Discussion: Trump Lawyers: DOJ Can’t Fairly Assess Seized Cohen Docs

[somethinghappened]

This supports my hypothesis that the real purpose of the letter brief is to force Cohen to turn over the seized materials to his “client.” Just possibly, the client doesn’t trust his lawyer to tell him what what seized.

Exactly. Trump has two big immediate concerns right now: 1) The damning information he knows Cohen had, and 2) the information he doesn’t know about – emails, recorded phone calls, etc. Together they’re causing him to melt down. If I wasn’t afraid he’s going to do something massively and dangerously stupid, I’d be enjoying it more.

[gr]

You had to remind me of this beast, did you?
Emetic photos.

[bboerner]

In her Sunday letter, Hendon said that agents acted in an “aggressive, intrusive, and unorthodox manner” during the raid and that their actions were “disquieting to lawyers, clients, citizens, and commentators alike.”

Nope, I didn’t find it disquieting at all. Relished the news actually.

[blandsten]

Is it possible this letter is aimed more at the public than the judge?

The Court of Public Perception must be appeased!!!

[judygran]

This letter is actually pretty sharp, and the assumption that DTJ stumbled into a bargain bin counsel stall might not be prudent. Hendon cites the government’s cases in the circuit as evidence to counter the filter claims, with startling logic.

I’m somewhat less impressed. The letter brief is workmanlike but contains more rhetoric than pointed argument. Of course it cites cases n the Second Circuit in which the government argued for the taint team process. What other authority would there be? Hendon argues that the procedure used for identifying privileged materials sought in a subpoena duces cecum and excluding them from discovery should apply here. This overlooks the difference between materials obtained via subpoena and those obtained via search warrant. The standard for getting a search warrant is much higher.

[blandsten]

Thank you.

This is what happens when non-lawyer folk opine on legal stuff…

[judygran]

If I wasn’t afraid he’s going to do something massively and dangerously stupid, I’d be enjoying it more.

This weekend, for the first time, I’ve become really, truly afraid for our country. There are too many ways in which this could not end well.

[demyankee]

While sneaking up on my Form 1040 when it’s not looking, the idea’s been lurking in the back of my mind that ultimately this frigging fiasco is going to come down to what-promises-to-become the classic undoing of a presidency, to wit - voice recordings of impeachable (in this case possibly treasonous) acts. In other words: Watergate II. And I suppose we’ll have to endure squabbling over missing/unintelligible portions, and a Biblical amount of pissing, moaning, and whining from the so-called president*. Sigh. It’s gonna be a long summer.

[eskimo]

Spot on … Cohen is a sentinel … and his crew speaks in gestures. Curious who referred, hired, and pays Joanna Hendon.

[irasdad]

This weekend, for the first time, I’ve become really, truly afraid for our country.

Don’t believe everything you think.

/wink

[judygran]

Not a lawyer, but it’s interesting that the case that Trump lawyer cites as precedent for “taint team” bias is the Lynn Stewart case

I noticed that the letter brief cited an opinion in the Von Bulow litigation, which sorta supports my theory that Joanna Henson came to the Dotard by away of Alan Dershowitz.

[demyankee]

@texastwostep

Donny an’ Tony? Just a coupla guys wid an innarest in concrete. Ya know whaddImean?

[blandsten]

My favorite:

Trump’s lawyers cite no law, rule, or legal opinion that grants Trump the right to go through documents seized by the government pursuant to the search warrant. They’re essentially asking the judge to do so based on “fairness.”

Sounds like a Trump thing.

[lastroth]

If you are going to go all biblical, get your tenses right. Otherwise you will forget who is coming and going and begatting.

Begetting
Begatting
Begone

[crackerjack]

So wait, which of his illegal acts are covered by executive privilege?

[az02132]

I am only responding because of the TPM headline for this article.

(Their headlines are another issue for another day …)

From a legal standpoint - does the Court care that Trump wants to review anything? I know, no one will reply. If someone does, I’m actually curious if he has “standing” ?

IDK the terminology and whatnot, but, does anyone care if Comrade Bone Spurs wants to "review’ anything?

[justruss]

As in mulligans as well?

[1gg]

For somebody who has been a party of almost 3500 lawsuits, its amazing that Donnie doesn’t seem to understand the legal process.

[judygran]

In her Sunday letter, Hendon said that agents acted in an “aggressive, intrusive, and unorthodox manner” during the raid and that their actions were “disquieting to lawyers, clients, citizens, and commentators alike.”

Nope, I didn’t find it disquieting at all. Relished the news actually.

I winced when I read that sentence in the letter brief. I would not have said that to a federal judge, who knows very well that one of her colleagues on the bench approved the search warrants and the manner in which they were carried out. I know Joanna Hendon is an experienced white collar defense lawyer, but to me, an implicit criticism of a federal judge is a no-no.

[eskimo]

Gratitude for that comment. Doesn’t she set her argument up based on the means of acquisition? For a next day delivery, this still seems to provide ample and specific case history to give the judge pause. It’s audacious and might be useful to whoever hired Hendon. DJT would not necessarily be disposed to explain his vulnerabilities to a former SDNY prosecutor. Maybe it was McGahn or Giuliani who dialed her up. Fascinating, this is only the start, prestart.