[Trump] Self-Dealing in Ukraine: The Core of the Impeachment Inquiry..
Another very good article.
Self-Dealing in Ukraine: The Core of the Impeachment Inquiry
https://www.lawfareblog.com/self-dealing-ukraine-core-impeachment-inquiry
By Philip Zelikow
Monday, October 21, 2019, 4:11 PM
As the Ukraine story develops, the public focus has remained largely on wrongdoing by the president outside the realm of criminal law, focusing instead on President Trumps apparent use of his office for personal gain. On one level, this makes sense: Impeachment is only about removal of the president from office, not about criminal prosecution and imprisonment. So the standards and processes for impeachment are different.
But it would be a mistake to ignore the criminal law entirely. Evidence of criminal misconduct, specifically, the federal bribery statute, should influence political judgments about impeachment. After all, Bribery is one of the grounds for impeachment specifically enumerated in the Constitution.
Before getting involved in foreign policy work, most of my professional work was in criminal justice. The emerging case should be understood from both of these perspectives. Here, I offer a view of how a public corruption prosecutor might regard the way the case is taking shape. In addition to the role that possible criminal wrongdoing by the president could play in the ongoing impeachment inquiry, evidence about criminal misconduct might also apply, more directly, to the possible investigations of others beyond the presidentincluding Trumps personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.
The core of the impeachment inquiry is about whether Trump engaged in self-dealing, where he used his power in a publicly held enterprise (that is, the government of the United States) for personal gain. Most executives in the private sector know what self-dealing is, and recent headlines about Renault-Nissan or WeWork have reminded them. They also know how most corporate boards would handle a case of self-dealing that involved important programs and sums of money, and in which the CEO had fired executives who interfered with the self-dealing.
When Mulvaney was asked about a quid pro quo, he said, on Oct. 17, We do that all the time with foreign policy. That is correct. But there is a profound difference between using governmental power in a quid pro quo as part of a public (or fiduciary) duty to advance the public interests of the United States versus using governmental power as a quid pro quo to advance the private interests of Donald Trump or Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani, a private citizen, said in May that he was working to advance the interests of my client. There are many jail inmates and former executives who could not distinguish between public (or fiduciary) interests and their private interests...................................
NBachers
(17,119 posts)crickets
(25,981 posts)Deserves a read: I especially enjoyed the section that methodically knocked the pins right out from under the defense Trump and cohorts seem to be developing.