Tag Archives: judge napolitano

Judge Napolitano: The Real Threat to Donald Trump

In the midst of worrying about North Korea, Syria and Democrats taking control of the House of Representatives this fall, President Donald Trump is now worrying about a government assault on his own business, which targeted his own lawyer.

Michael Cohen has been the personal lawyer for Trump and for the Trump Organization — the umbrella corporation through which Trump owns or manages nearly all entities that bear his name — for many years. Cohen is so closely connected to the Trump Organization that one of his two law offices is located on the 26th floor of Trump Tower, just a few doors from the corner office formerly occupied by Trump himself.

On Monday, shortly before dawn, a team of FBI agents bearing a search warrant from a federal judge broke in to the offices of the Trump Organization and removed computers, files, tax returns and telephones from Cohen’s office. At about the same time, three other teams of FBI agents performed raids. One was at another of Cohen’s offices a few blocks away, and his vacant New York City apartment and hotel rooms he had been occupying were searched, too; and agents also seized personal and professional files and equipment from those venues.

Did the FBI lawfully break in to the headquarters of the president’s family business and cart away files and equipment from his lawyer, as well as legal and financial files of the president himself? The short answer is: yes.

Here is the back story.

In October 2016, when the federal government began its investigation of alleged attempts by the Russian government to interfere with the 2016 presidential election, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch managed the work.

After Trump became president and Jeff Sessions became attorney general and Sessions recused himself from this investigation, the No. 2 person in the Department of Justice appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel in charge of the Russia investigation. The investigation in Washington is 18 months old and has been run by Mueller for about 11 months.

If a criminal investigation stumbles upon evidence of crimes substantially removed by geography or subject matter from the location and principal responsibilities of the investigation, it is the prosecutors’ duty either to prosecute those crimes if feasible or to pass whatever evidence has been found on to another prosecutor closer to the place of the alleged crime.

Sometimes, keeping that evidence is a temptation too great to resist. That’s because one of the techniques that prosecutors in America use to gather evidence about a crime is to indict those at the fringes of the behavior they are investigating and then attempt, by coercion and bribery, to turn those indicted individuals into cooperating witnesses. Sometimes the indicted crime is truly at the fringes, both rationally and geographically. But the targets of these fringe prosecutions are rarely attorneys who are representing a person who is a subject of the investigation.

Until now.

Though Cohen does not represent Trump in the Mueller investigation, he does represent him in nearly all other legal matters, and his files contain a treasure-trove of confidential and financial materials from and about Trump. Judges are very reluctant to sign search warrants authorizing the seizure of legal files, with two exceptions.

The first is the so-called crime/fraud exception. Under this rule, if the client is using his confidential communications with his lawyer to further an ongoing crime, fraud or tort, the communications are not privileged, and evidence of them may be seized.

The other exception is the independent criminal activity of the lawyer. That appears to be the case here. It seems that Cohen — who claims he borrowed $130,000 from a bank to pay an adult-film actress to remain silent about her relationship to Trump, which Trump denies was sexual — did not tell the bank from which he borrowed the funds the true purpose of the loan.

If so, that may be evidence of bank fraud on Cohen’s part. If he wired those funds over interstate lines, that is evidence of wire fraud. If he used the U.S. Postal Service to facilitate a material part of the deal with the actress, that would be considered mail fraud. Each of these fraud charges carries a prison term of five years.

When FBI agents arrive for a raid, they rarely take the time to examine fully all the documents they have seized — even if the documents are protected by the attorney-client privilege and even if the client is the president of the United States. Needless to say, there are safeguards in place to prevent the prosecutors who dispatched the agents from viewing the privileged materials.

When Mueller in Washington came upon evidence of Cohen’s bank fraud in Manhattan, he passed it along to the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan. That office — not Mueller — examined the evidence and obtained the search warrants for Cohen’s personal and professional premises, authorized the raids of those premises and received the fruits of the raids.

What will become of Cohen? Federal prosecutors in Manhattan will now decide whether to ask a grand jury to indict him on the fraud charges, and if he is indicted, Mueller will enter the picture looking to make a deal.

Trump’s lawyer was Mueller’s bait.

All of this has understandably infuriated Trump. His rights as a client were violated. His attorney of many years and on many matters will soon be a defendant. Can Trump restrain himself from offering to pardon those who could harm him or firing those who are tormenting him or waging war against real or imagined enemies? Will his anger, frustration and disgust at the violation of his financial and personal privacy push him and America into what even congressional Republicans fear would be a constitutional crisis?

The potential failure of self-restraint is the real threat he now faces.

Judge Napolitano Breaks Down Raid On Michael Cohen, Says Jeff Sessions Should Never Have Been Attorney General

(DCNF) Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano broke down the raid on President Donald Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen and thinks Jeff Sessions should never have accepted the attorney general job.

Napolitano said the government raided Cohen’s office looking for evidence of bank fraud and believes it never would have escalated to this point if Sessions had made different choices.

“[Sessions] should have never accepted the appointment,” Napolitano said. “The Russia investigation started in October of 2016 and he knew he was going to be a witness. But if he felt he had to recuse himself — Mr. President you are entitled to an attorney general in whom have you great confidence. I’m not sure if I’m the guy if I recuse myself. Half of what the DOJ does, I will have nothing to do with.”

Click here to watch.

Napolitano said Sessions is “too tentative” and lacks the demeanor and faculties to be an effective attorney general.

“The last time I was here last Thursday the president was ranting and raving about the DOJ. And quite properly so, about the DOJ not complying with subpoenas from a Republican Congress,” Napolitano concluded. “The DOJ lacks the stern management and strong will that a strong attorney general should bring because Sessions is too tentative.”

You can Follow Nick on Twitter and Facebook

 

This article was republished with permission from the Daily Caller News Foundation

(VIDEO) Judge Napolitano on SC’s Anti Obamacare Bill: “If enough states do this, it will gut Obamacare”

Judge Andrew Napolitano said South Carolina has the Constitutional right to pass a bill that would essentially nullify or eliminate Obamacare. The bill, entitled “South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act,” was voted on and passed by a 65-34 vote in the state House of Representatives last April. Now, it moves on to the Republican-controlled state Senate that will be fast-tracked and could quickly be signed into law by South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley.

Here is what Napolitano had to say about the proposed legislation:

“Basically, what South Carolina is doing is instructing employees of the state of South Carolina to not to participate in facilitating the law and to prohibit the expenditure of public funds on the law,” said Napolitano.

“If the President wants Obamacare in South Carolina, the feds will have to pay for it, and the feds will have to establish it.”

He cited that the original version of Obamacare required the states to establish and pay for their own exchanges. The Supreme Court said that the federal government does not have that authority to “commandeer” or force a state to spend money, he explained.

“So, South Carolina can do this.”

If South Carolina successfully does this, he said Republican-lead states will follow.

“If enough states do this, it will gut Obamacare,” he added.

Members Of The House Say Boehner’s Days Are Numbered: “Farewell”

Speaker of the House John Boehner has been under the gun for well over a year now. In fact, conservative groups have attempted to campaign for the removal of the Ohio republican twice in recent months. Once over his actions with regards to the Benghazi scandal, and again after he removed some of the most fiscally conservative members of Congress from their positions of power. Congressman Justin Amash was among one of those removed.

When the time came to reelect Boehner there were a number of conservatives who voted against him. However, he kept his seat.

Judge Napolitano recently made an appearance on the Tom Sullivan Show where he discussed the passage of the recent continuing resolution, which reopened the federal government.

“I’m going to make a wild prediction. The next time there is a dispute of this magnitude, which will be February, a different human being will be the speaker of the House of Representatives,” says Napolitano.

Napolitano goes on to point out that Boehner no longer represents the leadership of the core conservatives in the House. His sources within the House clarify his prediction.

Sullivan points out that Boehner received a standing ovation upon passing the continuing resolution. “I think it was a farewell,” jokes Napolitano.

Napolitano clarifies that he has no problems with Boehner and believes that he is a wonderful person, but that he simply hasn’t done what he was elected to do.

You can watch the interview here.