The Special Master of the US District Judge Aileen Cannon has rejected the proposal for a review of Donald Trump’s case against the FBI search of his Florida home
Former President Donald Trump got another boost in his bid to challenge the FBI search of his Florida home, with US District Judge Aileen Cannon reshaping the plan put forward by the special master she appointed to review the materials seized at Mar-a-Lago last month.
Cannon, who Trump had nominated in 2020 and was confirmed by the Senate after the November 2020 election, has shown himself to be more sympathetic to Trump than Dearie.
On Thursday, Cannon also pushed back the timeline for the review by at least a half-month, while making clear that additional litigation that Trump will have the chance to bring, after the special master process is finished, challenging the search will remain on her docket.
With the support of the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals, the department was allowed to resume the use of the documents that were classified in the criminal probe.
A complicated process was put in place by the Trump legal team for sorting through thousands of documents seized from Mar-a-Lago to determine whether they are off limits to investigators. But the Justice Department and intelligence community have had access for weeks to about 100 records marked as classified that Trump had kept in Florida.
Cannon on Thursday rejected part of the special master’s plan that would have forced the former President’s legal team to back up his out-of-court claims that the FBI planted evidence.
Cannon said that any additional matters that have to be reconsidered or objected to should be brought to the attention of the Special Master.
Cannon said that Trump’s legal team does not have to provide certain information about his executive privilege claims in the special master review.
The federal judge removed the special master’s proposed requirement that Trump, when asserting a document is covered by executive privilege, specify whether he believed that barred disclosure within the executive branch versus disclosure outside of it.
The Justice Department has argued that Trump’s executive privilege claims are especially weak because the materials were seized by the executive branch for an executive branch purpose, i.e. a DOJ criminal investigation.
Trump’s ludicrous exit from power in the wake of the insurrection: confronting the institutions of accountability through a subpoena in Mar-a-Lago
In explaining the “modest enlargement” of the timeline, Cannon pointed to the issues the parties had faced in securing a vendor to digitize the seized materials for the review.
The Government mentioned in conversations that 11,000 documents contain more than 200,000 pages. That estimated volume, with a need to operate under the accelerated timeframes supported by the Government, is the reason why so many of the Government’s selected vendors have declined the potential engagement,” Trump’s team wrote on Wednesday.
His most immediate clash with the institutions of accountability went to another level Friday when the House January 6 committee issued a subpoena for documents and testimony. Trump has a history of trying to interfere with the investigations into his conduct. Even though giving evidence under oath could cause him more legal exposure, the subpoena raised the possibility that he might opt to testify in order to claim the political spotlight.
The hearing featured never-before-seen footage of congressional leaders, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, huddled in a secure location during the insurrection grappling with the implications of the pro-Trump mob’s attack on the Capitol. It also made a case for the ex- President that his actions were even more heinous, as he tried to avoid publicly admitting he was a loser.
But the developments that could hurt Trump the most happened off stage. They reflect the extraordinary legal thicket surrounding the ex-President, who has not been charged with a crime, and the distance still left to run for efforts to account for his riotous exit from power and a presidency that constantly tested the rule of law.
It’s not surprising that Trump’s political career has been unprecedented since he’s posing new questions with the potential to challenge and damage the country’s political institutions.
The Supreme Court told the House select committee hearing that it wouldn’t want to be sucked into Trump’s bid to derail a Justice Department probe into classified material at Mar-a-Lago.
The court turned down his request to intervene in the case, without explaining why. No dissents were noted, including from conservative justices Trump elevated to the bench and whom he often seems to believe owe him a debt of loyalty.
The FBI has ruled that the Capitol insurrection is not obstructing Justice: Attorney General Letitia James has filed a lawsuit against the Trump Organization
For all the political drama that surrounds the continuing revelations over one of the darkest days in modern American history on January 6, it’s the showdown over classified documents that appears to represent the ex-President’s most clear cut and immediate threat of true criminal exposure.
While television stations beamed blanket coverage of the committee hearing, more news broke that hinted at further grave legal problems the ex-President could face from another Justice Department investigation – also into January 6. Unlike the House’s version, the DOJ’s criminal probe has the power to draw up indictments.
The man who worked forVice President Mike Pence was seen leaving the courthouse in DC. Short had been compelled to testify to the grand jury for the second time, according to a person familiar with the matter, CNN’s Pamela Brown reported. Another Trump adviser, former national security aide Kash Patel, was also seen walking into an area where the grand jury meets. Patel would not tell reporters what he was doing.
CNN reported late Wednesday that a Trump employee told the FBI that he was ordered to remove boxes from the basement of his club after his legal team received a subpoena. The FBI also has surveillance footage showing a staffer moving the boxes.
Still, David Schoen, who was Trump’s defense lawyer in his second impeachment, told CNN’s “New Day” that though the details of what happened at Mar-a-Lago raised troubling questions, they did not necessarily amount to a case of obstructing justice.
If anyone acting on President Trump’s behalf knew that they didn’t have the right to have these documents in their possession, they would have hid them or kept them.
On Thursday morning, New York Attorney General Letitia James asked a state court to block the Trump Organization from moving assets and continuing to perpetrate what she has alleged in a civil lawsuit is a decades-long fraud.
James filed an application for a preliminary injunction to stop Trump, his three children and the firm from engaging in any similar fraudulent conduct while her lawsuit is pending.
Trump branded the investigation a stunt and denied any wrongdoing. The Justice Department hasn’t charged the former President, nor anyone else in its investigation over the Capitol insurrection. The House select committee can bring criminal charges, as it is discussing whether to send criminal referrals to the Justice Department. The DOJ investigated the documents discovered in the FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence as a witch hunt and political persecution.
Yet in both investigations, under-seal court activity never subsided, with the Justice Department trying to force at least five witnesses around Trump to secretly provide more information in their grand jury investigations in Washington, DC, CNN has previously reported.
Trump’s First Unselect Committee: The Case for a Subpoena and the Implications for the House of Deliberations
On Thursday, one of the days when the seriousness of the crisis that Trump is facing can be gauged by the vehemence of his responses, he came out fighting.
The unanimous vote in the select committee to subpoena the former President for documents and testimony was mocked by the first Trump spokesman.
“Pres Trump will not be intimidate(d) by their meritless rhetoric or un-American actions. Trump-endorsed candidates will sweep the Midterms, and America First leadership & solutions will be restored,” Budowich wrote on Twitter.
The former President stirred up a political reaction from his supporters by posting on his Truth Social network that failed to answer the accusations against him.
The Unselect Committee asked me to testify months ago. Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting? Because the Committee is a total waste of time. Trump wrote.
This could all become academic anyway. There is a chance that the issue will become pointless since a new Republican House majority would most likely sweep away the January 6 committee since it was one of their first acts.
The subpoena could also give the bipartisan committee some cover from pro-Trump Republicans who claim that it is a politicized attempt to impugn Trump that has not allowed cross-examination of witnesses. If it wished to enforce a subpoena, the committee would have to seek a contempt of Congress referral to the Justice Department from the full House. It took such a step with the guilty conviction of Trump’s political guru, Steve Bannon, who faces a sentencing hearing soon.
But any effort to follow a similar path if Trump refuses to testify could take months and involve protracted legal battles. It’s unclear whether the Justice Department would consider this a good investment, especially given the advanced state of its own January 6 probe. The committee will be swept into history if the Republicans take over the House majority in the upcoming elections.
A dramatic vote to target Trump is what many observers will see as another theatrical flourish in a set of slickly produced hearings that often resembled a television courtroom drama, even though there is very little chance of Trump complying with a congressional subpoena.
Liz Cheney said that the investigation was not only about what happened on January 6, but about the future as well.
The Wyoming lawmaker, who lost her primary to a Trump supporter, said that there was an effort to excuse or justify the conduct of the former President.
The rule of law, free elections, and accountability are all being jeopardized by the movement of former President Donald Trump.
Trump dropped his clearest hint yet Saturday of a new White House run at a moment when he’s on a new collision course with the Biden administration, the courts and facts.
Trump never really went away after losing reelection in 2020, but a dizzying catalog of confrontations is vaulting him back into the center of US politics. It will deepen the divide in a nation already deeply divided. And Trump’s return to the spotlight probably means next month’s midterm elections and the early stages of the 2024 presidential race will be rocked by his characteristic chaos.
The open legal and political loops involving the former President could cause even more upheaval than his four-year term in office because of a potential presidential campaign based on his claims of political persecution.
There is a chance the coming political period revolves mostly around the former President as Democrats and Republicans disagree on policy on the economy, abortion, foreign policy and crime.
Trump’s men and women are also stepping up their activity. His political guru Steve Bannon, whose own grassroots movement is seeking to infiltrate school boards and local election machinery, is vowing to expose the Biden “regime” in an appeal against a prison sentence handed down last week for defying a congressional subpoena. Trump ally Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina is calling on the Supreme Court to block an attempt to force him to testify in an investigation in Georgia over Trump’s election stealing effort.
Kari Lake and the Trump Organization: a serial perpetrator of voter fraud falsehoods in AZ and a possible prosecutor for state of the union
In Arizona, one of the ex-President’s favorite candidates, GOP gubernatorial hopeful Kari Lake – a serial spreader of voter fraud falsehoods – is again raising doubts about the election system. Lake told AZTV7 on Sunday that he is fearful that it probably will not be fair.
The New York Post reported last week that one of the most powerful pro-Trump Republicans said that impeachment of Biden is on the table. Nancy Mace told Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” that she did not want to see any impeachment proceedings after Trump was impeached twice. She said she was against the process being “weaponized.” When she was asked if Biden had committed an impeachable offense, she said that was something that would have to be investigated.
The pro-Trump Republicans in Washington will likely increase their presence after the elections. Scores of Trump-endorsed candidates are running on a platform of his 2020 election fraud falsehoods, raising questions over whether they will accept results should they lose their races in just over two weeks.
The Trump Organization is going to go on trial in New York on Monday. The ex- President hasn’t been personally charged, but the trial could impact his business empire and prompt fresh claims from him that he is being persecution due to his political beliefs. In a separate civil case, New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, has filed a $250 million civil suit against Trump, three of his adult children and the Trump Organization, alleging that they ran tax and insurance fraud schemes to enrich themselves for years.
Democrats have tried to bring back Trump to the forefront. President Joe Biden equated MAGA followers with “semi-fascism” and some campaigns have tried to scare critical suburban voters by warning pro-Trump candidates are a danger to democracy.
Source: https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/24/politics/donald-trump-circus-analysis/index.html
The Ex-President’s Debate Against Joe Biden, the Circus and the Food Fight: The DC Deputy US Attorney’s Office in a Political Firestorm
But raging inflation and spikes in gasoline prices appear to be a far more potent concern before voters head to the polls, which could spell bad news for the party in power in Washington.
The ex- President said at the Texas rally on Saturday that he would probably have to run for president again.
It may take multiple days, and it may be done with a level of rigor and seriousness that it deserves, according to Cheney.
“This isn’t going to be, you know, his first debate against Joe Biden and the circus and the food fight that that became. This is a far too serious set of issues.”
The committee used testimony throughout its presentations, taking depositions in closed doors and on video. Its most sympathetic witnesses have shown up in person. The powerful narrative that has been created by this has helped create a good picture of Trump’s disloyalty on January 6, but it has deprived viewers of seeing witnesses during cross examination. It is difficult to assess whether the case would stand up to more rigorous evidence requirements in a court.
The prospect of video testimony over an intense period of days or hours is likely to be unappealing to the former President because it would be harder for him to dictate the terms of the exchanges and control how his testimony might be used.
Garland would be faced with a dilemma about whether the national interest in implementing the law to its fullest extent was worth it if the former president was tried and sentenced to death in a fractiously political atmosphere.
Indicting an active candidate for the White House would surely spark a political firestorm. The DOJ is considering whether to appoint a special counsel if accusations are made that Joe Biden is targeting his political rival, people familiar with the matter tell CNN.
As Donald Trump inches closer to launching another presidential run after the midterm election, Justice Department officials have discussed whether a Trump candidacy would create the need for a special counsel to oversee two sprawling federal investigations related to the former president, sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.
The months leading up to the election have provided little respite from the political and legal activity around the investigations. The DC US Attorney’s Office, which is still looking to charge hundreds of people for the January 6 riot in Washington, is feeling the effects of being burned out as they try to secure guilty pleas from hundreds of rioters.
A defense attorney working on January 6 matters said they can charge almost anyone, even though they do not know who will be charged.
The Justice Department’s Special Counsel for Mueller’s Russia investigation, a former prosecutor turned defense lawyer, and the final decision on Gaetz’s probe
Special counsels are not immune to political attacks. Both former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and special counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the FBI’s Russia probe came under withering criticism from their opponents.
The Justice Department has looked to an old guard of former Southern District of New York prosecutors and David Rody, a prosecutor turned-defense lawyer, who had previously specialized in gang and conspiracy cases.
Sources said that Rody left Sidley Austin recently to become a senior counsel at the DOJ in Washington, but his involvement has not been previously reported.
The team at the DC US Attorney’s Office handling the day-to-day work of the January 6 investigations is also growing – even while the office’s sedition cases against right-wing extremists go to trial.
A fraud and public corruption prosecutor who was previously a supervisor on the team and a prosecutor with years of experience in criminal appellate work are among the other prosecutors who have joined the investigations team.
Attorney General Garland will ultimately decide whether or not to charge Trump or his associates, since he served as a judge and provided some distance from partisan politics after the Senate blocked his Supreme Court nomination.
The Justice Department doesn’t shy away from cases that are controversial or politically charged according to Garland, who dodged a CNN question about a special counsel for Trump-related investigations.
“What we will avoid and what we must avoid is any partisan element of our decision making about cases,” Garland said. The department decisions should be based on the facts and the law and not on partisan considerations, that is what I intend to ensure.
Garland has tough decisions beyond Trump. The long-running investigation of Hunter Biden, son of the president, is nearing conclusion, people briefed on the matter say. Also waiting in the wings: a final decision on the investigation of Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz, after prosecutors recommended against charges.
A former Justice Department official with some insight into the thinking around the investigations said that they weren’t going to charge before they were ready. There will be more pressure to get through the review earlier than a five-year window.
Willis has observed her own version of a quiet period around the midterm election and is seeking to bring witnesses before the grand jury in the coming weeks. CNN could be indicted as soon as December, sources have previously said.
Key Trump allies, including South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows are among witnesses that have tried to fight off subpoenas in the state probe into efforts to interfere with the Georgia 2020 election.
How those disputes resolve in Georgia – including whether courts force testimony – could improve DOJ’s ability to gather information, just as the House Select Committee’s January 6 investigation added to DOJ’s investigative leads from inside the Trump White House.
Trump has also foiled the DOJ’s efforts to keep things quiet in the weeks leading up to the election, leading to a steady barrage of headlines related to the investigation.
The outcome of the intelligence review will determine if there is a case to be made in the matter, according to one source.
On Tuesday a federal judge ordered Trump adviser Kash Patel to testify before a grand jury investigating the handling of federal records at Mar-a-Lago, according to two people familiar with the investigation.
The Justice Department was closer to potentially charging the case because the District Court granted immunity from prosecution to the man.