|
Devor posted:It's interesting that it creates a requirement that the defendant turn over what I'd describe as "reverse Brady" communications that would undermine his defense. If you can't trust Trump or his lawyer, how do you trust his disclosure? quote:During the course of the Government’s investigation, at least 25 witnesses withheld information, communications, and documents based on assertions of the attorney-client privilege under circumstances where the privilege holder appears to be the defendant or his 2020 presidential campaign. quote:In addition to having publicly advanced the defense, the defendant knows what information the Government has—and does not have—that might support or undermine the defense. The Government produced in discovery the privilege logs for each witness who withheld material on the basis of a claim of privilege on behalf of the defendant or his campaign, and in some cases the defendant’s campaign was directly involved in discussions regarding privilege during the course of the investigation. In other instances, the Government produced court orders requiring the production of material claimed to be privileged. Compelling the defendant to provide notice, and thereby discovery, would be reciprocal of what the Government already has produced. For example, defense counsel publicly identified one attorney[Paracaidas note: Eastman]on whose advice the defense intends to rely at trial, and the Government has produced in discovery substantial evidence regarding that attorney and his advice, including relevant search warrant returns. Any material relevant to that attorney’s advice that remains shielded by the attorney-client privilege should be produced to the Government at the earliest date to avoid disruption of the trial schedule.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:38 |
|
|
Mainly they are too stupid to cover their tracks. It's sorta also remarkable how often lawyers who are bad, and even good lawyers accidentally leave something in a production that shouldn't have been there. Or in the case of Alex Jones attorneys give up all the stuff by accident and then don't respond when the plaintiff attorneys are like I think you sent all this incriminating evidence by accident. Where I work we've noticed missing documents where two custodians would otherwise talk 20 times a day, but there'd be conspicuous gaps around when the alleged activities took place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2023 21:59
|
|
|
It's pretty easy to miss priv stuff in a sufficiently large universe of docs. Especially with you're dealing with contract attorneys of... questionable quality. It isn't the case that all doc review attorneys suck, some just don't want to do litigation or deal with firm life or they want the flexibility of hourly work. But, quite frankly, a lot of them are the bottom of the barrel who couldn't get hired at a firm and this is their McDonalds-of-law backup. In the reviews I've run there has been some... astoundingly bad work product from some of the reviewers that make me question how they manage to breathe let alone pass law school or the bar. You can almost always fix that bad work product with QC where you have some higher-quality reviewers look over the coding from the first level team through search terms, sampling, etc. But clients or Sales will often times place limits on the amount of hours that can be billed on that work so there's only so much you can do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2023 23:04
|
|
|
Devor posted:It's interesting that it creates a requirement that the defendant turn over what I'd describe as "reverse Brady" communications that would undermine his defense. If you can't trust Trump or his lawyer, how do you trust his disclosure? I think the DOJ filing notes that 25 people have claimed that they can’t answer questions because it would violate Trumps attorney client privilege. That’s a lot of people you can suddenly question independently about who said what and when and then cross check that against everyone else and once they start finding inconsistencies then they can wedge the rest wide open.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
If you were curious what has been going on in the Trump NY fraud trial now that it left the front page, this is a pretty good running article with updates: https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/?id=103642561
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2023 12:01
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:No, but not because it's a crime (hell, I don't think murder is even a federal crime). It's because the executive branch doesn't have the legal authority to commit a premeditated summary execution of an American citizen without any due process. Yet they do it all the time, usually under the color of law enforcement action. See Michael Reinoehl for an example under the President in question, who publicly lauded the federal officers who gunned him down in a gangland hit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2023 13:36
|
|
|
HA HA HA, yes! After days of Trump bashing Forbes for having the temerity to move his position on the holy list Forbes has piped up that they have evidence that Weisselberg just probably perjured himself on the witness stand. Apparently they have YEARS of emails from Weisselberg arguing in detail for higher valuations for Trumps properties to move him up the list. Again Trumps ego torpedoes his own legal arguments. https://themessenger.com/politics/allen-weisselberg-trump-organization-cfo-testimony-forbes-perjury I assume Weisselberg is still on probation? That could be a problem. Edit: Also the Colorado CREW case to deny Trump a position on the state ballot has survived Trumps motion to dismiss. Murgos fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Oct 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2023 12:12
|
|
|
That would require someone to actually enforce civil perjury though, wouldn’t it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2023 14:53
|
|
|
Could theoretically be used as leverage for cooperation, though, to your point, if he doesn't fear actual enforcement, it wouldn't matter. NYAG might have the balls to do it now though. Edit: Going by the article, they sidebarred and dismissed him for the day right after hearing about the Forbes thing, so, leans towards them doing something about the new info, just not necessarily what. Wayback fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Oct 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
Wayback posted:Could theoretically be used as leverage for cooperation, though, to your point, if he doesn't fear actual enforcement, it wouldn't matter. NYAG might have the balls to do it now though. A brief Google search indicates that he got out in April 2023 for Tax Evasion. Depending on what his sentence was and the post release conditions, Perjury might be a great way if having the Feds look at the question of "can we reactivate your sentence? "
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
The Question IRL posted:A brief Google search indicates that he got out in April 2023 for Tax Evasion. Depending on what his sentence was and the post release conditions, Perjury might be a great way if having the Feds look at the question of "can we reactivate your sentence? " It was a NY state charge. This is that bonkers love letter of a deal where Weisselberg doesn’t even have to provide testimony.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2023 16:40
|
|
|
Wayback posted:Could theoretically be used as leverage for cooperation, though, to your point, if he doesn't fear actual enforcement, it wouldn't matter. NYAG might have the balls to do it now though. Could Letitia 'Peekaboo' James have enough of a grudge against Trump to pound his CFO into the ground as collateral damage? I think she might. I suppose that if this were a jury trial the prosecution would now be moving for a pause in the trial for a round of discovery (provide all Trump personal and corporate emails to news media relating to price evaluations of properties?) followed by bringing Weisselberg back to the stand for additional cross examination? Or would they simply call him back to the stand and have him recant his testimony to clear the perjury? But since it's just in front of the judge can he just ignore Weisselbergs entire testimony and allow himself to infer that this perjury indicates that they did knowingly and maliciously commit the fraud in question?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Could Letitia 'Peekaboo' James have enough of a grudge against Trump to pound his CFO into the ground as collateral damage? I think she might. Aren't you only allowed to draw a negative inference if someone takes the 5th in a civil trial (or, as we saw with Jones and Giuliani, refuse to participate in discovery)? Which he might well do if he's cross-examined about these specific parts of his testimony, so by all means pull him back on the stand and ask him about them. But he still has to claim that right first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Aren't you only allowed to draw a negative inference if someone takes the 5th in a civil trial (or, as we saw with Jones and Giuliani, refuse to participate in discovery)? Surely being caught in a brazen lie is worse than not saying anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
Heard on the MSW Jack podcast that the special counsel intends to show and prove motive for why Trump took and retained the documents at MAL. But we may have to wait until trial to find out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2023 18:58
|
|
|
gregday posted:Heard on the MSW Jack podcast that the special counsel intends to show and prove motive for why Trump took and retained the documents at MAL. But we may have to wait until trial to find out. Trump is probably on record dating why he did it
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2023 19:44
|
|
|
So if the judge accepts a gag order and he invariably violates the same day, will they be crazy enough to issue contempt of court? An entire judicial system cowed by the dumbest clown that is the perpetual narcissist victim, yet they are too afraid to do anything about it because of the years of evidence that everything he says is liable for incitement at any time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 12:58
|
|
|
Asproigerosis posted:So if the judge accepts a gag order and he invariably violates the same day, will they be crazy enough to issue contempt of court? An entire judicial system cowed by the dumbest clown that is the perpetual narcissist victim, yet they are too afraid to do anything about it because of the years of evidence that everything he says is liable for incitement at any time. No, there are several intermediate actions that they can and will take. He won't be hit with contempt until and unless he does it repeatedly to the same judge. And maybe not even then.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 15:54
|
|
|
Sorry not in a position to post around the paywall : https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/10/16/us/trump-gag-order-election-case-news?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare Chutkan tried to thread the needle by tailoring it specifically to witnesses, the prosecution and court staff. We’ll see how that goes, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 17:51
|
|
|
It's been about 5 minutes has Trump violated the gag order yet? Also what's the most likely form of punishment if and when Trump violates it? A fine?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:It's been about 5 minutes has Trump violated the gag order yet? quote:Judge Chutkan did not immediately address the question of how she will enforce her gag order. She merely said she would assess any consequences for Trump if and when he violates it. She's outlining her general plans from the bench atm. She'll write it all out eventually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 18:06
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:It's been about 5 minutes has Trump violated the gag order yet? You get pulled into judges chambers and yelled at and told to take it down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 18:08
|
|
|
It would have to be insanely egregious (e.g. “my loyal followers and True Patriots need to bomb the DoJ”) for it not do go through a couple rounds of warnings and fines first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 18:08
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:It would have to be insanely egregious (e.g. “my loyal followers and True Patriots need to bomb the DoJ”) for it not do go through a couple rounds of warnings and fines first. Nah he's allowed to keep yelling at the DOJ per the terms of the gag order. It's witnesses, prosecutors, and court staff (not the judge) who are protected. Biden and his corrupt DOJ are on the table Criminal threats are a separate thing that might get a new gag order, but it's outside this one's scope
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 18:13
|
|
|
Trump right now asking anyone standing near by what “turbulent” means
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
Honestly, if you actually want to cause Trump distress when violating the gag order, then all early infractions should come with global press releases that pontificate on whether it's his hands or his actual net worth that are smaller.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Honestly, if you actually want to cause Trump distress when violating the gag order, then all early infractions should come with global press releases that pontificate on whether it's his hands or his actual net worth that are smaller. Add a third option, Putin's respect for Trump.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
Judge Chutkan is doing all she can to give Trump the most leeway possible, because the last thing she (or the DoJ) want is for him to pause all the proceedings by going through all sorts of appeals on the legality of the gag order. The more she gives him, the less he'll be able to do poo poo to bog this down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2023 19:26
|
|
|
Cimber posted:Judge Chutkan is doing all she can to give Trump the most leeway possible, because the last thing she (or the DoJ) want is for him to pause all the proceedings by going through all sorts of appeals on the legality of the gag order. The more she gives him, the less he'll be able to do poo poo to bog this down. What makes you think they aren't going to appeal it regardless?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 00:19
|
|
|
Wayback posted:What makes you think they aren't going to appeal it regardless? It doesn't matter to the overall strategy, which is to: - give them considerable patience and leeway - make all appearances of absolute and sometimes overly generous forgiveness to the defendant's wildest impulses - make sure everything is being done by the book and with no conceivable appearances of antagonism by the court while this can drive outside observers crazy (myself included, I want trump spending nights in jail for obvious contempt already) it pays off in sealing shut as many potential doors to appeal as possible by leaving a long, consistent, documented history of the court being entirely reasonable and patient and not even the remote appearance of frustration or retaliatory action the best individual court case I can point to for watching it at play was the darrell brooks trial
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
Wayback posted:What makes you think they aren't going to appeal it regardless? Appellate is not going to hear an appeal on a pre-trial gag order. Let me say that in a different way. They'll appeal it and the response will be "this doesn't make sense because your trial is still ongoing"
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 02:53
|
|
|
Lock him the hell up! He's a stochastic terrorist. He shouldn't have a cell phone and he shouldn't be able to tour the country campaigning. We shouldn't weigh his free speech rights or his needs as a presidential candidate. He is under indictment. He shouldn't even be able to just run for president. He tried to overthrow the United States government and remain president. He shouldn't get these special accommodations. They are still treating this fascist scammer with kid gloves after all he has done. He is a danger to our country an embarrassment and he is a career criminal. No one else gets this. No other career criminal gets concern trolling about being unnecessarily embarrassed by a mugshot. It is a two tier system of justice and he found the third, ultraluxury super tier. After the beer hall putsch biased judges in Weimar Germany put Hitler in fake jail and treated him with the same kid gloves and look what happened. He should be in cell in a real prison, in an orange jumpsuit like everyone else. It is a mockery of the idea of a fair and impartial justice system. It is a mockery of the notion that no one is above the law. I am not so naive to think that our justice system is remotely fair. Poor defendants don't even get a trial. They get incompetent and overworked public defenders and are forced to take plea deals. But maybe we should try to make it more fair and not let this clown mock justice. The 14th amendment forbids people who engaged in insurrection from serving as elected officials. No trial was considered necessary in the 19th century for the people in the civil war. They didn't need a judge to tell them who an insurrectionist is. Lock his rear end up and take him off the ballot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 03:15
|
|
|
Zoeb posted:Lock him the hell up! He's a stochastic terrorist. He shouldn't have a cell phone and he shouldn't be able to tour the country campaigning. I agree with absolutely every clause of this post. BUT I also know how poorly equipped justice is to address the threat that comes from outside the context it has set for itself. It's gonna be one hell of a show
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 03:19
|
|
|
mdemone posted:I agree with absolutely every clause of this post. In a lot of way Trump is this malignant tumor and the disease is American fascism. He landed in this blind spot, like a fascist con artist demagogue shaped puzzle piece landing in a fascist con artist demagogue shaped hole that neoliberalism created. That is the way it is with a lot of fascists, they are opportunists with no scrupples. Musolini came to power in a coup. Hitler came to power by manipulating the broken and poorly thought out rules in the Weimar Republic. I know why they are treating him this way but that puzzle hole needs to have been closed years ago. It's like a wound that is getting infected. I am just very frustrated by the obvious injustice. He's so popular among the Republican base because he promises them everything they have ever wanted and validates their racism. The moderate never Trump republicans, created this monster years ago when they gerrymandered for their own advantage which meant Republicans would stay in power in states they controlled but also meant that the only challenger was someone further to the right than they were so now they have to perform being a fascist to appease Republican primary voters. This means they will interfere in any prosecution where they can. The Democrats helped create this monster when they adopted neoliberalism to be more Republican than Republicans, abandoned the working poor and people in rural states in favor of their own donor base. People felt abandoned and turned to blaming immigrants and minorities for competing with them for the scraps that were left. Like I know all this. But the hammer has to come down. Someone with authority has to be brave and put this motherfucker in jail while he awaits trial because he is not going to follow rules otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 03:30
|
|
|
Jail him on what grounds?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 03:43
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:Jail him on what grounds? Pick something, violating the terms of his release, threatening witnesses, making public statements that could taint the jury pool. They never seem to ask this question when it comes to poor defendants like that kid who was falsely accused of stealing a backpack and awaited trial in Rikers island for 3 years. That was wrong but it shows there's no consistency based on how defendants are treated. Trump has gets to have every right in the world.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 03:51
|
|
|
Wayback posted:What makes you think they aren't going to appeal it regardless? This is overly simplified, but on appeal the courts will be looking to determine if Chutkan's order manages to achieve its purpose (fair trial/administration of justice) through the least restrictive means possible. mdemone posted:Appellate is not going to hear an appeal on a pre-trial gag order. Provided there is an appeal and it is heard, NEBRASKA PRESS ASSN. et al. v. STUART, JUDGE, et al covers the factors to consider well (context is more directly to pretrial publicity) quote:To do so, we must examine the evidence before the trial judge when the order was entered to determine (a) the nature and extent of pretrial news coverage; (b) whether other measures would be likely to mitigate the effects of unrestrained pretrial publicity; and (c) how effectively a restraining order would operate to prevent the threatened danger.
I have in drafts a much deeper dive into Parloff (lawfare)'s livetweeting but the value didn't seem to merit the length and the tweet volume. If there's a specific bit of interest, I can dredge it out (recognizing that I'm not particularly capable or qualified to dive deep on something that's already getting every qualified legal pundit's attention). Overall, my read from Gaston today is that Justice fell back into its rut on civil liberties: Support until it's inconvenient. Lauro did Trump no favors with his absolutism, though narrowing this gag likely isn't a priority, and it seems like the post about the Judge's clerk in NY and Milley were Chutkan's biggest motivators. Worth noting that Lauro's answer to all the points listed above is that the trial can just be delayed til after the election and that's the least restrictive way to address the government’s concerns. Chutkan was, as ever, not biting. Zoeb posted:Lock him the hell up! He's a stochastic terrorist. He shouldn't have a cell phone and he shouldn't be able to tour the country campaigning. Zoeb posted:He shouldn't get these special accommodations. They are still treating this fascist scammer with kid gloves after all he has done. He is a danger to our country an embarrassment and he is a career criminal. No one else gets this. No other career criminal gets concern trolling about being unnecessarily embarrassed by a mugshot. A quick reminder on why "He is under indictment" is an abjectly terrible reason for suspending civil liberties. Even when it's a special counsel: On September 16th, 2021, Durham got an indictment against wellknown Democratic lawyer Michael Sussmann for making false statements to the feds regarding ~☆Russiagate☆~. Less than a month later, Sussmann's lawyers were forced to file a bill of particulars because Durham's indictment failed to contain, among other things:
We've already, VERY recently, seen Justice under Republicans corruptly pervert the court system to persecute and harass Dems. The idea that Feds should get to imprison, gag, and strip from the ballot anyone they can get an indictment for is grotesquely authoritarian and unspeakably idiotic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 04:12
|
|
|
Zoeb posted:Lock him the hell up! He's a stochastic terrorist. He shouldn't have a cell phone and he shouldn't be able to tour the country campaigning. A number of ex-Confederate officials defied the 14th Amendment and ran for office anyway, won seats, and were allowed to take them. Federal prosecutors did in fact need to go to trial to try to get them thrown out of their positions (though few, if any, of these cases made it through trials before Congress passed an amnesty anyway). The reason Trump isn't sitting in jail isn't "because the judge is treating him with kid gloves". It's because he could afford to make bail, and doesn't particularly fit the conditions to be denied bail. Remember also that he's not under indictment for tweeting mean things. The Chutkan case is an indictment for obstructing the electoral vote count, and they don't need to put him in pre-trial detention to keep him from doing that again - as long as they wrap up the trial before Jan 2025, he won't have the opportunity to reoffend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 05:10
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:A number of ex-Confederate officials defied the 14th Amendment and ran for office anyway, won seats, and were allowed to take them. Federal prosecutors did in fact need to go to trial to try to get them thrown out of their positions (though few, if any, of these cases made it through trials before Congress passed an amnesty anyway). Yeah I guess you're right. I'm just frustrated. We had his entire presidency where there would be some horrendous scandal and my mom, who is liberal would be like yeah this is it this is what gets him this is what gets them out of office and it never happens. And I'm just scared that he's going to get out of this one too. Truth be told I'm actually completely terrified of him becoming president again. With what other Republicans are doing with transgender people and me being trans I'm really scared about what's going to happen next. I'm scared about losing again. I'm scared about losing my ID. I'm scared about losing all my rights. I'm scared that I'm going to have to go back in the closet and that's why I am so eager to see Trump go to prison and frustrated by how long it's taking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 05:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:38 |
|
|
Zoeb posted:Yeah I guess you're right. I'm just frustrated. We had his entire presidency where there would be some horrendous scandal and my mom, who is liberal would be like yeah this is it this is what gets him this is what gets them out of office and it never happens. And I'm just scared that he's going to get out of this one too. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2023 13:52
|
|
