[EL] “Michael Cohen’s Guilty Plea Directly Implicates Donald Trump in a Felony”

Wed Aug 22 08:35:36 PDT 2018

Ned, I worked on impeachment at a state level a few years ago (two
different incidences). What we found in our research and in the committee
debates about impeachment is that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is an
extremely subjective (some would argue purely political) standard. It is
better to frame the discussion of what constitutes an impeachable offense
-- what rises to the level of high crime and misdemeanor --  in terms of an
ethics matter rather than a criminal matter, less a matter of overall
elements of a crime and more a matter of the overall thrust of the incident
or incidents and their impact on the integrity of the office and the
government. With that framework, your suggestion that "an election-related
crime should count more significantly for impeachment purposes" would have
great merit -- perverting the course of an election is more fundamentally
damaging to a democracy than other crimes, even election-related crimes.
But there are no bright lines, whatsoever.

All the best,

Douglas Carver
Albuquerque, NM

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 9:15 AM, David A. Holtzman <d at lavotefire.org> wrote:

> It wouldn't be "hush money" if it were disclosed.
>   - dah
> --
>
> On August 22, 2018 10:36:27 "Foley, Edward" <foley.33 at osu.edu> wrote:
>
>> Rick & list members,
>>
>>
>>
>> Am I correct that the “hush money” payments themselves would not have
>> been criminal conduct IF (1) made from the campaign itself using money
>> received in compliance with contribution limits and (2) disclosed as
>> campaign-related expenses?
>>
>>
>>
>> If so, I’m trying to evaluate whether Trump’s own culpability as alleged
>> by Cohen should rise to the level of an impeachable “high crime or
>> misdemeanor”.   In other word, if it ever comes to that, what should
>> Senator Rob Portman (for example) do, on the facts as stated by Cohen
>> yesterday if made the basis of an impeachment count by the House (assuming
>> that Senator Portman endeavors to do the right thing under the
>> Constitution, as some Republican Senators did in my judgment in acquitting
>> Andrew Johnson even though they had the raw power to remove him)?
>>
>>
>>
>> Presumably, some campaign finance violations—even if intentionally
>> criminal—do not rise to the level of impeachable offenses.  Assume a
>> situation in which no “hush money” payments were involved, but a
>> presidential candidate intentionally conspired with a wealthy donor to
>> receive a contribution in excess of the statutory limits, and also the
>> intentional conspiracy involved an effort to hide the illegally excessive
>> contribution from the FEC.  Would that be enough to warrant removing the
>> elected president from office?
>>
>>
>>
>> Does the Senate’s decision not to remove Bill Clinton from office count
>> as a relevant “precedent” in this context?  To be sure, criminality in an
>> effort to sway an election seems constitutionally more problematic (in my
>> judgment) than criminality in an effort to protect one’s personal
>> reputation (as arguably was the nature of Bill Clinton’s criminality).
>> Especially because there is no mechanism to remove a president other than
>> impeachment if there was criminally improper interference with the
>> electorate’s choice on which candidate should win, I think an
>> election-related crime should count more significantly for impeachment
>> purposes than at least some other types of crimes.  Even so, it is not
>> obvious to me that every election-related crime committed by a presidential
>> candidate should automatically be viewed as a sufficient basis for
>> impeachment and removal from office.
>>
>>
>>
>> Any input as I endeavor to think this through?  Thanks, Ned
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: The Ohio State University]
>> *Edward B. Foley *
>> Director, *Election Law @ Moritz *
>> Charles W. Ebersold and Florence Whitcomb Ebersold Chair in
>> Constitutional Law
>>
>> Moritz College of Law
>> 614-292-4288
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> *On
>> Behalf Of *Rick Hasen
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 21, 2018 8:23 PM
>> *To:* Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
>> *Subject:* [EL] “Michael Cohen’s Guilty Plea Directly Implicates Donald
>> Trump in a Felony”
>>
>>
>> “Michael Cohen’s Guilty Plea Directly Implicates Donald Trump in a Felony”
>> <https://electionlawblog.org/?p=100738>
>>
>> Posted on August 21, 2018 5:22 pm <https://electionlawblog.org/?p=100738>
>>  by *Rick Hasen* <https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>
>> I have written this piece
>> <https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/08/michael-cohens-guilty-plea-directly-implicates-donald-trump-in-a-felony.html> for
>> Slate. It begins:
>>
>> *For the first time since the Trump presidency began, President Donald
>> Trump is in some real legal jeopardy, providing potential grounds for his
>> eventual impeachment, if not indictment.*
>>
>> *Most people watching the investigations involving Trump and his orbit
>> have been focused on whether Special Counsel Robert Mueller is going to
>> bring charges related possible illegal coordination between the 2016 Trump
>> presidential campaign and Russian government entities. But Tuesday brought
>> news of a different kind of campaign collusion: between Trump and his
>> personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. Cohen’s guilty plea to campaign finance
>> violations related to hush money payments to porn actress Stormy Daniels
>> and former Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal bring the president front and
>> center in a conspiracy to violate federal campaign finance laws.*
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: Share]
>> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D100738&title=%E2%80%9CMichael%20Cohen%E2%80%99s%20Guilty%20Plea%20Directly%20Implicates%20Donald%20Trump%20in%20a%20Felony%E2%80%9D>
>>
>> Posted in campaign finance <https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,
>> campaigns <https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery
>> <https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick Hasen
>>
>> Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
>>
>> UC Irvine School of Law
>>
>> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
>>
>> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
>>
>> 949.824.3072 - office
>>
>> rhasen at law.uci.edu
>>
>> http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
>>
>> http://electionlawblog.org
>>
>> [image:
>> /Users/rhasen/Library/Containers/com.microsoft.Outlook/Data/Library/Caches/Signatures/signature_64374683]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>

-- 
Dilexi iustitiam et odivi iniquitatem, propterea morior in exilio.

(I have loved justice and hated iniquity, therefore I die in exile.)

    -- the last words of Saint Pope Gregory VII (d. 1085)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180822/57fd3b8d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6741 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180822/57fd3b8d/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3605 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180822/57fd3b8d/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180822/57fd3b8d/attachment-0002.png>