logo
Law Firms That Settled With Trump Are Pressed to Help on Trade Deals

Law Firms That Settled With Trump Are Pressed to Help on Trade Deals

New York Times2 days ago
Two of the law firms that reached deals with President Trump this year to avoid punitive executive orders were connected in recent months with the Commerce Department about working on trade deals, according to three people briefed on the matter.
The firms, Kirkland & Ellis and Skadden Arps, were connected to the department by Mr. Trump's personal lawyer, Boris Epshteyn, two of the people said.
Mr. Epshteyn, who does not hold a government position, played a direct role in brokering the initial deals between Mr. Trump and the law firms, in which the firms agreed to do pro bono work on causes the president has championed, like helping veterans, military families and first responders.
His previously undisclosed efforts connecting the firms with the Commerce Department shows how he is seeking to impose Mr. Trump's expansive view of the deals, including recruiting firms to work for the government in advancing the administration's agenda.
After Mr. Epshteyn helped connect the firms with the government in recent months, Kirkland and Ellis went on to work on the trade deals the administration struck with Japan and South Korea, which were announced in July, according to three of the people. It is unclear if Skadden Arps has done work for the administration.
Earlier this year, after the law firms struck deals with Mr. Trump, the president said that he had a broader understanding of the terms than the firms had let on, saying the pro bono work included helping the administration on trade deals and could even be applied to representing him in a personal capacity.
It's unclear whether Kirkland & Ellis did the work for free or charged the Commerce Department. But the revelation of the firm's work marks the first time that it has been publicly revealed that one of the firms that cut a deal with Mr. Trump is now doing work for the administration.
Representatives of Kirkland & Ellis and Skadden Arps did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
When asked for comment, Harrison Fields, a White House spokesman, did not directly address the latest developments. Instead, he said, Mr. Trump 'has radically changed the business of discrimination, including by ending D.E.I. in Big Law.'
He added: 'Law firms that have for years propelled one-sided justice by providing pro bono resources to those causes that make our nation more dangerous and less free have started serving their nation.'
Benno Kass, the director of public affairs for the Commerce Department, said the agency and the secretary, Howard Lutnick, 'are working with some of America's top law firms and legal minds to cement the truly historic trade deals that President Trump negotiated for the American people.' He did not specify which firms or what work they were doing.
Mr. Epshteyn would not provide comment.
Nine firms reached deals with Mr. Trump to head off executive orders. In total, the firms pledged nearly a billion dollars in pro bono legal work. At least some of the other firms are said to have been connected with the administration to do work for the government, but it's unclear which firms or what issues they were discussing working on.
None of the firms have acknowledged any wrongdoing. They were targeted with punitive executive orders or implicit threats for representing or aiding Mr. Trump's political foes or employing people he sees as having used the legal system to come after him.
The deals have been criticized by many in the legal community as unconstitutional and undemocratic, and have led to splits inside some of the firms about the wisdom of agreeing to terms with the White House.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Bank of America shares an eye-popping chart showing a potential stock-market bubble: 'It better be different this time'
Bank of America shares an eye-popping chart showing a potential stock-market bubble: 'It better be different this time'

Yahoo

time19 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Bank of America shares an eye-popping chart showing a potential stock-market bubble: 'It better be different this time'

AI optimism is driving the S&P 500 price-to-book ratio to records, surpassing dot-com levels. High valuations reflect expectations for AI-driven earnings. While the ratio's level is head-turning, it doesn't necessitate that stocks are in a bubble. Stock-market bulls convinced of the power of AI to transform the economy often shrug off comparisons to the dot-com bubble a quarter century ago. The real profits are already showing up, unlike in the early days of the internet boom — so it is different this time, the thinking goes. But Bank of America strategist Michael Hartnett has a message for these investors: "It better be different this time." Hartnett, who has often expressed skepticism of the market's bull run over the last few years, shared a head-turning chart that highlights just how optimistic investors have become about the impact AI will have. It shows the S&P 500's price-to-book ratio, which measures the total market cap of the index's constituents compared to their total assets minus liabilities. The valuation measure is at a record high of 5.3, topping the 5.1 level seen in March 2000, at the peak of the dot-com bubble. Other classic valuation measures show market froth relative to history. For instance, Hartnett also shared a chart showing the S&P 500's 12-month forward price-to-earnings ratio. Except for August 2020, it's at the highest level since the dot-com era. And the Shiller cyclically-adjusted price-to-earnings ratio, which measures current prices against a 10-year rolling average of earnings, is at similar levels to 1929, 2000, and 2021. High valuations reflect high expectations for future earnings. Sometimes those expectations turn out to be too elevated, and prices correct, but they don't necessitate a bubble scenario. So far, many AI firms have continually beat earnings expectations, suggesting the optimism could be justified. Valuations are also better predictors of average long-term returns than near-term performance, and views on Wall Street on where the market goes in the months ahead differ. Though there are calls for caution, many strategists continue to raise their year-end S&P 500 price targets. Earlier this week, Rick Rieder, the chief investment officer of global fixed income at BlackRock, said the market is in the "best investing environment ever" thanks to factors like strong demand for stocks, looming rate cuts, and recent boosts in productivity and earnings growth. If the market does start to unwind, however, Hartnett said he sees bonds and non-US stocks benefiting. Examples of funds that offer exposure to these trades include the iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (AGG) and the Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (VEU). Read the original article on Business Insider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Trump and Putin Didn't Make a Deal, but Putin Still Won
Trump and Putin Didn't Make a Deal, but Putin Still Won

Time​ Magazine

time21 minutes ago

  • Time​ Magazine

Trump and Putin Didn't Make a Deal, but Putin Still Won

During the press conference at the end of his brief and lukewarm summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, an uncharacteristically subdued Donald Trump said something painfully honest: "There's no deal until there's a deal." There was no deal. In many ways, Trump and Putin got the show they wanted. The ubiquitous television graphics, TRUMP-PUTIN SUMMIT, with fluttering American and Russian flags. The split-screen of Air Force 1 and Russia's executive plane landing at a remote airport in Alaska, and then the two protagonists walking down a skinny red carpet like the end of a buddy movie. The grip-and-grin handshakes, with Trump patting Putin's hand in a gesture known to maître d's everywhere. The cosy ride in "the Beast," a prize not even offered to close allies. Trump is likely happy because the eyes of the world are upon him and he was executive producing the images on the world's television screens. (And no one was talking about Jeffrey Epstein). Putin is happy because a Russian president is always happy when they are treated as equal to American presidents. Remember, Barack Obama said Russia was a second-rate, "regional power." Putin got what he wanted: a summit with an American president, something normally you have to make elaborate compromises to get. An indicted war criminal who cannot travel to over 100 nations, the Russian President literally had a red carpet rolled out for him on United States territory by an American president. And he didn't have to give up anything for it—he just had to show up. Read More: The Real Danger of the Trump-Putin Summit At the press conference, Putin talked about how close Russia was to America (shades of Sarah Palin) and claimed that Russian trade with American has increased by 20%. He made sure to praise Trump in the over-the-top way that has become customary in diplomacy with America. Trump was uncharacteristically restrained and circumspect. Even though Putin had alluded to an agreement, Trump did not do so. The self-professed world's greatest dealmaker left without a deal. He did, however, get in several references to the 'Russia hoax,' while Vlad smirked. The truth is, Trump needed a deal more than Putin did. 'Deals are what I do,' he said, and he didn't do one. In a larger way, the nothing-burger outcome exposes the flaws in Trump's theory of diplomacy. Trump seems to believe personal warmth between leaders will make his adversary more likely to compromise or agree with him. That is naïve and delusional. Earlier this week a White House spokesperson described Trump as a 'realist.' This is the classic foreign policy term, in contrast to a foreign policy idealist, whose legacy comes from Woodrow Wilson and his quest for a League of Nations. But Henry Kissinger, the ultimate American realist, said nations have no permanent friends or enemies, they have interests. That's something Donald Trump doesn't quite understand. Trump stands for himself. Putin stands for Russia. Putin's goals are unchanging; his smile and his handshake are fleeting. Long before Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin wanted to Make Russia Great Again. I spent several hours with Putin in 2006 for TIME's Person of the Year cover, and it was in that interview that he said the greatest tragedy of the 20th century was the disintegration of the Soviet Union. I remember we all wondered for a moment whether that was really what he had said, but the transcript bore it out. He believes it, devoutly. He was a KGB officer in Dresden when the Wall came down, and he was bereft. The Russian President has always wanted to put the Soviet Union back together again. (His foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, was spotted wearing a USSR sweatshirt ahead of the Summit.) Putin believes in a kind of Russian exceptionalism with Russia as the great power between East and West. Putin is nostalgic not just for the Cold War, but the Russian empire of the czars. He has a profound and angry grievance about the West and America. He told me Westerners regard Russians as monkeys. (Yes, he said that.) But then he also told me Russian voters were not sophisticated enough to choose their own leaders. (Yes, he said that too.) Under his leadership, Russia has been trying to destabilize the West for decades. Just last week the U.S. Justice Department announced that Russian hackers had penetrated the federal court system. Putin has been trying to put space between the US and Europe for decades. In his eyes, West and America are always the aggressors and Russia is always the victim—even when negotiating about the war in Ukraine. Read More: Trump's Make-or-Break Moment with Putin Normally, in any wartime negotiation, the country gaining territory does not want to negotiate or give up anything, while the country losing territory wants to negotiate and is willing to compromise. Russia is gaining territory, slowly; Ukraine is losing territory, grudgingly. Russia has a 50-year goal, to re-unite parts of the old Soviet Union; Ukraine has a more immediate goal, to stop the war and not give up any territory to do so. When Putin said during the press conference that they still needed to address the 'root causes' of the conflict, that was a hint to what may have transpired inside. Putin can talk for hours about the idea that Ukraine is not a nation, that the Kievan Rus is the basis of Russia, that the Russian Orthodox Church grew out of the Ukrainian one, and he could have spent the whole time on any of those subjects. And maybe he did. According to the 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee report, after the TIME Person of the Year cover came out, Trump sent Putin a handwritten note of congratulations to saying, 'As you probably heard, I am a big fan of yours!' Putin is still milking Trump's fanboy affection. He was the big winner today because he didn't have to compromise before or after the meeting. He got the superpower treatment even though he is a war criminal. He got equivalence with an American president on the world stage. Zelensky won by not losing. Ukraine could have been crippled today, and instead they live to fight another day. It's true that no deal is better than a bad deal. But what is the Dealmaker-in-Chief without a deal?

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store