Lawyers at DOJ are expected to lie for Trump

Last week we heard how the United States in their effort to deport people at any cost had deported someone by mistake. Well the Political Fallout has arrived.


In response to questions about Reuveni, Attorney General Pam Bondi said: “At my direction, every Department of Justice attorney is required to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States. Any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences.”

So if a lawyer says yes, we screwed up, he is gone. Telling the truth is an unacceptable behavior for a lawyer. Of course, telling a lie could well get them disbarred. So I guess they are in a real Pickle.

SavannahMann said:

Last week we heard how the United States in their effort to deport people at any cost had deported someone by mistake. Well the Political Fallout has arrived.

MSN

In response to questions about Reuveni, Attorney General Pam Bondi said: “At my direction, every Department of Justice attorney is required to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States. Any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences.”

So if a lawyer says yes, we screwed up, he is gone. Telling the truth is an unacceptable behavior for a lawyer. Of course, telling a lie could well get them disbarred. So I guess they are in a real Pickle.

Click to expand...

Lawyers at DOJ, work for the government and are expected to defend the governments position on cases. This is what lawyers at any firm in America do. Defend their client, follow the bosses directives on whatever position they take. As with other jobs, when you let you individual preferences get in the way of your job, you get asked to leave. Go work for a public defenders office if you want to be a crusader, or work for a firm that takes lots of pro-bono cases.

Integrityrespec said:

Lawyers at DOJ, work for the government and are expected to defend the governments position on cases. This is what lawyers at any firm in America do. Defend their client, follow the bosses directives on whatever position they take. As with other jobs, when you let you individual preferences get in the way of your job, you get asked to leave. Go work for a public defenders office if you want to be a crusader, or work for a firm that takes lots of pro-bono cases.

Click to expand...

As I said in the post. If a lawyer knowingly tells a lie, they face disbarment. See many of Trump’s former Lawyers for this problem. That means they can’t work as a Lawyer again.


Now vigorously defending your client, in this case the United States, doesn’t mean you have to lie.

Integrityrespec said:

Lawyers at DOJ, work for the government and are expected to defend the governments position on cases. This is what lawyers at any firm in America do. Defend their client, follow the bosses directives on whatever position they take. As with other jobs, when you let you individual preferences get in the way of your job, you get asked to leave. Go work for a public defenders office if you want to be a crusader, or work for a firm that takes lots of pro-bono cases.

Click to expand...

You are right to a point.
If a lawyer, a private or a government one, a prosecutor or a defense attorney, knowingly lies in court or to a judge, they will face the consequences, and rightly so.

Integrityrespec said:

Lawyers at DOJ, work for the government and are expected to defend the governments position on cases.

Click to expand...

They are expected to uphold the law, not run cover for a two-bit Mussolini.

SavannahMann said:

As I said in the post. If a lawyer knowingly tells a lie, they face disbarment. See many of Trump’s former Lawyers for this problem. That means they can’t work as a Lawyer again.

Trump lawyers who were disbarred or had law licenses suspended

Here's a list of the lawyers who have been disbarred or lost their licenses in connection to their work for Donald Trump.

www.newsweek.com

Now vigorously defending your client, in this case the United States, doesn’t mean you have to lie.

Click to expand...

Boy aren't you naive. Lawyers advocate for causes, on both sides of the issue all the time. So one must always be lying by your standard. There are so many legal ways to dance around an issue. The law library is filled with cases that are used to support both sides and that is why going to court is never a sure deal. Add to that the skill of a good attorney and it's seldom a slam dunk issue.
It's also why many law firms are very selective on what cases they take, but in corporate law they have clients and they defend them an sometimes they "forget' about some of the facts, unless the opponent can find it.
At any case, you assume from the get go Trump is breaking the law because of you personal political position. I doubt you have researched the issue for dozens of hours to find every bit of case law.

Integrityrespec said:

Boy aren't you naive. Lawyers advocate for causes, on both sides of the issue all the time. So one must always be lying by your standard.

Click to expand...

Tell me you know nothing about this without telling me you know nothing about this.

KingLeo said:

You are right to a point.
If a lawyer, a private or a government one, a prosecutor or a defense attorney, knowingly lies in court or to a judge, they will face the consequences, and rightly so.

Click to expand...

Yes, at it's up to the other side to catch and prove the lie. Often, the "lie" is not a lie at all but an interpretation of the law and that's what the argument is about to begin with. This is also why good attorneys are always trying to get evidence deemed as inadmissible.

Integrityrespec said:

Lawyers at DOJ, work for the government and are expected to defend the governments position on cases. This is what lawyers at any firm in America do. Defend their client, follow the bosses directives on whatever position they take. As with other jobs, when you let you individual preferences get in the way of your job, you get asked to leave. Go work for a public defenders office if you want to be a crusader, or work for a firm that takes lots of pro-bono cases.

Click to expand...

yet lawyers at the DOJ should not lie to the courts. Of course lawyers advocate for their clients. In doing so they should not make false statements on material facts, misrepresent the law, or knowingly lie to the court.

Integrityrespec said:

Yes, at it's up to the other side to catch and prove the lie. Often, the "lie" is not a lie at all but an interpretation of the law and that's what the argument is about to begin with. This is also why good attorneys are always trying to get evidence deemed as inadmissible.

Click to expand...

Knows many lawyers and none would knowing lie in court or to a judge regardless.

Integrityrespec said:

Boy aren't you naive. Lawyers advocate for causes, on both sides of the issue all the time. So one must always be lying by your standard. There are so many legal ways to dance around an issue. The law library is filled with cases that are used to support both sides and that is why going to court is never a sure deal. Add to that the skill of a good attorney and it's seldom a slam dunk issue.
It's also why many law firms are very selective on what cases they take, but in corporate law they have clients and they defend them an sometimes they "forget' about some of the facts, unless the opponent can find it.
At any case, you assume from the get go Trump is breaking the law because of you personal political position. I doubt you have researched the issue for dozens of hours to find every bit of case law.

Click to expand...

The DOJ has traditionally not been there to advocate for the president, but to uphold the law- so in that way their job has been more that of a judge than a lawyer. Well, at least that's how it has always been in the United States. But now that we are a two-bit banana republic, I know it's different.

Integrityrespec said:

Boy aren't you naive. Lawyers advocate for causes, on both sides of the issue all the time. So one must always be lying by your standard. There are so many legal ways to dance around an issue. The law library is filled with cases that are used to support both sides and that is why going to court is never a sure deal. Add to that the skill of a good attorney and it's seldom a slam dunk issue.
It's also why many law firms are very selective on what cases they take, but in corporate law they have clients and they defend them an sometimes they "forget' about some of the facts, unless the opponent can find it.
At any case, you assume from the get go Trump is breaking the law because of you personal political position. I doubt you have researched the issue for dozens of hours to find every bit of case law.

Click to expand...

Wow. Let’s cover this case specifically for a moment. The Court issued an order that the individual in question was not to be deported. A Court Order was on file. He wasn’t from Venezuela and was not a Venezuelan Gang Member. But he was deported with them.

The man’s attorney went to court to demand an explanation on why this fellow was deported. INS admitted they had the Court Order, and credited the erroneous deportation as an oversight.

So this fellow is in the Gang Prison in El Salvador. Where he isn’t supposed to be. So the Judge ordered the Government to tell him how they were getting the fellow back.

With me so far? The DOJ wanted this lawyer to argue that this was impossible as they have no authority over El Salvador. That would be a lie since we are paying El Salvador bribes to hold these folks in the Gang Prison.

This lawyer knew that was a lie because of extradition. That agreement to return people to nations to answer to courts.

The lawyer has been suspended because he wouldn’t tell a lie in court. This lawyer was one of three, all Trump appointees I might add, that signed a letter to the Court admitting that the deportation was in error.

So the DOJ wanted to say tough shit Judge. You don’t have authority over anything. In more flowery language but that was the basic argument.