Search for: "Jack Mueller"
Results 1 - 20
of 360
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 May 2019, 2:04 pm
Jack Goldsmith’s defense of Attorney General Barr’s handling of the Mueller report is typically thoughtful but ultimately unpersuasive. [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 8:19 pm
Joining me on the recorded conference call (pardon the audio quality) were Lawfare contributors Jack Goldsmith, Steve Vladeck, Carrie Cordero, and Bob Bauer. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 6:11 am
First-rate scholars have argued a range of failures, including Richard Pildes’s contention that Mueller abdicated a “core responsibility” in declining to reach a judgment on obstruction of justice and Jack Goldsmith’s argument that the Mueller report misapplied the law governing a president’s exposure to liability for obstruction.. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 8:25 am
Perusing the Mueller Report. [read post]
18 Nov 2022, 2:47 pm
A Very Special Episode: DOJ appointing Jack Smith to oversee Trump probe as special counsel. [read post]
11 May 2019, 10:00 am
“The Mueller Report’s Weak Statutory Interpretation Analysis”: Jack Goldsmith has this post at the “Lawfare” blog. [read post]
12 May 2019, 1:01 pm
I am far too good a lawyer—despite not being one at all—to take on Jack Goldsmith on a matter combining statutory interpretation, the presidency, and the historic positions of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel without a healthy dose of humility. [read post]
2 Nov 2020, 8:46 am
(Mueller refused.) [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 6:00 am
On Lawfare, Jack Goldsmith and Josh Blackman have argued that Mueller’s application of the obstruction statutes to presidential conduct facially authorized by Article II is deeply flawed. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 4:01 pm
With the exception of a seven year period from 1994-2001, public confidence in government has been dropping almost steadily since Jack Kennedy was President. [read post]
21 Jul 2017, 12:41 pm
But of course Mueller will. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 8:21 am
Jack Goldsmith and John Manning have studied the “protean” nature of the clause and the many contradictory interpretations that courts have adopted; here, Mueller’s analysis has some resemblance to the understanding set out by Andrew Kent, Ethan Leib and Jed Shugerman, who argue that the Take Care Clause imposes a “duty of fidelity” on the president. [read post]
25 Mar 2018, 1:24 pm
Lawfare, Jack Goldsmith, Maddie McMahon – Don’t Expect a Starr-Like Report from Mueller -“…In sum, we think that the best reading of the special counsel regulations in their historical context rules out a Starr-like report to Congress that lays out hundreds of pages of factual allegations as well as legal analysis and conclusions. [read post]
13 Nov 2018, 5:13 am
Jack Goldsmith and Benjamin Wittes have rightly observed that the road map was a restrained presentation, limited to key statements and a guide to the supporting material in the evidentiary record. [read post]
25 Oct 2018, 5:00 am
For instance, Jack Goldsmith has suggested that because of the manner of the appointment, the Justice Department special counsel regulations may apply to Mueller but not to his boss, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 3:30 pm
that she had been offered roughly $20,000 by a man claiming to work for a firm called Surefire Intelligence—which had been hired by a GOP activist named Jack Burkman—'to make accusations of sexual misconduct and workplace harassment against Robert Mueller.'"From "Mueller Wants the FBI to Look at a Scheme to Discredit Him/The special counsel says a woman was offered money to fabricate sexual-harassment claims" (The Atlantic). [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 8:01 pm
Mueller, not to fire him. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 9:59 am
Calabresi & Gary Lawson, Why Robert Mueller's Appointment as Special Counsel Was Unlawful, 95 Notre Dame Law Review 87, at pp. 118-125 (2019). [read post]
14 Sep 2018, 9:21 am
The document is also keenly relevant to current discussions of how Mueller should proceed. [read post]
14 May 2019, 4:47 am
Jack Goldsmith argues that Mueller’s analysis of the obstruction statutes does not stand up to close scrutiny. [read post]
