Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FBaggins

(26,721 posts)
11. That's in their filing
Tue Jun 8, 2021, 10:50 PM
Jun 2021

Emphasis mine

When members of the White House media asked then-President Trump to respond to Ms. Carroll’s serious allegations of wrongdoing, their questions were posed to him in his capacity as President. Likewise, when Mr. Trump responded to those questions with denials of wrongdoing made through the White House press office or in statements to reporters in the Oval Office and on the White House lawn, he acted within the scope of his office. Elected public officials can—and often must—address allegations regarding personal wrongdoing that inspire doubt about their suitability for office. Such wrongdoing can include not only the serious charges of criminal behavior leveled here, but a range of activities including fraud and malfeasance. Officials do not step outside the bounds of their office simply because they are addressing questions regarding allegations about their personal lives. Thus, in Ballenger, the D.C. Circuit concluded that a congressman acted within the scope of employment when he allegedly engaged in defamation during an interview to explain the reasons for his separation from his wife. 444 F.3d at 662.
GOOD! Well done by Bettie Jun 2021 #1
I agree MerryHolidays Jun 2021 #2
It was wrong then and it is wrong now dalton99a Jun 2021 #6
Excellent Me. Jun 2021 #3
Garland should have said NO. dalton99a Jun 2021 #4
well said, and I'd like a response from DOJ explaining their decision Takket Jun 2021 #5
That's in their filing FBaggins Jun 2021 #11
So the DOJ is affirming Sur Zobra Jun 2021 #15
Nope FBaggins Jun 2021 #16
So the Westfall Act only applies to torts Sur Zobra Jun 2021 #22
Your memory is faulty FBaggins Jun 2021 #23
Didn't Clinton lie about Paula Jones Sur Zobra Jun 2021 #24
Can't speak to the truthfulness of course... FBaggins Jun 2021 #27
The Legal Information site at Cornell Sur Zobra Jun 2021 #28
Trump is also represented by private counsel FBaggins Jun 2021 #29
A lot of people are starting to lose faith in the attorney general Ligyron Jun 2021 #7
Maybe he'll explain his reasoning to them soothsayer Jun 2021 #10
Well, this should rattle the feathers of a few DU legal experts who have been supporting Garland. jalan48 Jun 2021 #8
Lol, it should Sewa Jun 2021 #12
I guess staying at the Holiday Inn isn't fool proof when it comes to expertise. jalan48 Jun 2021 #13
But it won't. Autumn Jun 2021 #20
Most of them will slink off and ignore these kinds of topics and continue to be angry karens. SunImp Jun 2021 #26
K/R moondust Jun 2021 #9
An embarrassing decision by Garland budkin Jun 2021 #14
Thanks for this Sunsky Jun 2021 #17
Recommended Arazi Jun 2021 #18
I hope Garland has a good reason for this like trying to make the DOJ apolitical again and Vinca Jun 2021 #19
I hope so too SunImp Jun 2021 #25
I know there's been a lot of threads here over the last couple of days PRETZEL Jun 2021 #21
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Letter from @HouseJudicia...»Reply #11