A Conviction for Trump Creates Possible Disqualification as President

The jury in Donald Trump’s criminal trial in New York is expected to decide his guilt or innocence by the end of next week.

A guilty verdict would not only cast his campaign into disarray but also create a legal quagmire over what kinds of conduct could disqualify a candidate from the presidency.

Technically, he could become president even if he is convicted on all 34 felony counts he faces of falsifying business records.

The Constitution allows anyone who is a natural born citizen at least 35 years old and a resident of the United States for the past 14 years to run for president.

However, Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution gives states discretion over “the times, places and manner of holding elections.”

Most states have interpreted their authority over elections to determine restrictions on holding public office.

For Trump, the restrictions could require a pardon from the governor of each state before he could run for office there.

Other states have varying time periods after criminal conviction before an ex-con can run for office.

Convicted felons have run for president twice in U.S. history but both were inconsequential candidates who had minimal chance of winning anything.

Trump is the presumed Republican candidate for president and the leader to win the election in some polls.?

The most likely scenario is another round of litigation to decide his eligibility if Trump is convicted, according to election law attorneys.

Trump’s attorneys ended their criminal defense of the former president Tuesday with a problematic effort to undercut the credibility of the prosecution’s star witness.

The last witness was Robert Costello, a former legal advisor to Michael Cohen, who was Trump’s personal attorney and now his main accuser.

Costello’s testimony was only a marginal benefit to the defense. Some of it supported the prosecution’s case.

His contentious personal behavior Monday afternoon led the judge to clear the courtroom to warn Costello about being too belligerent.

“Ridiculous,” Costello said after listening to the judge’s ruling on a prosecution objection to his testimony. “Jeez,” he said on another occasion.

He said in his testimony that Cohen had told him he acted alone in paying hush money to two women who say Trump had sex with them. Costello quoted Cohen as saying Trump could not be blamed for any business records that sought to hide the payments.

To the defense team’s benefit, Costello described much of Cohen’s testimony as reflecting deceit.

When prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked whether he held animosity toward Cohen, Costello replied, "I don’t have animosity. I don’t think Michael Cohen is telling the truth."

"Yes or no?" Hoffinger asked.

"No," Costello said.

Several legal analysts interviewed on televised reports of the trial said the defense team made a mistake in calling Costello as a witness.

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

Arsonist at U.S. Supreme Court Sentenced to 10 Years in Prison

A man who set a police car on fire outside the U.S. Supreme Court was sentenced to 10 years in prison last week.

Cody Michael Tarner, 26, pleaded guilty to arson after he poured gasoline on three unmarked Supreme Court police cars, lighting one on fire.

The Hagerstown, Md., man said he was a leader of an unidentified militia group. He also has been diagnosed with schizophrenia.

A statement of the offense said a government investigation showed Tarner “had several encounters with law enforcement in which he has expressed what can be referred to as anti-government and militia extremist ideologies.”

Tarner accused the government during court appearances of conspiring against him to deprive him of his rights and of misrepresenting his political beliefs.

Police said Tarner drove his car into an employee parking lot at the Supreme Court on July 15, 2020. After walking around the parking lot for a few minutes, he returned to his parked car and pulled out a red gasoline can, police said.

Security cameras reportedly showed Tarner pouring gasoline on three cars. Some of the gasoline splashed onto his own clothing.

The car he lit on fire was totaled while the other two were seriously damaged.

In addition, the flames spread to Tarner’s clothing, engulfing him in fire and making him suffer severe burns.

In a statement to the judge presiding over his case, Tarner wrote that “the government believes its own lies against me, it has deceived itself into a false sense of security where it carelessly and continuously drops the feathers of its own ruin.”

U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled that Tarner was competent. He ordered him to pay restitution of $32,371.42.

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

Trump Advisor Bannon Awaiting Decision on Jail Sentence for Contempt Conviction

Former Trump administration advisor Steve Bannon is awaiting a decision by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., on whether he should remain out of jail while he appeals his criminal conviction.

Federal prosecutors last week asked U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols to compel Bannon to begin his four month sentence after being convicted on two counts of contempt of Congress.

Bannon won a stay of his sentence while he appealed the conviction. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.

"Consequently, there is no longer a 'substantial question of law that is likely to result in a reversal or an order for a new trial,'" prosecutors wrote in their court filing this week.

Prosecutors were referring to the appearance that Bannon’s losses in two federal courts mean he is unlikely to succeed with another appeal. His attorneys said they wanted to ask the circuit court to rehear the case.

Bannon was convicted in October 2022 of contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.?

The committee was seeking records and testimony that could indicate Bannon was complicit in the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the Capitol. Other witnesses said Bannon might have discussed with then President Donald Trump some kind of civil disobedience before the insurrection.

Bannon argued during his appeal that he did not “willfully” defy a congressional subpoena. He said he was following the advice of his attorney.

“Wilful” misconduct and the bad faith it implies is required for any kind of criminal conviction.

The circuit court ruled unanimously that proof of bad faith was not necessary to prove contempt of Congress. A simple refusal to comply with the subpoena was enough for a conviction because the purpose of the law is to uphold Congress’ power to investigate, the court said.

Bannon played a key role in Donald Trump’s campaign strategy before he was elected in 2016. He remained a high-ranking advisor until his departure from the Trump administration in August 2017.

The House select committee sought Bannon’s records and testimony about his communications with Trump leading to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol.

Former Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., who was then the committee’s vice-chair, explained in written comments why lawmakers wanted to speak with Bannon.?

"Based on the Committee's investigation, it appears that Mr. Bannon had substantial advance knowledge of the plans for January 6th and likely had an important role in formulating those plans,” Cheney said.

“The day before this all occurred — on January 5th — Mr. Bannon publicly professed knowledge that '(a)ll hell is going to break loose tomorrow,'” Cheney wrote. “He forecast that the day would be 'extraordinarily different' than what most Americans expected. He said to his viewers on the air: '(S)o many people said, "if I was in a revolution, I would be in Washington."' (W)ell, this is your time in history."

Bannon also said on his podcast on Jan. 5, 2021, “All I can say is, strap in. … You made this happen and tomorrow it's game day. So strap in. Let's get ready. It's all converging, and now we're on the point of attack tomorrow.”

Before the House subpoenaed Bannon, Cheney said Bannon and Trump’s statements “suggest that President Trump was personally involved in the planning and execution of January 6th.”

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

Senate Plan on Artificial Intelligence Would Broaden Legal Profession Uses

A bipartisan group of senators agreed last week on a "roadmap" for artificial intelligence policy that nearly ensures it will play a bigger role in the legal profession.

Their agreement calls for more funding for artificial intelligence development, testing to determine risks it creates and strategies for implementing it into the workforce.

"AI has huge potential, that's the transformational innovation we need to encourage, but there's also sustainable innovation," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at a press conference last week.

The American Bar Association made a similar statement recently that mixed hope for the future but warnings about the dangers of artificial intelligence.

“AI is driving innovation in the practice of law,” the American Bar Association said. “With new legal tools and approaches, lawyers and judges should understand how AI works, how it is developed and used, what advantages it can bring, and the risks it can create. AI will raise complex and challenging ethical questions such as the risk of compromising confidential client data or inadvertently waiving attorney-client and attorney work product privileges.”

The senators’ plan calls for legislative committees to approve federal investments of $32 billion a year for non-defense artificial intelligence innovation.

One of the risks foreseen in the Senate’s roadmap is a reduction in workforces as artificial intelligence takes over many jobs. Some of the reductions already are happening in the legal profession.

Artificial intelligence is being used in law firms for legal research, contract analysis and document review.

The artificial intelligence-driven chatbot ChatGPT will allow users to write the rough drafts of pleadings that could be submitted to a court. Google and Meta are developing similar chatbots.

For litigators, artificial intelligence is being developed to predict case outcomes and assess the strength of legal arguments. It analyzes historical case data to identify patterns that predict how judges are likely to rule on specific legal issues.

The Senate roadmap has not yet won by a vote in Congress. However, the bipartisan support indicates legislative proposals will follow soon.

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

D.C. Police Prepare for Terrorism During Gay Pride Month in June

District of Columbia police are preparing for a potential terrorist attack in June during Gay Pride month after an FBI warning last week.

“Foreign terrorist organizations or supporters may seek to exploit increased gatherings associated with the upcoming June 2024 Pride Month,” a joint FBI and Homeland Security Department announcement said.

The agencies did not specify which locations presented the greatest risk, only that terrorist groups continue to threaten LGBTQ events.

Washington, D.C., is planning for one of the nation’s biggest Gay Pride events on June 10 and June 11. More than 400,000 attendees and visitors are expected.

The Metropolitan Police Department “and our local and federal law enforcement partners monitor and assess intelligence and plan for large gatherings accordingly to ensure safety for all District of Columbia residents and visitors,” a D.C. police spokesman told The Legal Forum News.

The 1.5-mile Capital Pride Parade on June 10 will be accompanied by a day-long Capital Pride Block Party. Both of them are what the FBI calls “soft targets,” meaning they are easily accessible by the public and by terrorists.

The FBI announcement noted that June 12 is the eighth anniversary of the attack on the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida. It killed 49 people and injured 53 in the nation’s deadliest attack against the LGBTQ community.

The gunman, Omar Mateen, was killed by a police SWAT team. He had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State.

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.