Court Order Reveals DOJ Investigation Into Suspected Bribery-For-Pardon Scheme

WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 11: The West Wing of the White House is seen November 11, 2020 in Washington, DC. President Donald Trump has not yet conceded after President-elect Joe Biden claimed victory four days ago i... WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 11: The West Wing of the White House is seen November 11, 2020 in Washington, DC. President Donald Trump has not yet conceded after President-elect Joe Biden claimed victory four days ago in the 2020 presidential election. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) MORE LESS
|
December 1, 2020 6:37 p.m.

A redacted court order unsealed Tuesday revealed the existence of an investigation into a “bribery-for-pardon” scheme, in which an unnamed defendant allegedly mounted a White House lobbying effort to receive a pardon in exchange for “a substantial political contribution.”

CNN first reported on the highly-redacted court order, issued in late August and made public Tuesday by Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The identities of the defendant and their purported lawyer-lobbyists are not clear from the order. No one appears to have been charged to date in the alleged scheme.

The order itself authorizes prosecutors to review certain communications between various people whose names were redacted, and for which the court determined that attorney-client privilege did not apply.

Prosecutors alleged a “secret lobbying scheme”  in which individuals acted as “lobbyists to senior White House officials” without proper disclosure, the judge wrote. Communications from “over fifty digital devices” indicated alleged criminal activity, she said, quoting prosecutors.

The order goes on to describe an alleged bribery scheme in which an individual would offer a “substantial political contribution” in exchange for a presidential pardon or “reprieve of sentence” for an unnamed defendant.

The judge’s order reasoned that, because certain communications were “directed, copied or forwarded” to an unnamed individual who is not an attorney, attorney-client privilege did not apply.

Howell’s order Tuesday unsealing her order from late August noted that the Justice Department initially requested that she keep the whole thing under wraps.

“On November 25, 2020, the government submitted a status report requesting that the Court “maintain the Memorandum Opinion under seal,’ because it ‘identifies both individuals and conduct that have not been charged by the grand jury,'” she noted, quoting prosecutors.

In response, the court directed the government to explain why “each line” must remain under seal, even if the document was redacted. Ultimately, Howell wrote, the government responded with the redacted version of her order that was unsealed.

Read the filing below:

Newsletters
Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.
Latest News
Comments are now Members-Only

Non-members are still able to read comments, but will no longer be able to participate. To join the conversation, sign up now and get:

30% Off Annual Prime Membership

TPM strives to build as inclusive a community as financially possible. We offer FREE memberships to those experiencing financial hardship and FREE memberships for students.

View all options
Comments
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: