On the one hand, Cohen has some pretty sharp lawyers who can file something real and solidly argued instead of the PR stunt they started with. On the other, do they have a leg to stand on?
Everything Avenatti has said and done so far has proved to be significant and legal. Seems doubtful this attorney has any b.s. in him at all from his performances on every stage.
I can’t think of any good reasons Avenetti should be excluded. This just sounds like so much whining to me.
Won’t he’s to smart and we don’t like him work for Cohen’s lawyers?
“It would make our client look bad, Sir” ?
So the judge scored the win for Avenatti on the first match.
And she invites Cohen’s lawyers to the second.
This will be interesting.
What is at stake if Avenatti is/isn’t allowed to attend this status conference? (besides his ability to distract Cohen and make him uncomfortable with steely looks, arching eyebrows, knowing winks, etc.)
Avenatti is really a thorn in the side of Team Trump, isn’t he?
More like a blade in their side. Since they were so mind-boggling stupid as to use the same LLC for hush money outgoing payments as for pay-to-play incoming payments, discovery in Stormy Daniels’ suits would have exposed the pay-to-play. I don’t know if Avenatti knew about the pay-to-play or whether he just assumed they had stuff to hide.
Trump’s legal team taking on Avenatti is mostly like my high school baseball team taking on the New York Yankees. Mismatch doesn’t even come into it.;
Is Cohen wishing that he went to a real law school yet? Would it have made any difference?
probably not. Especially considering that Cohen has gotten a stay in the NDA trial, based on Cohen’s declaration that he’ll take the 5th. The judge will recognize that Avenatti is at least entitled to argue on his client’s behalf for access to documents relevant to the Stormy Daniel’s case.
This is more involved than this article suggest. Avenatti does not need permission to sit in the audience.
‘Appear’ is a legal term of art that means to be a party before the court and to have the right to address the court the same as the other actual parties to the case. Avenatti has filed a motion to be able to address the court on the record, with the right to be heard by the judge and respond to everything Cohen and the prosecution has to say. It’s significant.
I expect Cohen to object on the basis that neither Avenatti or his client are a party to this proceeding, have no business before this court, and their doing so is only intended to obstruct and obviscate, yada, yada, yada and will prejudice Cohen in his defense.
Were I the judge, I would disinclined to allow Avenatti to appear, barring some compelling case law to the contrary.
MSNBC is suggesting in their reporting that un-named Trump appointed Officials are purging permanent government financial records in the Treasury Department in order to cover up Trump/Cohen /Russia relationship evidence.
The disappearance of which is what triggered an Treasury official to leak hard copies of the bank filed Suspicious Activities Report documents, which have vanished from government servers.
“But, your honor! How can you allow this?! He’s being sued by his former partner! I saw it on FoxNews!”
Man, what a bunch of snowflakes!
are you not paying attention? he is burying these guys. and how, you ask? real documents and facts. each avenatti release has been another nail in the coffin.
Ronan Farrow at The New Yorker, actually.
the earliest interviews i saw… he explained he couldn’t understand how the Trump Combine could be as financially successful as claimed… that the usual successful businesses in his legal experiences hired competent help… lawyers who challenged him… but Trump’s retinue were incompetent. Whether this was his whole motivation, i too am watching and wondering… when did all this start?