Tag Archives: clause

Can Jeff Sessions Be Prosecuted for Perjury?

by LaverneSomers Posted on March 2, 2017

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Late Wednesday night, the Washington Post broke the news that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had twice met with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the presidential campaign, contacts he failed to disclose during his Senate confirmation hearings. “I did not have communications with the Russians,” said Sessions during his sworn testimony. As a growing list of lawmakers call for Sessions to recuse himself from the investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election—and some Democrats demand his resignation—an open question remains: Can Jeff Sessions be prosecuted for perjury?

The answer is not exactly cut and dry. At the time of his confirmation hearings, Sessions was still serving as a senator from Alabama. The Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause shields lawmakers from prosecution for lying during proceedings in the House or Senate. The clause was written with the intent to foster debate in Congress without the threat of lawsuits stifling discussion. So, since Sessions was a sitting Senator when he allegedly misled Congress, does that mean he’s off the hook? Mother Jones put the question to three constitutional law experts.

“There might be other things he can be prosecuted for,” says Josh Chafetz, a law professor at Cornell University, referencing laws that allow Congress to hold individuals in contempt for providing false testimony. But, says Chafetz, Sessions can’t be prosecuted for perjury.

Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe sees it differently. “That would be a laughable misuse of the Speech and Debate Clause,” he says. “He was testifying under oath as an Attorney General nominee, not in the discharge of any Senatorial business of his own.”

Yale Law Professor Bruce Ackerman says he’s inclined to believe that Sessions is not protected by the clause. Still, Ackerman says there’s no decisive case law on the issue, which muddies the waters. “Only one thing is clear,” he says, “Sessions must recuse himself, and it is incumbent on the Administration to appoint a special prosecutor.”

See original article here: 

Can Jeff Sessions Be Prosecuted for Perjury?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Can Jeff Sessions Be Prosecuted for Perjury?

House Dems Demand Investigation of Michael Flynn’s Putin Dinner

by ClydeFeakes Posted on February 1, 2017

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A key Trump White House official may have violated the Constitution in 2015 when he delivered a paid speech in Moscow and dined with Vladimir Putin, congressional Democrats alleged Wednesday. According to the lawmakers, Michael Flynn, the controversial national security adviser, may have run afoul of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause.

Since Donald Trump’s election in November, ethics experts have raised concerns that the president’s many overseas business interests might violate the Emoluments Clause—a provision that prohibits federal office holders from accepting financial benefits from a foreign government. But the possibility that Flynn, a retired Army general, may have also violated the clause is new.

The concern was raised in a letter signed by top Democrats on the House Oversight, Armed Services, Judiciary, Homeland Security, Intelligence, and Foreign Affairs committees and focuses on a trip to Russia that Flynn took in December 2015. On the trip, Flynn attended a 10th anniversary gala celebration for RT, the pro-Russia news outlet owned by the Russian government. At the gala, Flynn appeared on a panel and then sat next to Putin during dinner. Flynn retired from the military prior to the trip, but the Democratic letter notes that he may still have been covered by the Emoluments Clause.

In an interview with the Washington Post last year, Flynn downplayed the importance of the meeting by making it clear that he was only there as a paid speaker.

“I was asked by my speaker’s bureau, LAI. I do public speaking. It was in Russia. It was a paid speaking opportunity,” Flynn told the Post. “The gig was to do an interview with RT correspondent Sophie Shevardnadze. It was an interview in front of the forum, probably 200 people in the audience.”

Flynn would not tell the Post how much he was paid for the event. The White House did not immediately respond to Mother Jones’ request for comment on the letter.

Flynn had a long career in the US Army, rising to the rank of lieutenant general, and spent two years as the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency under Barack Obama. After clashing with Obama, Flynn retired from the Army in August 2014, roughly 16 months before his trip to Moscow. But the House Democrats’ letter points out that the Department of Defense has issued multiple warnings to retired military officers about accepting payments from foreign governments.

“Significantly, retired regular military officers are also subject to the Emoluments Clause because they are subject to recall, and, therefore, hold an ‘Office of Profit or Trust’ under the Emoluments Clause,” a 2013 Department of Defense white paper reads.

The Democrats point to other Department of Defense memos making clear that the restriction covers commercial entities owned by foreign governments, which could include RT because it is part of the state-owned RIA Novosti press agency.

The letter was sent to newly confirmed Secretary of Defense James Mattis. It asks for an investigation, including an examination of communications between Flynn and RT, as well as the details of how much he was paid.

Taken from: 

House Dems Demand Investigation of Michael Flynn’s Putin Dinner

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on House Dems Demand Investigation of Michael Flynn’s Putin Dinner