Posted on 06/09/2023 9:59:47 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
First, the good news. The judge assigned to the Trump documents case is U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon. She is the same judge who handled the lawsuit last year after the FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. Judge Cannon was the judge who appointed the “special master” to review the documents the DOJ was claiming were classified, but Team Trump was contending that definition.
Now the bad news. The DOJ is no longer legally arguing that Donald Trump held any classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. The DOJ is arguing that President Trump held documents vital to U.S. defense security. It’s a farce but that’s their position. The classification status of documents is moot, nonexistent, except to create the predicate for the proverbial FBI nose under the tent.
The DOJ-NSD (that’s Lisa Monaco) got a warrant to look for classified documents, but never intended to use classified documents as a case cornerstone because President Trump had full declassification authority. The DOJ got a search warrant by convincing a judge they were looking for something that wasn’t even a violation of law. That’s why the DOJ would not reveal the probable cause affidavit. The search was built upon a fraudulent pretense. “Classified” is a snipe hunt.
You will notice Jack Smith never discussed “classified documents” in his remarks, and the issue of classified documents appears nowhere except in the indictment as a purposeful lawfare description of documents. The DOJ is not legally charging anything relating to the classification status of the documents. That’s the Lawfare and media banter to create a talking point. The term “classified” is all over the indictment, but as a lawfare adjective only; it’s like using the word “stash”.
The special counsel legal framework is centered around documents the DOJ define as vital to “the defense security” of the United States. EVERYTHING is predicated on 31 counts of an 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) violation. The DOJ defines what is considered a defense document, and that intentionally has nothing to do with classification.
The granular news. You might have heard that two of Trump’s lawyers, Jim Trusty and John Rowley, quit today. The media wants to use their exit as a point to indicate Trump is in legal jeopardy; however, that’s not the case.
As soon as Trusty and Rowley saw their forced testimony was used in the indictment, they had no option except to exit the case. Despite the lawyers providing no damaging information against Trump, the DOJ used language in the indictment to turn Trump’s lawyers into material witnesses. Weissmann’s Lawfare tactic create a conflict, forcing the two Trump lawyers to depart.
WASHINGTON DC – Two of Donald Trump’s top lawyers abruptly resigned from his defense team on Friday, just hours after news broke that he and a close aide were indicted on charges related to their handling of classified documents.
Jim Trusty and John Rowley, who helmed Trump’s Washington, D.C.-based legal team for months and were seen frequently at the federal courthouse, indicated they would no longer represent Trump in matters being investigated and prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith, who is probing both the documents matter and efforts by Trump to subvert the 2020 election.
The resignations were shortly followed by an announcement from Trump himself confirming that a close aide, Walt Nauta, had also been indicted by federal prosecutors. Nauta, a Navy veteran, had served as the former president’s personal aide and was a ubiquitous presence during his post White House days.
In their place, Trump indicated that Todd Blanche — an attorney he recently retained to help fight unrelated felony charges brought by Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg in April — would lead his legal team, along with a firm to be named later. Trump and his team have liked Blanche, who is expected to play a more elevated, central role. (more)
Weissmann, Eisen and Smith are using lawfare in the indictment to put the interests of Trump and his aide Walt Nauta against each other. Obviously, Nauta would not turn on Trump, so the prosecution made Nauta a target for a federal 1001 charge of lying to investigators and will pressure him throughout the case to take a plea in exchange for testimony against Trump. Nauta is the baseline of the “Conspiracy Elements” which require two or more people. Again, pure Lawfare.
Obviously, Jim Trusty was unaware last night that his forced testimony would be used in the indictment. WATCH:
Vote DeSantis say the GOPe skunks. Spit.
While they’ve been dismantling the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, they might as well chuck the time-honored lawyer-client privilege, too.
The 2 lawyers said until they heard from Mr. Greene, they no longer could represent the former President.
.
switching horses at a time like this: very Frenchie white flag. ride or die.
We’re re visiting the same scenario that worked for them in forcing Romney as the GOP ‘candidate’
Worked for RINO’s... not for voters
p
As if the swamp would not install Biden anyway. Voting no longer matters.
Already done.
it’s what the GOPe wants you to do, so go ahead :) knock yourself, and the rest of the country out.
President Trump has all the right enemies while DeSantis has all the wrong friends.
Something weird is going on...the two lawyer witnesses...how would Jack(ass) Smith know what the lawyers talked about with Trump? Trump was not interviewed and did not testify in front of the GJ. The lawyers testified. That means that the lawyers breached attorney/client confidentiality and thats how Smith found out.
That's not what happened at all. Why are you making crap up?
"Strategic Lawfare at Work, They Didn’t Resign – Jack Smith Takes Down Two Trump Lawyers Using Compelled Testimony, Creating Witnesses Within Indictment"
"DEVELOPING: Trump’s Legal Team Prepares to File Motion to Dismiss Jack Smith’s Case Citing Prosecutorial Misconduct"
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/06/developing-trumps-legal-team-preparing-motion-dismiss-jack/
I don’t think you even know what “compelled testimony” means.
Or the FBI and NSA are doing surveillance and handing over emails, voicemails, etc.
I agree with your post, I am on your side; however, your post goes to a completely different issue than what was involved in my post. The indictment itself recounts (and quotes) some of Trump’s confidential discussions with his attorneys. How would Smith know about these? Now couple that with the fact that Smith has threatened to make those same attorneys witnesses. Make those connections and it is pretty obvious that Trump is being denied the protections of attorney client privilege, which is part of the concept of “due process of law”. They did it to him in the whole lyin’ cohen trial as well. Rules of Professional Conduct say if the information being released without the clients consent is no less than a threat to kill or substantially harm another human being, the information cannot be disclosed to outsiders to the representation. Possible penalties include civil liability to the client and DISBARRMENT. Interference with defense counsel is subject to those same penalties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.