Hi, and welcome back to Trump Watch! This reporter is getting a little antsy waiting for the jury to return a verdict in Roger Stone's trial as we head into day two of deliberations. Help me pass the time by sending news tips and your feedback on this newsletter to [email protected]. And follow me on twitter @jacq_thomsen for up-to-date news on when the verdict might come down.

Attorney Bruce Rogow arrives at Federal Court in Washington, D.C. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM

 

That Time Bruce Rogow Represented Trump in a Legal Fight About a Giant Flag

 

When Donald Trump found himself in a legal fight with Palm Beach in 2007 over a large flagpole at his Mar-a-Lago resort, one of the attorneys he turned to was local lawyer Bruce Rogow. Now, almost 15 years later, Rogow is at the heart of another legal fight involving Trump: The criminal trial of longtime Trump associate, Roger Stone.

Rogow, who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court 11 times, made both the opening and closing statements to the jury in Stone's trial, and was a key advocate for Stone during the pretrial proceedings.

But just days into Stone's trial, New York Attorney General Letitia James announced she had resolved a lawsuit against Trump and his foundation, and secured a $2 million judgement in the case. Among the allegations in that lawsuit was a claim Trump illegally used money from his charity to settle the dispute with Palm Beach over the oversized flagpole, which Rogow was involved in.

Rogow declined to comment "at this time."

Trump has insisted there was no wrongdoing in the handling of his foundation. Attorney Alan Futerfas represented Trump in the matter. Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla ordered the foundation on Nov. 7 to pay $2 million to eight different charities.

A Trump Foundation spokesperson said afterward that they "are pleased that the court, in rejecting the attorney general's frivolous request for statutory penalties, interest and other damages, recognized that every penny ever raised by the Trump Foundation has gone to help those most in need."

But back to 2006, after Trump planted a 80-foot flagpole boasting a 15-by-25-foot United States flag at the front of his Mar-a-Lago resort, town officials said it violated local ordinances and began fining him. Trump filed a lawsuit seeking $25 million in damages in response, and Rogow was one of the lawyers involved in that suit.

But when attorneys for the town wanted to depose Trump in the case, he settled and agreed to make a $100,000 donation to charity. That $100,000, according to the New York lawsuit filed in state court last year, was actually from the Trump Foundation.

Rogow's involvement in the flag and Stone cases underscores Trump's long history of being involved in litigation, and the breadth of the court cases that have touched various aspects of his life.

John Devault, one of the Florida attorneys who represented Palm Beach in the legal fight, said it made sense to him to see Rogow in court with Stone in Ft. Lauderdale, where Stone was first arraigned after his January arrest.

But Devault said he was surprised to see Rogow continue to represent Stone once the case moved to Washington, D.C. Stone has previously said he hired Rogow because of the 79-year-old legal veteran's vast experience defending First Amendment rights.

Devault called Rogow "very pleasant" and "professional" throughout the legal fight over the Mar-a-Lago flagpole. "He had a difficult client, that goes without saying," Devault added.

Devault said the day before Trump was to be deposed in the case, Trump invited him and his paralegal to visit Mar-a-Lago. He said Trump gave him the full tour, including of Trump's bedroom. At the end of the tour, Devault said the future president asked him if there was a way to resolve the case.

Devault said yes: If Trump took down the flagpole. But that wasn't going to work for Trump.

"Ok, see you at 9:30 in the morning for the taped deposition," Devault said of his reaction.

But rather than sit for the questions, Trump cut the check for $100,000, that allegedly came out of his charity's funds.

"Now I'm disappointed that it happened," Devault joked about the settlement. "I would have liked to take the deposition.

 

SPONSORED BY ALM

Thought Leader in Emergent Opportunities Added to Legalweek Keynote Lineup

With a gift of clearly explaining complex—and confusing—technologies, Blockchain researcher Bettina Warburg (Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Warburg Serres Investments and Animal Ventures) joins the keynote line up at Legalweek New York. READ MORE

 

 

A Look Ahead

 

11/18: A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear arguments on whether they should grant an emergency stay on a district court order requiring DOJ to hand over grand jury materials redacted from the Mueller report to the U.S. House as part of the impeachment inquiry.

11/19: The House moves ahead with its public impeachment hearings. Four people are expected to testify at this open hearing: Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, former special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker, Vice President Mike Pence aide Jennifer Williams, and former National Security Council director for Russian affairs Timothy Morrison.

11/20: Three more officials are set to testify publicly for the impeachment inquiry: EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland, Pentagon official Laura Cooper, and David Hale, the undersecretary of state of political affairs.

11/21: Fiona Hill, the former Russia adviser on the National Security Council, will testify at a public impeachment hearing.

 

What We're Reading

 

>> Steven Menashi's Confirmation Flips Second Circuit to GOP-Appointed Majority: "The Senate on Thursday confirmed Steven Menashi to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, bringing an end to a confirmation battle that at times drew ire from members of both parties toward the judicial nominee….Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, broke with her party to vote against the nominee. Menashi's confirmation flips the Second Circuit to a majority of Republican appointees." [The National Law Journal]

>> Mazars Subpoena Destined for Supreme Court as DC Circuit Rejects Trump on Rehearing: "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Wednesday rejected President Donald Trump's request for an en banc rehearing of the case challenging a congressional subpoena to his personal accounting firm Mazars, sending the case on a direct path to the U.S. Supreme Court….This means that two cases relating to the president are now prepared to go to the Supreme Court after Trump's lawyers said they will go to the high court over whether Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance can obtain Trump's state tax returns. This will be the first case over the congressional subpoenas issued for Trump's records to go to the Supreme Court." [The National Law Journal]

>> House Impeachment Lawyers Duel as Witness Testimony Goes Public: "Seated to the right of U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff of California, a former prosecutor himself and now chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, [Daniel] Goldman methodically drew out seemingly damning details about Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine to mount investigations that would advance the president's domestic political interests….Goldman's counterpart, Stephen Castor, a former commercial litigator at Blank Rome and now leading attorney for Republicans on the House oversight committee, used some of his time at the start of the hearing to raise questions about former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, both central figures in the Republican narrative about corruption in Ukraine." [The National Law Journal]

>> Mulvaney, Falling in Line With Trump, Drops Plan to Sue Over House Subpoena: "Mick Mulvaney on Tuesday said he would defy a U.S. congressional subpoena seeking his testimony as part of the impeachment inquiry, abruptly dropping plans to file a lawsuit to confront whether House Democrats could force him to sit for questioning. The about-face came a day after Mulvaney's lawyer, William Pittard of Washington's KaiserDillon, told a Washington federal trial judge that the acting White House chief of staff would file his own suit confronting the power of House Democrats to compel top Trump officials to testify." [The National Law Journal]

>> I Was a Federal Judge. My Former Colleagues Must Stop Attending Federalist Society Events: "Regardless of who pays, these judges' participation is shameful. Previously, judges pretended that nothing was wrong with their Federalist Society activities because there was no clear guidance. That excuse disappeared with Advisory Opinion 116." [Slate]

 

Thanks for reading. Tune back in next week for more Trump Watch.