“Continuing to Cooperate”

Special Counsel Robert Mueller revealed some indictments and charges, and he “accepted” a guilty plea deal from George Papadopoulos, a volunteer associate of the Trump campaign.

I’ll leave aside the indictments (which charges are wholly unrelated to the Trump campaign or the Trump administration or anything related to them, anyway); what’s interesting is Mueller’s plea deal with Papadopoulos.

Mr Papadopoulos is continuing to cooperate in the investigation, according to his plea agreement.

And that’s what’s key:

Papadopoulos’ cooperation is central to his plea. The plea agreement provides that the government will bring his cooperation to the Court’s attention at sentencing and that sentencing will be delayed until his cooperation is complete.

The prosecution—Mueller—is holding Papadopoulos’ sentence over his head in order to get “evidence” convenient to Mueller’s case.  This is legalized extortion.

I have to ask: what honest prosecutor would find value in what a man in Papadopoulos’ position might say about others whom Mueller is targeting?  What jury could take seriously testimony that the prosecutor—Mueller—has bought and paid for, or pressured out of on threat of heavy sentencing?

This sort of thing isn’t unique to Mueller, for all that Mueller’s pressuring of a witness is very high profile.  It’s a standard prosecutorial tactic.  “Tell me what I want to hear, and repeat it in open court, or go to jail for a very long time.”

EPA Settlements

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has issued new instructions that

requires the agency to seek the participation of affected industries and states in settlement negotiations.

Environmental groups are having major hissy fits over this, complaining among other things that the instructions will complicate settlements and drag out what used to be easy settlement negotiations.

Of course they’re in an uproar: they’re not going to get cushy deals anymore.

Regarding their other beef, about complexified settlements, here’s an obvious solution: don’t do settlements.  Force all suits through to a court ruling/jury verdict while refusing an environmental group’s efforts to withdraw a suit when it becomes apparent to the group that they’re not going to get the deal they thought they could force with its lawfare-originated suit.

There are legitimate environmental problems, and some of them want a court’s solution.  It’s well past time that those cases weren’t delegitimized by frivolous suits or lawfare uproars.