Skip to main content

CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin Reacts to Trump Inaugural Committee Subpoena: ‘Richard Nixon Had Nothing on This’


CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, consistent critic of President Donald Trump and his attorney Rudy Giuliani, discussed the overarching context of the Monday news that federal prosecutors had issued a subpoena of the Trump inaugural committee.

In case you missed it, it was reported Monday night that federal prosecutors issued a subpoena that the Trump inaugural committee plans on complying with. As Law&Crime previously noted, prosecutors already showed an interest in investigating whether wealthy donors gave money in exchange for access into and influence within the Trump administration. That news came out of the the Southern District of New York’s investigation of former Trump attorney Michael Cohen.

The kinds of crimes that are under investigation in New York,separate from Special Counsel Robert Mueller‘s investigation of the Trump campaign and Russian election interference. The New York investigation reportedly deals with possible conspiracy against the U.S., false statements, mail and wire fraud, money laundering, and illegal contributions from foreign nationals.

Toobin began counting the number of ongoing investigations into Trump-related entities and declared that the “stench of corruption” is so malodorous that Richard Nixon “had nothing on this.”

“There has not been anything like the kind of stench of corruption around one president,” Toobin said.

He pointed out that, the Trump Organization, the Trump Foundation (which dissolved after being accused of “a pattern of persistent illegal conduct”), the Trump campaign, the Trump presidency, and the Trump inauguration have all been under investigation. Everywhere you look, seemingly, a long-time friend or confidant of Trump’s (Roger Stone), a long-time lawyer (Michael Cohen), or a campaign chairman (Paul Manafort) is a centerpiece of a criminal investigation.

Toobin clarified that the Southern District of New York (SDNY) doesn’t have the “proof” it needs yet, hence the subpoena, but cautioned that, in modern times, paper trails tend to be more available to prosecutors.

“The good news for investigators is there is almost always a trail of where the money came from and where it goes, and that is what they are looking for,” he said, adding that the SDNY didn’t have to have “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion” to issue this subpoena.

“It’s very much up to the discretion of the individual prosecutors,’ he concluded.

[Image via CNN screengrab]

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Filed Under:

Follow Law&Crime:

Matt Naham is the Senior A.M. Editor of Law&Crime.