When Lara Trump reached out to Omarosa Manigault-Newman with the offer of a $15,000 a month do-nothing campaign job in exchange for her silence about the federal felony law violations she witnessed in the White House, the ex-Trump aide believes the President of the United States’ daughter-in-law was obstructing justice.
Youngstown, Ohio native Omarosa’s statements have been consistent in that she witnessed, reported and continues to report the information she has about felony violations of law by President Donald Trump, Sarah Huckabee-Sanders and other members of the White House staff. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4 it is a felony to have knowledge of a felony and not report it to a judicial authority, Omarosa had and has no choice but to share what she knows or be accused of “misprision.”
“Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
It’s why the non-disclosure agreement Lara Trump wanted Omarosa to sign isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) agrees.
“Public employees can’t be gagged by private agreements. These so-called NDAs are unconstitutional and unenforceable,” said Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project.
The non-disclosure agreement doesn’t supersede federal laws. The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that criminal speech connected to criminal conduct is not protected under the 1st Amendment. This issue was settled with Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972). “ … concealment of crime and agreements to do so” are not entitled to “First Amendment protection.” Pet. App. 14a (quoting Branzburg, 408 U.S. at 697).
Federal prosecutors used 18 U.S.C. 4 to prosecute the late Judge Richard Baumgartner of Knoxville, Tennessee on five counts of violating the federal law in 2012. The judge was prosecuted for using his office to enlist the help of other judges to do favors for a woman who supplied him with drugs and sex.
Baumgartner inserted non-existence language in the statute that the crime had to be witnessed by a federal official. He argued that telling violated his 1st Amendment right. Neither the jury nor the court bought his arguments. He lost and was sentenced to three years in prison.
Lara Trump’s bribe offer in exchange for her signature on a non-disclosure agreement from the Trump presidential campaign shows the extent to which the president has co-mingled his business and campaign practices with the duties of the “office” he holds.
In his official capacity as “president” it’s Trump’s mandatory duty pursuant to Article 2, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution to, “ … take care that the laws be faithfully executed …” That section of the U.S. Constitution puts the same “misprision” burden on Trump to report felonies he has knowledge of as it does Omarosa, Huckabee-Sanders and everyone else on his staff.
If he were acting within the authority of the “office” of “president” Trump would be asking U.S. Attorney General Jeffrey Sessions to investigate daughter-in-law Lara for her bribe offer to Omarosa. The fact he won’t serves as an admission to his own misprision violations and provides further evidence of co-mingling his personal interests with the “office” of president.
Omarosa has clearly stated that she witnessed “crimes” being committed by the president and his administrative aides. The entire investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller is based on discovering and examining the criminal acts Trump, his relatives and others have committed in the performance of official duties; and that the non-disclosure agreements sought and seek to conceal in violation of 18 U.S.C. 4.
Trump has claimed there is no “collusion” or “obstruction.” Lara Trump’s offer to Omarosa clearly provides evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the White House: just as her $15,000 a month bribe in exchange for silence sought to obstruct Omarosa from telling about the criminal acts she witnessed.
Affirmation that former federal employees like Sean Spicer signed private non-disclosure agreements with the Trump “campaign” to remain silent about the federal felonies they witnessed in exchange for payment has raised the commitment of an investigation rquest from U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings, according to reporter April Ryan of American Urban Radio Networks.
Congress needs to know if Trump employees who testified before them withheld information and lied because they’d signed a non-disclosure agreement not to tell. If they lied Trump’s employees violated 18 U.S.C. 1001. It’s a federal law about “statements or entries generally.”
(“a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of t
he Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.”
Trump and his team of White House administrators have obviously not read the United States Code he’s supposed to enforce. The non-disclosure agreements serve as evidence he’s brought his personal and “justice obstructing” business practices to the White House and co-mingled them with the Constitutional duties of the office.
Special Counsel Mueller is a “person in civil authority under the United States.” So is every federal judge and U.S. Attorney in the nation who’s seen, heard and read her well-publicized statements accusing federal officials connected to Trump of committing and concealing felony acts. The plain language of 18 U.S.C 4 is that whoever has knowledge of felony being committed within the jurisdiction of a court is concealing it if they don’t report it.
Whatever knowledge Omarosa or even Sean Spicer and Sarah Huckabee Sanders possesses or possessed about the commission of felonies in the White House must be told. Failure to tell is an act of concealment and it makes the person with the concealed knowledge a felon.
Omarosa in sending a message to Trump told him he has met his match. On NBC news she told reporter Craig Melvin that she was blowing the whistle on the corruption she witnessed in the Trump family, in the White House and in the campaign. All three are separate and legally distinct. Everyone seems to have forgotten that Omarosa is an attorney.
Omarosa has specifically stated that she personally knows Trump knew of the Hillary Clinton emails before they were released. When asked by NBC’s Katie Turr “he knew what was coming out about the DNC email before Wikileaks released them” and Omarosa said, “Yes. Absolutely.”
Trump has said he didn’t. Omarosa said she has proof of every claim and that one isn’t in her book, “Unhinged: An Insiders Look At The Trump White House.”
She’s sharing that information with Mueller.