Garry Geffert Attorney at Law

05/22/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel, Volume II, pages 33-36

“Also on January 27, the President called FBI Director Comey and invited him to dinner that evening. Priebus recalled that before the dinner, he told the President something like, "don't talk about Russia, whatever you do," and the President promised he would not talk about Russia at the dinner. McGahn had previously advised the President that he should not communicate directly with the Department of Justice to avoid the perception or reality of political interference in law enforcement. When Bannon learned about the President's planned dinner with Comey, he suggested that he or Priebus also attend, but the President stated that he wanted to dine with Comey alone. Comey said that when he arrived for the dinner that evening, he was surprised and concerned to see that no one else had been invited.

* * *

“According to Comey's account, at one point during the dinner the President stated, "I need loyalty, I expect loyalty." Comey did not respond and the conversation moved on to other topics, but the President returned to the subject of Comey's job at the end of the dinner and repeated, "I need loyalty." Comey responded, "You will always get honesty from me." The President said, "That's what I want, honest loyalty." Comey said, "You will get that from me." After Comey's account of the dinner became public, the President and his advisors disputed that he had asked for Comey's loyalty. The President also indicated that he had not invited Comey to dinner, telling a reporter that he thought Comey had "asked for the dinner" because "he wanted to stay on." But substantial evidence corroborates Comey's account of the dinner invitation and the request for loyalty. The President's Daily Diary confirms that the President "extend[ed] a dinner invitation" to Comey on January 27. With respect to the substance of the dinner conversation, Comey documented the President's request for loyalty in a memorandum he began drafting the night of the dinner; senior FBI officials recall that Comey told them about the loyalty request shortly after the dinner occurred; and Comey described the request while under oath in congressional proceedings and in a subsequent interview with investigators subject to penalties for lying under 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Comey's memory of the details of the dinner, including that the President requested loyalty, has remained consistent throughout.”

Doesn’t everyone fib about who asked whom out for a dinner date that did not go well?

05/21/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel, Volume II, pages 22-23:

“. . . The briefing occurred on January 6, 2017. Following the briefing, the intelligence community released the public version of its assessment, which concluded with high confidence that Russia had intervened in the election through a variety of means with the goal of harming Clinton's electability. The assessment further concluded with high confidence that Putin and the Russian government had developed a clear preference for Trump. Several days later, BuzzFeed published unverified allegations compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele during the campaign about candidate Trump's Russia connections under the headline "These Reports Allege Trump Has Deep Ties To Russia." In a press conference the next day, the President-Elect called the release "an absolute disgrace" and said, "I have no dealings with Russia. I have no deals that could happen in Russia, because we've stayed away . . .. So I have no deals, I have no loans and I have no dealings. We could make deals in Russia very easily if we wanted to, I just don't want to because I think that would be a conflict."”

No deals in the works except, you know, Trump Tower Moscow. (see pages 19-20 of Volume II).

05/16/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel, Volume II, page 24:

“During the presidential transition, incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn had two phone calls with the Russian Ambassador to the United States about the Russian response to U.S. sanctions imposed because of Russia's election interference. After the press reported on Flynn's contacts with the Russian Ambassador, Flynn lied to incoming Administration officials by saying he had not discussed sanctions on the calls. The officials publicly repeated those lies in press interviews. The FBI, which previously was investigating Flynn for other matters, interviewed him about the calls in the first week after the inauguration, and Flynn told similar lies to the FBI. On January 26, 2017, Department of Justice (DOJ) officials notified the White House that Flynn and the Russian Ambassador had discussed sanctions and that Flynn had been interviewed by the FBT. The next night, the President had a private dinner with FBI Director James Corney in which he asked for Corney's loyalty. On February 13, 2017, the President asked Flynn to resign. The following day, the President had a one-on-one conversation with Corney in which he said, ‘I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go.’”

Because, you know, it was just a little (series) of white lies about undercutting the nation’s foreign policy. And Mr. Flynn was individual number 1's bro.

05/15/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel, Volume II, p. 22:

"On December 29, 2016, the Obama Administration announced that in response to Russian cyber operations aimed at the U.S. election, it was imposing sanctions and other measures on several Russian individuals and entities. When first asked about the sanctions, President-Elect Trump said, 'I think we ought to get on with our lives.'"

Because, what a little Russian dressing on an election?

05/14/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel, Volume II, pages 19-20:

“During the [July 27, 2016] press conference, Trump repeated "I have nothing to do with Russia" five times. He stated that "the closest [he] came to Russia" was that Russians may have purchased a home or condos from him. He said that after he held the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013 he had been interested in working with Russian companies that "wanted to put a lot of money into developments in Russia" but " it never worked out." He explained, "[f]rankly, I didn't want to do it for a couple of different reasons. But we had a major developer ... that wanted to develop property in Moscow and other places. But we decided not to do it." The Trump Organization, however, had been pursuing a building project in Moscow-the Trump Tower Moscow project from approximately September 2015 through June 2016, and the candidate was regularly updated on developments, including possible trips by Michael Cohen to Moscow to promote the deal and by Trump himself to finalize it.

“Cohen recalled speaking with Trump after the press conference about Trump's denial of any business dealings in Russia, which Cohen regarded as untrue. Trump told Cohen that Trump Tower Moscow was not a deal yet and said, "Why mention it if it is not a deal?" According to Cohen, at around this time, in response to Trump's disavowal of connections to Russia, campaign
advisors had developed a "party line" that Trump had no business with Russia and no connections to Russia.”

Really, who needed to know that a candidate for the position which sets foreign policy for the nation was involved in negotiations with a major adversary of our country that could have a significant impact on the personal finances of that candidate? After all, when did money ever influence any decision made by any political candidate?

05/13/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel

Volume II, page 13:

“We also sought a voluntary interview with the President. After more discussion, the President declined to be interviewed. [Redaction because of Grand Jury issues.] During the course of our discussions, the President did agree to answer written questions on certain Russia-related topics, and he provided us with answers. He did not similarly agree to provide written answers to questions on obstruction topics or questions on events during the transition.”

Remind me again about how completely transparent and cooperative individual number 1 has been.

05/09/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel, Volume II:

Page 1:

"First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions" in violation of "the constitutional separation of powers."1 Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC's legal conclusion for the purpose of exercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct."

Page 2:
"Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

See, if Mr. Mueller thought individual number 1 had not obstructed justice, he would have said so. So, individual number 1 must be . . . something.

05/07/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel

Pages 33-34:

“Among the U.S. "leaders of public opinion" targeted by the IRA were various members and surrogates of the Trump Campaign. In total, Trump Campaign affiliates promoted dozens of tweets, posts, and other political content created by the IRA.

“Posts from the IRA-controlled Twitter account @TEN_GOP were cited or retweeted by multiple Trump Campaign officials and surrogates, including Donald J. Trump Jr., Eric Trump, Kellyanne Conway, Brad Parscale, and Michael T. Flynn. These posts included allegations of voter fraud, as well as allegations that Secretary Clinton had mishandled classified information.

“A November 7, 2016 post from the IRA-controlled Twitter account @Pamela_ Moore 13 was retweeted by Donald J. Trump Jr.

“On September 19, 2017, President Trump's personal .. account @realDonaldTrump responded to a tweet from the IRA-controlled account @ l0_gop (the backup account of @TEN_ GOP, which had already been deactivated by Twitter). The tweet read: ‘We love you, Mr. President!’”

Page 14:
The IRA is “the Internet Research Agency, LLC (IRA), a Russian organization funded by Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin and companies he controlled, including Concord Management and Consulting LLC and Concord Catering (collectively "Concord"). The IRA conducted social media operations targeted at large U.S. audiences with the goal of sowing discord in the U.S. political system.”

Like individual number 1 has said, no connection with Russians at all, at least as far as he or anyone connected with individual number 1 remembers at this point in time.

05/02/2019

From the Report of the Special Counsel:

Page 14:
The first form of Russian election influence came principally from the Internet Research Agency, LLC (IRA), a Russian organization funded by Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin and companies he controlled, including Concord Management and Consulting LLC and Concord Catering (collectively "Concord"). The IRA conducted social media operations targeted at large
U.S. audiences with the goal of sowing discord in the U.S. political system. These operations constituted "active measures" (aKTMBHbie Meporrprumu1), a term that typically refers to operations conducted by Russian security services aimed at influencing the course of international affairs.

Page 25:
IRA-purchased advertisements referencing candidate Trump largely supported his campaign. The first known IRA advertisement explicitly endorsing the Trump Campaign was purchased on April 19, 2016. The IRA bought an advertisement for its Instagram account "Tea Party News" asking U.S. persons to help them "make a patriotic team of young Trump supporters" by uploading photos with the hashtag "#KIDS4TRUMP."60 In subsequent months, the IRA purchased dozens of advertisements supporting the Trump Campaign, predominantly through the Facebook groups "Being Patriotic," "Stop All Invaders," and "Secured Borders."

My memory may be faulty, but I do not remember any of these fictional accounts being labeled as "fake news" by the purveyors of that term.

05/01/2019

From pg. 10 of the Mueller report summary about collusion with Russia:

"Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated-including some associated with the Trump Campaign---deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. In such cases, the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.

Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report. "

I seem to recall some considerable expression of outrage by individual number one about emails which had allegedly been deleted from the server of Secretary Clinton. I may have missed it, but I have not heard any such protestations about the emails discussed in Special Counsel Mueller's report.

02/02/2018

Rep. Nunes and his republican buddies are upset because information used by the DOJ to get a warrant regarding Russian interference in the election on behalf of Mr. Trump was supplied by a person who did not want Mr. Trump to become president. I guess Mr. Nunes and his buddies think only information supplied by Trump sycophants and Putin partisans should have been used.

New standard: no warrant unless the person is a good friend and supporter of the person to be surveilled.

This article is a reminder that the what the majority of republican politicians now deride as a failure in fact had majo...
01/29/2018
What Everyone Gets Wrong About LBJ’s Great Society

This article is a reminder that the what the majority of republican politicians now deride as a failure in fact had major and enduring successes.

It wasn't some radical left-wing pipedream. It was moderate; and it worked.

Link to an article quoting me about legislation supported by state Sen. Trump to make help bad businesses cheat workers ...
01/16/2018
Senator Charles Trump and the West Virginia Legislative Drive to Cheat Workers and Consumers | Morgan County USA

Link to an article quoting me about legislation supported by state Sen. Trump to make help bad businesses cheat workers and consumers:

http://morgancountyusa.org/?p=3137

Senator Charles Trump (R-Morgan), the chairman of the West Virginia Senate Judiciary Committee, is leading the charge in the state legislature to help corporations cheat workers and consumers — and to make getting caught a mere cost of doing business.

12/12/2017

In June 2011, would-be senator Roy Moore said, during a radio interview, that getting rid of all but the first 10 amendments to the Constitution would solve many of today's problems. Among the amendments Mr. Moore would get rid of are the 13th amendment, which abolished slavery, the 14th amendment, which guaranteed black people the equal protection under the law, and the 15th amendment, which guaranteed to right black people the right to vote.

In November 2017, Mr. Moore said that America was great during the days of slavery, because families stayed together and were strong. That, of course, applied only to white families, because white slave owners broke up black families as part of their business selling black skinned human beings.

And in November 2017, Mr. Moore said that "new rights" created in 1965 caused many of today's problems. The "new rights" were in the Civil Rights Act of 1965 which outlawed racial discrimination in employment.

None of this, however, figures in the discussion among political leaders about why Roy Moore is a not fit to hold office, or why he is a disgrace to the republican party. That discussion focuses entirely on the accusations of nine white women regarding sexual misconduct verging on pedophilia by Moore some 30 years ago.

To summarize, complaints by white people about inappropriate sexual misconduct 30 years ago: disqualifying. Recent racist statements: nearly complete silence.

And people wonder why Colin Kaepernick felt is necessary to take a knee before a football game to call attention to persistent racism in our government.

Address

114 S Maple Ave
Martinsburg, WV
25401

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Garry Geffert Attorney at Law posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Garry Geffert Attorney at Law:

Nearby law practices


Other Bankruptcy Lawyers in Martinsburg

Show All