Should Christina Bobb be held accountable?

We've been hearing that she attested to the fact that Trump had returned all pertinent documents, but now we're focusing on CYA language she added:

"based upon the information that has been provided to me."

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-lawyers-2658420858/

I'm sort of thinking, based on this, that there's not much to hold her accountable for legally, despite the moral and ethical problems with representing a criminal client.

Did she satisfy her ethical duty of candor towards the tribunal?

I'd say she did, if this language was included, and she didn't make any further representations about her inquiry.

I'm not a fan, but this stuff makes me think she tried to do her job, while not violating her professional obligations.

And, I also think, that those attacking her for representing Trump should have picked up on this a long time ago.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-lawyers-2658420858/

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

So, she was only following orders.

MistyCee

@LordShadowfire Yeah and she apparently made it clear that she only was following them based on limited information she was given, and at least impliedy, didn't feel like her responsibilities as an officer of the court, or even as a human being, should have led her to go past the information she was given.

Seems pretty silly to me to draw these kind of distinctions, but realistically, they might keep her from being disbarred, and capable of earning a living with a law degree even if her client doesn't get off and pave a way/pardon all of his loyalists.