Discussion: Cohen Team: DOJ Can't Review Seized Docs Because of 'Impartiality' Concerns

What does Leonardo da Vinci and the Mona Lisa have to with it? Granted, Leonardo was known to have a thuggish temperament and was often seen “pal-ing around” with the Medici Family.

5 Likes

Is this for real? The Republican president’s attorney is claiming that the DOJ of that Republican president has some sort of bias against him? We’re all laughing, right? Not a “that’s funny” laugh, but an “embarrassed for you” laugh.

17 Likes

The president has described the newly revealed criminal investigation into Cohen in similar terms, saying that federal agents acting on legally obtained search warrants “broke into” Cohen’s office and committed an “attack on our country.”

Actually, this is very close to the truth.

Except, it was the GRU, not DOJ, that “broke in”.

And it was 39 state election systems, not Cohen’s office.

But, other than that, Trump’s right: It was a (literal) “attack on our country”.

19 Likes

Just so I’m not missing anything—the people being investigated want to review the evidence first because they’re more impartial than the Department of Justice based on serious questions of DOJ partiality that have been raised by the people being investigated. That’s what they’re going with? For real? I’m not having some sort of episode?

48 Likes

Ah. Missed that. Thanks.

Ikr?

1 Like

There are recognized exceptions to that rule.

There’s an easy way to solve this problem. If Trump were to resign as president, all the putative conflicts with the DoJ would be moot.

7 Likes

It’s weasel time!

5 Likes

In CA no letters accepted usually. Any info presented to the court is in a proper filing. It could be under seal if the court signs an order for such, along with a declaration why said document should be filed under seal.

My brain hurts. They are all criminals. Never mind a parade on Veteran’s Day, I want a perp walk.

8 Likes

This is what’s known as “pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.” The Dotard and his minions attack the DoJ as “biased,” then claim there is “widespread discussion” of its lack of impartiality, therefore the Court needs to steer clear of the DoJ to avoid the “appearance of impropriety.” The approach rivals Karl Rove’s statement that the Empire creates its own historical facts.

18 Likes

From personal experience, the two are not mutually exclusive. :wink:

7 Likes

A lot of people will assume Cohen’s third client was another big-dollar bimbo NDA. Let’s see how long the name can be kept secret.

1 Like

In fairness to Mr. Cohen and Mr. Trump, they should be able to decide who gets to see the materials and only after that person has reviewed the materials will the relevant materials be turned over to the DOJ lawyers.

I would suggest someone like Marc Kasowitz would be acceptable to both Trump and Cohen. That would be the fair thing.

7 Likes

I’m not in the least swayed by the Trump/Cohen’s arguments, but then, I don’t know the law. But I get the impression that they are trying to intimidate Judge Wood because a. It involves Trump and b., they seem to be implying ( intimidating?) that this is all somehow radically precedent setting, are you judge enough not to blink?

14 Likes

So if I am a Democrat and the arresting officer is Republican I can fight the charges on grounds of bias?

CRIME SPREE!

23 Likes

It makes perfect Trumpian sense. If the Justice Dept. is BIASED against potential criminals, they can’t judge and rule on criminal cases. See?

13 Likes

I have seen attorneys try to intimidate female judges. One in particular was about 5’ tall, and she threw it right back at the attorneys. The court staff silently cheered.

20 Likes

This is number three or four in our daily half-dozen instances of being shocked but not surprised, obviously. But I’m curious: Can’t you be sanctioned for making such an insane argument? No matter how modestly proposed, because we all understand that outrageous things can be couched in reasonable-sounding terms? This is just gobsmackingly corrupt and impudent.

8 Likes

Think the Judge will follow the established law and precedent here and favor the Justice Department. She’ll probably exclude some material that is true attorney-client communications, but even Dershowitz stated that the Trumpers are reading A/C privilege too expansively. The crime fraud exception may also apply here.

14 Likes