web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > News (Page 41)

Democrats vow to investigate whether Trump obstructed justice

Democrats are vowing to investigate whether President Donald Trump obstructed justice — with some openly floating the prospect of impeachment or his resignation — following a bombshell BuzzFeed report that Trump personally directed his former attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress.

Westlake Legal Group cnn_topstories?d=yIl2AUoC8zA Democrats vow to investigate whether Trump obstructed justice   Westlake Legal Group cnn_topstories?d=7Q72WNTAKBA Democrats vow to investigate whether Trump obstructed justice   Westlake Legal Group cnn_topstories?i=oNb06st_Zb4:o8PU9lfuuVA:V_sGLiPBpWU Democrats vow to investigate whether Trump obstructed justice   Westlake Legal Group cnn_topstories?d=qj6IDK7rITs Democrats vow to investigate whether Trump obstructed justice   Westlake Legal Group cnn_topstories?i=oNb06st_Zb4:o8PU9lfuuVA:gIN9vFwOqvQ Democrats vow to investigate whether Trump obstructed justice

Westlake Legal Group oNb06st_Zb4 Democrats vow to investigate whether Trump obstructed justice

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Perdue recalls gluten-free chicken nuggets after reports of wood in product

Perdue Foods has recalled about 68,200 pounds of organic, gluten-free ready-to-eat chicken nuggets after consumers complained about finding pieces of wood in the product.

Westlake Legal Group CHICKEN_NUGGET_RECALL Perdue recalls gluten-free chicken nuggets after reports of wood in product fox-news/health/healthy-living/product-recalls fox news fnc/health fnc article Alexandria Hein 4afb4adb-7bad-56e6-a6f5-0ba9994f667d

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Does Mueller have evidence Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress?

Westlake Legal Group cohen-plea Does Mueller have evidence Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress? The Blog subornation of perjury Russia Robert Mueller perjury Michael Cohen donald trump Buzzfeed

Firing James Comey does not amount to obstruction of justice. Telling Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about a real-estate deal in Russia almost certainly would be. Buzzfeed reported last night that Donald Trump “personally instructed” his personal attorney to give the false testimony to intelligence committees in both chambers that resulted in a three-year sentence for Cohen.

If true, this is a very big problem for the White House, but there’s at least a little room for skepticism:

President Donald Trump directed his longtime attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about negotiations to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, according to two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation of the matter. …

Cohen pleaded guilty in November to lying about the deal in testimony and in a two-page statement to the Senate and House intelligence committees. Special counsel Robert Mueller noted that Cohen’s false claim that the project ended in January 2016 was an attempt to “minimize links between the Moscow Project and Individual 1” — widely understood to be Trump — “in hopes of limiting the ongoing Russia investigations.”

Now the two sources have told BuzzFeed News that Cohen also told the special counsel that after the election, the president personally instructed him to lie — by claiming that negotiations ended months earlier than they actually did — in order to obscure Trump’s involvement.

Is it true, however? Buzzfeed claims that the special counsel already has the goods on this particular point:

The special counsel’s office learned about Trump’s directive for Cohen to lie to Congress through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents. Cohen then acknowledged those instructions during his interviews with that office.

CNN also wonders whether it’s true. If it is, former FBI agent Asha Rangappa notes, Mueller would likely have it cold:

This thread has been building for some time, ever since Cohen began cooperating with prosecutors. A few weeks ago, Cohen claimed to have been in “close and regular contact” with administration officials while preparing his congressional testimony, part of his filing to reduce his sentence after his plea deal. At the time, it sounded as though Cohen was accusing White House staff and lawyers of suborning perjury. However, if this report is true, then the suborning came from the highest point on the White House org chart.

That filing, however, is where some room for skepticism emerges. If Trump told Cohen to lie, why not just say so in the filing? Why not just tell the judge that he got instructed to lie by President Trump — or “Individual-1,” the reference used in filings for Cohen’s case? That would certainly be a lot more interesting than just a passive implication of subornation by White House staff, which is what Cohen’s filing suggested. If Cohen really wanted a sentence reduction, that certainly would have gotten the judge’s attention. And for that matter, why sentence Cohen at all at that point if Trump suborned perjury? One would expect a prosecutor to hold off sentencing for a major material witness until after a trial, in order to ensure that the witness didn’t change his story — especially one with a track record of changing stories, like Cohen.

Needless to say, the House Intelligence Committee under Democratic leadership has taken a keen interest in finding the answers to those and other questions:

“The allegation that the President of the United States may have suborned perjury before our committee in an effort to curtail the investigation and cover up his business dealings with Russia is among the most serious to date,” committee chairman Adam Schiff said in a statement. “We will do what’s necessary to find out if it’s true.” …

Other Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee agreed that the new revelation about Trump’s involvement in the Moscow project and Cohen’s testimony should be investigated as part of the panel’s reinvigorated Russia inquiry. Democrats, who won control of the House and its committees in November, plan to restart the probe in the weeks ahead after Republicans shuttered it last year.

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I believe Congress should immediately investigate Michael Cohen’s claim, based on this reporting, that the President directed him to lie to Congress during its Russia investigation,” Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas told BuzzFeed News. “Such an instruction would amount to obstruction of justice.”

They may have to wait for Mueller to finish his probe to start digging around for the evidence that Rangappa assumes the special counsel has for this claim. Otherwise it might end up crossing up Mueller’s investigators as they try to conclude their probe. If they do get evidence of subornation of perjury, it’s a clear predicate for impeachment, especially given the separation-of-powers issue in having a president instruct people to lie to Congress. That kind of violation might even get a few Senate Republicans to consider removal.

But it’s still an if, and a curiously late development in the Michael Cohen arc of this saga. If it has any legs, we’ll know next month when Cohen testifies to the House Oversight Committee, unless Mueller files his report first.

The post Does Mueller have evidence Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress? appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group cohen-plea-300x153 Does Mueller have evidence Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress? The Blog subornation of perjury Russia Robert Mueller perjury Michael Cohen donald trump Buzzfeed   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Oregon’s scheme to defy Janus, prop up unions and rob workers

Westlake Legal Group unions Oregon’s scheme to defy Janus, prop up unions and rob workers union dues The Blog public sector unions Oregon Janus v AFSCME

Here’s a case you’ll want to keep an eye on in the months ahead. Since the decision was handed down in Janus v AFSCME, public sector unions, in particular, have been on the ropes. No longer able to extract union dues (or “agency fees”) from workers and use them for political speech the employee may disagree with, the cash cow has largely ceased giving milk. But unions in Oregon clearly aren’t ready to go down without a fight. Legislators in the Beaver State are now moving forward with a bill clearly designed to subvert the Supreme Court decision and keep money flowing into the union coffers.

The method they are using is blatantly obvious. As the Freedom Foundation reports this week, this new scheme would see the state reducing the pay of state government employees and then transferring that money directly to the unions. How is this legal? It certainly doesn’t sound like it is, but we’ll see when the state is taken to court, assuming the legislation is signed into law.

Oregon lawmakers are hopeful their state will pioneer legislation that would exempt it from the effects of a landmark right-to-work ruling this past summer by the U.S. Supreme Court.

House Bill 2643, authored by Rep. Paul Holvey (D-Eugene) and scheduled to be introduced during the legislative session beginning later this month, is a shot across the bow of Janus v. AFSCME, which banned so-called “agency” fees charged by government employee unions to workers who’ve opted out of full membership and dues.

The bill — a wolf in sheep’s clothing — first recognizes the newly affirmed rights given to workers in the Janus decision. Later, however, it creates a slush fund from which the state would pay the unions directly rather than deducting dues from workers’ paychecks.

I understand that the unions support the Democratic Party virtually without exception and Oregon’s state government is run by the Democrats. But couldn’t they at least try to be a little more subtle about it? This is nothing short of robbery and the only ones benefitting from the theft are the public sector unions.

Keep in mind that unions, at least in theory, are supposed to be protecting and empowering the workers. But if this scheme somehow makes it into law, they will be fighting to reduce the pay of the public sector workers so the money can be redirected into their coffers. And since when can the state unilaterally slash everyone’s pay? Don’t they have some sort of standardized pay scale enshrined in law?

This also flies in the face of the Janus decision in terms of political speech. If you reduce the pay of the workers without their consent, give it to the unions and they turn around and engage in political speech, isn’t that precisely what the Supreme Court said they couldn’t do? All that’s changing in the proposed scenario is which bank account the money is being drawn from.

That money is entirely the property of the taxpayers. Having it used in this fashion is a classic case of the state robbing its own citizens to prop up one political party over the other. And it should not be tolerated.

The post Oregon’s scheme to defy Janus, prop up unions and rob workers appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group unions-300x159 Oregon’s scheme to defy Janus, prop up unions and rob workers union dues The Blog public sector unions Oregon Janus v AFSCME   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Woman who Robin Thicke groped in viral photo speaks out for 10 Year Challenge

The woman who Robin Thicke famously groped has resurfaced — using the “10-year challenge” to say that she no longer wants to “be known as the ass-grab girl.”

Westlake Legal Group Blurred-Lines-Song-Di_Cham Woman who Robin Thicke groped in viral photo speaks out for 10 Year Challenge Page Six Team New York Post fox-news/entertainment/genres/viral fnc/entertainment fnc article 0f78a233-1b99-521e-91d1-c898c56df3db

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Laura Ingraham: Big questions about life and viability face the Supreme Court over ailing Bader Ginsburg

The left relies on the Supreme Court to advance their causes, which is why the stakes over Ruth Bader Ginsburg are so high.

Westlake Legal Group RBG011819 Laura Ingraham: Big questions about life and viability face the Supreme Court over ailing Bader Ginsburg laura ingraham fox-news/shows/ingraham-angle/transcript/lauras-monologue fox-news/politics/judiciary/supreme-court fox-news/politics/judiciary fox-news/politics fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc article ab1db27d-c79d-5223-a76d-2e66c57a4d52

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com