Search for: "Bob Bauer"
Results 321 - 340
of 639
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 May 2017, 10:51 am
Bob Bauer examined what the President’s disclosures in yesterday’s NBC News interview might mean for executive privilege and obstruction of justice. [read post]
12 May 2017, 4:43 am
Paul Rosenzweig has ably detailed its deficiencies; Bob Bauer has described how the document, which was produced in the less-than-two-weeks that Rosenstein has been in office, does not indicate whom Rosenstein consulted with and on what factual record his conclusions depended. [read post]
11 May 2017, 10:46 am
ICYMI: Yesterday, on Lawfare Bob Bauer assessed the procedure followed and explanation given by the administration for the firing of FBI Director James Comey. [read post]
11 May 2017, 8:14 am
Yet this is the process that Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Rod Rosenstein effectively bypassed in a conclusory and rushed-out memorandum for the Attorney General—a memorandum that, as Benjamin Wittes and Susan Hennessey have noted, reads like an op-ed and that, as Bob Bauer observes, raises more questions than it answers. [read post]
11 May 2017, 7:05 am
" Perhaps most accurately, on this blog, Bob Bauer has said that the memo was "short [and] seemingly informal. [read post]
15 Apr 2017, 7:00 am
Former White House Counsel Bob Bauer discussed a recent paper he authored dealing with executive transparency and a White House obligation to disclose, and Daphna Renan flagged her recent paper on structures of executive branch legal review at work in the presidential decision-making process. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 11:53 am
Bob Bauer discussed a recent paper he authored dealing with executive transparency and a White House obligation to disclose. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 5:30 am
As former Obama White House Counsel Bob Bauer notes in an insightful new piece, the President needs some space for such legal positions, even if they don’t represent the “best” view of the law. [read post]
18 Mar 2017, 5:42 am
Bob Bauer flagged a paper he recently wrote entitled “The National Security Lawyer, In Crisis: When the Best View of the Law May Not Be the Best View. [read post]
14 Mar 2017, 10:16 am
The Wall Street Journal tells us that President Donald Trump has rolled back another Obama-era national security policy by granting the CIA increased authority to conduct drone strikes against suspected terrorists. [read post]
25 Feb 2017, 7:00 am
And Bob Bauer provided his thoughts on the proper role of the White House Counsel. [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 10:44 am
Bob Bauer provided his thoughts on the proper role of the White House Counsel. [read post]
19 Jan 2017, 4:44 am
” At More Soft Money Hard Law, Bob Bauer weighs in on the pending cert petition in Independence Institute v. [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 7:08 am
Former White House Counsel Bob Bauer concluded that the report failed to scrutinize the proper role lawyers should play in the policymaking process. [read post]
12 Jul 2016, 9:38 am
Also reflecting on the Inquiry, Bob Bauer reflected on the role lawyers should play in contentious policy and legal debates. [read post]
12 Jul 2016, 8:12 am
Bob: Well I think that again, you get back to this issue of perverse incentives, right? [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 8:17 pm
Second, it is important to note, as Bob Bauer does, that the Chilcot report does not disagree with Peter Goldsmith’s (or the US) legal conclusions. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 12:36 pm
United States, in which the Court struck down the federal corruption convictions of former Virginia governor Bob McDonnell, comes from Matt Zapotosky in The Washington Post; and Frank Green of Richmond Times-Dispatch. [read post]
14 Jun 2016, 5:15 am
” At More Soft Money Hard Law, Bob Bauer notes that the Court will “soon decide whether to take up a major case about disclosure and this has received little attention—far less than it should. [read post]
3 May 2016, 4:03 am
” Briefly: At More Soft Money Hard Law, Bob Bauer looks back at last week’s oral arguments in former Virginia governor Bob McDonnell’s challenge to his fraud convictions; he characterizes it as “an extraordinary argument, highlighting through dead-end hypotheticals and confusing exchanges the ambiguity of the law–an argument that defied the best efforts at clarification of everybody involved. [read post]
