White House looking at ethics rule to weaken special investigation: sources
Source: Reuters
The Trump administration is exploring whether it can use an obscure ethics rule to undermine the special counsel investigation into ties between President Donald Trump's campaign team and Russia, two people familiar with White House thinking said on Friday.
Trump has said that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's hiring of former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to lead the investigation "hurts our country terribly."
Within hours of Mueller's appointment on Wednesday, the White House began reviewing the Code of Federal Regulations, which restricts newly hired government lawyers from investigating their prior law firms clients for one year after their hiring, the sources said.
An executive order signed by Trump in January extended that period to two years.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-mueller-idUSKCN18F2KK
C_U_L8R
(45,002 posts)In fact, the Trumps end up looking guilt as fuck.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)unblock
(52,209 posts)that said, maybe there was a more independent choice for special counsel.
not that that's donnie's goal, of course....
elleng
(130,895 posts)Unlikely, imo.
chillfactor
(7,575 posts)unblock
(52,209 posts)then again, i'd wager that every major law firm has had donnie as a client....
but think about it, if mueller goes light on donnie, we'll all scream foul.
elleng
(130,895 posts)edit BUT represents Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner,
unblock
(52,209 posts)well, it could apply if others under investigation were clients, not necessarily donnie in particular.
elleng
(130,895 posts)unblock
(52,209 posts)mueller wouldn't personally get involved in the case against jared; he could hire someone from a different law firm to work that case. mueller would then focus on non-clients (flynn? trump? his kids?)
elleng
(130,895 posts)he may be somehow insulated, for a while at least.
Response to unblock (Reply #13)
emulatorloo This message was self-deleted by its author.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Mueller never represented them personally.
Here's more from a Reuters article:
"The Justice Department is already reviewing Mueller's background as well as any potential conflicts of interest, said department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores.
Even if the Justice Department granted a waiver, the White House would consider using the ethics rule to create doubt about Mueller's ability to do his job fairly, the sources said. Administration legal advisers have been asked to determine if there is a basis for this.
Under this strategy, the sources said the administration would raise the issue in press conferences and public statements."
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-mueller-idUSKCN18F2KK
In other words, they're going to publicly attack him personally, for ethics. Continuing in the Trump pattern of behaving unprofessionally, mean, vindictive, spiteful, and personal. Expect lots of tweets. "UNFAIR!" "SPECIAL COUNSEL UNETHICAL! UNFAIR!" "WITCH HUNT BY SC!" "PERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST MY FAMILY!" "SON IN LAW DIDN'T WANT MUELLER TO REPRESENT HIM, SO MUELLER TAKING REVENGE!"
I wouldn't think this would work. But who knows? Times are crazy. I worked for law firms for decades. Big law firms represent at some time almost everyone who is anyone. It's not uncommon to leave a firm and work on cases against clients of prior firm, as long as the particular lawyer isn't the one who represented that client. But laypeople may not understand the situation.
Amaryllis
(9,524 posts)elleng
(130,895 posts)as a partner in its Washington, D.C. office in 2014.[19] Among other roles while at the firm, he oversaw the independent investigation into the NFL's conduct surrounding the video that appeared to show NFL player Ray Rice assaulting his fiancée.[20] In January 2016, he was appointed as Settlement Master in the U.S. consumer litigation over the Volkswagen emissions scandal; as of May 11, 2017, the scandal has resulted in $11.2 billion in customer settlements.[21] On October 19, 2016, Mueller began an external review of "security, personnel, and management processes and practices" at government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton after an employee was indicted for massive data theft from the National Security Agency.[22] On April 6, 2017, he was appointed as Special Master for disbursement of $850 million and $125 million for automakers and consumers, respectively, affected by rupture-prone Takata airbags.[23]'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mueller
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilmer_Cutler_Pickering_Hale_and_Dorr
LOTS of clients, as with most other big firms.
emulatorloo
(44,120 posts)Thanks for the links.
bucolic_frolic
(43,156 posts)throwing out a highly respected former FBI Director
I don't think Congress - Republican or Democrat - would support such a maneuver
riversedge
(70,208 posts)plans of attack!! --plus RW radio, websites, conservative PACs would go 24/7 with Trump.
...........If the department did not grant a waiver, Mueller would be barred from investigating Kushner or Manafort, and this could greatly diminish the scope of the probe, experts said.
The Justice Department is already reviewing Mueller's background as well as any potential conflicts of interest, said department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores.
Even if the Justice Department granted a waiver, the White House would consider using the ethics rule to create doubt about Mueller's ability to do his job fairly, the sources said. Administration legal advisers have been asked to determine if there is a basis for this.
Under this strategy, the sources said the administration would raise the issue in press conferences and public statements.
Moreover, the White House has not ruled out the possibility of using the rule to challenge Muellers findings in court, should the investigation lead to prosecution.
sheshe2
(83,754 posts)unless they were all al guilty as hell.
dalton99a
(81,485 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,704 posts)herding cats
(19,564 posts)This makes them appear all the more guilty.
riversedge
(70,208 posts)......If the department did not grant a waiver, Mueller would be barred from investigating Kushner or Manafort, and this could greatly diminish the scope of the probe, experts said.
The Justice Department is already reviewing Mueller's background as well as any potential conflicts of interest, said department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores.
Even if the Justice Department granted a waiver, the White House would consider using the ethics rule to create doubt about Mueller's ability to do his job fairly, the sources said. Administration legal advisers have been asked to determine if there is a basis for this.
Under this strategy, the sources said the administration would raise the issue in press conferences and public statements.
Moreover, the White House has not ruled out the possibility of using the rule to challenge Muellers findings in court, should the investigation lead to prosecution.
dhill926
(16,337 posts)and it may work...
rzemanfl
(29,557 posts)This may force an up or down vote in Congress on Mueller's appointment. It would be hard for Repukes who praised him to say, "No, we are going to follow an obscure regulation that Drumpf modified with an Executive Order."
Could be three dimensional chess on either side of the board. Or just another Washington fuck up.
WePurrsevere
(24,259 posts)All this type of bs does is make them look more guilty.
notdarkyet
(2,226 posts)Of acting paid for turkey and Russia. So I don't see the big deal here.
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)That last line is haunting.
briv1016
(1,570 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Mueller appointment in January. Why did Trump find it SO important in January when he had just got in to sign this executive order to extend the wait period. Gotta be something to that - I need to look that up and see
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)What Are the Restrictions on Incoming Appointees?
1. Two-year ban on participating in any matter directly and substantially related to their former employers or clients
The Ethics Executive Order requires all incoming appointees to pledge that for two years from the date of their appointments, they will not participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to their former employers or clients, including regulations and contracts. This requirement applies to any incoming appointee, whether or not he or she was a lobbyist before entering service. This requirement and the relevant defined terms are unchanged from President Obamas Executive Order on ethics.
https://www.perkinscoie.com/en/news-insights/executive-order-adds-ethics-commitments-for-executive-branch.html
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)who is actually working for Trump right now.
Mz Pip
(27,442 posts)Can't make this stuff up.
3hummingbirds
(58 posts)Of course he will try to use obscure rules. Nothing is his fault. His staff did it, the Dems are at fault, the media lies. He lies every time he opens his mouth.
Massacure
(7,521 posts)From the article:
Kathleen Clark, a professor of legal ethics at Washington University School of Law, said the Justice Department can grant a waiver if concerns about bias are minimal.
Given that Mueller ran the FBI for 12 years and that Mueller never represented Manafort nor Kushner, I'm thinking the concerns of bias are minimal.
TomCADem
(17,387 posts)...unlike the Nixon era, today's Republicans are in too deep with Trump to complain. Look at how they backed Trump's firing of Comey.
mackdaddy
(1,527 posts)Rachel Maddow had on the the former Justice Department guy again who wrote the current JD rules for the Special Councel.
He said that if Muller were recused from the hand full of persons who used his law firm, that a Second Special counsel could then be appointed and they both would be operating at the same time!
Skittles
(153,160 posts)*NOT*
mulsh
(2,959 posts)[link:http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/justice_department_will_conduct_conflicts_review_involving_mueller_and_his/|
my money is with the people who provide the most valid and factual information.