White House counsel Pat Cipollone played a starring role in the New York Times’s latest report on the details in John Bolton’s forthcoming memoir, The Room Where It Happened, raising even more questions about Cipollone’s candor and participation in President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial.
According to the Times, Trump instructed Bolton–“during an Oval Office conversation in early May that included the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, the president’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone”– to “help” with the pressure campaign on Ukraine to leverage investigations of the Bidens.
The president has denied the meeting (“never happened,” he said) and Giuliani said it was “absolutely, categorically untrue.” That hasn’t stopped people from calling out Cipollone. House Manager Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) immediately brought up the Times article in Cipollone’s presence on Friday, the day the Senate is expected to block new witnesses. Acquittal would soon follow, whether today or sometime early next week.
Schiff hits Pat Cipollone over new report of his involvement in Trump's Ukraine scheme, per Bolton's unpublished manuscript. pic.twitter.com/DZGHQboNCI
— TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) January 31, 2020
At least legal ethics scholar has argued the Cipollone should not have been allowed to represent the president at the impeachment trial, citing the advocate-witness rule. That argument was made well before the latest reporting because Cipollone was the White House lawyer who was told there were concerns about the July 25 Trump-Volodymyr Zelensky phone call–a call that went on to be described in a whistleblower complaint. Many immediately responded to Friday’s news by suggesting Cipollone should face disciplinary action or, at the very least, that he “must come clean.”
#Cipollone must come clean.
Stephen Gillers' prescient piece analyzes House Manager's letter to Cipollone warning him of ethical breach and saying, "At a minimum, you must disclose all facts and information as to which you have first-hand knowledge."https://t.co/yEVWaDUDVp
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) January 31, 2020
Ok, DC legal folks…get ‘em. @CREWcrew https://t.co/ivRemMtRoe
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) January 31, 2020
Brace for descent. https://t.co/446LT3xIpS
— Carrie Cordero (@carriecordero) January 31, 2020
So all the people who have been screaming and ranting about false representations by lawyers to a FISA court are going to be out of their minds about the President's lawyers lying to a Senate impeachment tribunal presided over by the Chief Justice, right? RIGHT?
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) January 31, 2020
So as a matter of professional legal ethics you can't really represent a client in a matter in which you are also a witness (or accomplice) and it's a bar-grievable issue — I would have thought this is obvious but these days it's worth reiterating https://t.co/glyBSoxhjA
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) January 31, 2020
This exposes a massive and disqualifying conflict that Pat Cipollone has been concealing from the Senate and the Chief Justice. https://t.co/onlCHkQd7p
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) January 31, 2020
Rule 5 of the Senate impeachment rules allow for a motion to be made to the Chief Justice about all of this. Briefing and argument to follow. https://t.co/FnHziQLmrR
— Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) January 31, 2020
Recall: Rudy's claim of attorney-client privilege has been based on his PERSONAL representation of Trump.
That's why Mulvaney always left the room.
But now @nytimes says Trump gave the order w/ Rudy, Mulvaney, Bolton & Cipollone all there.
There goes attorney-client privilege!
— Joshua A. Geltzer (@jgeltzer) January 31, 2020
This puts Cipollone’s letter declaring Trump would not cooperate in a whole new light. He wasn’t just trying to cover up Trump’s wrongdoing, but also his own exposure. https://t.co/xcGgfksB7K
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) January 31, 2020
Shame this wasn't published yesterday so that Cipollone could have been asked about it. https://t.co/YF04YEWopV
— Marty Lederman (@marty_lederman) January 31, 2020
Some wondered if the heat on Cipollone explained why he has played a less central role in recent days.
Looks like Cipollone was in the room where it happened. Maybe that's why he kind of faded into woodwork at Senate trial in recent days https://t.co/RVmWX0GXL6
— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) January 31, 2020
Just yesterday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) suggested Trump lawyers should be disbarred for the statements they’ve made at trial.
Cipollone’s falsehood about what went on in the SCIF sparked similar outrage and demands for formal discipline by the bar.
[Image via Drew Angerer/Getty Images]
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow Law&Crime:
