SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
jamie raskin
Raskin Says Alito Must Recuse After Private Call With Trump
"Alito claims it was to help a former clerk get a job," wrote one legal commentator. "Doesn't matter. Federal law requires Alito now be DISQUALIFIED from the Trump stay petition."
Jan 09, 2025
Following the revelation that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito had a private phone call with Trump the day before Trump's legal team petitioned the Supreme Court to halt his sentencing in his New York "hush money" case, Congressman Jamie Raskin was among those Thursday who called for Alito's recusal from the high profile case.
ABC News first reported the call between Trump and Alito, which took place Tuesday, and that Alito subsequently claimed concerned one of Alito's former law clerks, who is seeking a job in the new administration. "William Levi, one of my former law clerks, asked me to take a call from President-elect Trump regarding his qualifications to serve in a government position," Alito explained to ABC News in a statement.
On Wednesday morning, Trump's legal team filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court to pause his sentencing in New York court on on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection to hush-money payment to porn actress Stormy Daniels.
Alito said that he and Trump did not discuss Trump's emergency request.
Raskin, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, denounced the call as a "breach of judicial ethics" in a statement Thursday, adding "especially when paired with his troubling past partisan ideological activity in favor of Trump, Justice Alito's decision to have a personal phone call with President Trump—who obviously has an active and deeply personal matter before the court—makes clear that he fundamentally misunderstands the basic requirements of judicial ethics or, more likely, believes himself to be above judicial ethics altogether."
Trump's legal team also appealed to the New York Court of Appeals to postpone the sentencing, which was rejected Thursday, a day after a state appeals court in New York also rejected the request. The sentencing is slated to take place on Friday.
Other court watchers also blasted Alito for the phone call.
President of the watchdog Accountable.US Caroline Ciccone urged Alito to recuse himself from all upcoming cases in which Trump is a named party. "In addition, Congress should investigate Alito's—and other justices'—lapses in judicial ethics in order to strengthen the Court's lax code of conduct. Anything less would confirm what so many already fear: that the Court has become overtly political and a playground for the powerful," she wrote.
"Alito claims it was to help a former clerk get a job. Doesn't matter. Federal law requires Alito now be DISQUALIFIED from the Trump stay petition," wrote Tristan Snell, a lawyer and legal commentator, on Wednesday.
This is not the first time that Alito has engendered this type of scrutiny. Last year, following revelations that flags carried by Trump supporters who took part in the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol were seen flying outside Alito's homes, Alito faced calls to recuse himself from a case two cases: one dealing with Trump's claims of presidential immunity and another on the question of whether defendants who participated in the January 6, 2021 attempted insurrection should be charged with obstructing an official proceeding. Alito rejected the calls to step aside.
"Every federal judge and justice knows he or she must avoid situations such as this. Yet Justice Alito did not," said Raskin.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ethics Report Finds Matt Gaetz, Trump's First AG Pick, Paid for Sex With a Minor
"Keep in mind that Donald Trump believed that Gaetz was the most qualified person in America to be the chief law enforcement official in the United States," said one attorney.
Dec 23, 2024
Government ethics advocates on Monday voiced serious concerns over President-elect Donald Trump's judgment and transition process following the release of a congressional probe containing "substantial evidence" that, while in office, former Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida—Trump's erstwhile pick for U.S attorney general—committed statutory rape against a minor, bought and used illegal drugs, and obstructed the investigation against him.
The bipartisan House Ethics Committee "determined there is substantial evidence that Rep. Gaetz violated House rules and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of Congress" during his time in office, according to the panel's 37-page report.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, (D-Md.), the incoming ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, toldUSA Today on Monday that "it's a terribly damning report for any member of Congress and a humiliating one for someone who wanted to be considered as an attorney general of the United States."
The report says Gaetz made more than $90,000 in payments for what the committee believed were likely "sexual activity and/or illicit drug use," including $400 for sex with a 17-year-old girl who "had just completed her junior year of high school" at a July 15, 2017 party at the home of Christopher Dorworth, a former Republican state lawmaker in Florida who was once
named "legislator of the year" by the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence. According to court filings viewed by Rolling Stone, Dorworth repeatedly sought the destruction of records related to the party.
The publication further states that the girl did not disclose her age to Gaetz—who was 35 at the time—nor did he ask. The girl also "acknowledged that she was under the influence of ecstasy during her sexual encounters" with Gaetz at the party and said she saw him "use cocaine" at the gathering. The panel found that Gaetz repeatedly used these and other illicit drugs.
The committee also found that Gaetz:
- Accepted gifts, including transportation and lodging in connection with a 2018 trip to the Bahamas, in excess of permissible amounts;
- Arranged for his chief of staff to assist a woman with whom he engaged in sexual activity in obtaining a passport, falsely indicating to the U.S. Department of State that she was a constituent;
- Knowingly and willfully sought to impede and obstruct the committee's investigation of his conduct; and
- Acted in a manner that reflects discreditably upon the House.
While the report states that all of the sexual encounters involving Gaetz were consensual, "at least one woman felt that the use of drugs at the parties and events they attended may have 'impair[ed their] ability to really know what was going on or fully consent.'"
One woman told the committee, "When I look back on certain moments, I feel violated."
Statutory rape and 20 instances of paying for sex, which Gaetz has vehemently denied. What was Gaetz thinking putting himself up for AJ? And for Trump “vetting“ team, malpractice if they didn’t know; fraud on Senate, country if they did know and tried to slide him through with no investigation
— Harry Litman ( @harrylitman.bsky.social) December 23, 2024 at 7:13 AM
The probe did not find that Gaetz broke federal sex trafficking laws, because although he "did cause the transportation of women across state lines for purposes of commercial sex, the committee did not find evidence that any of those women were under 18 at the time of travel, nor did the committee find sufficient evidence to conclude that the commercial sex acts were induced by force, fraud, or coercion."
Gaetz—who on Monday filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block the report's release on the grounds that he is now a private citizen—has repeatedly denied having sex with a minor.
"These claims would be destroyed in court—which is why they were never made in any court against me," he toldThe Hill on Monday ahead of the report's release—but after some of the findings were reported on late Sunday.
In a move widely seen as an attempt to prevent the public from ever seeing the report, Gaetz resigned from Congress on November 13, shortly after Trump announced him as the nominee for attorney general.
The Republican-controlled House Ethics Committee initially said on November 20 that it would not release the report on Gaetz, which widespread criticism. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) vehemently objected to releasing the report, arguing that doing so would set a "terrible precedent."
The following day, Gaetz said he would not accept Trump's nomination to head the U.S. Department of Justice. Trump subsequently tapped former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi for the top DOJ post.
The report on Gaetz has renewed focus on Trump's fitness for office.
As you read the House Ethics report about Gaetz, always keep in mind that Donald Trump believed that Gaetz was the most qualified person in America to be the chief law enforcement official in the United States.
— Ron Filipkowski ( @ronfilipkowski.bsky.social) December 23, 2024 at 7:16 AM
"Matt Gaetz is the man Donald Trump would have had as attorney general of the United States of America," Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in a statement. "Trump and his transition team are disregarding obvious red flags in announcing their planned Cabinet and top official nominees, seemingly relying on rabid loyalty to the incoming president as the primary selection criterion."
"The Gaetz report underscores the importance of the Senate independently and aggressively exercising its advise and consent function," Weissman added.
Lawyers for Good Government vice-chair Adam Cohen wrote on social media, "I don't care if Gaetz was some strategic sacrificial lamb pick."
"Trump now expects his other nominees to sail through," he added. "We need to challenge them all."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Emoluments Probe Concludes Trump Used DC Hotel to Enrich Himself, Fleece Taxpayers While President
"Far from expressing contrition for cashing in on the presidency, Donald Trump has made explicit his intent to expand his commodification of federal office if re-elected."
Oct 18, 2024
Democrats on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee on Friday published a staff report detailing how, while in office, former U.S. President Donald Trump—the 2024 Republican nominee—used his Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. to enrich himself with hundreds of illegal or questionable payments from federal and state officials, job-seekers, and presidential pardon recipients.
The report—titled Room Rates May Vary: How Donald Trump Violated the Constitution by Fleecing Taxpayers With Unlawful and Exorbitant Hotel Charges—was released by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who in 2021 managed Trump's historic second impeachment for inciting the January 6 Capitol insurrection.
"Trump has used the presidency—and his yearslong pursuit of it—as the world's greatest get-rich-quick scheme."
Offering "a glimpse into President Trump's domestic emoluments rackets," the publication accuses the former president of violating the Constitution's Domestic Emoluments Clause "as he used the Secret Service as his personal ATM and repeatedly took payments that raise the specter of pay-to-play corruption from individuals who sought and, in many cases obtained, favors from the commander-in-chief."
"From the time he became a candidate and launched his campaign as ' the greatest infomercial in political history,' Donald Trump has used the presidency—and his yearslong pursuit of it—as the world's greatest get-rich-quick scheme," the report states.
"Earlier this year, the Democratic staff of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability released a staff report documenting the nearly $8 million former President Trump received through just four of his businesses and over just parts of a two-year period from at least 20 foreign governments that sought—and in many cases received—favors from the Trump administration," the report notes.
"This figure is clearly just a fraction of the total amount of unconstitutional foreign emoluments President Trump collected while in office—a total that still needs to be fully accounted for," the paper contends.
As Common Dreamsreported in January, documents from Trump's former accounting firm reviewed by the committee revealed that businesses owned by the former president received payments from at least 20 foreign governments during his White House term, including over $5.5 million from China, $615,422 from Saudi Arabia, $465,744 from Qatar, and $303,372 from Kuwait.
The new report continues:
This follow-up report is based on a single set of records: guest logs for a single Trump property, Donald Trump's Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., covering just an 11-month period between September 2017 and August 2018 (excluding July 2018). Thus, the results would presumably represent less than one-quarter of Trump's ill-gotten gains from a single hotel over the course of his four-year term. While this is an exceedingly small window into the opaque web of more than 500 corporations, limited liability companies, and trusts that Donald Trump carried with him into the presidency, it is enough to reveal hundreds of unconstitutional and ethically suspect payments he accepted while in office from domestic sources—including a federal agency, numerous federal and state officials, and individuals who sought, and frequently obtained, federal offices as well as presidential pardons from him.
"The Constitution makes clear: Beyond a salary, the president may not receive any additional payments from federal or state governments," Raskin said in a statement. "This is a non-waivable prohibition against exploiting the office to convert and pocket public funds."
"While we still do not know the full extent of the unconstitutional payments Trump pocketed while fleecing American taxpayers, one thing is certain: We must put legal barriers in place now to prevent the kind of ripoff corruption our Founding Fathers so strongly opposed," Raskin added. "Given the need to enforce the U.S. Constitution against both foreign and domestic emoluments corruption, in the coming days, I will work with my Democratic colleagues on a legislative fix and hope that my Republican colleagues will join us in this effort."
The report notes that "Trump was very clear that he did not believe that the Constitution's prohibitions on either foreign or domestic emoluments applied to him. For example, in 2019, when public outrage forced him to reverse his plan to hold the following year's G7 summit at his 'foundering Doral resort,' he publicly denigrated what he called the 'phony Emoluments Clause.'"
"And far from expressing contrition for cashing in on the presidency, Donald Trump has made explicit his intent to expand his commodification of federal office if re-elected—including by gutting the federal civil service and replacing professional, expert, nonpolitical federal employees with a cadre of yes-men, sycophants, and loyalists," the paper adds.
Raskin said that "Trump
has made clear that he will not only refuse to divest from his businesses in a possible future presidency, but he will seek to multiply opportunities to commodify the Oval Office for his personal enrichment by turning thousands of civil service jobs into patronage positions—all with the attendant payoff possibilities from supplicant job-seekers and the prospective blessing of his hand-picked Supreme Court justices."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular