Court papers detail alleged White House ‘bribery-for-pardon’ scheme
Donald Trump not named in documents related to investigation
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Court documents have detailed the alleged White House “bribery-for-pardon” scheme being investigated by the Justice department.
The documents are heavily redacted and do not name who is being investigated, Donald Trump, or if the White House even knew of the alleged scheme.
The court papers, which date back to August, were unsealed by the chief judge for the federal court in Washington DC and discuss if prosecutors can review seized documents that may be protected by attorney-client privilege.
It is linked to an ongoing investigation that may involve at least two people who “acted as lobbyists to senior White House officials."
In the documents the government stated that its “filter team” had obtained “over 50 digital media devices” and emails that “indicated criminal activity.”
“Namely a ‘secret lobbying scheme’ in which (redacted) and (redacted) acted as lobbyists to senior White House officials, without complying with the registration requirement of the Lobbying Disclosure Act to secure a pardon or reprieve of sentence for (redacted),” it stated.
"And a related bribery conspiracy scheme, in which (redacted) would offer a substantial political contribution in exchange for a presidential pardon or reprieve of sentence for (redacted), using (redacted) as the intermediaries to deliver the proposed bribe (Bribery-for-pardon scheme.)"
Chief Judge Beryl A Howell ruled that the communications could be reviewed by investigators because they included someone who was not a lawyer.
“This political strategy to obtain a presidential pardon was 'parallel' to and distinct from (redacted) role as an attorney advocate for (redacted),” the ruling stated, removing both names.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments