This comes to you from Slate via Raw Story: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg secured the only legal conviction against now-President Donald Trump in the series of criminal cases against him, under an arcane bookkeeping fraud statute for his hush payments to an adult film star to keep damaging information away from voters in the 2016 election. Now, he should file another case against him, wrote Jonathan Zasloff for Slate.
Specifically, the case should target Trump’s series of “deals” with law firms that represented anti-Trump clients, to change their policies in ways favorable to the president to be exempt from executive orders that would lock them out of federal contracts — an arrangement, Zasloff wrote, that is a textbook case of criminal extortion. While some law firms are fighting these orders, others have caved to Trump’s demands. It appears to be pretty sound to me, BUT, I’m not a lawyer. It does seem that Jonathan knows what he’s talking about, though.
But wait, there’s more! “What Trump is doing to these firms — first Perkins Coie; then Paul, Weiss; then Covington & Burling; then Jenner & Block; then WilmerHale — has for the most part been treated as a political scandal and a threat to the First Amendment, which it is,” wrote Zasloff. “But there’s a legal term for what Trump is doing: extortion. He is threatening to kneecap businesses not because they are doing anything illegal, but rather just the opposite: because they are using legal channels to resist him. Trump’s message is straightforward enough: Nice law firm you got here; it would be too bad if something were to happen to it. This is an extortion racket run straight out of the Oval Office.”
What do *you* think? I wonder how much law Jonathan knows because his reasoning is pretty damn sound to *this* layperson. This is fascinating and it’s something I *never* would have thought of. Agent Orange already has one RICO case going in Georgia, remember? They can continue with that because it’s a *Georgia criminal case*, not a federal case. Of course, there’s some nonsense going on with the prosecution (not their fault), but the case is still open! Well, it might be on hold because tRump is a sitting president with “absolute immunity,” but I don’t think it’s gone away, just like his hush money case didn’t go away.
Alrighty, here’s your last quote: “It is incumbent on Bragg to try to stand up for the laws of his state, regardless. There is no time to wait,” wrote Zasloff. “Bragg should take this case to a grand jury, and if it indicts, it indicts. If then Trump argues that he can’t be indicted, or that Trump v. United States allows him to use the power of the federal government on a vendetta against his political enemies, and the Supreme Court agrees, then at least we will have some confirmation that the Constitution is a dead letter and the rule of law has all but perished.”
That would/will be a sad thing. If the Supreme Court aids and abets him, it feels like the rule of law will not be there anymore. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that point. Mad King Donald, indeed. And if he gets an indictment? Aw yea, there we go! Whether or not this happens, since it depends on Mr. Bragg to take it up and do the work, it will certainly give me a lot of glee thinking about it!
*****And now, please read a very special request from our awesome boss******
Zoomers, we feel guilty asking for cash, but if you can spare a small amount, it will keep us trekking through cyberspace. Many hands make light work, many small contributions add up to enough. And most of all, we thank you for coming here to read. Ursula
New York STATE has a quite robust RICO statute with as many sharp teeth as the federal one. Yes, Trump would claim immunity by calling his extortion an “Official Act” but if Bragg includes him in an indictment when the appeals start if the rest of us are lucky it will make it’s way up to SCOTUS quickly. Barret clearly had misgivings about the sweeping scope of Robert’s decision and I have to think at this point Roberts himself is having buyers remorse. Maybe either Gorsuch or Kavanaugh (or both) would join in with the three Democratic apppointees and roll back that immunity – narrow it considerably to things like decisions to order military strikes and such. Maybe I’m wrong and Roberts (and the others I mentioned have given up but maybe not. A bigger problem is that lawyers HATE going after other lawyers and there are two parts to this – Trump and the lawyers/firms that caved to his demands and made their deals with the Devil. I think those firms would survive as many of the junior partners aren’t happy with what the full partners did. Especially if some of the full partners objected but got outvoted. We should all put a pin in this because it could heat up – and fast.