Quantcast
Connect with us

‘A grotesque violation of the president’s oath’: Law experts blast Trump for sharing classified intel with Russians

Published

on

As the news cycle remains dominated by the fallout of a Washington Post report claiming that President Donald Trump revealed classified intel to Russian officials in the Oval Office last week, a team of legal experts have released a scary analysis of what the revelation could mean.

The end of a Lawfare Blog analysis of the bombshell report offers one terrifying prospect: that the president may have violated the constitution.

ADVERTISEMENT

“This may well be a violation of the President’s oath of office,” reads the fifth point in the post co-authored by six legal experts. “Questions of criminality aside, we turn to the far more significant issues: If the President gave this information away through carelessness or neglect, he has arguably breached his oath of office.”

The analysis calls a potential “loose lips” situation in which the president bragged about intel he’d received a “grotesque violation of the President’s oath” that could operate “as a standalone basis for impeachment”.

“In taking the oath President Trump swore to ‘faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States’ and to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States’ to the best of his ability,” it reads. “It’s very hard to argue that carelessly giving away highly sensitive material to an adversary foreign power constitutes a faithful execution of the office of President.”

According to the analysis, “violating the oath of office does not require violating a criminal statute” — and all three presidents who’ve been tried or considered for impeachment (Presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton) have been investigated for violating their oath.

ADVERTISEMENT

Along with claims that the president may indeed have breached his own oath of office, the analysis also raises the question of whether or not Trump, like Nixon before him, believes that “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” The writers of the analysis state that in certain cases, this can be true because “the President gets to disclose what he wants”.

You can read the entire report via Lawfare Blog.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

‘Should we talk about Ivanka?’: MSNBC guest calls for Trump family investigation if Biden’s son is scrutinized

Published

on

During a panel discussion on Donald Trump's call for an investigation of Joe Biden's son Hunter over his Ukraine dealings, an "AM Joy" guest said if Congress is going to investigate politician's kids why not start with Ivanka Trump and her brothers Don Jr. and Eric.

Speaking with MSNBC host Joy Reid, Intercept columnist Mehdi Hasan called out President Donald Trump for his "brazenness" going after the former vice president's son.

"There's so much to say about this story, as for the Ukrainian denials, what are they going to do, come out and say, 'Yes, Donald Trump did pressure our president eight times in a single phone call'? It's absurd." Hasan began.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Tapper smacks Mnuchin with Trump kids’ international business deals after attack on Biden son

Published

on

In a fairly contentious interview with Steve Mnuchin, CNN host Jake Tapper pointed out how Donald Trump's children -- Don Jr., Ivanka and Eric -- have been using their father's name to swing international deals after the Treasury secretary accused former Vice President Joe Biden's son of doing the same.

Mnuchin first dismissed reporting by the Washington Post and the conservative Wall Street Journal that Donald Trump was withholding Ukraine funding in an effort to get dirt on Biden and his son -- saying neither newspaper could be trusted -- he then complained to the CNN host about having to spend seven and a half minutes talking about Trump's Ukraine scandal.

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

Will Trump peacefully vacate the Oval Office if he loses the presidential election in 2020? A lesson from 1800

Published

on

As primary season heats up in the United States, the Democrats are anxiously debating the best path to unseat Donald Trump in 2020. But the question of how to beat Trump is perhaps less urgent than the issue of whether he will accept defeat.

Trump has already questioned his loss of the 2016 popular vote with baseless accusations of voter fraud. He has also repeatedly toyed with the idea of extending his presidency beyond the eight-year limit enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, even trumpeting Jerry Falwell Jr.’s assertion that his first term be extended by two years to compensate for the Russia investigation. Perhaps most ominously, Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen warned while testifying before the House Oversight Committee in February 2019:

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Investigate and Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image