Former Trump DOJ lawyer Jeffrey Clark faces possible DC disbarment over 2020 election claims
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulatory czar Jeffrey Clark will be suspended from practicing law for 30 days — and banned entirely unless the DC Court of Appeals strikes down the ruling.
'Lawyers cannot advocate for any outcome based on false statements and they certainly cannot urge others to do so,' the DC Bar's Board of Professional Responsibility stated.
Advertisement
4 Office of Management and Budget regulatory czar Jeffrey Clark will be suspended from practicing law for 30 days — and banned entirely unless the DC Court of Appeals strikes down the ruling.
AP
Clark 'persistently and energetically sought to do just that on an important national issue,' the board wrote in their ruling. 'He should be disbarred as a consequence and to send a message to the rest of the Bar and to the public that this behavior will not be tolerated.'
'Yesterday, I received disappointing news from a 100% politicized DC Bar process,' Clark posted on his X in response. 'But I also received an outpouring of support from a host of my friends in the law, many thoughtful legal and political commentators, but most importantly, from thousands of ordinary Americans like you. I am very grateful for that.
Advertisement
'And even though a major part of my identity is under assault — a law license the son of a truck driver who never graduated from high school managed to achieve though birthed to parents who could not themselves fully afford my fancy education — I am and remain surprisingly calm,' he added.
4 'I know I did the right thing in 2020 and 2021 during the first President Trump Administration and wouldn't be able to look at myself in the mirror if I had not proceeded to internally raise the election questions I did,' Clark said.
AFP via Getty Images
'I know I did the right thing in 2020 and 2021 during the first President Trump Administration and wouldn't be able to look at myself in the mirror if I had not proceeded to internally raise the election questions I did.'
In 2021, Democrats in Congress pointed to evidence that Clark, a former assistant attorney general in the DOJ's Civil Division, had 'attempted to involve the Department of Justice in efforts to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power' and urged special state legislative sessions to 'evaluate' possible election fraud.
Advertisement
Trump had considered appointing Clark as acting attorney general in between his electoral loss to Joe Biden and the certification of the 2020 count by Congress on Jan. 6, 2021.
4 Former AG Bill Barr had resigned in December 2020 after announcing there was no widespread fraud in the election.
REUTERS
Former AG Bill Barr had resigned in December 2020 after announcing there was no widespread fraud in the election.
Other Trump attorneys have faced disbarment, including John Eastman, the author of a memo claiming then-Vice President Mike Pence had the authority to reject vote counts from swing states; and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
Advertisement
Clark serves as the acting head of OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. It's unclear how the suspension would affect his ability to undertake the role.
4 Clark serves as Trump's acting head of OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, but it's unclear how the suspension would affect his ability to undertake the role.
Bloomberg via Getty Images
James Burnham, a lawyer who recently left the Department of Government Efficiency to start an AI policy group, called the decision 'an outrageous weaponization of the bar ethics process' and warned it 'could be turned against any lawyer serving in government at any time. All steps must be taken to push back.'
Burnham and Clark 'worked closely' together in the first and second Trump administrations, the ex-DOGE official noted.
The Post reached out to Clark's lawyer for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas Democrats defy Gov. Abbott's redistricting ultimatum, and threats of arrest, to block consideration of new congressional maps
The governor had threatened to kick Democrats out of office after dozens fled the state to prevent new district lines from being approved. Texas Democrats who fled the state in order to block new congressional maps favored by Republicans successfully prevented a scheduled legislative session to consider those maps from going forward on Monday. Due to their absence, the Texas House of Representatives did not have enough members present to establish the necessary quorum to open the proceedings. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott had threatened to try to kick dozens of Democrats out of the legislature if they were not present for the session. When they did not show up, Republicans in the chamber voted to issue civil warrants for their arrest, though the warrants reportedly only apply within state lines. 'It's imperative that they be swiftly arrested, punished, and face the full force of the law,' Texas's Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote in a statement Monday afternoon. The Democrats' decision to leave Texas, with some going to Illinois and others going to New York, came a few days after Republicans unveiled their new proposed congressional map that experts say could secure the GOP five additional seats in the House of Representatives if it's in place before the 2026 midterm elections. 'This truancy ends now,' Abbott wrote in a letter sent to Democrats Sunday evening. He had also previously argued that the Democrats may have committed a felony by leaving the state. In a press conference on Monday morning in New York, where they were joined by the state's Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul, some of the Texas Democrats said they were committed to their fight to stop the maps and argued that Abbott does not have the legal authority to punish them for leaving the state. 'Respectfully, he's making up some shit,' Democratic state Rep. Jolanda Jones said. The Texas House Democratic caucus had initially responded to Abbott's threats with the statement 'come and take it.' What comes next? The Texas House is scheduled to reconvene again on Tuesday, but every indication is that Democrats will miss that session as well. It remains to be seen how long they can continue to stay outside of the state, or how their procedural gambit might actually stop the map from eventually being approved. A previous walkout four years ago designed to block a controversial voting bill delayed a final vote, but ultimately did not prevent it from being passed. It's also uncertain whether Abbott truly can follow through on his threat to oust the Democrats from their seats. He can't do so unilaterally. Any attempt to boot them from the legislature would have to go through the courts, which could set off a lengthy legal battle with no apparent timeline for when it might be resolved, according to analysis by Politico. What prompted this fight? The decision of how many House members each state gets is made at the federal level, but it's the states themselves that choose how to carve up their territory into their allotted number of districts. There is a long history of parties using this process to draw maps that give them an advantage, often by slicing opposition's electoral strongholds into small pieces or by cramming them all into one district so seats elsewhere in the state are safe. This practice, known as gerrymandering, has become increasingly common in recent years. That's especially true in Republican-led states. Even in the context of recent gerrymandering, what Texas Republicans are trying to do is remarkable for both its timing and the aggressiveness of the partisan slant in its proposed map. States usually redraw their districts every 10 years, after the new census determines where House districts will be apportioned. The Texas GOP have opted to create new maps just five years after the state's last round of redistricting so they will place ahead of the midterms, when Democrats would only need to pick up a few seats to seize control of the House. Republicans currently control 25 of Texas's 38 congressional districts. The new map puts them in position to hold 30 House seats after next year, which would give them 80% of the state's representation in Congress in a state where President Trump secured 56% of the vote in last year's presidential race, according to the official tally from the Texas Secretary of State. Will other GOP states follow Texas's lead? Ohio has unique laws that require the state to redraw its maps before 2026. The GOP currently controls 10 of Ohio's 15 districts. Members of the state GOP are reportedly debating how partisan they should be in putting together their new maps. Depending on how aggressively they gerrymander the new map, Republicans could give themselves two or even three more House seats. In the most extreme case, Democrats could be left with just two congressional seats in a state where Kamala Harris received 44% of the vote in 2024. President Trump has also reportedly encouraged Missouri Republicans to redraw their maps. They already hold six of the state's eight congressional seats, but a plan to split a safe Democratic district in Kansas City could secure an additional seat for the GOP. So far there hasn't been any real redistricting action in other red states, but experts say the maps in states like Florida, Nebraska, Kansas and Nebraska could be carved up to give Republicans more advantages if there's the political will to do so. What are the stakes? With Republicans fully in control of both houses of Congress, Democrats have been largely unable to stand in the way of Trump's agenda. That could change if they gain a majority in either chamber. Flipping the Senate appears unlikely, but early forecasters are giving Democrats strong odds of taking over the House. If they do, Democrats would effectively have veto power over any legislation Trump and the GOP want to pass. They would also have new oversight authority and the ability to launch investigations into the president's actions and hold public hearings on the most controversial moves taken by his administration. The partisan split in the House has been incredibly thin in recent years, in part because gerrymandering has reduced the number of genuinely competitive seats across the country. Republicans adding five seats in Texas, two in Ohio plus possibly a few more in other states could prove to be the difference between holding onto the House or having Democrats be in charge for the final two years of Trump's second term. Democrats threaten to go 'nuclear' Blue state Democrats have made a lot of noise about countering the GOP's redistricting gambit, but experts say the tools they have to actually do that are limited. 'We can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be,' California Gov. Gavin Newsom said earlier this month. 'Or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment.' Newsom has said he will push to have deep-blue California redraw its own maps to balance out any gains the GOP makes from redistricting in Texas or elsewhere. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul have made similar statements. Democrats in Congress have also said they're willing to consider any options to prevent Republicans from using redistricting to maintain control of the House. 'If they're going to go nuclear in Texas, I'm going to go nuclear in other places,' Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin told Axios earlier this month. Despite their strong rhetoric, Democrats would face significant hurdles if they wanted to match the GOP tit-for-tat in redistricting. California, a deep-blue state with 14 more congressional seats than any other state, might seem like the obvious place for Democrats to pick up more seats. But congressional districts in the Golden State are currently drawn by an independent commission, not the state Legislature. To get that power back, lawmakers would have to hold a special election and convince California voters to overturn the state's redistricting system. New York also has an independent redistricting commission. Democratic lawmakers unveiled a bill Wednesday that would give them authority over the state's maps again, but it would have to go through a lengthy process that would make it next to impossible for the new districts to be in place by next year's midterms. At Monday's press conference, Hochul said bolder action may be necessary. 'I'm exploring, with our leaders, every option to redraw our state congressional lines as soon as possible,' she said. Lawmakers do control redistricting in Illinois, but the state only has three GOP-held districts, which significantly limits the gains Democrats could make there.
Time Magazine
22 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Marjorie Taylor Greene Signals Potential Split From GOP
Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has historically been closely aligned with President Donald Trump's MAGA movement, is proclaiming her discontent with the current trajectory of the Republican Party. 'I don't know what the hell happened with the Republican Party,' Greene told the Daily Mail in an interview published over the weekend. 'But I'll tell you one thing, the course that it's on, I don't want to have anything to do with it, and I, I just don't care anymore.' While Greene said that she is still loyal to Trump, she told the outlet that she thinks the party 'has turned its back on America First and the workers and just regular Americans.' On Monday, the Georgia lawmaker appeared to criticize the Trump Administration's handling of various issues on social media. In one post, she included an image that said 'number of arrests' and listed several incidents or events—including an apparent reference to the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, 'pedophile arrests' related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and the '2020 election'—with the number zero next to each one. Greene captioned the post, 'Don't talk about it if you aren't going to do it.' In another post the same day, she noted that 'our Republican controlled Congress is no where near completing our appropriations bills' ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline, and that lawmakers are on recess until Sept. 2. 'The American people pay ALL the taxes and deserve their representatives to do our jobs and put Americans needs and interests FIRST,' she wrote. Greene has made a handful of other critical comments toward her fellow Republican lawmakers or the Trump Administration in recent weeks. On July 28, Greene became the first Republican in Congress to call the situation in Gaza a 'genocide,' taking the step in a post denouncing what she called an 'awful statement' from her Republican colleague Rep. Randy Fine of Florida regarding the conflict. Earlier that month, she criticized the Trump Administration's handling of files related to Epstein's case, calling it 'a red line that it crosses for many people.' Both issues have been the subject of broader tensions within the Republican Party, as deepening divides have emerged between lawmakers over the conflict in Gaza and as the Trump Administration has faced fierce backlash from the President's MAGA base over Epstein. Polling has also suggested other trouble for Trump and congressional Republicans. The President hit the lowest approval rating of his second term late last month as he lost support from Independents. And the massive tax and spending bill the GOP passed earlier in July—a signature piece of Trump's agenda—appears to be the most unpopular piece of major legislation in decades. In her interview with the Daily Mail, Greene said she wants to stop foreign aid, cut down on government spending via the Department of Government Efficiency, and reign in the national debt. The Georgia lawmaker also told the outlet that she thinks Republican women 'are really sick and tired of the way men treat' them. She said that Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York, whose nomination to serve as the U.S. representative at the United Nations was pulled by the Trump Administration earlier this year, 'got shafted.' Greene didn't blame the President specifically for the move, but rather 'the people in the White House.' She called it 'weird' that Mike Waltz was then tapped for the role, being reassigned from his position as National Security Adviser, even after The Atlantic revealed that he had apparently added its editor in chief to a private Signal group chat that was being used to discuss sensitive military operations. 'How does he get awarded after 'Signalgate'?' Greene told the Daily Mail. 'I don't know if the Republican Party is leaving me, or if I'm kind of not relating to Republican Party as much anymore,' she said. 'I don't know which one it is.'
San Francisco Chronicle
23 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Modi and Trump once called each other good friends. Now the US-India relationship is getting bumpy
NEW DELHI (AP) — The men shared bear hugs, showered praise on each other and made appearances side by side at stadium rallies — a big optics boost for two populist leaders with ideological similarities. Each called the other a good friend. In India, the bonhomie between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and U.S. President Donald Trump was seen as a relationship like no other. That is, until a series of events gummed up the works. From Trump's tariffs and India's purchase of oil from Russia to a U.S. tilt towards Pakistan, friction between New Delhi and Washington has been hard to miss. And much of it has happened far from the corridors of power and, unsurprisingly, through Trump's posts on social media. It has left policy experts wondering whether the camaraderie the two leaders shared may be a thing of the past, even though Trump has stopped short of referring to Modi directly on social media. The dip in rapport, some say, puts a strategic bilateral relationship built over decades at risk. 'This is a testing time for the relationship,' said Ashok Malik, a former policy adviser in India's Foreign Ministry. Simmering tensions over trade and tariffs The latest hiccup between India and the U.S. emerged last week when Trump announced that he was slapping 25% tariffs on India as well as an unspecified penalty because of India's purchasing of Russian oil. For New Delhi, such a move from its largest trading partner is expected to be felt across sectors, but it also led to a sense of unease in India — even more so when Trump, on social media, called India's economy 'dead.' Trump's recent statements reflect his frustration with the pace of trade talks with India, according to a White House official who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity to describe internal administration thinking. The Republican president has not been pursuing any strategic realignment with Pakistan, according to the official, but is instead trying to play hardball in negotiations. Trump doubled down on the pressure Monday with a fresh post on Truth Social, in which he accused India of buying 'massive amounts' of oil from Russia and then 'selling it on the Open Market for big profits.' 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA,' he said. The messaging appears to have stung Modi's administration, which has been hard-selling negotiations with Trump's team over a trade deal by balancing between India's protectionist system while also opening up the country's market to more American goods. Many expected India to react strongly considering Modi's carefully crafted reputation of strength. Instead, the announcement prompted a rather careful response from India's commerce minister, Piyush Goyal, who said the two countries are working towards a 'fair, balanced and mutually beneficial bilateral trade agreement.' India's Foreign Ministry also played down suggestions of any strain. However, experts in New Delhi wonder. 'Strenuous, uninterrupted and bipartisan efforts in both capitals over the past 25 years are being put at risk by not just the tariffs but by fast and loose statements and social media posts,' said Malik, who now heads the India chapter of The Asia Group, a U.S. advisory firm . Malik also said the trade deal the Indian side has offered to the U.S. is the 'most expansive in this country's history,' referring to reports that India was willing to open up to some American agricultural products. That is a politically sensitive issue for Modi, who faced a yearlong farmers' protest a few years ago. Trump appears to be tilting towards Pakistan The unraveling may have gained momentum over tariffs, but the tensions have been palpable for a while. Much of it has to do with Trump growing closer to Pakistan, India's nuclear rival in the neighborhood. In May, India and Pakistan traded a series of military strikes over a gun massacre in disputed Kashmir that New Delhi blamed Islamabad for. Pakistan denied the accusations. The four-day conflict made the possibility of a nuclear conflagration between the two sides seem real and the fighting only stopped when global powers intervened. But it was Trump's claims of mediation and an offer to work to provide a 'solution' regarding the dispute over Kashmir that made Modi's administration uneasy. Since then, Trump has repeated nearly two dozen times that he brokered peace between India and Pakistan. For Modi, that is a risky — even nervy — territory. Domestically, he has positioned himself as a leader who is tough on Pakistan. Internationally, he has made huge diplomatic efforts to isolate the country. So Trump's claims cut a deep wound, prompting a sense in India that the U.S. may no longer be its strategic partner. India insists that Kashmir is India's internal issue and had opposed any third-party intervention. Last week Modi appeared to dismiss Trump's claims after India's Opposition began demanding answers from him. Modi said that 'no country in the world stopped' the fighting between India and Pakistan, but he did not name Trump. Trump has also appeared to be warming up to Pakistan, even praising its counterterrorism efforts. Hours after levying tariffs on India, Trump announced a 'massive' oil exploration deal with Pakistan, saying that some day, India might have to buy oil from Islamabad. Earlier, he also hosted one of Pakistan's top military officials at a private lunch. Sreeram Sundar Chaulia, an expert at New Delhi's Jindal School of International Affairs, said Trump's sudden admiration for Pakistan as a great partner in counterterrorism has 'definitely soured' the mood in India. Chaulia said 'the best-case scenario is that this is just a passing Trump whim,' but he also warned that 'if financial and energy deals are indeed being struck between the U.S. and Pakistan, it will dent the U.S.-India strategic partnership and lead to loss of confidence in the U.S. in Indian eyes.' India's oil purchases from Russia are an irritant The strain in relations has also to do with oil. India had faced strong pressure from the Biden administration to cut back its oil purchases from Moscow during the early months of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Instead, India bought more, making it the second-biggest buyer of Russian oil after China. That pressure sputtered over time and the U.S. focused more on building strategic ties with India, which is seen as a bulwark against a rising China. Trump's threat to penalize India over oil, however, brought back those issues. On Sunday, the Trump administration made its frustrations over ties between India and Russia ever more public. Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff at the White House, accused India of financing Russia's war in Ukraine by purchasing oil from Moscow, saying it was 'not acceptable.'
