The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Photo by skpy/ CC BY-SA 2.0

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

A new, heavily redacted filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia revealed on Tuesday that the Justice Department is seriously investigating a potential "bribery conspiracy scheme" relating to a presidential pardon. The document were first publicized by CNN.

The names of individuals involved in the investigation have been redacted throughout the documents since they haven't been charged at this point with any crimes. President Donald Trump's name does not appear in the filing. But of course, only a president can issue a presidential pardon.


A memorandum opinion from Chief Judge Beryl Howell also suggests that the Justice Department is investigating whether two people whose names are redacted "acted as lobbyists to senior White House officials, without complying with the registration requirement of the Lobbying Disclosure Act."

The investigators are pursuing what the judge referred to as a "Bribery-for-pardon scheme" in which a person whose name is redacted "would offer a substantial political contribution in exchange for a presidential pardon or reprieve of sentence for [redacted]." A footnote indicates that the government has submitted emails do not show a direct payment for a pardon. Instead, the judge wrote, they "indicate that [redacted] expected [redacted] to assist in obtaining clemency for [redacted] due to [redacted]'s past substantial campaign contributions [extensive redaction] and [redacted]'s anticipated future substantial political contributions."

The memorandum suggests that the person seeking a pardon has already been charged and sentenced for a crime. It also suggests the person in question is already in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons.

The heart of the question Howell was addressing in the opinion was whether certain evidence, obtained by investigators with a search warrant, should be covered by attorney-client privilege. Her discussion of the issue suggests that an attorney, possibly working for the president, was involved. However, she also says that the involvement of a third-party in the communications nullifies the attorney-client protection.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Rep. Adam Kinzinger

When the flags fly proudly on the Fourth of July, I remember what my late father taught me about love of country. Much as he despised the scoundrels and pretenders he liked to call "jelly-bellied flag flappers," after a line in a favorite Rudyard Kipling story, he was deeply patriotic. It is a phrase that aptly describes the belligerent chicken hawk who never stops squawking — someone like Ted Cruz or Donald Trump.

Like many who volunteered for the U.S. Army in World War II, my dad never spoke much about his four tough years of military service, which brought him under Japanese bombardment in the Pacific theater. But eventually there came a time when he attached to his lapel a small eagle-shaped pin known as a "ruptured duck" — a memento given to every veteran. With this proof of service, he demonstrated that as a lifelong liberal, he loved his country as much as any conservative.

Keep reading... Show less

Liz Cheney

YouTube Screenshot

Rep. Liz Cheney delivered two clear warnings during last week's House Select Committee hearings. One was to Donald Trump aides and allies who conspired with him to violently overthrow our government. The second was to those who merely observed these crimes but refuse to tell what they know.

The first message: the game is up because the J6 committee has the goods on Trump’s conspiracy, the coverup and the witness tampering so it’s time to either rat out Donald to save your own skin or give up any hope of leniency when indictments are handed out.

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}