Reply With Quote
Trump reportedly asked his lawyer to lie to NARA, he refused.. Hope he has good bodyguards.
seems there can be occasional drawbacks to appointing inexperienced simps as judges.now they're just playing with house money...
The appeals court already stated the district court erred and had no jurisdiction. That would basically means getting rid of Cannon and the special master.
Feds seek to fast-track appeal in Trump Mar-a-Lago do ents fight
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...fight-00059879
Filing here:
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000...7-b7be49d40000
Trump reportedly asked his lawyer to lie to NARA, he refused.. Hope he has good bodyguards.
Last edited by Winehole23; 10-05-2022 at 11:18 PM. Reason: he refused
thumb on the scales
https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/10/0...e-to-help-him/On September 5, Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that depriving Donald Trump of personal items cons uted “real harm.”being deprived of potentially significant personal do ents [] creates a real harmYesterday, the newly unsealed filter team status report revealed that, for two weeks, Judge Cannon deliberately inflicted that harm on Trump.
That’s because on August 30, DOJ’s filter team told her that they wanted to return the original copies of do ents designated as Category B — 43 sets of do ents amounting to 382 pages of do ents — to Trump.
[T]he PrivilegeReview Team proposes to return the originals and provide a Bates-stamped control copy to the Plaintiff. Many of these materials do not appear to be privileged (although one appears to be.11), but they are all either legal in nature (e.g.,settlement, non-disclosure, and retainer agreements) or otherwise potentially sensitive, and they do not appear to be themselves government or Presidential Records or classified do ents.These do ents were lawfully seized: many were likely in the desk drawer in which Trump also had a do ent marked Confidential and another do ent marked Secret. The others would have been seized from the storage closet where Trump was hiding 79 do ents with classification markings. But on August 30, DOJ proposed to Aileen Cannon that they give them back.
Then, the next day, on September 1, filter attorney Benjamin Hawk asked for permission to pursue “the proposal that we offered,” which, in addition to providing Trump with Bates-stamped copies of all the do ents treated as potentially privileged, would also include (per the status report that had been discussed at length in the hearing) giving him the originals back.
MR. HAWK: Your Honor, if I may.In response to a request to (among other things) give the originals of Trump’s personal do ents back, Cannon declined to approve the request. Had she approved it, 382 pages of personal do ents would have been back in Trump’s custody right away. He would no longer have been deprived of those potentially significant personal do ents. The harm that Cannon said was caused by his deprivation of those do ents would be ended.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. HAWK: We would like to seek permission to provide copies — the proposal that we offered, Your Honor, provide copies to counsel of the 64 sets of the materials that are Bates stamped so they have the opportunity to start reviewing. THE COURT: I’m sorry, say that again, please.
MR. HAWK: The privilege review team would have provided Bates stamped copies of the 64 sets of do ents to Plaintiff’s counsel. We would like to seek permission from Your Honor to be able to provide those now, not at this exact moment but to move forward to providing those so counsel has the opportunity to review them and understand and have the time to review and do their own analysis of those do ents to come to their own conclusions. And if the filter process without a special master were allowed to proceed, we would engage with counsel and have conversations, determine if we can reach agreements; to the extent we couldn’t reach agreements, we would bring those before the Court, whether Your Honor or Judge Reinhart. But simply now, I’m seeking permission just to provide those do ents to Plaintiff’s counsel.
THE COURT: All right. I’m going to reserve ruling on that request. I prefer to consider it holistically in the assessment of whether a special master is indeed appropriate for those privileged reviews. I think Mr. Bratt is hoping to get a few more minutes in.
And that is precisely the harm she cited when she first ruled that a Special Master had to review the do ents that she had prevented DOJ from returning to Trump. Indeed, she claimed there was a dispute about the very personal property that DOJ had tried to give back five days earlier.
Although some of the seized items (e.g., articles of clothing) appear to be readily identifiable as personal property, the parties’ submissions suggest the existence of genuine disputes as to (1) whether certain seized do ents cons ute personal or presidential records, and (2) whether certain seized personal effects have evidentiary value. Because those disputes are bound up with Plaintiff’s Rule 41(g) request and involve issues of fact, the Court “must receive evidence” from the parties thereon. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) (“The court must receive evidence on any factual issue necessary to decide the motion.”). That step calls for comprehensive review of the seized property.By that point, she had personally been responsible for depriving Trump of 382 pages of do ents for five days.
Review is further warranted, as previewed, for determinations of privilege. The Government forcefully objects, even with respect to attorney-client privilege, pointing out that the Privilege Review Team already has screened the seized property and is prepared to turn over approximately 520 pages of potentially privileged material for court review pursuant to the previously approved ex parte filter protocol [ECF No. 48 p. 14]. In plain terms, the Government’s position is that another round of screening would be “unnecessary” [ECF No. 48 p. 22]. The Court takes a different view on this record.
She would cite back to this passage, claiming a dispute including over do ents DOJ had tried to give back, when she refused to stay her injunction on investigating the classified do ents.
To further expand the point, and as more fully explained in the September 5 Order, the Government seized a high volume of materials from Plaintiff’s residence on August 8, 2022 [ECF No. 64 p. 4]; some of those materials undisputedly cons ute personal property and/or privileged materials [ECF No. 64 p. 13]; the record suggests ongoing factual and legal disputes as to precisely which materials cons ute personal property and/or privileged materials [ECF No. 64 p. 14]; and there are do ented instances giving rise to concerns about the Government’s ability to properly categorize and screen materials [ECF No. 64 p. 15]. Furthermore, although the Government emphasizes what it perceives to be Plaintiff’s insufficiently particularized showing on various do ent-specific assertions [ECF No. 69 p. 11; ECF No. 88 pp. 3–7], it remains the case that Plaintiff has not had a meaningful ability to concretize his position with respect to the seized materials given (1) the ex parte nature of the approved filter protocol, (2) the relatively generalized nature of the Government’s “Detailed Property Inventory” [ECF No. 39-1], and (3) Plaintiff’s unsuccessful efforts, pre-suit, to gather more information from the Government about the content of the seized materials [ECF No. 1 pp. 3, 8–9 (describing Plaintiff’s rejected requests to obtain a list of exactly what was taken and from where, to inspect the seized property, and to obtain information regarding potentially privileged do ents)].The only dispute here was between Cannon and the government! They had already asked to give Trump’s personal do ents back, and she refused to grant permission to do that.
And Cannon pointed to those personal items — items the government had already tried to give back — when she refused to lift her injunction on investigating classified do ents.
Thief demands that stuff he stole not be given back to its rightful owner.
Best part of all of this is you just know Trump is definitely wetting himself behind closed doors
Walls are closing in for sure.Best part of all of this is you just know Trump is definitely wetting himself behind closed doors
How did his election fraud cases go with the Supreme Court?
He looks happy
That was quick. This is probably why his lawyer asked to be paid $3 million upfront.
sorry this is happening to you
No doubt right? These dumb s here have been rubbing their hands for years and proclaiming that Trump is on the ropes time and time again. They are some of the dumbest s around while hurling insults at those like us who just laugh at their ludicrous conspiracies and asinine assumptions.
He was impeached and likely would have been convicted if the Senate had a different makeup.
Dont try to make this thing out like Trump escaped some legal proceedings.
3500 lawsuits BEFORE he was president…
Just another innocent guy on the streets treated unfairly…. Sure thing.
So Trump should run again? If not, who do you want for your rotten red team?
Since, “They are Leftists!”, trying to take a good man down.
The particulars have all been redacted by the Gestapo
lol #StillWithHer
Trump was fully exonerated, yet you keep spinning your wheels.
Buy a vote of party driven Senators.
Im not impressed.
Maybe you are.
Chrissy Christian.
lol no they haven'tThe particulars have all been redacted by the Gestapo
lol #StillWithHer
You're posting about her nonstop, not us.
Qhris
Who said he was "innocent" in those previous cases? You know people sue others for all types of bs anyhow so why pretend otherwise? It's like some here claiming the dude is a complete moron for filing for bankruptcy on a few of his businesses when that is in fact a business strategy for some; just like my land lord having empty properties he can write off as a loss.
And yes, you leftists ing suck!
1st impeachment was bs just like the 2nd. You're more concerned with a call to a ty comedian cokehead in Ukraine than the corpse in the WH rn presenting a QPQ on live tv.
ducks some women relax and get horny when under the influence of a mild dose of marijuana.
Beware!
3500 times.
Sure, thats a good way to do business.
You think this was all Trump GETTING sued? Think again.
Trump cannot even get a loan in the US from any major bank.
Why do you think this is? Would you loan him money? Do it...
Yeah asking a foreign government to use their intelligence to get dirt on Biden was proper?1st impeachment was bs just like the 2nd. You're more concerned with a call to a ty comedian cokehead in Ukraine than the corpse in the WH rn presenting a QPQ on live tv.
You think presidential candidates should ask foreign intelligence services to spy on each other? Seriously?
Just because you dont have a clue what the impeachment was about does make the outcome correct because of PARTY LINES VOTES
If it was your far right reactionary candidates you might have read a little closer.
IDC if he can't get a loan from any US bank because it means nothing to me.
You're just sour, salty, and have a huge case of Trump Derangement Syndrome bro.
Show me the transcript.
And there's no need to ask anyone to spy on anyone when Biden's QPQ is on film for all to see.
Btw who are these fic ious far right reactionary candidates that I back? Jump to conclusions much you re ?
You think Biden is a leftist! And you ask me to find your candidate when you wont dare mention anyone you like but complain about the blue team because they are LEFTISTS? That bonzo stupid. Biden a leftists...IDC if he can't get a loan from any US bank because it means nothing to me.
You're just sour, salty, and have a huge case of Trump Derangement Syndrome bro.
Show me the transcript.
And there's no need to ask anyone to spy on anyone when Biden's QPQ is on film for all to see.
Btw who are these fic ious far right reactionary candidates that I back? Jump to conclusions much you re ?
so who do you back? All you do is complain about fic ious commies.
Not being able to get a loan means NOTHING to you?IDC if he can't get a loan from any US bank because it means nothing to me.
You're just sour, salty, and have a huge case of Trump Derangement Syndrome bro.
Show me the transcript.
And there's no need to ask anyone to spy on anyone when Biden's QPQ is on film for all to see.
Btw who are these fic ious far right reactionary candidates that I back? Jump to conclusions much you re ?
You have a problem rich guy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
