Cameron Miranda
Donald Trump's phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July 2019, in which he asked Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden's son Hunter, may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to the request. While the call may not have broken any specific laws, it proved to be a tipping point for Democrats to open an impeachment inquiry. Legal experts say that the call may not have violated the letter of the law, but it could be considered politicising law enforcement investigations for personal political gain. Questions have also been raised over whether federal bribery statutes were violated, and whether the call represented a campaign finance violation. In a separate incident, Trump pressured Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, to change the state's election results, which could lead to charges including criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, intentional interference with performance of election duties, and conspiracy to commit election fraud.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Date of the call | 25 July |
| Who was the call with? | The Ukrainian president |
| What was discussed? | Trump asked the Ukrainian president to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden |
| What laws may have been broken? | Federal bribery statutes, campaign finance violation, Criminal Solicitation to Commit Election Fraud, Intentional Interference with Performance of Election Duties, Conspiracy to Commit Election Fraud, Criminal Solicitation, Racketeering |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- Trump's call with Zelensky may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to a request to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter
- Trump's call with Zelensky may have politicised law enforcement investigations for personal political gain
- Trump's call with the Ukrainian president may have constituted a campaign finance violation
- Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, may have constituted criminal solicitation to commit election fraud
- Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, may have constituted intentional interference with the performance of election duties
Trump's call with Zelensky may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to a request to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter
In a phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, Donald Trump may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to a request to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter. While legal experts say this may not have violated the letter of the law, it could be considered an impeachable offence.
Trump had ordered almost $400 million in military aid to be withheld from Ukraine at least a week before the phone call, according to the *Washington Post*. In the call, he asked Zelensky to investigate Biden's son, which may have constituted a quid pro quo arrangement. Questions over whether federal bribery statutes were violated would turn on proof that Trump was seeking a quid pro quo, and whether an investigation into Biden would be considered "anything of value" under the law.
The call proved to be a tipping point for Democrats, who opened an impeachment inquiry. The Justice Department focused on whether the call represented a campaign finance violation, but determined it had not.
Trump has also faced scrutiny over another phone call in which he pressured Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, to change the state's election results. Trump is reportedly at risk for charges including criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, intentional interference with performance of election duties, conspiracy to commit election fraud, criminal solicitation, racketeering, and a dozen other charges.
Informing Others of Their Illegal Actions
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Trump's call with Zelensky may have politicised law enforcement investigations for personal political gain
While it is unclear whether Trump broke any specific laws during his phone call with Zelensky, legal experts have suggested that the call may have politicised law enforcement investigations for personal political gain.
In the call, Trump asked Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter, and may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to the request. This could be seen as an attempt to use the power of his office to influence a foreign government for his own political benefit.
Trump had ordered the withholding of almost $400 million in military aid to Ukraine at least a week before the phone call, according to the *Washington Post*. While this does not necessarily constitute a quid pro quo arrangement, it raises questions about whether an investigation into Biden would be considered "anything of value" under the law. The Justice Department looked into whether the call represented a campaign finance violation but determined it had not.
Legal expert Bradley Moss has commented that Trump's actions could be seen as "politicising a foreign law enforcement investigation for personal political gain". While Moss acknowledges that the law may not have "caught up" to this idea yet, the call has nonetheless revealed an important development in how members of Congress, particularly House Democrats, are beginning to define a key constitutional power: deciding what constitutes "high crimes and misdemeanors", the grounds for impeachment.
Fleeing the Holocaust: Did Jews Break Laws?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Trump's call with the Ukrainian president may have constituted a campaign finance violation
While it is unclear whether Trump broke any laws during his phone call with the Ukrainian president, legal experts have suggested that the call may have constituted a campaign finance violation. In the call, Trump asked the Ukrainian president to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter, and may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to the request. This could be seen as politicising a foreign law enforcement investigation for personal political gain.
However, determining whether this constitutes a campaign finance violation is challenging. The Justice Department investigated the call and concluded that it did not represent a campaign finance violation. Nonetheless, the call sparked an impeachment inquiry, with Democrats arguing that it revealed an important development in how members of Congress define a key constitutional power: deciding what constitutes "high crimes and misdemeanors", the grounds for impeachment.
It is worth noting that Trump has faced scrutiny for other phone calls as well. In a separate incident, he pressured Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, to change election results, leading to potential charges including criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, intentional interference with election duties, and conspiracy to commit election fraud.
Sanctuary Cities: Breaking Federal Law or Not?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, may have constituted criminal solicitation to commit election fraud
In a phone call, Trump pressured Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, to change the state's election results. Trump is reportedly at risk of charges including criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, intentional interference with the performance of election duties, conspiracy to commit election fraud, criminal solicitation, racketeering, and a dozen other charges.
Trump's call with Zelensky, in which he asked the Ukrainian president to investigate Joe Biden's son Hunter, may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to the request. Legal experts say that this may not have violated the letter of the law. However, it could be considered politicising a foreign law enforcement investigation for personal political gain.
Questions over whether federal bribery statutes were violated would turn on proof that Trump was seeking a quid pro quo, and whether an investigation into Biden would be considered "anything of value" under the law. The Justice Department focused on whether the call represented a campaign finance violation but determined it had not.
Trump's call with the Ukrainian president in July 2019 proved to be a tipping point for Democrats to open an impeachment inquiry. However, it is tricky to point to any specific law broken in the conversation, especially given the President's broad powers to conduct foreign policy under Article II of the Constitution.
Assange's Legal Battle: What Laws Were Broken?
You may want to see also
Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, may have constituted intentional interference with the performance of election duties
In a phone call, Trump pressured Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, to change the state's election results. This may have constituted intentional interference with the performance of election duties. Trump is reportedly at risk of charges including criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, conspiracy to commit election fraud, criminal solicitation, racketeering, and a dozen other charges.
Legal experts have said that Trump's call with Zelensky, in which he asked the Ukrainian president to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter, and may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to the request, may not have violated the letter of the law. However, it is argued that this would be politicising law enforcement investigations and particularly politicising a foreign law enforcement investigation for personal political gain.
Questions over whether federal bribery statutes were violated would turn on proof that Trump was seeking a quid pro quo, and whether an investigation into Biden would be considered "anything of value" under the law. The Justice Department focused on whether the call represented a campaign finance violation but determined it had not.
While Mueller did not determine whether Trump had committed obstruction, Attorney General Bill Barr concluded he had not. However, legal experts have said that it would probably be tricky to point to any specific law broken in the conversation, especially given the President's broad powers to conduct foreign policy under Article II of the Constitution.
Gays and the Law: Breaking Rules and Boundaries
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Legal experts say that Trump's call with Zelensky may not have violated the letter of the law, but it did prove to be a tipping point for Democrats to open an impeachment inquiry.
In the phone call, Trump asked Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden's son, Hunter, and may have implicitly tied foreign aid money to the request.
Trump is reportedly at risk for charges including Criminal Solicitation to Commit Election Fraud, Intentional Interference with Performance of Election Duties, Conspiracy to Commit Election Fraud, Criminal Solicitation, Racketeering, and a dozen other charges.
While the phone call may not have broken any specific laws, legal experts say that it would probably be tricky to point to any specific law broken in the conversation, especially given the President's broad powers to conduct foreign policy under Article II of the Constitution.
