[EL] ELB News and Commentary 9/25/19

Wed Sep 25 19:31:02 PDT 2019

Inspector General for Intelligence Community Had Concluded Trump May Have Committed Campaign Finance Crime with Ukraine Activities (A View Rejected by DOJ)<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107465>
Posted on September 25, 2019 6:40 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107465> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/25/us/politics/trump-ukraine-whistleblower.html>

The whistle-blower, moreover, identified multiple White House officials as witnesses to potential presidential misconduct who could corroborate the complaint, the people said — adding that the inspector general for the intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, interviewed witnesses.

Mr. Atkinson eventually concluded that there was reason to believe that the president may have illegally solicited a foreign campaign contribution — and that his potential misconduct created a national security risk, according to a newly disclosed Justice Department memo….

Mr. Atkinson also found reason to believe that the whistle-blower may not support the re-election of Mr. Trump and made clear that the complainant was not in a position to directly listen to the call or see the memo that reconstructed it before it was made public, according to the Justice Department memo, which referred only to a single phone call between Mr. Trump and an unnamed foreign leader.

Instead, the officer heard about the call secondhand from unidentified White House officials who expressed concern that Mr. Trump had “abused his authority or acted unlawfully in connection with foreign diplomacy,” the memo said. Still, Mr. Atkinson concluded after an investigation that the information in the complaint was credible.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D107465&title=Inspector%20General%20for%20Intelligence%20Community%20Had%20Concluded%20Trump%20May%20Have%20Committed%20Campaign%20Finance%20Crime%20with%20Ukraine%20Activities%20(A%20View%20Rejected%20by%20DOJ)>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Looking Forward to Talking About Voting Rights and the Census Friday on Texas Tribune Festival Panel<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107463>
Posted on September 25, 2019 5:41 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107463> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Details:<https://ttf19.sched.com/event/Srhi/representation-nation>

Friday, September 27 • 2:30pm – 3:30pm
Representation Nation<https://ttf19.sched.com/event/Srhi/representation-nation>

Programmed in partnership with the Solutions Journalism Network.

ModeratorAlexa Ura<https://ttf19.sched.com/moderator/alexa_ura.1zu9vm1f>
Demographics Reporter for The Texas Tribune
Ura covers the intersection between politics and race, with an emphasis on the state’s surging Hispanic population, as the Tribune’s demographics reporter. She also covers voting rights issues for the Tribune, where she started as a reporting fellow in 2013. Ura is a graduate… Read More →<https://ttf19.sched.com/moderator/alexa_ura.1zu9vm1f>

SpeakersCarol Alvarado<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/carol_alvarado.1zsf0ljv>
State Senator
Alvarado, D-Houston, has represented Senate District 6 since a 2019 special election. She sits on the Senate Intergovernmental Relations, Nominations, Transportation, and Water & Rural Affairs committees. Previously, Alvarado served more than 10 years representing House District 145… Read More →<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/carol_alvarado.1zsf0ljv>

Rick Hasen<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/rick_hasen.1zsireu8>
Chancellor’s Professor of Law and Political Science at the University of California, Irvine School of Law
Hasen has expertise in election law and has written on issues including campaign finance, election administration and Supreme Court jurisprudence. He is the author of four academic books, including “Plutocrats United” and, most recently, “The Justice of Contradictions” on… Read More →<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/rick_hasen.1zsireu8>

Michael Li<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/michael_li.76gb449>
Redistricting and Voting Counsel at the Brennan Center at New York University Law School
Li serves as senior counsel for the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program, where he focuses on redistricting, voting rights and elections. He is also the author of txredistricting.org, a widely cited redistricting blog. Previously, Li practiced law at Baker Botts LLP in Dallas and… Read More →<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/michael_li.76gb449>

Nina Perales<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/nina_perales.1ztpy1r8>
Vice President of Litigation at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
Perales is the vice president of litigation at MALDEF, where she supervises the organization’s legal staff and litigation dockets. She has worked on numerous redistricting and voting rights cases, including the 2006 case LULAC v. Perry, a Voting Rights Act challenge to Texas congressional… Read More →<https://ttf19.sched.com/speaker/nina_perales.1ztpy1r8>

[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D107463&title=Looking%20Forward%20to%20Talking%20About%20Voting%20Rights%20and%20the%20Census%20Friday%20on%20Texas%20Tribune%20Festival%20Panel>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Justice Dept. rejected investigation of Trump phone call just weeks after it began examining the matter”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107461>
Posted on September 25, 2019 5:22 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107461> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I’m quoted in this WaPo piece:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-rejected-investigation-of-trump-phone-call-just-weeks-after-it-began-examining-the-matter/2019/09/25/6f7977ce-dfb5-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html>

Justice Department officials took less than a month to abandon an inquiry into President Trump’s communications with his Ukrainian counterpart about investigating former vice president Joe Biden — reigniting concerns among Democrats and legal observers that the law enforcement agency is serving as a shield for the commander in chief.

Just weeks after intelligence leaders asked the Justice Department and FBI to consider examining a summer phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the head of the department’s criminal division determined there was not sufficient cause even to launch an investigation, senior Justice Department officials said….

Even before the Justice Department’s decision was made public, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Democrats would conduct an impeachment inquiry into Trump — which need not find technical violations of campaign finance or bribery laws.

“It is still within Congress’s power to impeach and remove by viewing this as an abuse of power,” said Richard L. Hasen, a University of California at Irvine law professor specializing in election law. “Whether it’s a crime is secondary to the impeachment inquiry. It could be relevant if Trump is out of office and somebody wants to try to prosecute him.”…

Mueller had to wrestle with a similar question as he examined the Trump campaign’s July 2016 meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer who had offered derogatory information on Hillary Clinton, Trump’s opponent in the presidential race. Mueller’s team wrote in their report that “candidate-related opposition research” could be a contribution and potentially break the law, if it came from a foreign source. But they also noted that “no judicial decision has treated the voluntary provision of uncompensated opposition research or similar information as a thing of value that could amount to a contribution under campaign-finance law.”

Hasen, the law professor, said he thought the Justice Department’s determination that Trump’s request could not be quantified was “laughable.”

“You’re talking about information on a potential rival that could be used in a presidential campaign, a presidential campaign which likely would run into the billions of dollars,” Hasen said. “I don’t think there’s any question that a prosecutor could go forward with the theory.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D107461&title=%E2%80%9CJustice%20Dept.%20rejected%20investigation%20of%20Trump%20phone%20call%20just%20weeks%20after%20it%20began%20examining%20the%20matter%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

“Did NC skip a step? New voting machines questioned again”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107459>
Posted on September 25, 2019 5:04 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107459> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WRAL:<https://www.wral.com/did-nc-skip-a-step-new-voting-machines-questioned-again/18657405/>

Activists and computer scientists have raised questions about the process used to certify new voting machines in North Carolina that, for weeks, the State Board of Elections hasn’t answered.

The board’s chairman and its executive director say answers are coming and that staff plan to bring detailed information to the board at its meeting next Tuesday. But at least two board members, along with a string of academics and activists, are concerned that the state skipped steps as it certified three new election systems.

Counties around the state are weighing whether to buy those systems to use in the 2020 elections. Frustrated by slow progress at the state level, activists worried about the security of touchscreen systems reached out to county officials responsible for picking and buying new machines, spurring an email Tuesday from the state elections director promising local officials answers next week.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D107459&title=%E2%80%9CDid%20NC%20skip%20a%20step%3F%20New%20voting%20machines%20questioned%20again%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

Ned Foley: “Congress Should Remove Trump from Office, But Let Him Run Again in 2020”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107457>
Posted on September 25, 2019 4:26 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107457> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ned <https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/25/congress-should-remove-trump-from-office-but-let-him-run-again-228228> in Politico.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D107457&title=Ned%20Foley%3A%20%E2%80%9CCongress%20Should%20Remove%20Trump%20from%20Office%2C%20But%20Let%20Him%20Run%20Again%20in%202020%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Reps. Jamie Raskin and Don Beyer Sponsor of New Ranked Choice Voting Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107455>
Posted on September 25, 2019 4:17 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107455> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

FairVote release.<https://www.fairvote.org/rcv_act_introduction_release>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D107455&title=Reps.%20Jamie%20Raskin%20and%20Don%20Beyer%20Sponsor%20of%20New%20Ranked%20Choice%20Voting%20Act>
Posted in alternative voting systems<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>

DOJ Apparently Rejected Campaign Finance Crime Investigation in Ukraine By Wrongly Viewing Opposition Research as Not a “Thing of Value”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107453>
Posted on September 25, 2019 8:11 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=107453> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

As I explain here<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1176875301533413377>:
[cid:image002.jpg at 01D573D7.C3C04BE0]<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
Rick Hasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
✔@rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>

<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1176875301533413377>

This is totally wrong. Even Mueller concluded opposition research is a thing of value for campaign finance purposes.
I spell it out @slate<https://twitter.com/Slate>: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/09/trump-ukraine-campaign-finance-crime.html …<https://t.co/iWuMT40G4J> https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161 …<https://t.co/gQhxkMJH6L>
<https://t.co/iWuMT40G4J>
[cid:image003.jpg at 01D573D7.C3C04BE0]<https://t.co/iWuMT40G4J>
Trump’s Ukraine Gambit Could Be Another Campaign Finance Crime<https://t.co/iWuMT40G4J>

Mueller’s decision not to enforce the law last time around is partly to blame for the president acting with total impunity.<https://t.co/iWuMT40G4J>
slate.com<https://t.co/iWuMT40G4J>

<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>
Zoe Tillman<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>
✔@ZoeTillman<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>
Replying to @ZoeTillman<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>

NEW: DOJ explored whether Trump's call with the Ukrainian president would merit a criminal investigation into campaign finance violations. They concluded it would not — that there was no "thing of value" that could be quantified, per senior DOJ official https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/trump-ukraine-call-transcript-biden-impeachment …<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>

<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1176875301533413377>
564<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1176875301533413377>
8:05 AM - Sep 25, 2019<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1176875301533413377>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1176875301533413377>
207 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1176875301533413377>

[cid:image004.jpg at 01D573D7.C3C04BE0]<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan>
<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan>
Paul Seamus Ryan at ThePaulSRyan<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan>

<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan/status/1176868670510907393>

Trump's DOJ concluded that Ukraine gov investigation into Joe Biden & the resulting oppo research given to Trump campaign wouldn't amount to a "thing of value."

Mueller disagreed, concluding that oppo research given to campaign "could constitute a contribution" to campaign. https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161 …<https://t.co/rKlR2u32fA>
[View image on Twitter]<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan/status/1176868670510907393/photo/1>
<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>
Zoe Tillman<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>
✔@ZoeTillman<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>
Replying to @ZoeTillman<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>

NEW: DOJ explored whether Trump's call with the Ukrainian president would merit a criminal investigation into campaign finance violations. They concluded it would not — that there was no "thing of value" that could be quantified, per senior DOJ official https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/trump-ukraine-call-transcript-biden-impeachment …<https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1176859689042268161>

<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1176868670510907393>
44<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1176868670510907393>
7:38 AM - Sep 25, 2019<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan/status/1176868670510907393>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan/status/1176868670510907393>
42 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/ThePaulSRyan/status/1176868670510907393>

[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D107453&title=DOJ%20Apparently%20Rejected%20Campaign%20Finance%20Crime%20Investigation%20in%20Ukraine%20By%20Wrongly%20Viewing%20Opposition%20Research%20as%20Not%20a%20%E2%80%9CThing%20of%20Value%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

--
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<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org<http://electionlawblog.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190926/3d5903ff/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190926/3d5903ff/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2973 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190926/3d5903ff/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 27453 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190926/3d5903ff/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2795 bytes
Desc: image004.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190926/3d5903ff/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 136850 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190926/3d5903ff/attachment-0003.jpg>