The Trump administration's non-denial denials on Emil Bove

Yahoo

2 days ago

Amid all the Trump administration's efforts to politicize the justice system, few loom larger right now than the nomination of top Justice Department official Emil Bove to a prestigious appeals-court judgeship.
Bove, a former personal lawyer to Donald Trump, has been central to a number of high-profile controversies in the early months of the president's second term. But the most significant one right now is a whistleblower's allegation that Bove suggested that the Justice Department might simply ignore court orders. Former Justice Department attorney Erez Reuveni has said Bove suggested at a March meeting that the department might need to tell the courts 'f**k you.'
That a soon-to-be appellate judge would say such a thing would obviously be problematic; Democrats have suggested Trump is trying to install a political 'henchman' in a powerful judgeship.
We might never know what happened.
But what's also clear is that the administration is offering some seemingly very carefully worded denials. You could even call them non-denial denials.
Often, they don't directly deny what Reuveni claimed. At other points, Bove has simply said he didn't recall certain things and declined to provide more detail.
It's all worth a parse.
The latest news Thursday was that the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee released contemporary messages, emails and documents produced by Reuveni that lend credence to his claims. They show DOJ officials repeatedly citing the concept of telling the courts 'f**k you' around the period in question. They don't prove Bove said what Reuveni claims, but they do suggest government lawyers were talking about that precise phrase after the meeting in question.
('Guess we are going to say f**k you to the court,' one text message says. 'This doesn't end with anything but a nationwide injunction,' another text says, 'and a decision point on f**k you.')
The top two officials at DOJ soon posted on social media their responses to the new disclosures.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said Reuveni was 'asserting false claims.' She added that 'no one was ever asked to defy a court order.'
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche added, 'No one was ever asked to defy a court order — because there was no court order to defy.'
But the thing is: Reuveni never said anyone was asked to defy a court order. He merely said that Bove floated the idea.
'Bove stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts 'f**k you' and ignore any such court order,' Reuveni stated in his whistleblower complaint.
Blanche has also vouched for Bove in another way: by citing his own presence at the March 14 meeting in question – the one where Reuveni alleges Bove made the remark.
'I was at the meeting described in the article, and at no time did anyone suggest a court order should not be followed,' Blanche said last month.
But a fast-emerging question is whether Blanche was actually at the entire meeting.
Reuveni said in an interview with The New York Times published Thursday that, in fact, Blanche was not. He said Blanche entered the conference room briefly and spoke privately with Bove, but then left and did not participate in the fuller meeting.
Reuveni said Bove's remark came after Blanche left.
Bove has also talked around this issue, according to written responses to Senate Judiciary Committee members obtained by CNN.
In questions for the record posed to Bove after last month's confirmation hearing, Bove was asked if Blanche was at the meeting.
'Mr. Blanche has stated publicly that he was at the meeting,' Bove said, merely referring to Blanche's public comments.
Then Bove was asked whether Blanche was 'present for the entire meeting.' Bove declined to answer. He said he didn't want to get into 'non-public specifics about particular topics' and says it would be 'inappropriate' to comment further, since Reuveni's complaint is involved in ongoing litigation.
Which brings us to Bove's own answers.
While his responses at last month's confirmation hearing seemed to deny Reuveni's claims, it's not so simple.
For one, Bove – like Bondi and Blanche – has seemed more willing to deny telling people to actually defy court orders, rather than to actually deny what Reuveni alleged – that he merely suggested it.
'I have never advised a Department of Justice attorney to violate a court order,' Bove said early in the hearing.
'I will reiterate, I did not advise any Justice Department attorney to violate court orders,' he said shortly thereafter.
But when Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California asked more specifically about Reuveni's allegation – whether Bove suggested such a thing – Bove didn't so firmly deny it. He instead said he didn't recall saying that.
'Senator, I have no recollection of saying anything of that kind,' Bove said.
When asked if he suggested telling the courts 'f**k you in any manner,' Bove responded, 'I don't recall.'
Pressed in the same exchange, Bove said, 'I did not suggest that there would be any need to consider ignoring court orders. At the point of that meeting, there were no court orders to discuss.'
Precisely what that means isn't totally clear. It would seem possible to suggest ignoring court orders without suggesting there would be a need to do so. Indeed, top DOJ officials have repeatedly cited how there was no actual court order at the time, as if that made the entire controversy moot. And Bove bookended this comment by saying twice that he didn't recall making such a suggestion.
Right now, it's clear as mud. The question before Senate Republicans is if they care to find out more and really drill down on this – say, by getting sworn statements from others present at the meeting, and/or the government lawyers who cited the 'f**k you' concept in the texts Reuveni produced.
But for now, this issue hasn't been put to bed. And it hasn't really been firmly denied either.