TriggerFinger


More anti-Trump leaks


USA TodayFederal prosecutors' decision to end an investigation into hush money payments to women claiming affairs with Donald Trump relied at least in part on long-standing Justice Department policy that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime, a person familiar with the matter said Thursday.

The Justice Department told a federal judge on Monday that it had "effectively concluded" its investigation into efforts to silence the women in the final months of the 2016 campaign, but did not explain why it had done so. Prosecutors have said the payoffs violated a federal law that restricts campaign donations.

Not mentioned: there is serious and signifcant doubt as to whether the charges in this case could possibly be campaign finance violations. Cohen basically pled to legal conduct as part of a "get Trump" effort. When Edwards was charged with similar but significantly worse conduct -- he paid off his mistress with campaign funds from a donor -- he was acquitted. Even those charges were considered controversial and a bit of a stretch.

The leaker here is basically saying Trump wasn't charged because he is the President. But that's pretty much never stopped anyone from enforcing campaign finance law before, and there are lots of other reasons not to prosecute a case like this.

Leaking this information is almost certainly a violation of DOJ ethics rules for prosecutors. As a prosecutor, you either indict, or shut up. You don't leak smears.

This entry was published Mon Aug 26 06:47:22 CDT 2019 by TriggerFinger and last updated 2019-08-26 06:47:22.0. [Tweet]

comments powered by Disqus

Related Categories


Subscribe to Atom Feed

I am not a lawyer, and nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice.

This site is run on custom blog software and is being actively developed. Please be forgiving of errors.


This website is an Amazon affiliate and will receive financial compensation for products purchased from Amazon through links on this site.