what if the attorney general decides not to prosecute trump

What did Trump pressure his acting attorney general to do?

Is there a need for investigations of presidential wrongdoing?

Is it a crime to conspire to defraud the United States?

Can federal criminal prosecutions take place?

Did Trump order Rosen to enforce the Hatch Act?

See 2 more

About this website

The real reason the feds haven’t indicted Trump - New York Daily News

The frustration with Garland has built steadily over the past 12 months. Recently, the polite Garland-nudging by Democratic politicians and media pundits has given way to a ferocious anger at ...

Why Merrick Garland Is Unlikely to Indict Donald Trump - Newsweek

The U.S. attorney general is facing pressure to charge the former president with a crime over January 6, but doing so may result in unprecedented backlash according to an expert.

Refusing to Prosecute Trump Is a Political Act | Washington Monthly

The evidence is clear. It’s time to prosecute the former president, and Merrick Garland shouldn’t wait.

Bad News For Trump As Merrick Garland Vows To Prosecute White ...

In his opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Garland will say, “If confirmed, I will supervise the prosecution of white supremacists and others who stormed the Capitol on ...

If Merrick Garland Doesn’t Charge Trump and His Coup Plotters, Our ...

Photo Illustration by Kristen Hazzard/The Daily Beast/GettyThe Department of Justice announced this week that it would crack down on airline passengers who throw tantrums. Now, if Attorney General Merrick Garland would only get around to doing something about people who plot the overthrow of our government and a former president who's serially obstructed justice and abused power we might be ...

What did Trump pressure his acting attorney general to do?

He pressured his acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, to open an investigation of purported fraud in the vote count in Georgia , even though there was no evidence of such wrongdoing. In one call, Trump apparently directed Rosen to "just say the election was corrupt, [and] leave the rest to me."

Is there a need for investigations of presidential wrongdoing?

Investigations of presidential wrongdoing, by Congress and others, are wise and even necessary. But actual prosecutions are not, and Donald Trump should be the beneficiary of this tradition, even if he himself would surely not offer such grace to others.

Is it a crime to conspire to defraud the United States?

But what about a conspiracy "to defraud the United States," which does not require proof of an underlying offense? According to Justice Department policy, the government will only bring such a charge if the defendant "made statements that he/she knew to be false, fraudulent or deceitful to a government agency, which disrupted the functions of the agency or of the government."

Can federal criminal prosecutions take place?

Federal criminal prosecutions can take place only pursuant to specific statutes, so it's worth analyzing some of the laws that critics say Trump may have violated.

Did Trump order Rosen to enforce the Hatch Act?

Notwithstanding the Hatch Act, presidents and their staffs have engaged in partisan political activities since the birth of the Republic. And Trump could argue that he was not ordering Rosen to engage in political activity, but rather to enforce the law. Again, this criminal provision has rarely been invoked, and it seems unfair to raise it in connection with Trump's dealings with his acting attorney general.

What is the legal reasoning behind Attorney General Barr's suspect claim?

The memo obtained by CREW explains the legal reasoning behind Attorney General Barr’s suspect claim that “the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s [Robert Mueller’s] investigation is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”.

Who edited Barr's testimony?

Documents show, for instance, that Engel edited Barr’s prepared testimony for his confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee as well as a letter to Chairman Lindsey Graham in which Barr confirmed that he had shared the memorandum and discussed his views on obstruction with multiple DOJ and White House officials as well as personal counsel to the president.

Did Trump obstruct the Russia investigation?

The Mueller report catalogued numerous instances in which President Trump may have obstructed the Russia investigation, including by asking associates to curtail it or to fire the special counsel. The memo obtained by CREW explains the legal reasoning behind Attorney General Barr’s suspect claim that “the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s [Robert Mueller’s] investigation is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.” The memorandum is also presumably the supposed vindication of President Trump’s claim, after Barr’s announcement, that there was “No Collusion, No Obstruction, Complete and Total EXONERATION.”

Is the DOJ laying out the grounds for not charging Trump?

In response to ongoing litigation involving a Freedom of Information Act request by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, DOJ turned over a heavily redacted version of one of the most important legal documents the American people have never seen: the official grounds for not char ging Trump with obstruction of justice.

Was Barr hand picked by Trump?

Another possibility is that the memorandum contributes to a body of evidence suggesting that Barr was hand-picked by Trump to discredit and undermine the eventual findings of the Special Counsel —especially with respect to the obstruction case against the president. In the summer preceding Barr’s nomination to run DOJ, Barr penned a lengthy memorandum asserting that Mueller’s theory of obstruction of justice was “fatally misconceived.” Barr sent this letter to a number of individuals, including attorneys for the president, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel Stephen Engel. The secret March 24, 2019 memorandum recommending Trump not be charged was authored in part by Engel and approved by Rosenstein.

Destabilizing prosecutions

Other countries’ former presidents are being investigated, prosecuted and even jailed worldwide.

Mature democracies

Strong democracies are usually competent enough – and the judicial system independent enough – to go after politicians who misbehave, including top leaders. Sarkozy is France’s second modern president to be found guilty of corruption, after Jacques Chirac in 2011. The country didn’t fall apart after Chirac’s conviction.

Overzealous prosecution versus rule of law

Overzealous political prosecution is more likely, and potentially more damaging, in emerging democracies where courts and other public institutions may be insufficiently independent from politics.

Stability versus accountability

Mexico has a different approach to prosecuting past presidents: It doesn’t do it.

Who decides who is the ultimate decision maker on any investigation or prosecution?

Relatedly, Biden must also decide who will be the ultimate decision-maker on any investigation or prosecution: the president himself or the attorney general. Biden would be well within his legal rights, and within the norms of apolitical law enforcement, were he to directly instruct the attorney general not to investigate or prosecute Trump ...

What did Biden say about the investigations?

According to NBC, “Biden has raised concerns that investigations would further divide a country he is trying to unite.”. He “believes investigations would alienate the more than 73 million Americans who voted for Trump.”.

Does Biden want a criminal investigation?

One plausible reading of these statements is that Biden does not want a criminal investigation of Trump or people close to him, but that he wants his attorney general to be seen as the one who made this decision.

Has Biden made an explicit statement on the matter?

Biden has not made an explicit statement on the matter, but he may have already publicly signaled his views on both of these issues. During a Democratic primary debate in November 2019, he was asked whether he would order an investigation of Trump, if elected. Biden responded:

Is it appropriate for Biden to direct the Justice Department to drop any investigations of Trump or his family and close associate?

Thus it would be appropriate for President Biden to direct the Justice Department to drop any investigations of Trump or his family and close associates, assuming he were motivated by concerns in the public interest. But Biden has not indicated that he plans to take this path.

Did Gerald Ford pardon Nixon?

Perhaps most relevant to the Trump situation, President Gerald Ford issued a blanket pardon to his predecessor, Richard Nixon, for Watergate and any other federal crimes that Nixon may have committed. Although some charged then (and now) that Ford may have made a “corrupt bargain” with Nixon—Nixon would resign and allow Ford, the vice president, ...

Is it possible that Biden thinks criminal enforcement against Trump and his circle would be a bad idea?

It is possible that Biden thinks criminal enforcement against Trump and his circle would be a bad idea, but that he is genuinely open to the attorney general disagreeing with him and pursuing an investigation or prosecution. Second, Trump may use the pardon power in ways that change Biden’s or his attorney general’s thinking.

What did Trump pressure his acting attorney general to do?

He pressured his acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, to open an investigation of purported fraud in the vote count in Georgia , even though there was no evidence of such wrongdoing. In one call, Trump apparently directed Rosen to "just say the election was corrupt, [and] leave the rest to me."

Is there a need for investigations of presidential wrongdoing?

Investigations of presidential wrongdoing, by Congress and others, are wise and even necessary. But actual prosecutions are not, and Donald Trump should be the beneficiary of this tradition, even if he himself would surely not offer such grace to others.

Is it a crime to conspire to defraud the United States?

But what about a conspiracy "to defraud the United States," which does not require proof of an underlying offense? According to Justice Department policy, the government will only bring such a charge if the defendant "made statements that he/she knew to be false, fraudulent or deceitful to a government agency, which disrupted the functions of the agency or of the government."

Can federal criminal prosecutions take place?

Federal criminal prosecutions can take place only pursuant to specific statutes, so it's worth analyzing some of the laws that critics say Trump may have violated.

Did Trump order Rosen to enforce the Hatch Act?

Notwithstanding the Hatch Act, presidents and their staffs have engaged in partisan political activities since the birth of the Republic. And Trump could argue that he was not ordering Rosen to engage in political activity, but rather to enforce the law. Again, this criminal provision has rarely been invoked, and it seems unfair to raise it in connection with Trump's dealings with his acting attorney general.