Trump's Work on Son's Press Statement Adds Yet Another Piece to His Legal Puzzle
Former prosecutors say Trump's involvement in crafting a statement for his son, Don Jr., isn't necessarily obstruction of justice.
August 01, 2017 at 08:12 PM
13 minute read
Even if President Donald Trump did not break any laws during the 2016 election campaign, lawyers say his actions since the election are creating their own legal conundrum.
On Monday, the Washington Post reported Trump personally dictated a misleading statement to be attributed to his son, Donald Trump Jr., last month. And in a lawsuit first reported on Tuesday, a former private investigator alleged Fox News worked with the Trump administration to publish a fake news story connecting a murdered Democratic National Committee staffer to Wikileaks, which disseminated DNC internal emails during the campaign. As special counsel Robert Mueller continues his investigation into Russian interference in last year's election and possible collusion with the Trump campaign, lawyers say the apparent White House dysfunction can only add to any case Mueller may be building.
“Unless this is simply an exercise in utter chaos, the variety of different representations and misrepresentations and counter-representations that continue to emanate not just out of the White House, but also from the president himself, give the impression that there's something to hide,” said Richard Ben-Veniste, a partner at Mayer Brown who served as chief of the Watergate Special Prosecutors' Watergate Task Force from 1973 to 1975. Ben-Veniste gave his personal opinion, not that of his current firm, on the matter.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Sharp and Profound' Policy Shifts Prompt DC Law Firms to Evaluate Opportunities, Challenges
5 minute readTrump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'We’re Here to Empower People to Make Good Decisions': Why Compliance Chiefs Must Learn to Think Like a Businessperson
- 2People in the News—Nov. 19, 2024—Pond Lehocky, Duane Morris
- 3Court System's Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission Presents Annual Diversity Awards
- 4Commentary: James Madison, Meet Matt Gaetz
- 5The Narcissist’s Dilemma: Balancing Power and Inadequacy in Family Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250