In a previous post, I discussed how a competent lawyer would have responded to a campaign’s proposal that it accept a foreign government’s offer to help with the campaign. The lawyer, I wrote, would have quickly spotted a whole host of issues under federal campaign finance laws and would certainly have advised against any such engagement.
Latest in Campaign 2016
Former acting solicitor general Walter Dellinger tweeted a question last week:
Who decided that the right word for the Russian military/intelligence attack on our democratic election was "meddling"? This trivializing term is defined as to "busy oneself unduly with something that is not one's concern" The attack was that, of course, but so much more.
On the June 21 episode of Preet Bharara’s podcast, “Stay Tuned with Preet,” a listener called in to ask about the legal meaning of the word “collusion.” Bharara and his two guests were quick to set the record straight; the term collusion, despite it frequent use, has no actual legal definition outside of antitrust law.
On Thursday, the Justice Department’s inspector general released its final report on conduct by FBI and Justice Department leadership during the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. The full report is below.
A law-nerd analysis of whether Donald J. Trump Jr. violated the CFAA based on his recently-disclosed e-mail.
On Friday, the Democratic National Committee filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Russian government, the Trump campaign and associated persons, and WikiLeaks, alleging an illegal conspiracy to influence the outcome of the election.
On Wednesday, I testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittees on Information Technology and Intergovernmental Affairs about the cybersecurity of voting machines.
A variety of recent reports have noted complaints that the sanctions on Russia for its meddling in the November election are insufficient. For example,
Many writers on this site have highlighted why they are concerned about President-Elect Donald Trump’s becoming the Commander in Chief of our armed forces. I share almost all these concerns. But in this post, I will try to explain the concern I consider most significant: Trump’s campaign statements consistently indicate a complete failure to appreciate the importance of legitimacy in U.S. operations.
Donald Trump is the President Elect of the United States. And over the next few weeks, personnel questions will move to the forefront of transition coverage. Who will Trump select or retain in key Cabinet and federal positions? Who should be willing to serve and under what terms? There are many unknowns.