must do so in writing. They provide: The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.3 In addition, since Mueller was appointed pursuant to a statutory provision, Supreme Court precedent holds that he can only be removed by the department head (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Document Requests
    Annie Donaldson DOCUMENT REQUESTS Please produce the documents set forth in Schedule A, provided, however, that in order to facilitate production of documents on an expedited basis, you may limit your production at this time to documents you furnished at any time after November 8, 2016 to: (a) the Special Counsel’s Office established by Department of Justice Order No. 3915-2017 (May 17, 2017); (b) the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”); (c) any other federal or state regulatory and/or law enforcement agency; (d) any congressional committee; or (e) in civil or other litigation. This includes but is not limited to documents that were voluntarily provided, produced under compulsion, or seized. Instructions for producing documents appear in Schedule B, and definitions appear in Schedule C. SCHEDULE A 1) All documents relating to the following: a) Communications between Donald McGahn and President Donald Trump on or about January 26-27, 2017, relating to Michael Flynn’s statements to the FBI about his contacts with Sergey Kislyak. b) The resignation or termination of Michael Flynn, including but not limited to the discussion of Sean Spicer’s February 14, 2017 public statements about Flynn’s resignation. c) President Trump’s contacts with James Comey on or about January 27, 2017, February 14, 2017, March 30, 2017, and April 11, 2017. d) Communications involving one or more of the following individuals on or about May 8- 9, 2017 relating to the possible termination of James Comey: President Trump, Vice President Pence, Reince Priebus, Stephen Bannon, Don McGahn, Jared Kushner, Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions, and/or Rod Rosenstein.
    [Show full text]
  • Tech Stocks Shine in Bumpy Quarter
    For personal, non-commercial use only. Do not edit, alter or reproduce. For commercial reproduction or distribution, contact Dow Jones Reprints & Licensing at (800) 843-0008 or www.djreprints.com. Lessons From WSJ Strange Brains TheSmarterBoat REVIEW THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WEEKEND OFF DUTY ******** SATURDAY/SUNDAY, JUNE 30 - JULY 1, 2018 ~ VOL. CCLXXI NO. 152 WSJ.com HHHH $5.00 What’s 40% Trump Tech Stocks Shine Narrows News 35 World-Wide In Bumpy Quarter Court List Netflix s32.53% BY AKANE OTANI an early slump in the second 30 To Five rump said he has nar- AND MICHAEL WURSTHORN Inflation Redux quarter to book its eighth Trowed the field of can- straight gain. didates for Justice Ken- Stocks were all over the map Prices heat up after six The S&P 500 and the Dow BY LOUISE RADNOFSKY nedy’s seat on the Supreme in a jittery quarter as investors years of falling short............. A2 Jones Industrial Average rose AND PETER NICHOLAS Court to about five and dumped industrial stalwarts on 2.9% and 0.7%, respectively, for 25 plans to announce his fi- fears of a trade war stifling the quarter, trailing the Nas- WASHINGTON—President nal pick on July 9. A1, A5 global growth and increased trade tensions and political daq’s 6.3% advance. The first Donald Trump said on Friday their bets on shares of large uncertainty in the eurozone, as two indexes remain well below that he planned to interview Europe’s leaders agreed Facebook technology companies. well as signs of slowing mo- their January records, while one or two candidates this to start holding some mi- 20 s21.61% Indexes finished the tumul- mentum in the global econ- the Nasdaq notched a series of weekend at his Bedminster, grants in detention camps, tuous three months mostly omy.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapman Law Review
    Chapman Law Review Volume 21 Board of Editors 2017–2018 Executive Board Editor-in-Chief LAUREN K. FITZPATRICK Managing Editor RYAN W. COOPER Senior Articles Editors Production Editor SUNEETA H. ISRANI MARISSA N. HAMILTON TAYLOR A. KENDZIERSKI CLARE M. WERNET Senior Notes & Comments Editor TAYLOR B. BROWN Senior Symposium Editor CINDY PARK Senior Submissions & Online Editor ALBERTO WILCHES –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Articles Editors ASHLEY C. ANDERSON KRISTEN N. KOVACICH ARLENE GALARZA STEVEN L. RIMMER NATALIE M. GAONA AMANDA M. SHAUGHNESSY-FORD ANAM A. JAVED DAMION M. YOUNG __________________________________________________________________ Staff Editors RAYMOND AUBELE AMY N. HUDACK JAMIE L. RICE CARLOS BACIO MEGAN A. LEE JAMIE L. TRAXLER HOPE C. BLAIN DANTE P. LOGIE BRANDON R. SALVATIERRA GEORGE E. BRIETIGAM DRAKE A. MIRSCH HANNAH B. STETSON KATHERINE A. BURGESS MARLENA MLYNARSKA SYDNEY L. WEST KYLEY S. CHELWICK NICHOLE N. MOVASSAGHI Faculty Advisor CELESTINE MCCONVILLE, Professor of Law CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY HAZEM H. CHEHABI ADMINISTRATION JEROME W. CWIERTNIA DALE E. FOWLER ’58 DANIELE C. STRUPPA BARRY GOLDFARB President STAN HARRELSON GAVIN S. HERBERT,JR. GLENN M. PFEIFFER WILLIAM K. HOOD Provost and Executive Vice ANDY HOROWITZ President for Academic Affairs MARK CHAPIN JOHNSON ’05 JENNIFER L. KELLER HAROLD W. HEWITT,JR. THOMAS E. MALLOY Executive Vice President and Chief SEBASTIAN PAUL MUSCO Operating Officer RICHARD MUTH (MBA ’05) JAMES J. PETERSON SHERYL A. BOURGEOIS HARRY S. RINKER Executive Vice President for JAMES B. ROSZAK University Advancement THE HONORABLE LORETTA SANCHEZ ’82 HELEN NORRIS MOHINDAR S. SANDHU Vice President and Chief RONALD M. SIMON Information Officer RONALD E. SODERLING KAREN R. WILKINSON ’69 THOMAS C. PIECHOTA DAVID W.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic City Native Don Mcgahn Gives Glimpse Into White House Counsel Role
    https://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/politics/atlantic-city-native-don-mcgahn-gives-glimpse-into-white- house/article_57dcdd98-e5f8-574e-895a-50591141c4bc.html Atlantic City native Don McGahn gives glimpse into White House counsel role MICHELLE BRUNETTI POST Staff Writer Jan 23, 2020 Don McGahn, former White House counsel and Brigantine resident, speaks with Bill Hughes, Jr., during a “Conversation McGahn”, at Stockton University, in Galloway, Thursday Jan. 23, 2020. (VERNON OGRODNEK / For The Press) VERNON OGRODNEK / For The Press GALLOWAY TOWNSHIP — As former White House counsel to President Donald Trump, Atlantic City native Don McGahn helped reshape the nation’s federal judiciary and remains in the middle of legal wranglings over Trump’s impeachment. McGahn spoke at an event Thursday at the William J. Hughes Center for Public Policy at Stockton University, answering questions about how he grew up in a prominent Democratic family and became a conservative Republican; what the job of White House counsel entails, and his family’s long association with Trump. The impeachment issue, however, was off limits, as he is awaiting an appeals court decision about whether it will uphold a judge’e order forcing McGahn to comply with a House subpoena to testify in Congress’ impeachment probe. +2 Limited number of tickets available for McGahn at Stockton Asking the questions was McGahn’s friend William J. Hughes Jr., son of the Democratic former congressman and ambassador for whom the Hughes Center is named. “It’s timely that you’re here. Couldn’t come at a better time,” Hughes started by saying. “You have some on one side saying actions were necessary — almost required — and on the other side saying actions aren’t justified — it was rash and an institution is in jeopardy.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Means of Compulsion Are Essential To
    ªSome Means of Compulsion are Essential to Obtain What is Neededº: Reviving Congress's Oversight Authority of the Executive Branch by Imposing Fines for Non-Compliance with Congressional Subpoenas MAX G. LESSER* INTRODUCTION Congressional oversight has played a critical role in uncovering wrongdoing in the executive branch, from the historic corruption of the Teapot Dome Scandal to the presidential abuses of power in Watergate. Underpinning these investigations has been the Supreme Court's long-standing recognition of the broad oversight authority possessed by Congress, which empowers the body to compel testimony and documentation.1 Possessing investigative power allows Congress to ful®ll several critical responsibilities. First, Congress can oversee whether the laws it passes are being faithfully executed, in terms of how ªeffectively, ef®ciently, and frugally the executive branch is carrying out congressional mandates.º2 Second, Congress can identify any executive misconduct, such as ªpoor administration, arbitrary and capricious behavior, abuse, waste, dishonesty, and fraud.º3 Third, Congress can utilize the information gained from investigative oversight to address issues through appropriate legislation, the body's core constitutional function. For these reasons, the Supreme Court has described congressional over- sight as ªessentialº4 for the Article I branch of our government. When congressional oversight faces resistance, the contempt power provides Congress a tool for coercing compliance and punishing those who obstruct its investigations.5 The power has generally been utilized to address non-compliance with a congressionally issued subpoena, and has historically been enforced by the * J.D., Georgetown University Law Center (expected May 2022); M.S.Ed., Hunter College of The City University of New York - Graduate School of Education (2016); B.A., The George Washington University (2014).
    [Show full text]
  • Of LAW Why the President Will Prevail JANUARY 2021 | VOL
    JANUARY 2021 | THETRUMPET.COM Flaw in Mideast peace deals Abraham Lincoln’s view on tearing down sacred statues COVID-19’s economic impact Will blockchain block out America? The key to answered prayer RULE of LAW Why the president will prevail JANUARY 2021 | VOL. 32, NO. 1 | CIRC. 247,820 FEATURES FROM THE EDITOR : COVER STORY 1 Why Donald Trump Will Remain America’s President The Radical Left’s Ongoing Coup 6 Battle for God’s Truth 8 Europe vs. Donald Trump 11 Deadly Flaw in Mideast Peace Deals 15 INFOGRAPHIC Economic Virus 18 Lincoln’s View on Tearing Down Sacred Statues 20 Liberté, Égalité, and Down With Muslims! 22 A Military Alliance in All But Name 25 Will Blockchain Block Out America? 26 Guttenberg—an Expert on Financial Crises 27 DEPARTMENTS WORLDWATCH 28 SOCIETYWATCH 31 PRINCIPLES OF LIVING 33 The All-Important Key to Answered Prayer DISCUSSION BOARD 34 COMMENTARY 35 America’s Election: ‘Truth Dies in the Streets’ THE KEY OF DAVID TELEVISION LOG 36 WIN MCNAMEE/GETTY IMAGES, COVER: GARY DORNING/TRUMPET GARY COVER: IMAGES, MCNAMEE/GETTY WIN Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry’s weekly television program theTrumpet.com/keyofdavid News and analysis updated daily theTrumpet.com Trumpet executive editor Stephen Flurry’s television program theTrumpet.com/trumpetdaily FROM THE EDITOR GERALD FLURRY Why Donald Trump Will Remain America’s President The media and virtually the entire world rushed to crown Joe Biden president. But Bible prophecy shows that God still has plans for Mr. Trump. n Saturday, Nov. 7, 2020, just four days after the Amos 7:7 reads, “Thus he shewed me: and, behold, the Lord presidential election, the American news media decided stood upon a wall made by a plumbline, with a plumbline in his O to declare Joe Biden the winner and the president-elect hand.” A plumbline is usually used in measuring a building or of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Possible Misconduct in Prevention of White House Counsel’S Testimony to Congress
    Report on Possible Misconduct in Prevention of White House Counsel’s Testimony to Congress Possible Violation of the Law Did President Trump obstruct justice, or attempt to obstruct justice, in his various requests and orders to former White House counsel Donald McGahn? Is his refusal to permit McGahn to comply with a congressional subpoena legal, and does it interfere with Congress’s constitutionally granted power of oversight? Facts When Robert Mueller’s report summarizing the findings of his nearly two-year investigation was released, some of the most significant legal revelations came from one prominent former Trump advisor: Donald McGahn, who served as White House counsel from 2016 until late 2018. McGahn spent over thirty hours with Mueller’s team of special investigators,1 and his name appeared in Mueller’s report over 150 times.2 His time with the special counsel shed light on two damning episodes of possible obstruction of justice, which Mueller disclosed in his report.3 The two episodes McGahn bore witness to are linked, and each may constitute an attempted obstruction. First, McGahn told investigators that President Trump ordered him to have the Department of Justice fire Mr. Mueller in June of 2017.4 Second, McGahn further explained that in February of 2018, after the New York Times reported President Trump’s order to fire Mueller, President Trump requested that McGahn create a false paper trail denying this account.5 Not only did President Trump want McGahn to deny the Times story publicly, but he also asked McGahn to write a letter for his records, falsifying evidence so that there was “something beyond a press statement to demonstrate that the reporting was inaccurate.”6 Notably, McGahn refused each of the President’s requests.7 He neither ordered the firing of Mueller, nor denied the episode to Mueller or to the country at large.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Dilemmas Facing White House Counsel in the Trump Administration: the Costs of Public Disclosure of FISA Requests
    Fordham Law Review Volume 87 Issue 5 Article 6 2019 Legal Dilemmas Facing White House Counsel in the Trump Administration: The Costs of Public Disclosure of FISA Requests Peter Margulies Roger Williams University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons Recommended Citation Peter Margulies, Legal Dilemmas Facing White House Counsel in the Trump Administration: The Costs of Public Disclosure of FISA Requests, 87 Fordham L. Rev. 1913 (2019). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol87/iss5/6 This Colloquium is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LEGAL DILEMMAS FACING WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: THE COSTS OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF FISA REQUESTS Peter Margulies* INTRODUCTION Not every presidential administration can forge a new brand of government lawyering. Historically, government lawyering has swung between two poles: (1) dialogic lawyering, which stresses reasoned elaboration, respect for institutions, and continuity with unwritten norms embodied in past practice; and (2) insular lawyering, which entails opaque definitions, disregard of other institutions, and departures from unwritten norms.1 Because President Trump regularly signals his disdain for institutions, such as the intelligence community, and unwritten norms, such as prosecutorial independence,2 senior lawyers in the White House have added a new mode of legal representation that entails ad hoc adjustments to President Trump’s mercurial decisions and triage among the presidential decisions they will try to temper.
    [Show full text]
  • Attorney General Barr Letter on Mueller Report, LAWFARE (Mar. 24, 2019, 3:44 PM)
    April 11, 2019 VIA ONLINE PORTAL Douglas Hibbard Chief, Initial Request Staff Office of Information Policy U.S. Department of Justice 1425 New York Avenue NW Suite 11050 Washington, DC 20530-0001 Via FOIAOnline Re: Expedited Freedom of Information Act Request Dear Mr. Hibbard: Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the implementing regulations of the Department of Justice (DOJ), 28 C.F.R. Part 16, American Oversight makes the following request for records. Requested Records American Oversight requests that DOJ produce the following within twenty business days and seeks expedited review of this request for the reasons identified below: 1. All communications (including emails, email attachments, letters, messages sent by courier, and other communications) attaching or otherwise including any draft, or any portion of a draft, of Attorney General William Barr’s March 24, 2019 letter to the Judiciary Committees of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives concerning Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.”1 2. All records reflecting communications (including emails, email attachments, telephone call logs, talking points, electronic or handwritten notes, or drafts used as reference documents during oral communications) between DOJ and any employee or official at the White House regarding Attorney General William Barr’s March 24, 2019 letter to the Judiciary Committees of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives concerning Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report on the Investigation into Russian 1 A copy of Attorney General Barr’s letter can be viewed here: Quinta Jurecic, Document: Attorney General Barr Letter on Mueller Report, LAWFARE (Mar.
    [Show full text]